The Triggering Procedure of the International Criminal Court, Procedural Treatment of the Principle of Complementarity, and the Role of Office of the Prosecutor

2005 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 121-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Héctor Olásolo
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Civil Procedures ◽  
Principle Of Complementarity

AbstractThis article addresses the most fundamental procedural issues arising from Arts. 13, 14, 15, 18 and 53(1), (2) and (4) of the ICC Statute (hereinafter “the Rome Statute” or “RS”). It first analyses the reasons why the proceedings provided for in those articles constitute, referred to in this article as “Triggering Procedure”, within the complex procedural system provided for in the ICC Statute, an autonomous procedure whose object, parties and proceedings are perfectly distinguishable from the object, parties and proceedings of the Criminal and Civil Procedures. Once the relationship between the Triggering Procedure and the Criminal and Civil Procedures is introduced, the article analyses the procedural treatment of the principle of complementarity in the different procedures provided for in the ICC Statute. Finally, the last part of the article brie fly addresses the key role of the Of fice of the Prosecutor in the Triggering Procedure, and the duties imposed upon the competent Chamber of the Court to control, propio motu or at the request of a party to the proceedings, that the Of fice of the Prosecutor is acting within the powers granted to it by the RS and fully respecting the substantive and procedural standards set out by the RS.

The International Criminal Court and Universal Jurisdiction: A Fraught Relationship?

2009 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 498-512 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cedric Ryngaert
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
The State ◽  
Universal Jurisdiction ◽  
Territorial State ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Principle Of Complementarity ◽  
Do So

This article deals with the relationship between the principle of universal jurisdiction and the jurisdiction of the ICC. Voices have been raised to expand the jurisdictional basis of the ICC's Rome Statute to include the universality principle. The author does not support this expansion, however, mainly on practical grounds. At the same time, however, he does support, albeit cautiously, taking into account the universality principle for purposes of the admissibility analysis under Article 17 of the Statute. The ICC's principle of complementarity indeed requires that the ICC defer to any state that might have jurisdiction, including a state having universal jurisdiction over serious crimes. It is proposed that the ICC Prosecutor encourage certain "bystander" states that can provide an effective forum to investigate and prosecute atrocity cases, at least if the territorial state, or the state of nationality, proves unable and unwilling to do so.

Sexual Slavery and Members of a Terrorist Group – What is the Future of the 'Boko Haram' Trial at the International Criminal Court?

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 229-253
Author(s):  
Michala Chadimova
Keyword(s):  
Human Trafficking ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Boko Haram ◽  
Sexual Slavery ◽  
Preliminary Examination ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Principle Of Complementarity

Crimes committed by the members of Boko Haram in Nigeria are not only the subject of national trials but also of preliminary examination at the International Criminal Court (ICC). This article focuses on the sexual slavery perpetrated by Boko Haram, describes how the crimes are viewed within the national Nigerian criminal process and addresses the possibility of prosecution of the crimes at the ICC.<br/> This article analyses the legal terminology used to describe the crimes connected to Boko Haram – enslavement, sexual slavery, human trafficking and terrorism – and their interaction. While providing an overview of the ICC's current preliminary examination into the situation in Nigeria, this article discusses how the principle of complementarity is potentially holding the OTP back from the formal investigation.<br/> Furthermore, an overview of cases at the ICC that have involved charges of sexual slavery or enslavement will be provided. By analysing the Court's findings in relation to elements of sexual slavery, this article provides an insightful view into the Court's rhetoric on this crime. Similarly, this article discusses modes of liability that have been employed in the Katanga/Chui and Ntaganda cases and provides a learning opportunity for future cases of sexual slavery as both a crime against humanity (Article 7(1)(g) of the Rome Statute) and a war crime (Article 8(2)(e)(vi) of the Rome Statute; 8(2)(b)(xxii) of the Rome Statute).

