Canadian Implementing Legislation for the Rome Statute

2000 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 337-346 ◽  
Author(s):  
William A. Schabas
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Ongoing Work ◽  
Preparatory Committee ◽  
Draft Statute ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

Canada has been very much at the centre of the establishment of the International Criminal Court (ICC) since the momentum shifted in late-1994 from the International Law Commission (ILC) to more broadly representative bodies established by the General Assembly. It was Canada that chaired the ‘like-minded’, a group of states active during the several sessions of the Preparatory Committee and during the Diplomatic Conference in Rome from 15 June to 17 July 1998. The ‘like-minded’ were committed to invigorating the ILC's draft statute by enhancing the independence of the Prosecutor and trimming the sails of the Security Council. At Rome, Canadian diplomat Philippe Kirsch was elected chair of the Committee of the Whole, and he directed the intense negotiations throughout the five-week session. Kirsch crafted the final package of compromises that was submitted to the Conference at its close, on the morning of 17 July, and that succeeded in rallying the vast majority of delegations when put to a vote later that day. Since then, Kirsch and his team have presided over the ongoing work of the Preparatory Commission.

Visits to the ICRC

1990 ◽  
Vol 30 (277) ◽  
pp. 345-346
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
United Nations General ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
United Nations General Assembly ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

• ICRC President Comelio Sommaruga received the members of the International Law Commission (ILC) at ICRC headquarters on 7 June 1990.The Commission is a subsidiary body of the United Nations General Assembly. Its 34 members are elected from among the most eminent representatives of the world's different legal systems. The Commission is entrusted with the task of promoting the codification and development of international law. It is currently working on the codification of offences against the peace and security of mankind (which include war crimes) and the setting up of an international criminal court.

Completing the ``International Criminal Order''

1998 ◽  
Vol 67 (2) ◽  
pp. 107-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Community ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Criminal Jurisdiction ◽  
Draft Statute ◽  
Domestic Jurisdiction ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

AbstractRecent efforts in the United Nations to establish a comprehensive system of international criminal repression by creating a permanent international criminal court are by no means free from doubts regarding the possibility ever to enforce such law. The preamble of the draft statute prepared by the International Law Commission states the basis on which the court is to assert jurisdiction in an ambitious manner: it is the ``International Community'', joining against ``the most serious crimes of international concern''. The project cannot, however, ignore decades of realist criticism against the assumption of the existence of an international community that is ready to accept an international criminal jurisdiction. In the negotiations, this contradiction is dealt with by a technique provided with an ambiguous name: ``complementarity'', i.e. the coordination of the tasks of the international and domestic jurisdiction. The writer discusses the various ideas and proposals presented under the heading of ``complementarity'' in order to examine the tension between communitarian and sovereignty-based strands in the international project to create an effective criminal jurisdiction.

Part 3 General Principles of Criminal Law: Principes Généraux Du Droit Pénal, Art.32 Mistake of fact or mistake of law/Erreur de fait ou erreur de droit

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schabas William A
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
General Rule ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

This chapter comments on Article 32 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 32 addresses defences of mistake of fact or mistake of law. The drafters of the Statute did not want to leave the determination of defences to the discretion of judges, an approach used in all of the earlier models including the final draft Code of Crimes adopted by the International Law Commission in 1996. In general, the purpose of codifying defences in the Rome Statute is not to authorize them but rather to confine them. Thus, article 32 admits defences of mistake of fact and law but under certain conditions. If article 32 were not in the Statute, the general rule on mens rea set out in article 30 would apply without restriction, possibly subject to limitation by the Elements of Crimes.

The Forty-Fifth Session of the International Law Commission

1994 ◽  
Vol 88 (1) ◽  
pp. 134-140
Author(s):  
Robert Rosenstock
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
State Responsibility ◽  
Draft Statute ◽  
Working Groups ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Future Work ◽  
Law Commission

The International Law Commission of the United Nations held its forty-fifth session from May 2 to July 23, 1993, under the chairmanship of Ambassador Julio Barboza of Argentina. The Commission elaborated a substantially complete draft statute of an international criminal court in a working group, considered aspects of state responsibility, commenced drafting articles on liability for injurious consequences arising out of acts not prohibited by international law, began its second reading on non-navigational uses of international watercourses, and made recommendations for its future work. The Commission continued its innovative use of working groups and subgroups to expedite its work and, consequently, had a highly productive session.

The Forty-Sixth Session of the International Law Commission

1995 ◽  
Vol 89 (2) ◽  
pp. 390-395 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Rosenstock
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
State Responsibility ◽  
Current Term ◽  
Sixth Session ◽  
State Succession ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

The International Law Commission of the United Nations held its forty-sixth session from May 2 to July 22, 1994, under the chairmanship of Professor Vladlin Vereshchetin of Russia.The Commission had one of its most productive sessions. It completed a second draft of a statute for an international criminal court; completed its second reading on nonnavigational uses of international watercourses; completed, provisionally on first reading, a discrete portion of its work on liability for injurious consequences arising out of acts not prohibited by international law; considered aspects of state responsibility; began its second reading on the Draft Code of Crimes; and appointed Vaclav Mikulka and Alain Pellet, respectively, as special rapporteurs for the new topics of “State succession and its impact on the nationality of natural and legal persons” and “the law and practice relating to reservations to treaties.” It is the intention of the Commission to conclude its work on these two topics during the current term, i.e., by 1996.

