Some Comments on the Elements of Crimes for the Crimes of the ICC Statute

2000 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 273-288
Author(s):  
Herman von Hebel ◽  
Maria Kelt
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Time Limit ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Limit Set

On 30 June 2000, the Preparatory Commission for the International Criminal Court (ICC) adopted by consensus the draft Elements of Crimes for the crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, as defined in Articles 6, 7 and 8 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (the Statute). Herewith, the Preparatory Commission fulfilled its mandate to elaborate such elements in accordance with the time-limit set out in resolution F of the Final Act, adopted by the Rome Conference on 17 July 1988.

scholarly journals Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al-Bashir, Judgment in the Jordan Referral re Al-Bashir Appeal

2020 ◽  
Vol 114 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-109
Author(s):  
Angela Mudukuti
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Arrest Warrant ◽  
Head Of State

In 2009, the International Criminal Court (ICC) stepped into uncharted waters as it issued its first arrest warrant for a sitting head of state, then President of Sudan Omar Al-Bashir. Following the UN Security Council's referral of the situation in the Darfur region of Sudan to the ICC, Al-Bashir was charged by the Court with war crimes and crimes against humanity, and in 2010, he was also charged with genocide. As a consequence, all of the states parties to the Rome Statute had a duty to arrest Al-Bashir. Several states have nonetheless failed to arrest him during country visits, allowing Al-Bashir to evade the ICC. This has given rise to a number of cases before the ICC Chambers, including this Appeals Chamber judgment regarding the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.

Prosecutor v. Callixte Mbarushimana: Judgment on the Appeal of the Prosecutor Against the Decision of Pre-Trial Chamber I of 16 December 2011 Entitled “Decision on the Confirmation of Charges” (Int'l Crim. Ct.)

2013 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 417-439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Frolich
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Democratic Republic ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Trial Chamber ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Republic Of The Congo

On May 30, 2012, the Appeals Chamber (Chamber) of the International Criminal Court (ICC) voted unanimously to dismiss the appeal of the Prosecution against the decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber not to confirm the charges against the alleged Congolese warlord Callixte Mbarushimana. The Prosecution had alleged Mbarushimana was criminally responsible under Article 25(3)(d) of the Rome Statute (Statute) for crimes against humanity and war crimes committed by members of the Forces Démocratiques de Libération du Rwanda (FDLR) in the Kivu provinces of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The Prosecution had appealed the Pre-Trial Chamber’s decision on three separate issues, all of which were rejected.

scholarly journals Encroachment on Cultural Values in the Occupied Territories of Ukraine in the Context of International Crimes

2020 ◽  
pp. 313-319
Author(s):  
Nataliia PLYSIUK ◽  
Anna GOLUB
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Values ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Cultural Property ◽  
Crimean Peninsula ◽  
Occupied Territories

The article examines the essence and nature of war crimes through the prism of encroachments on cultural property in the context of the conflict in eastern Ukraine and illegal actions on the Crimean peninsula. The state of protection of cultural property in the occupied territories, the main problems of prosecution for export, damage, destruction of cultural property in the conditions of military conflict are considered. It is analyzed that the issue of protection of cultural values is currently on the table, but Ukrainian domestic science does not contain research on the process of bringing perpetrators to justice. The article highlights the main decisions of the International Criminal Court in cases of encroachment on cultural property during the armed conflict, the decisions of tribunals, analyzes their main aspects that may be useful for Ukraine. It is established that the case law of tribunals and the International Criminal Court is heterogeneous; there is no established and clearly defined list of criteria for determining the grounds for bringing perpetrators to justice, the degree and form of their guilt. There is a heterogeneous understanding of the object of the encroachment and the form of guilt, which can lead to the impossibility of bringing the perpetrators to justice. From the analysis of the essence of war crimes, it was concluded that the relevant acts may be qualified under Article 438 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, as well as Article 8 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as war crimes. The composition of a war crime under the Rome Statute has also been studied, and possible obstacles to Ukraine’s future trials within the framework of the International Criminal Court have been outlined. The situation with the Bakhchisaray Palace in Crimea is highlighted as an object on which trilateral negotiations have already been initiated, which has the prospect of filing lawsuits in international courts. At present, Ukraine’s actions are aimed only at condemning the international community against the enemy for his illegal actions with cultural property, but the issue of initiating legal proceedings remains open.

scholarly journals Managing Frozen Assets at the International Criminal Court

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 765-790
Author(s):  
Daley J Birkett
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Trial Chamber ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
The Hague

Abstract On 8 June 2018, more than 10 years after his arrest, the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) reversed Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo’s conviction by the Trial Chamber for crimes against humanity and war crimes, acquitting him of all charges. Soon after the start of his time in detention in The Hague, assets belonging to Bemba were frozen by states across a number of jurisdictions at the request of the ICC. Many of these assets remain frozen, more than 18 months after his acquittal. This article examines the consequences of prolonged asset freezes by the ICC through the lens of the Bemba case, demonstrating the existence of gaps in the legal framework applicable to the management of frozen assets under the ICC Statute system and suggesting possible responses thereto at the domestic and international levels.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document