Jo Stigen, The Relationship between the International Criminal Court and National Jurisdictions: The Principle of Complementarity

2009 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 439-440
Author(s):  
D. P. Hein
Author(s):  
Cedric Ryngaert

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.


2005 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 121-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Héctor Olásolo

AbstractThis article addresses the most fundamental procedural issues arising from Arts. 13, 14, 15, 18 and 53(1), (2) and (4) of the ICC Statute (hereinafter “the Rome Statute” or “RS”). It first analyses the reasons why the proceedings provided for in those articles constitute, referred to in this article as “Triggering Procedure”, within the complex procedural system provided for in the ICC Statute, an autonomous procedure whose object, parties and proceedings are perfectly distinguishable from the object, parties and proceedings of the Criminal and Civil Procedures. Once the relationship between the Triggering Procedure and the Criminal and Civil Procedures is introduced, the article analyses the procedural treatment of the principle of complementarity in the different procedures provided for in the ICC Statute. Finally, the last part of the article brie fly addresses the key role of the Of fice of the Prosecutor in the Triggering Procedure, and the duties imposed upon the competent Chamber of the Court to control, propio motu or at the request of a party to the proceedings, that the Of fice of the Prosecutor is acting within the powers granted to it by the RS and fully respecting the substantive and procedural standards set out by the RS.


Author(s):  
Michala Chadimova

Crimes committed by the members of Boko Haram in Nigeria are not only the subject of national trials but also of preliminary examination at the International Criminal Court (ICC). This article focuses on the sexual slavery perpetrated by Boko Haram, describes how the crimes are viewed within the national Nigerian criminal process and addresses the possibility of prosecution of the crimes at the ICC.<br/> This article analyses the legal terminology used to describe the crimes connected to Boko Haram – enslavement, sexual slavery, human trafficking and terrorism – and their interaction. While providing an overview of the ICC's current preliminary examination into the situation in Nigeria, this article discusses how the principle of complementarity is potentially holding the OTP back from the formal investigation.<br/> Furthermore, an overview of cases at the ICC that have involved charges of sexual slavery or enslavement will be provided. By analysing the Court's findings in relation to elements of sexual slavery, this article provides an insightful view into the Court's rhetoric on this crime. Similarly, this article discusses modes of liability that have been employed in the Katanga/Chui and Ntaganda cases and provides a learning opportunity for future cases of sexual slavery as both a crime against humanity (Article 7(1)(g) of the Rome Statute) and a war crime (Article 8(2)(e)(vi) of the Rome Statute; 8(2)(b)(xxii) of the Rome Statute).


2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 172-197 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Arcudi

In recent norm research, the question of the relationship between norm contestation and norm dynamics has been the subject of substantial debate. However, until now too little attention has been paid to the question of how and when contestation intensifies. Based on the differentiation between applicatory and validity contestation, this article proposes a specific mechanism for intensifying contestation—understood as an increase in the contestation itself as well as an extension to its validity level—by treating norm modification as an intervening variable. The main argument is that norm modification may be necessary to reconcile different interpretations of norms. Consequently, if norm modification does not occur, norm contestation may intensify. This article elaborates this mechanism by examining the controversies involving the International Criminal Court (icc). It shows that contestation began at a low and applicatory level but intensified after several attempts at norm modification had failed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document