Foreword by the President of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda

1997 ◽  
Vol 37 (321) ◽  
pp. 603-604
Author(s):  
Laïty Kama
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Red Cross ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Review ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Set Up

The decision to devote an issue of the International Review of the Red Cross to a series of articles on the two ad hoc International Criminal Tribunals set up by the United Nations to prosecute persons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law in the former Yugoslavia and in Rwanda reflects the increasing importance of these courts both for the general public and for legal experts.

scholarly journals Le tribunal pénal international pour le Rwanda - La justice trahie (Note)

2005 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 827-840
Author(s):  
John Philpot
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Military Intervention ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Legal Requirements ◽  
Real Issue ◽  
Set Up

On November 8,1994, the Security Council of the United Nations adopted Resolution 955 creating an ad hoc international criminal tribunal to judge individuals responsible for violations of international humanitarian law committed in Rwanda between January 1, 1994 and December 31, 1994. In its form and structure, the Tribunal does not respect basic legal requirements required of a tribunal set up in international law. Us mandate - limited in time, in scope of potential indictment, and in jurisdiction to violations of international humanitarian law - mil prevent any light from being shed on the real issue raised by the Rwandan conflict, namely that of armed military intervention in Rwanda from Uganda. It will likely lead to the reinforcement of a one-sided view of the crisis in Rwanda and legitimate further unilateral interventionist policies in Africa and elsewhere. The Tribunal will institutionalize the de facto impunity for the members and supporters of the present government of Rwanda who undoubtedly committed many serious crimes between October 1, 1990 and the present.

New Mechanisms for the Enforcement of International Humanitarian Law

2001 ◽  
Vol 95 (4) ◽  
pp. 934-952 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daryl A. Mundis
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
International Community ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Domestic Courts

The international criminal court (ICC) will serve as a permanent institution dedicated to the enforcement of international humanitarian law sixty days after the sixtieth state has deposited its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval, or accession to the Treaty of Rome with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.1 Pursuant to Article 11 of the ICC Statute, however, the ICC will have jurisdiction only with respect to crimes committed after the treaty comes into force.2 Consequently, when faced with allegations of violations of international humanitarian law in the period prior to the establishment of the ICC, the international community has five options if criminal prosecutions are desired.3 First, additional ad hoc international tribunals, similar to those established for the former Yugoslavia (International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, ICTY) and Rwanda (International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, ICTR) could be established.4 Second, "mixed" international criminal tribunals, which would share certain attributes with the ad hoc Tribunals, could be created.5 Third, the international community could leave the prosecution of alleged offenders to national authorities, provided that the domestic courts are functioning and able to conduct such trials. Fourth, in those instances where the national infrastructure has collapsed, international resources could be made available to assist with the prosecution of the alleged offenders in domestic courts. Finally, the international community could simply do nothing in the face of alleged violations of international humanitarian law.

Big Fish and Small Fish Debate–An Examination of the Prosecutorial Discretion

2007 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 677-685 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hitomi Takemura
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
East Timor ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Small Fish ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Senior Leaders ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
War Criminals

AbstractIt is widely known that the earlier practices of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia have been criticized for having dealt with comparably minor war criminals. The implications behind such a criticism may be that an ad hoc international or hybrid criminal tribunal should concentrate on those who were most responsible for the crimes and serious violations of international humanitarian law. The first part of this paper will thus focus on the logic of targeting big fish. Then the recent practices of the ad hoc International Criminal Tribunals and the Special Panels for Serious Crimes of East Timor have been addressed in this light. Irrespective of the institutional and practical demands of targeting big fish, the concern remains whether there is a normative demand for targeting only senior leaders of mass atrocities. Therefore, the last part of this paper would like to discuss the big fish versus small fish debate by examining the possibilities of a leadership element in ratione materiae of international criminal tribunals.

Off target on the Iraq campaign: a response to Professor Schmitt

2003 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 111-125 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dinah PoKempner ◽  
Marc Garlasco ◽  
Bonnie Docherty
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Committee ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Red Cross ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Civil Society Organisations ◽  
The Military

Law without facts makes a dull subject, and it is one of the peculiarities of international humanitarian law (IHL) that many of the interesting facts are classified or unavailable to those outside the military. This partially explains why IHL until recently has been the redoubt of military lawyers and the International Committee of the Red Cross. That situation is changing, for many reasons.Popular interest in IHL is growing due to concern with responses to terrorism, interventionism (humanitarian and otherwise) and international justice. Civil society organisations have successfully campaigned for both new standards, such as the Landmines Convention, as well as new mechanisms of enforcement, such as the ad hoc international criminal tribunals and the International Criminal Court. At the same time, technology and globalisation have facilitated both real-time battlefront reporting and post-battle analysis by civilians.

