The International Criminal Court: Recent Developments

AbstractInternational law has not traditionally recognised individuals as victims of the crime of aggression. Recent developments may precipitate a departure from this approach. The activation of the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court over the crime of aggression opens the way for the future application of the Court's regime of victim participation and reparation in the context of prosecutions for this crime. The determination by the United Nations Human Rights Committee in General Comment No. 36 that any deprivation of life resulting from an act of aggression violates Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights serves to recognise a previously overlooked class of victims. This article explores these recent developments, by discussing their background, meaning and implications for international law and the rights of victims.

Download Full-text

Cooperation Between the United Nations and the International Criminal Court

International Organizations Law Review ◽

10.1163/15723747-01001007 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 10 (1) ◽

pp. 223-246

Author(s):

Tamara Cummings-John

Keyword(s):

United Nations ◽

International Criminal Court ◽

Rome Statute ◽

Administrative Support ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Court ◽

Recent Developments ◽

The United Nations ◽

Judicial Assistance ◽

The Relationship

As contemplated by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (‘Court’), the United Nations and the Court entered into a Relationship Agreement in 2004. The Relationship Agreement provides a framework for cooperation between the United Nations and the Court, including through logistical or administrative support to the Court, in particular in countries where the Prosecutor has opened investigations or is conducting preliminary examinations. The United Nations also provides substantive support and judicial assistance to the Court’s organs, in particular to the Prosecutor, but also increasingly now to the Defence, by making available documents and information generated or obtained by the United Nations and its various field presences. United Nations staff and experts have also been made available to the Court for interview and some have testified before the Court, for which the United Nations Secretary-General has to waive their immunity. This commentary provides an update on recent developments in two areas of cooperation between the United Nations and the court: information sharing, and contact with persons subject to warrants or summonses.

Download Full-text

Collisions of Common and Civil Law Approaches within the ICC’s Unique Procedural Framework – A Permanent Challenge Exposed by Recent Developments

International Criminal Law Review ◽

10.1163/15718123-01904001 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 19 (4) ◽

pp. 551-599

Author(s):

Laura Katharina Sophia Neumann

Keyword(s):

Criminal Justice ◽

Special Needs ◽

International Criminal Court ◽

International Criminal ◽

Common Law ◽

Civil Law ◽

Criminal Court ◽

International Criminal Justice ◽

Recent Developments ◽

Practical Guidelines

Due to the different legal backgrounds of its judges, the International Criminal Court (icc) constantly faces the challenge of reconciling common and civil law approaches in its daily proceedings. At the same time, it must accommodate the special needs of international criminal justice and of the concrete trial in question. After elucidating the underlying problem of legal pluralism in international criminal procedure, the divergences of common and civil law procedural concepts and their interplay at the icc, the article faces this challenge by analysing two disputes that recently culminated in icc trials, concerning rulings on the admissibility of evidence and the admissibility of leading questions respectively. Based on these case studies, it develops practical guidelines on how civil and common law approaches could possibly be balanced within the icc’s unique procedural framework in the light of its own special needs.

Download Full-text

On Implementation of Intersectionality in Prosecuting and Adjudicating Mass Atrocities by the International Criminal Court

International Criminal Law Review ◽

10.1163/15718123-bja10064 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-27

Author(s):

Gregor Maučec

Keyword(s):

