Part 12 Financing: Financement, Art.115 Funds of the Court and of the Assembly of States Parties/Ressources financières de la cour et de l’assemblée des états parties

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schabas William A
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
The United Nations

This chapter comments on Article 115 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 115, in a sense, completes article 114, confirming that the funds of the Court are derived from the States Parties. Specifically, it states that the expenses of the Court and the Assembly of States Parties, including its Bureau and subsidiary bodies, as provided for in the budget decided by the Assembly of States Parties, shall be provided the following sources: assessed contributions made by States Parties; and funds provided by the United Nations, subject to the approval of the General Assembly, in particular in relation to the expenses incurred due to referrals by the Security Council.

scholarly journals The International Criminal Court and Non-Party States

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
William A. Schabas
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
The World ◽  
The United Nations

Although more than half of the States in the world are parties tothe Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, morethan eighty have yet to ratify. The article considers the relationshipof the Court with these non-party States. It examines theexercise of jurisdiction over their nationals, arguing that internationallaw immunities continue in force despite the terms ofthe Statute. Declarations of jurisdiction by non-party States arealso studied, including the declaration formulated by the PalestinianAuthority with respect to Gaza in January 2009. NonpartyStates may be asked to cooperate with the Court and, whereso ordered by the United Nations Security Council, they may berequired to do this.Quoique plus de la moitié des États du monde soient Partiesau Statut de Rome de la Cour pénale internationale, plus dequatre-vingt d’entre eux ne l’ont pas encore ratifié. Cet articleconsidère le rapport de la Cour avec ces États qui n’y sont pasParties. Il examine l’exercice de sa compétence à l’égard de leursressortissants, soutenant que les immunités du droit internationaldemeurent en vigueur malgré la teneur du Statut. L’article étudieaussi les déclarations de compétence d’États qui ne sont pas Partiesau Statut, y compris la déclaration formulée par l’Autorité palestinienneen rapport à Gaza en janvier 2009. On peut demanderaux États qui ne sont pas Parties au Statut de coopérer avec laCour, et, lorsque cela est ordonné par le Conseil de Sécurité desNations Unies, il peut être exigé qu’ils le fassent.

Part 2 Jurisdiction, Admissibility, and Applicable Law: Compétence, Recevabilité, Et Droit Applicable, Art.15ter Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (Security Council referral)/Exercice de la compétence à l’égard du crime d’agression (Renvoi par le Conseil de sécurité)

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schabas William A
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
The United Nations

This chapter comments on Article 15ter of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 15ter is part of a package of amendments adopted at the Kampala Review Conference in 2010. Under article 13(b), the Security Council may trigger the jurisdiction of the Court with respect ‘over the crime of aggression’. Article 13(b) entitles the Security Council to trigger the Court's jurisdiction, pursuant to Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations. Article 15ter(1) makes clear that the Security Council may only trigger jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with the provisions of article 15ter. Essentially, this is about the temporal limits of the exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression.

Part 13 Final Clauses: Clauses Finales, Art.126 Entry into force/Entrée en vigueur

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schabas William A
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Secretary General ◽  
The United Nations

This chapter comments on Article 126 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 126 deals with the entry into force of the Rome Statute. The Statute entered into force on the first day of the month after the sixtieth day following the date of the deposit of the sixtieth instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval, or accession with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, that is, on July 1, 2002. For States that ratify, accept, approve, or accede after the entry into force of the Statute, it will enter into force for them on the first day of the month after the sixtieth day following the deposit of instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval, or accession.

Part 13 Final Clauses: Clauses Finales, Art.127 Withdrawal/Retrait

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schabas William A
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
The State ◽  
Secretary General ◽  
State Party ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
One Year

This chapter comments on Article 127 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 127 addresses the withdrawal of a State Party from this Statute. A State may withdraw from the Rome Statute by providing a written notification to the depositary, the Secretary-General of the United Nations. The withdrawal takes effect one year after receipt of the notification by the Secretary-General, unless a later date is specified. There have been no notifications of withdrawal from the Rome Statute. The Statute does not indicate whether a notice of withdrawal can itself be withdrawn, thereby returning the State to ordinary status as a Party. Withdrawal does not affect the continuation of the Statute with respect to other States Parties, even if the number of them falls below the threshold of sixty.

Cooperation Between the United Nations and the International Criminal Court

2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 223-246
Author(s):  
Tamara Cummings-John
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
Administrative Support ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Judicial Assistance ◽  
The Relationship

As contemplated by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (‘Court’), the United Nations and the Court entered into a Relationship Agreement in 2004. The Relationship Agreement provides a framework for cooperation between the United Nations and the Court, including through logistical or administrative support to the Court, in particular in countries where the Prosecutor has opened investigations or is conducting preliminary examinations. The United Nations also provides substantive support and judicial assistance to the Court’s organs, in particular to the Prosecutor, but also increasingly now to the Defence, by making available documents and information generated or obtained by the United Nations and its various field presences. United Nations staff and experts have also been made available to the Court for interview and some have testified before the Court, for which the United Nations Secretary-General has to waive their immunity. This commentary provides an update on recent developments in two areas of cooperation between the United Nations and the court: information sharing, and contact with persons subject to warrants or summonses.

scholarly journals The African Union, the United Nations Security Council and the Politicisation of International Justice in Africa

2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 351-379 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benson Chinedu Olugbuo
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
African Union ◽  
African Countries ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Relationship

There are two questions with multiple answers regarding the relationship between Africa and the International Criminal Court. The first is whether the International Criminal Court is targeting Africa and the second is if politics plays any role in the decision to investigate and prosecute crimes within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. For the African Union, the International Criminal Court has become a western court targeting weak African countries and ignoring the atrocities committed by big powers including permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. The accusation by the African Union against the International Criminal Court leads to the argument that the International Criminal Court is currently politised. This is a charge consistently denied by the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court. The aim of this paper is to discuss the relationship between the United Nations Security Council, the International Criminal Court and the African Union. It articulates the role of the three institutions in the fight against impunity and the maintenance of international peace and security with reference to the African continent. The paper argues that complementarity should be applied to regional organisations and that the relationship between the African Union and the International Criminal Court should be guided by the application of positive complementarity and a nuanced approach to the interests of justice. This offers the International Criminal Court and the African Union an opportunity to develop mutual trust and result-oriented strategies to confront the impunity on the continent. The paper further argues that the power of the United Nations Security Council to refer situations to the International Criminal Court and defer cases before the Court is a primary source of the disagreement between the prosecutor and the African Union and recommends a division of labour between the International Criminal Court and the United Nations Security Council.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document