Assistance, direction and control: Untangling international judicial opinion on individual and State responsibility for war crimes by non-State actors

2014 ◽  
Vol 96 (893) ◽  
pp. 243-273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shane Darcy
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
State Responsibility ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Specific Direction ◽  
Significant Disagreement ◽  
State Actors

AbstractDespite the general consistency in the treatment of international humanitarian law by international courts and tribunals, recent decisions have seen significant disagreement regarding the scope of indirect responsibility for individuals and States for the provision of aid or assistance to non-State actors that perpetrate war crimes. The divisions at the international criminal tribunals with regard to the “specific direction” element of aiding and abetting are reminiscent of the divergence between the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia on the question of State responsibility for supporting or assisting non-State actors that engage in violations of international law. This article analyzes this jurisprudence on individual and State responsibility for the provision of support to non-State actors that breach international humanitarian law, and considers the interaction and interrelationship between these related but distinct forms of responsibility.

A tremendous challenge for the International Criminal Tribunals: reconciling the requirements of international humanitarian law with those of fair trial

1997 ◽  
Vol 37 (321) ◽  
pp. 635-650 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne-Marie La Rosa
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
Theoretical Concept ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
The Hague ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Tremendous Challenge

The two International Criminal Tribunals set up by the United Nations Security Council in 19931 and 19942 are in the process of demonstrating that international repression of serious violations of international humanitarian law is no longer a purely theoretical concept. A total of 21 persons charged with or suspected of committing such breaches have been transferred to the seat of the Arusha Tribunal, and two judgments sentencing the defendants to prison terms have been handed down by the Hague Tribunal. The two Tribunals are competent to hear cases against persons allegedly responsible for serious violations of humanitarian law, but in so doing they are also required, under their respective Statutes, to ensure that the internationally recognized rules relating to the rights of the accused are fully respected at all stages of the proceedings. Article 20 of the Statute of the Tribunal for Rwanda and Article 21 of that of the Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, modelled on Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, enumerate in detail the rights that must be accorded to every accused person.

The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda: Its role in the African context

1997 ◽  
Vol 37 (321) ◽  
pp. 685-693
Author(s):  
Djiena Wembou
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
International Community ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
The Face ◽  
African Context

In the face of the atrocities committed in Rwanda between April and July 1994, the international community committed itself to ensuring respect for international humanitarian law and trying those responsible for breaches of it. Thus, on 8 November 1994, the United Nations Security Council adopted resolution 955 creating the International Criminal Tribunal for the prosecution of persons responsible for genocide and other serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in the territory of Rwanda and of Rwandan citizens responsible for such acts committed in the territory of neighbouring States.

Conference of Government Experts: Second Session

1975 ◽  
Vol 15 (172) ◽  
pp. 359-361
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Committee ◽  
Secretary General ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Red Cross ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Conventional Weapons

In November 1974, the International Committee of the Red Cross sent governments a provisional mimeographed edition of the report on the work of the Conference of Government Experts on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons (Lucerne, 24 September-18 October 1974). This report was also sent to the United Nations Secretary-General, who transmitted it to the First Committee of the General Assembly, whose agenda contained the item: “Napalm and other incendiary weapons”. The printed edition was issued in January 1975, in English, French and Spanish, and was consulted by the Ad Hoc Committee on Weapons at the second session of the Diplomatic Conference on the Reaffirmation and Development of International Humanitarian Law Applicable in Armed Conflicts (Geneva, 3 February-18 April 1975).

The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda

1997 ◽  
Vol 37 (321) ◽  
pp. 675-683
Author(s):  
Cécile Aptel
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
National Reconciliation

The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda was created on 8 November 1994 by the United Nations Security Council, of which it is a subsidiary body. Its task is to help restore and maintain peace and bring about national reconciliation by trying persons allegedly responsible for acts of genocide and other grave breaches of international humanitarian law committed in Rwanda and Rwandan citizens suspected of committing such acts and violations in the territory of neighbouring States between 1 January and 31 December 1994.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document