Close to Home

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 219-242
Author(s):  
Kim Thuy Seelinger

Abstract For decades, the ad hoc tribunals and the International Criminal Court have taken the presumptive spotlight in prosecuting international crimes cases, including those involving conflict-related sexual violence. However, recent progress in prosecuting conflict-related sexual violence in national courts has started to both fulfil and complicate the notion of ‘complementarity’ between these two arenas of international criminal justice. This article presents the historical antecedents and current diversity of national courts addressing conflict-related sexual violence. It first casts back to the 1940s, to the little-known efforts of the United War Crimes Commission that guided national authorities in their prosecution of wartime atrocities including rape and forced prostitution. It then focuses on three kinds of national courts addressing conflict-related sexual violence today: military tribunals, hybrid tribunals and ‘purely domestic’ specialized chambers, highlighting key case studies and different ways these courts have engaged international actors. In conclusion, the article confirms the growing importance and diversity of national courts in the prosecution of conflict-related sexual violence, identifying ways the international community can better support survivors’ access to this more local justice.

2021 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 209-226
Author(s):  
Małgorzata Szwejkowska

In the last decade of the 20th century, a war in the former Yugoslavia broke out, once again making Europe a witness to an armed conflict. Almost at the same time, another local ethnic bloodshed started, but this time in distant Africa — in Rwanda. Both these events included the most horrifying international crimes against humanity: genocide and war crimes. To prosecute the most important commanding figures involved in these conflicts and hold them criminally responsible, two ad hoc United Nations tribunals were created: International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in Hague and International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda in Arusha. They finished their operation in 2017 and 2015, respectively. The tasks of conducting and completing all ongoing proceedings, including law enforcement, after the completion of their mandates have been entrusted to the UN International Residual Mechanism. One of the crucial assignments of the tribunals and later the Redisual Mechanism was to deal with the request on behalf of the convicted for granting them early release. Although none of the statutes of the aforementioned courts provided any ground for early release, soon it was accepted that both tribunals, as well as their successor, were entitled to proceed despite this issue. As soon as in 2001, the first convict was granted early release, but with no conditions. It is estimated that, to date, more than 2/3 of all convicted by the Tribunals have been released before the termination of their sentence. This should raise the question of how to rehabilitate that kind of offender, convicted of genocide, war crimes, or crimes against humanity, to ensure they do not pose a threat to society anymore. Especially since the offenders serve their punishment outside the country of their origin — meaning, different rules apply according to the domestic law regulation of the state that voluntarily agreed to enforce the sentence. This article analyzes the juridical approach of the tribunals and the Residual Mechanism on the issue of early release of the convicts involved in the armed conflicts in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda.


Author(s):  
Beth Van Schaack

This book situates the war in Syria within the actual and imagined system of international criminal justice. It explores the legal impediments and diplomatic challenges that have led to the fatal trinity that is Syria: the massive commission of international crimes that are subject to detailed investigations and documentation but whose perpetrators have enjoyed virtually complete impunity. The book tracks a number of accountability solutions to this tragic state of affairs that are being explored within multilateral gatherings, by states, and by civil society actors, including innovations of institutional design; the reactivation of a range of domestic jurisdictional principles (including universal jurisdiction in Europe); the emergence of creative investigative and documentation techniques, technologies, and organizations; and the rejection of state consent as a precondition for the exercise of jurisdiction. Engaging both law and policy around international justice, the text offers a set of justice blueprints, within and without the International Criminal Court. It also considers the utility, propriety, and practicality of establishing an ad hoc tribunal and pursuing a transitional justice program without a genuine political transition. All told, the book attempts to capture the creative energy radiating from members of the international community intent on advancing the accountability norm in Syria even in the face of geopolitical blockages within the U.N. Security Council. In so doing, it presents the range of juridical measures—both criminal and civil—that are available to the international community to respond to the crisis, if only the political will existed.


2009 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aryuni Yuliantiningsih

Israel’s agrresion to Palestina has international reactions because of enormous victims caused by that action, whom mostly were civilians. According humanitarian law, Israel’s agression to Palestina had breached humanitarian law principles, there are : humanity principle, limitation principle and distinction principle. Israel has done war crimes so  international society asked how Israel can be justiced ? There are three mechanism to enforce humanitarian law. First, the contracting parties of Jeneva Convention State to enact any legislation neccessary to provide effective penal sanction for person committing or ordering to be comitted any of the grave breaches , second by ad hoc tribunal and third by International Criminal Court, but   it is rather difficult to prosecute Israel because Israel don’t ratificate Roma Statuta 1998. Kata kunci : Agresi Israel, Palestina


Author(s):  
Wilmshurst Elizabeth

This chapter concerns the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the ad hoc Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda, as well as other courts with international elements. It begins with a discussion of the ICC, and then addresses more briefly the residual mechanism set up to deal with the remaining work of the two ad hoc Tribunals and finally, even more briefly, other courts with international elements. The ICC in particular was borne out of the success of the ad hoc Tribunals, although other courts with international elements have since been created. All these courts and tribunals share the characteristic that they have jurisdiction over individuals, not States, and their purpose is to investigate and prosecute for various international crimes. Of these courts and tribunals, the ICC is the only one with a substantial continuing caseload and is the only permanent international criminal court.


