Part 4 Composition and Administration of the Court: Composition et Administration de la Cour, Art.51 Rules of Procedure and Evidence/Règlement de procédure et de preuve

Rome Statute ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Court ◽

Intermediate Level ◽

Legal Norms ◽

Applicable Law ◽

Policies And Procedures ◽

Rules Of Procedure ◽

Flexible Mechanism

This chapter comments on Article 51 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 51 sets out the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, which have been described as ‘an instrument for the application of the Rome Statute’. They contain more than 225 distinct provisions, many of which are comprised of several paragraphs. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence provide for an intermediate level of legal norms, sitting between the Rome Statute itself and the policies and procedures adopted by the judges. It provides the Assembly of States Parties, which adopts the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, with a flexible mechanism, one that can be amended quickly and efficiently. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence sit at the same level of applicable law as the Elements of Crimes. The former are essentially procedural, the latter substantive.

Rome’s Legacy: Negotiating the Reparations Mandate of the International Criminal Court

International Criminal Law Review ◽

10.1163/15718123-01702002 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 17 (2) ◽

pp. 351-377 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Christoph Sperfeldt

Keyword(s):

Criminal Justice ◽

Rome Statute ◽

International Criminal ◽

Legal Framework ◽

Criminal Court ◽

International Criminal Justice ◽

Fresh Perspective ◽

Rules Of Procedure ◽

Victim Reparations

This article examines the negotiations that led to the incorporation of reparations provisions into the legal framework of the International Criminal Court (icc). Building upon a review of the travaux préparatoires and interviews, it traces the actors and main debates during the lead-up to the Rome Conference and the drafting of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, explaining how and why reparations were included into the Rome Statute. In doing so, the article shows how the reparations mandate was produced at the intersection of a set of different agendas and actors. From this account, it identifies a number of key themes that were at the centre of the negotiations and often galvanised contestations among delegations or with ngos. The article concludes with a fresh perspective on the origin of victim reparations in the Rome Statute and its relevance for understanding many of today’s debates around reparations in international criminal justice.

Part 10 Enforcement: Exécution, Art.103 Role of States in enforcement of sentences of imprisonment/Rôle des États dans l’exécution des peines d’emprisonnement

10.1093/law/9780198739777.003.0108 ◽

2016 ◽

Author(s):

Schabas William A

Keyword(s):

Rome Statute ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Court ◽

The State ◽

This chapter comments on Article 103 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 103 deals with State enforcement of sentences. The enforcement regime of the International Criminal Court is premised on three broad principles: sentences are served in the prison facilities of States and are subject to their laws; enforcement of the sentence is subject to the supervision of the Court; and the sentence imposed by the Court is binding upon the State of enforcement. The provisions of the Statute governing enforcement are quite succinct, and much of the detail on the issue appears in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence.

Part 2 Jurisdiction, Admissibility, and Applicable Law: Compétence, Recevabilité, Et Droit Applicable, Art.8bis Crime of aggression/Crime d’agression

10.1093/law/9780198739777.003.0011 ◽

2016 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Schabas William A

Keyword(s):

United Nations ◽

Rome Statute ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Court ◽

Secretary General ◽

State Party ◽

Applicable Law ◽

The Subject ◽

One Year

This chapter comments on Article 8bis of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 8bis defines the crime of aggression, one of four categories of offence within the subject-matter jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. The provision is part of a package of amendments adopted at the Kampala Review Conference in 2010. It entered into force in accordance with article 121(5) one year after ratification of the amendments by the first State Party. Liechtenstein was the first State Party to ratify the amendments, on May 8, 2012. Consequently, the amendment entered into force on May 8, 2013. On that date, the amendment was registered by the depository, the Secretary-General of the United Nations. However, exercise of jurisdiction by the Court over article 8bis is subject to article 15bis and article 15ter.

Part 4 Composition and Administration of the Court: Composition et Administration de la Cour, Art.41 Excusing and disqualification of judges/Décharge et récusation des juges

10.1093/law/9780198739777.003.0046 ◽

2016 ◽

Author(s):

Schabas William A

Keyword(s):

Rome Statute ◽

International Criminal ◽

Judicial Independence ◽

Criminal Court ◽

This chapter comments on Article 41 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 41 provides the mechanism to ensure the protection of judicial independence and impartiality that is affirmed in article 40. It distinguishes between ‘excusing’, which refers to a request by the judge to the Presidency, and ‘disqualification’, which describes an application by the Prosecutor or the accused person. The Presidency is without authority to raise issues of impartiality proprio motu, given that‘[n]either the Statute nor the Rules of Procedure and Evidence make provision for the pre-emptive control by the Presidency of the impartiality of the judges’.

Part 7 Penalties: Les Peines, Art.77 Applicable penalties/Peines applicables

10.1093/law/9780198739777.003.0081 ◽

2016 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Schabas William A

Keyword(s):

Rome Statute ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Court ◽

Third Parties ◽

Life Imprisonment ◽

Rules Of Procedure ◽

Bona Fide ◽

The Individual

This chapter comments on Article 77 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 77 sets out the penalties the Court may impose on a person convicted of a crime. These include imprisonment for a specified number of years, which may not exceed a maximum of 30 years; a term of life imprisonment when justified by the extreme gravity of the crime and the individual circumstances of the convicted person; a fine under the criteria provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; and a forfeiture of proceeds, property, and assets derived directly or indirectly from that crime, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties.

