Human Rights at the International Criminal Court: Testing the Limits of Judicial Discretion

2017 ◽  
Vol 86 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-90 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Aksenova
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Specific Reference ◽  
Judicial Discretion ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
The Relationship

The future of the International Criminal Court (icc) is uncertain. The system established by the Rome Statute of the icc ensures that priority is given to domestic prosecutions, while at the same time, it imbues international values into national systems. The approach of the Court to the rights of the accused and victims’ rights poses challenges. In the Al Senussi complementarity decision, the icc refused to act as a human rights court and rendered the case inadmissible, notwithstanding the death penalty threatening the accused if tried in Libya. Does the same reasoning hold true in other circumstances? The article explores the relationship between human rights law and international criminal law with specific reference to the principle of complementarity and argues that judicial discretion is central in the assessment of the degree of human rights protection at the icc.

O SURGIMENTO DO TRIBUNAL PENAL INTERNACIONAL COMO UMA DECORRÊNCIA DO NEOCONSTITUCIONALISMO E DE SUA PROPOSTA DE PROTEÇÃO AOS DIREITOS HUMANOS UNIVERSAISTHE EMERGENCE OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT AS A RESULT OF THE NEOCONSTITUTIONALISM AND ITS PROPOSAL FOR UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS’ PROTECTION

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (9) ◽  
Author(s):  
Artemis Cardoso Holmes (Universidade Nova de Lisboa)
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Universal Human Rights

Neste artigo pretende-se demonstrar que o Neoconstitucionalismo, ao priorizar os princípios em detrimento das normas positivadas e eleger os direitos humanos como lastro de validade das leis, contribuiu para o desenvolvimento da jurisdição internacional, fato que possibilitou a instituição do Tribunal Penal Internacional.

scholarly journals The other side of the Article 21(3) coin: Human rights in the Rome Statute and the limits of Article 21(3)

2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 837-850
Author(s):  
Emma Irving
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Central Place ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
The Past

AbstractThe drafters of the Rome Statute sought to accord human rights a central place within the legal framework of the International Criminal Court (ICC). This was done not only through numerous provisions on the rights of the accused, victims, and witnesses, but also through the inclusion of the overarching Article 21(3) of the Rome Statute. Article 21(3) Rome Statute requires that the interpretation and application of all ICC law be consistent with internationally recognized human rights. While this provision has been employed on numerous occasions to bolster human rights protection in the ICC legal framework, it is not without its limits. In a series of decisions over the past few years, ICC judges have placed limits on the protections that can be read into the ICC legal framework on the basis of Article 21(3). Beyond stating that the ICC ‘is not a human rights court’, the decisions in question articulate no clear justification for the limitations imposed on Article 21(3). The present article analyses these decisions and identifies the underlying rationale for the Court’s approach: the principle of speciality. However, the picture is further complicated by the judges’ willingness to overlook the principle of speciality when particularly serious violations of human rights are involved. This leaves the precise contours of human rights protection in the ICC legal framework undefined.

Human Rights Protection before the International Criminal Court

2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 72-101
Author(s):  
Alex Davidson
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Successful Operation ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Substantive Content ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Interpretative Analysis

This article assesses the human rights framework of those accused before the International Criminal Court, with particular emphasis on Article 21(3) of the Rome Statute. Part 2 examines a number of obstacles currently impinging the successful operation of human rights protection before the Court, which Article 21(3) may remedy. Part 3, drawing on strands of interpretative analysis, seeks to interpret and illuminate Article 21(3), arguing that a broad scope ought to be adopted for determining the substantive content encapsulated by ‘internationally recognized human rights’. Moreover, Article 21(3) should be recognised as containing the hierarchical standard of what has been termed ‘super-legality’. Part 4 then highlights the interpretive potential for Article 21(3) as both a tool of innovation and as a remedial device for human rights violations before the Court that are not explicitly provided for in the Rome Statute.

scholarly journals Forced Labour in Brazil: International Criminal Law as the Ultima Ratio Modality of Human Rights Protection

2006 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 151-193
Author(s):  
JAMES L. BISCHOFF
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Criminal Sanctions ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Brazilian Government ◽  
Forced Labour ◽  
The Individual

Notwithstanding estimates that 12.3 million persons today are subjected to conditions analogous to slavery, public international lawyers have almost completely ignored slavery and related institutions in recent decades. This article explores the phenomenon of forced labour in the Amazon, where anywhere between 25,000 and 100,000 people are compelled through trickery and coercion to work in subhuman conditions. After outlining the legal regime governing slavery-related practices, the author examines why the Brazilian government has failed in its efforts to secure compliance within its own borders of its obligations under anti-slavery and human rights conventions. The author then argues that holding the Brazilian state responsible and assessing monetary damages is not in fact the most effective and fair way to secure the human rights of the victims of forced labour, and that international criminal sanctions for the individual perpetrators – including prosecution in the ICC for crimes against humanity – is a viable and preferable alternative.

