8 Specifically Protected Persons and Objects

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geiß Robin ◽  
Paulussen Christophe
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Cultural Property ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Islamic State ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Peacekeeping Missions

This chapter addresses the categories of persons and objects which receive specific protection under international humanitarian law (IHL), typically because they are seen as particularly vulnerable. In addition to the legal protection granted to the wounded and sick, contemporary IHL specifically regulates religious personnel; medical units and transports; persons and objects displaying the distinctive emblem; humanitarian relief personnel and objects; personnel and objects involved in peacekeeping missions; journalists; women; children; missing persons; hospital and safety zones; cultural property; and the environment. However, current practice shows that these categories continue to be vulnerable and that respect for the implementation of IHL is often lacking, with the repugnant practices of Islamic State (IS) as the new nadir. Therefore, the enforcement of IHL, through the application of international criminal law, either at the national or international level, is of the utmost importance to show that conduct violating IHL will not be tolerated. An interesting and hopeful sign in that respect is the prosecution of Al Faqi Al Mahdi before the International Criminal Court (ICC).

The Protection of Peacekeepers and International Criminal Law: Legal Challenges and Broader Protection

2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 585-608 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alice Gadler
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Peacekeeping Missions ◽  
First Time

The concern for the safety and security of personnel involved in peacekeeping missions has grown in the last two decades, mainly because of the increased risks deriving from deployment in volatile environments and mandates comprising multiple tasks. This article provides an overview of the developments of international law regarding the protection of peacekeepers, with a special focus on international criminal law and its role in enhancing the safety of the personnel and objects involved in peacekeeping missions. Indeed, starting in 2008, international and hybrid tribunals have issued their first decisions and judgments against individuals indicted for war crimes and crimes against humanity in connection with attacks against peacekeepers.After an analysis of the legal regimes established by the 1994 Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel and by international humanitarian law, the article examines the relevant international criminal law provisions and their application and interpretation by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, the Special Court for Sierra Leone, and the International Criminal Court. It is argued that the application of the specific war crime of attacking peacekeepers, introduced for the first time in the Rome Statute in 1998, presents particular challenges, but it has also led to the punishment of a broader range of offences against peacekeepers. Furthermore, the application of this crime may contribute to the broadening of the range of punishable offences under the more general war crime of attacking civilians, thus leading to the enhancement of the protection of civilians.

Protecting and Respecting Civilians

2011 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 519-575 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adil Ahmad Haque
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Civilian Life ◽  
The Law

There is a gap between the international humanitarian law of Geneva and the international criminal law of Rome, a gap between the law we have and the law we need if we are to “ensure respect for and protection of the civilian population” caught in the midst of armed conflict. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court fails to fully enforce four core principles of humanitarian law designed to protect civilians: distinction, discrimination, necessity, and proportionality. As a result, it is possible for a combatant with a culpable mental state, without justification or excuse, and in violation of humanitarian law, to kill civilians, yet escape criminal liability under the Rome Statute. The Rome Statute also ignores or misapplies three fundamental criminal law distinctions: between conduct offenses and result offenses, between material elements and mental elements, as well as between offenses and defenses. These distinctions are not empty formalisms but rather are the means by which any system of criminal law gives expression to its underlying moral values. The purpose of this article is to expose these defects and propose a way to overcome them. Drawing on contemporary criminal law theory, it offers a new approach to war crimes against civilians, one that better protects and respects the value of civilian life. This article proposes a redefined offense of Willful Killing that fully incorporates the principles of distinction and discrimination as well as a new affirmative defense that fully incorporates the principles of necessity and proportionality. Only by adopting such an approach can international criminal law provide civilians the legal protection and moral recognition they deserve. The recent adoption of an operative definition of the crime of aggression during a Review Conference in June 2010 suggests that further reform of the Rome Statute is achievable.

