Address of Louise Arbour, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights

2006 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 511-526 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Just War ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The Political ◽  
Political Will ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
High Commissioner ◽  
War Criminals

AbstractIn July 2001, a few years after my first encounter with the intersection of criminal law and international law at the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and for Rwanda (ICTR), I asked the following question at a lecture at Melbourne University:While the political will to pursue war criminals was first lacking, is there, as some seem to fear, a danger that it will become relentless? If so, what effect will that have on the integrity of the complex aspirations and methodologies of criminal law as an instrument of social control in a democracy?After 11 September of the same year, the question acquired added acuity as I assumed that it would be not just war criminals but also international terrorists that the criminal law framework, domestic and international, would now be pursuing. I obviously was gravely mistaken in my concerns. The pursuit of terrorist suspects seems to have little to do with criminal or international law as we know it. Hence the real questions: What is it then about? Under what legal framework, if any, does it purport to operate and who is accountable to whom?

14. International Criminal Law

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Dixon ◽  
Robert McCorquodale ◽  
Sarah Williams
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
Political Will ◽  
National Courts ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals

This chapter addresses the prosecution of crimes in international criminal courts according to international—not national—criminal law. International law has long recognised that certain conduct, for example piracy and slavery, are crimes against international law which may be tried by international bodies or by any State. This principle has been expanded to cover more substantive crimes. International mechanisms for criminal accountability may be established where national courts have failed or are unable to try offenders due to a lack of political will, insufficient resources, deficiencies in national law, and/or ongoing conflict. The establishment and jurisdiction of the existing international criminal tribunals, including the International Criminal Court, are considered.

scholarly journals Nazi Crimes in Poland. A Never-Ending Search for Justice

2019 ◽  
pp. 142-160
Author(s):  
Hanna Kuczyńska
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
World War ◽  
National Courts ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Efficient Machine

This article deals with the model for prosecuting Nazi crimes committed in Poland in the light of the model presently used in international criminal law. It tries to answer the question: should the investigation of crimes of international law be handed over to transnational tribunals? Should they be hybrid tribunals involving a national factor, or completely supra-national tribunals like the International Criminal Court? Is it legitimate to transfer jurisdiction over these matters to national courts? The case of unpunished Nazi crimes in Poland may give a partial answer to this question. Certainly, various attempts made after World War II, including procedures brought before Polish courts, have contributed to understanding the function of international criminal law, and finding the answer to the question of the best model for prosecuting crimes of international law. At present, we also have the experience of international criminal tribunals, in particular the ICC, which is an efficient machine for prosecuting crimes of international law. Interesting conclusions can be drawn from its functioning that could improve the work of Institute of National Remembrance (IPN) prosecutors, and shed new light on the considerations regarding the prosecution of Nazi crimes in Poland after World War II.

scholarly journals State Practice as Element of Customary International Law: A White Knight in International Criminal Law?

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (5) ◽  
pp. 784-804
Author(s):  
Harmen van der Wilt
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Case Law ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
State Practice

Inter-state practice is relatively scarce in the area of human rights and international criminal law. This article ventures to inquire how this has affected the process of identification of customary international law by international criminal tribunals and courts. The main conclusion is that the two components of customary international law – opinio juris and state practice – have become blurred. In search of customary international law, international tribunals have resorted to national legislation and case law of domestic courts. These legal artefacts can be qualified as both evidence of state practice and opinio juris. The author attempts to explain the reasons for this development and holds that, if properly applied, the methodology, while seemingly messy, comports with the nature of international criminal law.

Is Peace in the Interests of Justice? The Case for Broad Prosecutorial Discretion at the International Criminal Court

2009 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-126 ◽  
Author(s):  
KENNETH A. RODMAN
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
The Political ◽  
Prosecutorial Discretion ◽  
Criminal Violence ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Peace Processes ◽  
History Of

AbstractThe argument against factoring peace processes into the discretion of the ICC Prosecutor is based on the premise that international law can be decontextualized from international politics and that in doing so will have superior consequences in terms of deterring atrocity and in consolidating peace. This view is at odds with the history of international criminal tribunals and the cases currently under review by the ICC. Those episodes demonstrate that the effectiveness of international criminal justice and its impact on peace are shaped and constrained by the political strategies of conflict resolution used by states and intergovernmental organizations to end criminal violence. Hence the Prosecutor should construe his discretion broadly to take account of the political context in which international criminal law has to operate.