The ILC’s Draft Statute for an International Criminal Tribunal

1994 ◽  
Vol 88 (1) ◽  
pp. 140-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Crawford
Keyword(s):  
Working Group ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Second Stage ◽  
Third Stage ◽  
Draft Statute ◽  
Basic Parameters ◽  
International Law Commission

At its forty-fifth session in 1993, the International Law Commission took note of the report of a working group containing a Draft Statute for an International Criminal Tribunal, and transmitted that report to the General Assembly for comment. This is the second stage in a process that began in 1992, when the Commission established a Working Group on an International Criminal Court, which laid down the basic parameters for a draft statute. Its general approach was endorsed by the Commission and subsequently by the General Assembly. The Draft Statute adopted by the working group in 1993 gives effect to that approach, although with a number of refinements and much added detail. The third stage of the process is intended to occur in 1994, when the Commission hopes to adopt a final version of the Draft Statute, taking into account comments made on it at the General Assembly and elsewhere. The purpose of this Note is to outline the provisions of the Draft Statute, in the hope of furthering understanding and discussion of its provisions.

The ILC Adopts a Statute for an International Criminal Court

1995 ◽  
Vol 89 (2) ◽  
pp. 404-416 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Crawford
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Working Group ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Draft Statute ◽  
Basic Parameters ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Fourth Session

As an offshoot of its work on a Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind, the International Law Commission has for the past several years been working on the idea of an international criminal court. At its forty-fourth session in 1992, the Commission established a working group, which laid down basic parameters for a Draft Statute. The general approach of the working group was endorsed by the Commission and by the General Assembly in 1992. At its forty-fifth session in 1993, the Commission received the report of a working group containing a Draft Statute for an International Criminal Tribunal and, without formally adopting the text, referred it to the General Assembly for comment. The 1993 Draft Statute gave effect to the general approach adopted in 1992, but with a number of modifications and refinements and with much further detail. The General Assembly “took note with appreciation” of the Draft Statute and invited the Commission to continue its work “as a matter of priority,” with a view to elaborating a final draft, if possible, at its 1994 session.

Counterintuiting Countermeasures

2002 ◽  
Vol 96 (4) ◽  
pp. 817-832 ◽  
Author(s):  
David J. Bederman
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
State Responsibility ◽  
Methodological Challenge ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
State Succession ◽  
International Law Commission

The adoption in August 2001 by the International Law Commission (ILC) of its articles on responsibility of states for internationally wrongful acts well and truly brings to a close the twentieth century’s engagement with international law as (in Martti Koskenniemi’s memorable refashioning of George Kennan’s savage critique) a “gentle civilizer of nations.” Including the entry into force of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, the seven pillars of international legal codification have been completed with some form of assistance by the ILC: diplomatic immunities, the law of the sea, a comprehensive law of treaties, the Nuremberg Principles, andjurisdictional immunities of states. Indeed, the articles on state responsibility may represent an even greater methodological challenge for international law codification because they pose fundamental questions regarding the identity and nature of states. Like the Montevideo Convention on Rights and Duties of States and the ILC’s own somewhat obtuse efforts on the international law of state succession, the articles on state responsibility go to the intellectual core of public international law by delimiting the character of states and the nature of their obligations when they interact with other international actors. Perhaps, then, it is no surprise that the ILC’s journey into that doctrinal realm took over half a century, and consumed the attention of five special rapporteurs and countless Commission members.

The Forty-Fourth Session of the International Law Commission

1993 ◽  
Vol 87 (1) ◽  
pp. 138-144
Author(s):  
Robert Rosenstock
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
State Responsibility ◽  
Future Plan ◽  
International Liability ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Fourth Session ◽  
Law Commission

The International Law Commission of the United Nations held its 44th session from May 4 to July 24, 1992, under the chairmanship of Professor Christian Tomuschat. The Commission considered aspects of state responsibility, the possible establishment of an international criminal court, international liability for injurious consequences arising out of acts not prohibited by international law, and its future plan of work and working methods.

Towards an International Criminal Court

1950 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vespasian V. Pella
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
United Nations General ◽  
International Court ◽  
Nulla Poena Sine Lege ◽  
International Law Commission

The United Nations General Assembly on December 9, 1948, adopted a resolution reciting that “in the course of development of the international community, there will be an increasing need of an international judicial organ for the trial of certain crimes under international law,” and therefore inviting the International Law Commission to study the desirability and possibility of establishing such a judicial organ, in particular as “a Criminal Chamber of the International Court of Justice.” Further, in approving the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on December 10, 1948, the General Assembly endorsed a principle of the greatest import for the codification of international criminal law: that of nullum crimen sine lege, nulla poena sine lege.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document