The Yerodia Ruling of the International Court of Justice and the 1993/1999 Belgian Law on Universal Jurisdiction

2003 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 491-509 ◽  
Author(s):  
ALAIN WINANTS
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
National Court ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Universal Jurisdiction ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
The Relationship

The 1993/1999 Belgian Law on Universal Jurisdiction allows for prosecution before Belgian domestic courts regardless of the nationality of perpetrators or victims, the place where the breaches were committed, or the presence on Belgian territory of the alleged perpetrators. Is universal jurisdiction contrary to international law? Is universal jurisdiction in absentia permitted under Belgian law and under international law? What is the relationship between universal jurisdiction, as exercised by a national court, and the Statute of the International Criminal Court? This article provides an overview of the Belgian legislation and its future with regard to international law and the Statute of the International Criminal Court.

scholarly journals RETURN TO SENDER: LET THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE JUSTIFY OR QUALIFY INTERNATIONAL-CRIMINAL-COURT EXCEPTIONALISM REGARDING PERSONAL IMMUNITIES

2019 ◽  
Vol 78 (3) ◽  
pp. 596-611
Author(s):  
Sarah M.H. Nouwen
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court

AbstractThis article argues that it is important for the International Court of Justice to be given an opportunity, for instance through a request for an Advisory Opinion, to explain what exactly it meant when it suggested that the ordinarily applicable international law on immunities need not be an obstacle “before certain international criminal courts, where they have jurisdiction”. Two international criminal courts have built a structure of case law on this one obiter comment, which it seems unable to support.

Combating Impunity in Sri Lanka

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Supanki Kalanadan
Keyword(s):  
Sri Lanka ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
Universal Jurisdiction ◽  
Sri Lankan ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Structural Investigations ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
International Court

Abstract Often referred to as a ‘war without witness’, over a decade has passed since the Sri Lankan armed conflict ended, with no significant progress towards fostering accountability for the alleged international crimes committed in the last phases of the war. Traditionally available legal mechanisms have served to be a barrier to address impunity as Sri Lanka is not a party to the International Criminal Court, and the United Nations Security Council has not taken any action for accountability. However, the last decade has witnessed a growing number of innovative approaches under ‘universal jurisdiction’, which can be applied to prosecute the alleged international crimes committed in Sri Lanka. This article examines the current options available under universal jurisdiction that can be applied in the Sri Lankan context, including Germany’s structural investigations model, the growing participation of regional organizations in international criminal justice, and the role of the International Court of Justice in addressing state violations of international human rights.

House Approves Proposal Permitting ICJ to Advise Domestic Courts

1983 ◽  
Vol 77 (2) ◽  
pp. 338-340
Author(s):  
Jack M. Goldklang
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
National Court ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
The Icj ◽  
Advisory Opinions

On December 17, 1982, the House of Representatives adopted a resolution supporting an expansion of the advisory opinion jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice. The resolution (H.R. Con. Res. 86) urges the President to explore the appropriateness of establishing a United Nations committee to seek advisory opinions from the ICJ. The committee would act when asked by a national court seeking advice regarding any international law question under the national court’s jurisdiction.

scholarly journals Universal jurisdiction in the activities of international criminal courts

Legal Ukraine ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 42-47
Author(s):  
Oleksandr Bazov
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Crime ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Universal Jurisdiction ◽  
International Terrorism ◽  
Legal Institution ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
International Crimes

The article presents an analysis of the principle of universal jurisdiction as an important legal institution of international criminal justice. Analyzed the main international legal norms and judicial practice in this area. The directions of further development of universal jurisdiction have been determined. Analyzed the Princeton Principlesof the universal jurisdiction. Investigated the work of the UN International Law Commission and the UN General Assembly on this issue. Proposals for the improvement of international and national legal acts are presented. Universal jurisdiction or the principle of universality in the fight against international crime is an important legal institution in the activities of both national and international criminal courts. As with any international offense, the obligation to stop international crimes such as aggression, genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimes of international terrorism take the form of an alternative to aut dedere aut judicare or aut prosegue by Hugo Grotius, and under which any State has an obligation to search for and prosecute international criminals for these heinous acts, regardless of the nationality of the perpetrators and their victims, as well as the place where the crime was committed, or to extradite international criminals to any State that requires their extradition for prosecution and punishment, or to an international criminal tribunal. Thus, a state is obliged to exercise universal criminal jurisdiction over international crimes and international criminals, or to extradite them to another state or to an international criminal court under conditions determined by international law and national law. Key words: universal jurisdiction, International criminal court, international crime, state sovereignty.

The International Criminal Court and Universal Jurisdiction: A Fraught Relationship?

2009 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 498-512 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cedric Ryngaert
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
The State ◽  
Universal Jurisdiction ◽  
Territorial State ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Principle Of Complementarity ◽  
Do So

This article deals with the relationship between the principle of universal jurisdiction and the jurisdiction of the ICC. Voices have been raised to expand the jurisdictional basis of the ICC's Rome Statute to include the universality principle. The author does not support this expansion, however, mainly on practical grounds. At the same time, however, he does support, albeit cautiously, taking into account the universality principle for purposes of the admissibility analysis under Article 17 of the Statute. The ICC's principle of complementarity indeed requires that the ICC defer to any state that might have jurisdiction, including a state having universal jurisdiction over serious crimes. It is proposed that the ICC Prosecutor encourage certain "bystander" states that can provide an effective forum to investigate and prosecute atrocity cases, at least if the territorial state, or the state of nationality, proves unable and unwilling to do so.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document