30. International criminal justice

2019 ◽  
pp. 645-664
Author(s):  
James Crawford
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
National Courts

This chapter discusses the development of international criminal law and institutions, international criminal courts and tribunals, and international criminal justice in national courts. These developments respond to but also reflect repeated failures to prevent serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law. The work of the International Criminal Court, specialized criminal tribunals and ‘hybrid’ tribunals is outlined.

scholarly journals The International Committee of the Red Cross and the International Criminal Court: Turning international humanitarian law into a two-headed snake?

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-19
Author(s):  
Fernanda García Pinto
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Committee ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Red Cross ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Gender Based Violence ◽  
Critical Approach

Abstract The International Committee of the Red Cross and the International Criminal Court are two very different entities that simultaneously apply international humanitarian law but do so after their own perspectives. This article proposes a cautious yet critical approach to some of their divergent interpretations (conflict classification, the difference between direct and active participation in hostilities, intra-party sexual and gender-based violence, and the notion of attack) and examines how the broader legal system copes with these points of divergence. The analysis considers the institutional characteristics of these two organizations and the pluralistic nature of international humanitarian law as well as its dynamic rapport with international criminal law in order to highlight the versatility needed to face the challenges posed by contemporary armed conflicts.

The Contestation of Value-Based Norms: Confirmation or Erosion of International Law?

2019 ◽  
pp. 311-334
Author(s):  
Tiyanjana Maluwa
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
First Time ◽  
Normative Powers

The chapter discusses the concepts of shared values and value-based norms. It examines two areas of international law that provide illustrative examples of contestation of value-based norms: the fight against impunity under international criminal law and the debates about the responsibility to protect. It argues that the African Union’s (AU) difference of view with the International Criminal Court (ICC) over the indictment of Omar Al-Bashir is not a rejection of the non-impunity norm, but of the context and sequencing of its application. As regards the right of intervention codified in the Constitutive Act of the AU, Africans states responded to the failure of the Security Council to invoke its existing normative powers in the Rwanda situation by establishing a treaty-based norm of intervention, the first time that a regional international instrument had ever done so. Thus, in both cases one cannot speak of a decline of international law.

scholarly journals The Legacy of the ICTY and ICTR in China

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 110 ◽  
pp. 245-250
Author(s):  
Bing Bing Jia
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Tribunal

Legacy is a matter that may become topical when its creator finally stops producing. Normally, the silent years would be many before the thought of legacy enters into open, formal discourse among lawyers and decision-makers. This comment treats the meaning of the word as relative to the circumstances in which it is invoked. The more closely it is used in relation to the present, the more distant it drifts from its literal meaning, to the extent that it denotes what the word “impact” signifies. This essay questions whether the word “legacy” is apt in describing the footprint of the work of the two ad hoctribunals in China, where its influence has, as a matter of fact, been waning ever since the adoption of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court in 1998 (“Rome Statute” ). The Chinese example suggests that the work of the tribunals is (at least so far) no more significant to international criminal law than the illustrious Nuremberg and Tokyo Trials of the 1940s. The most major impact (a more apposite term than legacy) of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) for China may be that China’s policy with regard to the tribunals, manifested mostly in the United Nations, has determined its approach to the International Criminal Court (“ICC” ). For that, the work of the tribunals could be considered as having left China something in the nature of an indirect legacy.

Part 3 General Principles of Criminal Law: Principes Généraux Du Droit Pénal, Art.27 Irrelevance of official capacity/Défaut de pertinence de la qualité officielle

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schabas William A
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Head Of State

This chapter comments on Article 27 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 27 consists two paragraphs that are often confounded but fulfil different functions. Paragraph 1 denies a defence of official capacity, i.e. official capacity as a Head of State or Government, a member of a Government or parliament, an elected representative or a government official shall not exempt a person from criminal responsibility under the Statute. Paragraph 2 amounts to a renunciation, by States Parties to the Rome Statute, of the immunity of their own Head of State to which they are entitled by virtue of customary international law. In contrast with paragraph 1, it is without precedent in international criminal law instruments.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document