Part 6 The Trial: Le Procès, Art.70 Offences against the administration of justice/Atteintes à l’administration de la justice

10.1093/law/9780198739777.003.0074 ◽

2016 ◽

Author(s):

Schabas William A

Keyword(s):

Rome Statute ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Court ◽

Administration Of Justice ◽

This chapter comments on Article 70 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 70 deals with acts punishable by the Court as offences against the administration of justice. These acts may be divided into three categories: those involving perjury or false testimony; obstruction of the activities of the Court; and solicitation of bribes. The principles and procedures governing the Court's exercise of jurisdiction over offences under this article shall be those provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The maximum penalty for article 70 offences is five years imprisonment; a fine is an alternative as well as the possibility of both being imposed. Fines may be set for each individual offence or count, but cannot exceed in total 50 per cent of the convicted person's assets, ‘after deduction of an appropriate amount that would satisfy the financial needs of the convicted person and his or her dependants’.

Part 6 The Trial: Le Procès, Art.64 Functions and powers of the Trial Chamber/Fonctions et pouvoirs de la chambre de première instance

10.1093/law/9780198739777.003.0068 ◽

2016 ◽

Author(s):

Schabas William A

Keyword(s):

Rome Statute ◽

International Criminal ◽

Trial Chamber ◽

Criminal Court ◽

This chapter comments on Article 64 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 64 sets out the functions and powers of the Trial Chamber. It confirms that ‘[t]he functions and powers of the Trial Chamber set out in this article shall be exercised in accordance with this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence’. The general duties of the Trial Chamber include ensuring a ‘fair and expeditious’ trial, conducted with ‘full respect for the rights of the accused’ and ‘due regard for the protection of victims and witnesses’.

Sexual Exploitation and Beyond: Using the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court to Prosecute UN Peacekeepers for Gender-based Crimes

International Criminal Law Review ◽

10.1163/157181211x587661 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 11 (4) ◽

pp. 803-827 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Melanie O'Brien

Keyword(s):

Criminal Law ◽

Rome Statute ◽

International Criminal ◽

Sexual Exploitation ◽

Real Life ◽

Criminal Court ◽

International Criminal Law ◽

Applicable Law ◽

Gender Based

AbstractAllegations and confirmed cases of misconduct by peacekeeping personnel have been revealed by non-governmental organisations, the press and UN investigations. The majority of misconduct has fallen under the term 'sexual exploitation and abuse'. Sexual exploitation and abuse has encompassed rape, sex with minors, trafficking, prostitution-related conduct, sexual exploitation, and other sexual abuse. This article discusses accountability in international criminal law for such conduct, first exploring the development of gender-based crime in international criminal law. The core of this article consists of an examination of the applicable law under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, to determine whether or not the provisions could be used to prosecute peacekeepers for the crimes of rape, sexual slavery, sexual exploitation, prostitution-related conduct, and trafficking. Real life examples of criminal conduct by peacekeeping personnel will be given to test the applicability of the Rome Statute provisions.

Part 9 International Cooperation and Judicial Assistance: Coopération Internationale Et Assistance Judiciaire, Art.98 Cooperation with respect to waiver of immunity and consent to surrender/Coopération en relation avec la renonciation à l’immunité et le consentement à la remise

10.1093/law/9780198739777.003.0103 ◽

2016 ◽

Author(s):

Schabas William A

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Rome Statute ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Court ◽

Customary International Law ◽

Legal Norms ◽

Coopération Internationale ◽

Military Activity ◽

Judicial Assistance

This chapter comments on Article 98 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 98 emerged in the context of the debate on grounds to refuse surrender and assistance. The Rome Statute has the potential to conflict with other obligations of States under international law, whether pursuant to customary international law or treaty. In particular, they are required to respect the immunities of diplomats and international officials. States that allow military activity by foreign troops on their territory often have agreements, known as ‘status of forces agreements’ (SOFAs). Article 98 governs these conflicts by, in effect, making obligations of arrest and surrender under the Statute subordinate to other legal norms.

Part 2 Jurisdiction, Admissibility, and Applicable Law: Compétence, Recevabilité, Et Droit Applicable, Art.15 Prosecutor/Le Procureur

10.1093/law/9780198739777.003.0018 ◽

2016 ◽

Author(s):

Schabas William A

Keyword(s):

Rome Statute ◽

International Criminal ◽

Trial Chamber ◽

Criminal Court ◽

Applicable Law

This chapter comments on Article 15 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 15 sets out the rules applicable to the exercise of proprio motu (that is, on the Prosecutor's own initiative) triggering of the jurisdiction of the Court. It is closely associated with article 53, dealing with the ‘[i]nitiation of an investigation’. Article 53 confirms that the Prosecutor has the discretion to decide to proceed with an investigation. This issue is partly addressed by article 15 because it contemplates the ‘triggering’ of an investigation by the Prosecutor and the mechanism by which authorization for this is provided by a Pre-Trial Chamber.