s.VIII Boundaries, Ch.35 The Unity of International Criminal Law: A Socio-Legal View

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mégret Frédéric
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Crime Control ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Meta Theory

This chapter suggests the need to rethink, on both doctrinal and political grounds, the distinction between core and transnational criminal law with a view to recovering a sense of the discipline of international criminal law’s lost unity. It identifies a tendency towards fragmentation and rarefication that has led both core crimes and the operation of international criminal tribunals to monopolize attention and increasingly be identified with ‘international criminal law’ (ICL). This chapter argues that, in addition to having a weak doctrinal basis, that distinction is theoretically and criminologically dubious. It suggests that the time may have come to recover at least a unified research agenda when it comes to ICL—one that rediscovers the extent to which supranational and transnational criminal law are at the very least joined at the hip. This involves better conceptualizing how the defining phenomenon of ICL is not only the criminalization of certain international law prohibitions, but also the ascendancy of certain ideas about crime control globally, as well as the degree to which both core crimes and transnational crimes rely on a common criminal corpus and conceptual baggage. The chapter ends with a call for renewed engagement with a sort of meta-theory of ICL, one that would make more sense of the relations between its diverse constituent parts.

13. International criminal law

2021 ◽  
pp. 178-190
Author(s):  
Ilias Bantekas ◽  
Efthymios Papastavridis
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals

This chapter examines the fundamental concepts and notions of international criminal law, which is linked to other key areas of international law, particularly human rights, international humanitarian law, immunities, and jurisdiction. In particular, there is a focus on the concept of individual criminal responsibility under international law. The four core crimes are considered; namely, genocide, crimes against humanity, grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, and the crime of aggression. Moreover, attention is paid to two unique forms of participation in international crimes, namely, command responsibility and joint criminal enterprise. Finally, the chapter addresses enforcement of international criminal law, particularly through international criminal tribunals, with an emphasis on the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Accessibility and Foreseeability in the Application of the Principle of Legality under General International Law: A Time for Revision?

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 649-674
Author(s):  
Talita de Souza Dias
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Close Analysis ◽  
Principle Of Legality ◽  
Check Compliance

ABSTRACT The principle of legality is one of the most fundamental principles of domestic and international criminal law. It features in some of the most prominent human rights instruments, and its application has been scrutinised by various human rights courts and international criminal tribunals. One of the principal tests used to check compliance with that principle measures the accessibility and foreseeability of the criminal law at the time of the conduct. Yet a close analysis of this test reveals a number of fundamental flaws that seem to have escaped the eyes of most commentators and practitioners. These have led to outcomes of dubious legality. In this article, I argue that those problems are serious enough to justify a revision or a substitution of that test for one which is more in line with the rationales and dictates of the legality principle.

scholarly journals Daring Diversity – Why There Is Nothing Wrong with ‘Fragmentation’ in International Criminal Procedures

2013 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 777-781 ◽  
Author(s):  
VOLKER NERLICH
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Effective Control ◽  
Control Test ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals

International criminal law has made impressive strides over the past twenty years. The 1990s and 2000s saw the establishment of ad hoc international criminal tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda (ICTY and ICTR), the coming into being of the permanent International Criminal Court (ICC), and the birth of several internationalized ‘hybrid’ jurisdictions, notably the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL) and the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC). However, the dynamic development of international criminal law into a new branch of public international law has also led to some problems and confusion. The rules and principles developed by the newly founded international criminal tribunals have sometimes seemed at odds with accepted views on public international law more generally – raising fears about the ‘fragmentation’ of the law. Perhaps the best-known example of this is the controversy over the ‘overall-control’ test developed by the ICTY Appeals Chamber in the Tadić case to determine under which circumstances armed forces may be considered to be acting on behalf of a third state, rendering an internal armed conflict international. The Tadić test differed from the ‘effective-control’ test developed by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the Nicaragua case and confirmed in the Bosnia Genocide case, where the ICJ specifically rejected the ICTY approach. Also more generally, the discussion on ‘fragmentation’ and international criminal law continues; recently, Elies van Sliedregt set out in these pages her vision of legal pluralism in international criminal law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document