Mobilizing Smart Coalitions and Negotiating Global Governance Reform

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom Buitelaar ◽  
Richard Ponzio
Keyword(s):  
Global Governance ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Mutual Recognition ◽  
Implementation Strategies ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
Governance Reform ◽  
Reform Strategies ◽  
High Level

This chapter examines global governance reform strategies based on “smart coalitions” that include all parties with relevant assets to contribute. It analyzes and draws lessons from historical reform efforts, first, those undertaken by three international commissions: the Commission on Global Governance (1995), the International Commission for Intervention and State Sovereignty (2001), and the High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges, and Change (2004). It then scrutinizes the factors contributing to the success of two recent global governance reform coalitions: the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (1997) and the International Criminal Court (1998). Analysis shows that reform strategies based on mutual recognition of the strengths and weaknesses of the various partners involved, and with active and sustained implementation strategies, have had the greatest success.

Complementarity in Practice: The International Criminal Court as Part of a System of Multi-level Global Governance in the Democratic Republic of Congo

2005 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 557-590 ◽  
Author(s):  
WILLIAM W. BURKE-WHITE
Keyword(s):  
Global Governance ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Democratic Republic ◽  
Domestic Politics ◽  
Democratic Republic Of Congo ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Judicial Reform ◽  
Republic Of Congo ◽  
Multi Level

This article asserts the emergence of multi-level global governance through an analysis of the relationship between the International Criminal Court and the Democratic Republic of Congo. The article suggests a far deeper set of influences than previously anticipated, presenting research on how the ICC is directly influencing Congolese domestic politics and how some actors within the Congo are seeking to manipulate the Court for their own political benefit. Further, the article considers the self-referral by the Congolese government, the early impact of complementarity, and efforts at judicial reform in the Congo. In the process the article develops a set of criteria to evaluate the ‘total or substantial collapse’ provisions of the complementarity regime.

Part 9 International Cooperation and Judicial Assistance: Coopération Internationale Et Assistance Judiciaire, Art.101 Rule of speciality/Règle de la spécialité

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schabas William A
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
The State ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
Coopération Internationale ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Judicial Assistance

This chapter comments on Article of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 101 sets out the principle of speciality, which is part of the customary law governing extradition between States. The rationale for the principle of speciality ‘is to protect State sovereignty’. For this reason, the rule is limited to the scenarios in which the person is arrested and is surrendered as a result of a request submitted by the Court to the State. It is inapplicable if the suspect has appeared voluntarily. The State that surrenders the individual to the Court may be asked to waive the rule of speciality if the Court seeks to proceed with respect to crimes that were not part of the original request for surrender.

Continental Divide and the Politics of Complex Sovereignty: Canada, The United States and the International Criminal Court

2006 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 227-248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrian L. Jones
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
The United States ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
Continental Divide ◽  
Transnational Cooperation ◽  
Le Canada

Abstract. As a recent instance of transnational cooperation and governance, encompassing a novel combination of international and supranational legal properties, the International Criminal Court provides an instructive forum for considering increasingly complex sovereignty. This paper considers why Canada and the United States have pursued such divergent policies toward the Court. I argue that these postures are informed by their subjective conceptions of state sovereignty, a reflection of varying interests, values and capacities. As such, this case study illuminates factors that may influence patterns and limitations of transnational cooperation by states.Résumé. Comme exemple récent de coopération et de gouvernance transnationales, englobant une combinaison innovatrice de caractéristiques juridiques internationales et supranationales, la Cour pénale internationale constitue un forum instructif pour l'étude de la complexité croissante de la souveraineté. Cet article examine pourquoi le Canada et les États-Unis ont adopté des politiques aussi divergentes à l'égard de la Cour. J'avance que leurs positions sont fondées sur leurs notions subjectives de la souveraineté des États et qu'elles reflètent les divergences de leurs intérêts, de leurs valeurs et de leurs capacités. En définitive, cette étude de cas met en lumière les facteurs susceptibles d'influencer les modèles et les limites de la coopération transnationale entre les États.

scholarly journals The International Criminal Court’s Impact on Peacebuilding in Africa

2020 ◽  
pp. 235-256
Author(s):  
Phil Clark
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Peace Negotiations ◽  
Policy Debates ◽  
Republic Of The Congo ◽  
High Level ◽  
Conflict Affected States ◽  
Resolution Processes

Abstract This chapter examines the International Criminal Court (ICC) and its intersections with two widespread domestic conflict resolution processes in Africa: national amnesties and peace negotiations. In doing so, it connects to two overarching scholarly and policy debates, namely the appropriateness and legality of amnesties as opposed to prosecutions for suspected perpetrators of international crimes, and the “peace versus justice” debate over whether the threat of prosecution imperils peace negotiations that involve high-level atrocity suspects. This chapter focuses on the ICC’s first two—and therefore most developed—situations in northern Uganda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), with secondary reference to Rwanda, South Sudan, and other conflict-affected states in Africa. The chapter concludes with some lessons from the ICC’s interventions for recrafting international criminal justice in support of the wider pursuit of peace.

Preliminary Proceedings of the International Criminal Court functions and powers

2021 ◽  
Vol 65 (04) ◽  
pp. 249-262
Author(s):  
Nihad Fərhad oğlu Qəyayev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Crime ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
Criminal Investigation ◽  
Court Of Appeals

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

Audience-Based Authority in Politics

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah S. Stroup ◽  
Wendy H. Wong
Keyword(s):  
Global Governance ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court

Our conclusion revisits the main findings in this study, but since we are hopeful that our authority framework travels to other parts of IR, we discuss extensions of and exceptions to the authority trap. For this, we both bring forth the example of the International Criminal Court, which, if anything, was not a vanilla victory. We also explore how the authority trap might work differently for non-INGOs, specifically non-state groups that use violence, and for global governance generally. What we show is that while the authority trap may be difficult to escape, it is not ironclad.

State Sovereignty, Jurisdiction, and ‘Modern’ International Law: The Principle of Complementarity in the International Criminal Court

2006 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 1095-1123 ◽  
Author(s):  
FEDERICA GIOIA
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Community ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
The Core ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Principle Of Complementarity

The article analyses the main features of the Statute of the International Criminal Court in the context of recent developments in international law. The core submission is made that the states' obligations enshrined in the Statute (namely, to investigate and prosecute the most heineous crimes, and to co-operate with the Court in their investigation and prosecution) are to be construed as obligations erga omnes. Since ending impunity for such crimes transcends the interests of individual states, the Court should act on behalf of the international community in remedying any shortcomings of states' action in this respect. In this perspective, particular attention is devoted to the principle of complementarity: it is argued that it could and should be construed and implemented in such a way as genuinely to allow the achievement of the universal objective of preventing impunity for those crimes of concern to the international community.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document