Well, my tuppence worth of view on this matter is that indeed the UN Security Council resolution, which was aimed at protecting civilians, initially from bombings by the government of Col Muammar Gaddafi, was in a sense overstretched by Nato forces. That in itself creates a problem for the UN Security Council and for future interventions. As you are well aware, the situation in Syria is also of grave concern precisely because of this precedent created in Libya.
The UN Security Council has not been able to agree on how to intervene in Syria. As you know, in the Security Council there are permanent member states with veto power. So, if they don't want any resolution to see the light of day they veto it. In Libya, those who did not vote for Resolution 1973 abstained, which allowed the resolution to go through. But because of this precedence it has created very serious doubts in the permanent members of the UN Security Council.
Therefore, if the International Criminal Court, ICC, is to act on the basis of concrete information against those who would have been responsible for loss of lives of civilians, it would be very difficult for Nato to justify why and how it came to any conclusion.
We know that they are now attempting to create the impression that the rebels are acting on their own regarding attacks in Tripoli, but there are clear links and co-ordination at that level. The question is whether the ICC would have the wherewithal to unearth that information and bring those who are responsible to book, including the Nato commanders on the ground.