9. Global Civil Society and Human Rights

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marlies Glasius ◽  
Doutje Lettinga
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Global Civil Society ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Social Rights ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Rights Issues

This chapter examines the relationship between global civil society (GCS), defined as ‘people organizing to influence their world’, and the normative ideal of a ‘global rule-bound society’. It first explains the concept of GCS before discussing some of the GCS actors involved in human rights issues, with a particular focus on their background, methods, and influence. It then decribes three kinds of activities of individuals and organizations in civil society in relation to human rights corresponding to three different phases: shifting norms, making law, and monitoring implementation. These activities are illustrated with two case studies: norm-shifting activities in relation to economic and social rights, and lawmaking and monitoring activities in relation to the International Criminal Court.

Legality, Culpability and Dogmatik: A Dialogue between the ECtHR, Comparative and International Criminal Law

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (5) ◽  
pp. 823-860
Author(s):  
Giulio Vanacore
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
Constitutive Element

This article aims to analyse a peculiar interplay between the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), comparative and international criminal law. The discussion focuses on legality, foreseeability of the criminal nature of conduct, knowledge of a fact’s wrongfulness and mistakes of law. Starting from foreseeability as a constitutive element of legality in the ECtHR case-law, the author examines ‘knowability’ of a fact’s wrongfulness as a component of the Continental law Dogmatik category of culpability, the issue of ignorance in common law and the general interaction between the principles of legality and culpability. With regard to the International Criminal Court, there is a problematic need to establish a personal mental link between an individual’s actions and the system criminalising such action. In this context, the issue of foreseeability as applied to modes of liability has proven to be problematic. The upshot is this paper’s appeal for a truly international criminal Dogmatik.

Assessing Victim Participation during Sentencing at the International Criminal Court

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 431-451
Author(s):  
Juan-Pablo Pérez-León-Acevedo
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Victim Participation

Abstract Although the academic literature has examined victim participation at the International Criminal Court (ICC), victim participation during the sentencing stage has remained a virtually unexplored topic. Thus, this article assesses the law and, in particular, the practice of the ICC on victim participation during sentencing in light of domestic/international criminal law and human rights law standards. Victim participation during the ICC sentencing stage, i.e. mainly written observations and sentencing hearing participation, is overall consistent with international and domestic criminal law standards, particularly with certain common law jurisdictions and with the Special Tribunal for Lebanon where the trial and sentencing stages are also divided. Additionally, victim participation during the ICC sentencing stage may arguably be justified under international human rights law, especially human rights case law. Importantly, the ICC has introduced some limitations to victim participation to safeguard the convicted person’s rights and procedural efficiency.

scholarly journals The Relationship between the International Criminal Court and its Host State: The Impact on Human Rights

2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 479-493 ◽  
Author(s):  
EMMA IRVING
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Host State ◽  
Legal Relationship ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Relationship

AbstractWhen an international criminal tribunal establishes its headquarters in a state, its legal relationship with that state must be carved out. This legal relationship has the potential to exclude the applicability of human rights protection by curtailing the host state's jurisdiction in parts of its territory. Despite this, there is little clarity as to when when such curtailment should arise. This problem is illustrated by the situation regarding witnesses at the International Criminal Court, which has recently been the subject of decisions of the Hague District Court and of the European Court of Human Rights. These two courts disagree on the threshold at which the human rights issues engaged by the situation are brought under the jurisdiction of the Netherlands. This article submits that the European Court in Djokaba Lambi Longa v. The Netherlands set the threshold for jurisdiction under the Convention too high. In applying easily distinguishable previous case law, and failing to take into account all relevant facts, the Court's finding of inadmissibility is unconvincing. The Dutch Court, on the other hand, took a broader approach from which the European Court of Human Rights could learn. Ultimately the two decisions give contrasting interpretations of the relationship between the ICC and its host state, which could have wider ramifications.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document