International Criminal Court ◽

International Criminal ◽

Case Law ◽

Criminal Court ◽

International Criminal Law ◽

International Crimes ◽

Recent Developments ◽

Gender Based ◽

And Gender ◽

Sectional Analysis

Abstract This article examines the relevant case law of the International Criminal Court (hereafter icc or Court) in order to assess the actual scope, confines and prospects of taking ‘intersectionality’ perspective in the Court’s prosecution and adjudication of mass atrocities involving discriminatory targeting. While the icc Prosecutor and judges traditionally resorted to uni-sectional analysis in considering such atrocities, some of the Court’s more recent jurisprudence subsequent to the adoption of the icc Prosecutor’s Policy Papers on Sexual and Gender-Based Crimes (2014) and on Children (2016) seems to be indicative of a more intersectionality-friendly approach to prosecuting and adjudicating international crimes against different protected groups and their members. In addition to the two Prosecutor’s policy documents—both of which explicitly address the interplay between phenomena of interesectional discrimination and mass crimes in the work of the icc Prosecutor—the Al Hassan confirmation decision, carii decisions and Ntaganda reparations order appear to betoken similarly positive developments towards pursuing more intersectional approach in the icc case law. A critical and chronological assessment of the Court’s intersectionality jurisprudence, however, suggests that it may be too early to say that these recent developments in icc case law are to be seen as an indication of an emerging trend to give greater and more conscious consideration to the intersectionality phenomena in its rulings. They may just as well simply represent occasional lucid moments in the Court’s reasoning and pronouncement on this complex issue. It is accordingly proposed that the icc should take intersectionality more seriously in both prosecution and adjudication of international crimes that involve multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination. Having discussed what that might have looked like in some of the earlier icc case law, the article turns to consider the prospects and space for the icc to actually implement intersectionality in its future jurisprudence. It looks at potential practical implications of the proposed jurisprudential developments for the Court and for the field of international criminal justice more generally. Finally, the article also reflects on the eventual pitfalls and challenges that such a regular and consistent intersectionality-driven interpretation and application of international criminal law may present for the Court.

Download Full-text

State Sovereignty, Jurisdiction, and ‘Modern’ International Law: The Principle of Complementarity in the International Criminal Court

Leiden Journal of International Law ◽

10.1017/s0922156506003761 ◽

2006 ◽

Vol 19 (4) ◽

pp. 1095-1123 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

FEDERICA GIOIA

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

International Criminal Court ◽

International Criminal ◽

International Community ◽

Criminal Court ◽

State Sovereignty ◽

The Core ◽

Recent Developments ◽

Principle Of Complementarity

The article analyses the main features of the Statute of the International Criminal Court in the context of recent developments in international law. The core submission is made that the states' obligations enshrined in the Statute (namely, to investigate and prosecute the most heineous crimes, and to co-operate with the Court in their investigation and prosecution) are to be construed as obligations erga omnes. Since ending impunity for such crimes transcends the interests of individual states, the Court should act on behalf of the international community in remedying any shortcomings of states' action in this respect. In this perspective, particular attention is devoted to the principle of complementarity: it is argued that it could and should be construed and implemented in such a way as genuinely to allow the achievement of the universal objective of preventing impunity for those crimes of concern to the international community.

Download Full-text

The Role of Fair Trial Considerations in the Complementarity Regime of the International Criminal Court: From ‘No Peace without Justice’ to ‘No Peace with Victor's Justice’?

Leiden Journal of International Law ◽

10.1017/s092215650500302x ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 18 (4) ◽

pp. 829-869 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

ENRIQUE CARNERO ROJO

Keyword(s):

International Criminal Court ◽

Rome Statute ◽

Due Process ◽

Ad Hoc ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Responsibility ◽

Criminal Court ◽

International Peace ◽

Recent Developments

This article discusses the possibility of the International Criminal Court's taking domestic investigations and prosecutions of crimes within its jurisdiction where states are unwilling genuinely to investigate or prosecute such crimes. In particular sustaining the admissibility of a case on the basis of the lack of impartiality or independence of national proceedings is subject to analysis. Whereas the lack of this due process guarantee is expressly considered in the Rome Statute as a ground for admissibility where it is meant to shield a person from criminal responsibility, it is not equally clear that a case can be declared admissible where domestic proceedings are or were unfairly conducted to the prejudice of the person concerned. On an analysis of the wording of the Statute, its object and purpose, and its ‘preparatory works’, the possibility of the Court's taking on domestic proceedings on the basis of their being intentionally unfair to the prejudice of a suspect or accused does not appear to have a strong legal basis. However, recent developments at the ICTY and the ICTR show the importance of such a possibility to the fulfilment of the mission entrusted to the ad hoc tribunals. This circumstance brings about crucial questions about the role of the International Criminal Court in the enforcement of international justice and its contribution to international peace and security.

Download Full-text