Systematic and Casuistic Approaches to the Role of Victims in Criminal Proceedings Before the International Criminal Court

2009 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 513-528
Author(s):  
Hééctor Oláásolo
Keyword(s):  
Present Article ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Specific Manner ◽  
Critical Issues

The scope of victims' participation at the investigation stage of a situation and throughout case-related proceedings is today one of the critical issues before the ICC. The key provision on this matter is Article 68(3) of the Rome Statute. This provision entrusts the ICC Chambers with the discretion to determine (i) when victims can participate in ICC proceedings and (ii) the specific manner in which such participation can take place. The present article, which is written against the backdrop of the first Review Conference scheduled for next year pursuant to Article 121(1) of the Rome Statute, focuses on the systematic and casuistic approaches adopted so far by different ICC chambers in shaping, pursuant to Article 68(3) of the Statute, the role of victims at the investigation stage of a situation and in case-related proceedings.

Part 10 Enforcement: Exécution, Art.103 Role of States in enforcement of sentences of imprisonment/Rôle des États dans l’exécution des peines d’emprisonnement

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schabas William A
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
The State ◽  
Rules Of Procedure

This chapter comments on Article 103 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 103 deals with State enforcement of sentences. The enforcement regime of the International Criminal Court is premised on three broad principles: sentences are served in the prison facilities of States and are subject to their laws; enforcement of the sentence is subject to the supervision of the Court; and the sentence imposed by the Court is binding upon the State of enforcement. The provisions of the Statute governing enforcement are quite succinct, and much of the detail on the issue appears in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence.

Part 6 The Trial: Le Procès, Art.76 Sentencing/Prononcé de la peine

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schabas William A
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Trial Chamber ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Form Part ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Individual Role

This chapter comments on Article 76 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 76 governs the imposition of sentence in the event of a conviction. If the accused is convicted, the Trial Chamber is required to establish the ‘appropriate sentence’. In so doing, the Statute instructs it to consider the evidence presented and submissions made during the trial that are relevant to the sentence. Mitigating and aggravating factors relating to the commission of the crime itself, such as the individual role of the offender and of the treatment of the victims, will form part of the evidence germane to guilt or innocence and thus appear as part of the record of the trial.

Ratifying the Amendments to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court on the Crime of Aggression

2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 176-215
Author(s):  
Meagan S. Wong
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
State Party ◽  
Domestic Legislation ◽  
Force Mechanism ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
The Relationship

The Review Conference of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court in Kampala adopted amendments to the Rome Statute, providing for a definition and conditions for the jurisdiction of the crime of aggression (‘Kampala Amendments’). At present, the jurisdiction over crime of aggression has not come into effect at the International Criminal Court (ICC). For the activation of the Court’s jurisdiction over the crime of aggression, two cumulative conditions must be met: first, a minimum of 30 ratifications of the Kampala Amendments must take place; second, a majority of two thirds of States Parties have to make a decision to activate the Court’s jurisdiction after 1 January 2017. This paper analyses salient legal aspects of the activation of the Court’s jurisdiction over the crime of aggression. First, the question whether the requirements of 30 ratifications will be met will be considered. Second, the relationship of the entry into force mechanism of the amendments and the conditions for the exercise of jurisdiction will be analysed. Third, the procedure of ascertainment of the jurisdictional regime of the ICC over the crime of aggression, with particular reference to State referrals and proprio motu investigations, will be dealt with. Fourth, the need for States Parties intending to ratify the Kampala Amendments to implement the crime of aggression into their domestic legislation will be explored. Finally, the paper will explore the question whether the aggressor State (party) must ratify the Kampala Amendments in order for the jurisdictional regime over the crime of aggression to apply, or whether it suffices that the aggressed State is a ratifying State Party. A qualified solution will be suggested: while the latter reading of the law is the better one, consent of the aggressor State (party) is nevertheless upheld pursuant to the sui generis jurisdictional regime of the ICC over the crime of aggression.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document