Author(s):  
Amrita Kapur

This chapter explores the opportunities present in the Rome Statute to promote justice for victims of sexual and gender-based violence in the International Criminal Court (ICC). It focuses on the concept of complementarity to show the ICC’s potential for reform and to catalyze the prosecution of international crimes (genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes). It then describes the ICC’s broader approach to sexual violence and gender, as well as the domestic impact of this jurisprudence. The chapter concludes by suggesting that the Rome Statute’s standards should be introduced into national law. This could create broader benefits for women and victims of sexual and gender-based violence beyond the prosecution of criminal perpetrators.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 266-297
Author(s):  
Emma Charlene Lubaale

Abstract Not many states have effective national laws on prosecution of international crimes. Presently, of the 124 states parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Rome Statute), less than half have specific national legislation incorporating international crimes. Some faith has been placed in the ordinary-crimes approach; the assumption being that states without effective laws on international crimes can prosecute on the basis of ordinary crimes. This article assesses the practicality of this approach with regard to the crime of rape in Uganda. Based on this assessment, the author draws a number of conclusions. First, that there are glaring gaps in the Ugandan definition of rape, making it impossible for it to be relied on. Secondly, although national courts have the option to interpret national laws with a view to aligning them with international law, the gaps salient in the definition of ordinary rape are too glaring; they cannot be remedied by way of interpretation without undermining the principle of legality. Thirdly, prosecuting the international crime of rape as an ordinary crime suggests that approaches applicable to the prosecution of ordinary rape will be invoked. Because these approaches were never intended to capture the reality of the international crime of rape, the ordinary-crimes approach remains illusory.


2018 ◽  
Vol 57 (5) ◽  
pp. 960-965
Author(s):  
Scott A. Gilmore

On September 21, 2017, the United Nations Security Council unanimously passed Resolution 2379 mandating the establishment of an Investigative Team to collect and preserve evidence for use in national courts of international crimes carried out by the terrorist group Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). Resolution 2379 marks a growing trend in the United Nations’ establishment of investigative mechanisms to support the domestic prosecution of international crimes, in lieu of referrals to the International Criminal Court or creation of ad hoc international or hybrid tribunals.


Author(s):  
Serge Brammertz

This chapter presents a prosecutorial perspective on the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia’s (ICTY) legacies. It traces the evolution of the Office of the Prosecutor from a service that is grounded in primacy of jurisdiction into a more complementarity-oriented actor, in which interaction with domestic systems is an essential element to achieving justice for serious international crimes. The author argues that the support provided to national justice sectors in the countries of the former Yugoslavia is one of the most important legacies of the ICTY. The Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) started to engage with new techniques—including establishing the Transition Team—when the ICTY Completion Strategy was put into force. The OTP referred cases to national judiciaries, which improved in their capacities to process war crimes cases. The chapter concludes that the OTP’s cooperation with national courts establishes a new model of collaboration between international and domestic courts.


2003 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 345-367 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sam Garkawe

AbstractThe Statute of the permanent International Criminal Court (the "ICC") agreed to in Rome in 1998 contains many provisions that deal with the specific concerns and rights of victims and survivors of the international crimes that the ICC will have jurisdiction over. It consolidates the work of the two ad hoc international criminal Tribunals (the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda) in this area, but also further enhances the role and rights of victims in a number of innovative ways. These three international criminal Tribunals thus collectively represent an important step forward in the recognition of the suffering and the position of victims and survivors of international crimes. This article will examine three main issues in relation to victims and the ICC. First, after identifying the protective measures for victims allowed at the discretion of the international criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, it will focus on the most controversial measure (which the ICC can also order) - the non-disclosure to the defence of the identity of witnesses. Does this protective measure violate a defendant's right to a fair trial? The Statute of the ICC also allows, for the first time in international criminal justice, for the right of victims to obtain their own legal representation, subject to the discretion of the ICC. The second issue is how is this going to work in practice in light of the fact that international crimes normally involve hundreds, if not thousands or even tens of thousands, of victims? And finally, while the ICC Statute provides for the possibility of reparations to victims, where will the money come from, and thus what are the chances of victims actually being able to receive compensation?


2013 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 203-223 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dan Plesch ◽  
Shanti Sattler

Abstract More than 2,000 international criminal trials were conducted at the end of World War II in addition to those held by the International Military Tribunals (IMTs) at Nuremburg and Tokyo. Fifteen national tribunals conducted these trials in conjunction with an international war crimes commission established by these same states in October 1943 under the name, The United Nations Commission for the Investigation of War Crimes, that soon became the United Nations War Crimes Commission (UNWCC). The extensive work of the UNWCC and these tribunals serves as a source of customary international criminal law that relates directly to the current work of the International Criminal Court and the ad hoc tribunals in operation since the 1990s.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document