Substance and Procedure

Author(s):  
George P. Fletcher

This chapter discusses the procedure for prosecuting international crime. Being guilty of an international crime is one thing; being prosecuted and convicted is quite another. Being guilty in principle requires the following: first, an identification of a norm under which the suspect would be guilty if the norm applied to them; second, the application of the norm to the offender to conclude that the particular person is guilty. Initially, this two-stage procedure might take place in the minds of observers, and then, in the minds of people capable of bringing to bear the procedures of the International Criminal Court (ICC) or other international-national tribunals in order to effectuate a conviction. In either case, the notion of liability or guilt requires reasoning in a syllogism. The major premise is the substantive law, and the minor premise consists of the facts that appear to be provable at trial.

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (7) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Георгий Русанов ◽  
Gyeorgiy Rusanov

This paper is devoted to the issues of international criminal responsibility for the crime of genocide. The author explores the corpus delicti of it and draws attention to the problem of bringing the guilty persons to international responsibility. The author examines in detail individual acts constituting the corpus delicti: the murder of members of any national, ethnic, racial or religious group, causing serious bodily or mental harm to the members of such group, deliberate creation of such living conditions which are meant for total or partial physical destruction of the group; imposing measures intended to prevent childbirth within the group; forcible transfer of children from one human group to another. Special attention is paid to the problem of describing the individual elements of an act. The author supports all theoretical conclusions by examples from the practice of the International Criminal Court.


2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melanie O'BRIEN

The International Criminal Court (ICC) was established to prosecute crimes that “threaten the peace, security and well-being of the world”. Maritime piracy has a long history as a threat to international security and was in fact the first international crime. Yet piracy was excluded from the Rome Statute. In the years since the drafting of the Rome Statute, piracy has increased dramatically to become more like the threat it was in the “Golden Age of Piracy”. Criminal accountability for piracy has been minimal, due to logistical and jurisdictional difficulties. This paper offers an analysis of the potential of the ICC for prosecuting pirates: why it should be considered as a potential forum for ensuring criminal accountability for piracy, how piracy fits within the ICC's jurisdiction, and whether or not piracy should be added to the Rome Statute as a stand-alone crime or under the rubric of crimes against humanity.


Legal Ukraine ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 42-47
Author(s):  
Oleksandr Bazov

The article presents an analysis of the principle of universal jurisdiction as an important legal institution of international criminal justice. Analyzed the main international legal norms and judicial practice in this area. The directions of further development of universal jurisdiction have been determined. Analyzed the Princeton Principlesof the universal jurisdiction. Investigated the work of the UN International Law Commission and the UN General Assembly on this issue. Proposals for the improvement of international and national legal acts are presented. Universal jurisdiction or the principle of universality in the fight against international crime is an important legal institution in the activities of both national and international criminal courts. As with any international offense, the obligation to stop international crimes such as aggression, genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimes of international terrorism take the form of an alternative to aut dedere aut judicare or aut prosegue by Hugo Grotius, and under which any State has an obligation to search for and prosecute international criminals for these heinous acts, regardless of the nationality of the perpetrators and their victims, as well as the place where the crime was committed, or to extradite international criminals to any State that requires their extradition for prosecution and punishment, or to an international criminal tribunal. Thus, a state is obliged to exercise universal criminal jurisdiction over international crimes and international criminals, or to extradite them to another state or to an international criminal court under conditions determined by international law and national law. Key words: universal jurisdiction, International criminal court, international crime, state sovereignty.


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.


2020 ◽  
Vol 56 (07) ◽  
pp. 56-59
Author(s):  
Farid Ziyat Ahmadov ◽  

The fight against international crime has been a serious problem for states, especially since the second half of the 20th century. One of the most effective organizations in the fight against this is the International Criminal Court. One of the main bodies of the International Criminal Court is the Prosecutor Office. The article describes the main tasks of Prosecutor Office, the main features of the candidates for this position, the grounds for appointment and dismissal, the main functions of collecting evidence used in the investigation of international crimes and the main features of the cooperation agreement between Interpol and the Prosecutor Office. Key words: fight against international crimes, prosecutor office, evidence, investigation of crimes, cooperation agreement


Author(s):  
Станислав Тимошков ◽  
Stanislav Timoshkov

This research article examines the activities of the international community for inclusion in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court a number of amendments, concerning the fixation of the definition of the crime of aggression and the establishment of the Court’s jurisdiction over the international wrongful act. In a view of disputes between the states in the adoption of the Rome Statute concerning the definition of this international crime, set up a special working group whose objective was the development of a project for amendments in the Statute. After a long work at the international conference in the Ugandan capital – Kampala, the Member States of the Rome Statute were considered the amendments to be made to the Statute of the International Criminal Court for its greater efficiency. In considering these amendments were also taken into account the fact that not all states ratified the Rome Statute, respectively, for their adoption it was necessary to consider the national interests of these states. Despite the fact that the introduction of the amendments regarding the crime of aggression was deferred for a certain period, their adoption will strengthen the system of international justice. However, the article notes that it is important to consider the national interests of the states exercising the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court over the crime of aggression. This aspect concerns the extradition of persons accused of committing serious international crimes, especially the crime of aggression. In a view of the fact that, in accordance with the constitutions of most States, including the Russian Federation, not allowing the extradition of its citizens to the international judicial authorities, as a result, there is a conflict between the provisions of the Rome Statute and national law of several states. Thus, to prevent the crime of aggression and the development of liability rules for it, it is necessary to maintain joint action between states and international judicial organs.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 158
Author(s):  
Anak Agung Ngurah Riski Wahyudi ◽  
I Nyoman Budiana

This study aims (1) to analyze and find out the efforts to resolve genocide disputes from the perspective of international criminal law, (2) to determine the comparison of resolving genocide disputes that occurred in Rwanda and Myanmar. This type of research uses normative legal research, namely literature study, rules and literature related to genocide, and uses an argumentative descriptive approach. The results of this study explain the efforts and comparisons of resolving genocide disputes that occurred in Rwanda and Myanmar from the perspective of international criminal law. Genocide is an international crime that aims to eliminate ethnicity, ethnicity, race and religion in a systematic and structured manner. Efforts to resolve disputes are carried out in an international criminal manner and are handled by the International Criminal Court. The International Criminal Court is the highest judicial institution, and has the authority to handle international cases. comparative law is a method of investigation with the aim of obtaining deeper knowledge about certain legal materials. Comparative law is not a set of rules and legal principles and is not a branch of law, but is a technique for dealing with foreign legal elements from a legal problem. Court. The International Criminal Court is the highest judicial institution, and has the authority to handle international cases


2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 97-101
Author(s):  
Nihad Fərhad oğlu Qəyayev ◽  

The functioning of the International Criminal Court is carried out on the basis of the principle of complementarity. Thus, in the Preamble and Article 1 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court explicitly states that “the International Criminal Court….complements the national criminal justice authorities”. The principle of complementarity is revealed in Art. 17-20 of the Statute. This article discusses the algorithm and the criteria for evaluating the performance of the complementarity based on the analysis of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Statute), the Rules of Procedure and Evidence (2000), the Policy Paper on Case Selection and Prioritisations of 2016, the Policy Paper Preliminary Examinations of 2013. Key words: International Criminal Court, principle of complementarity, Rome Statute, international crime, state sovereignty, criminal law jurisdiction, international criminal law, principles of criminal procedure


2021 ◽  
Vol 65 (04) ◽  
pp. 249-262
Author(s):  
Nihad Fərhad oğlu Qəyayev ◽  

The Preliminary Division is a court unit that has important functions and powers within the structural links of the International Criminal Court and provides a link between criminal investigation, prosecution and trial procedures. In fact, this Department filters out whether the criminal act that took place during the period before the criminal case reached the Judicial Department falls within the jurisdiction of the Court, and such important nuances, and transfers the so-called "finished product" to the Judicial Department. The BCM stage of the proceedings has a very important role to play in the termination of the proceedings and in the issuance of the relevant decision (sentence). This stage involves an inseparable process, with the Prosecutor referring the case to the Preliminary Chamber, referring it to the Court of Appeals, and finally appealing to the Chamber of Appeals against the decisions and proceedings of those chambers. Key words: International Criminal Court, Rome Statute, international crime, state sovereignty, criminal law jurisdiction, principles of criminal procedure, international criminal law


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document