The ICC and the Crime of Aggression: A Need to Reconcile the Prerogatives of the SC, the ICC and the ICJ

2008 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 655-686
Author(s):  
Vimalen Reddi
Keyword(s):  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Potential Interaction ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The Icj ◽  
International Rule

AbstractThis paper proposes a framework under which the ICC should exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression, in view of the much anticipated and impending Review Conference of the Rome Statute. In this context, it examines the potential interaction between the UN Security Council, the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice, in an eventual prosecutorial regime for the crime of aggression. The paper's underlying premise rests on the vindication of an international rule of law, so often dismissed in international relations.

scholarly journals Custom as a Source Under Article 21 of the Rome Statute

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Amit KUMAR
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Icj ◽  
Principle Of Legality

Abstract The adoption of the Rome Statute is a significant moment for international criminal law. Before its formulation, the criminal law was governed by the sources mentioned in their statute or Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice [ICJ Statute]. Custom is one of the important sources within the ICJ Statute. The ad hoc tribunals applied custom and even formulated certain customs. The formulation of custom is considered as against the principle of legality. To avoid such criticism, the State Parties inserted Article 21 in the Rome Statute. The provision clarifies the law which the court can apply. The parties chose not to include custom explicitly. However, the wordings of the provision indicate that the custom is still a source for the court. Apart from the wording of Article 21, other provisions of the Statute give ample scope for the application of custom.

The Situation in the People's Republic of Bangladesh/Republic of the Union of Myanmar Decision to Authorize Investigation (I.C.C.) and the Gambia V. Myanmar Order for Provisional Measures (I.C.J.)

2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (4) ◽  
pp. 616-693
Author(s):  
Alessandra Spadaro
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
The Gambia ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Preliminary Stage ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
First Time

For the first time, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the International Criminal Court (ICC) are dealing concurrently with the same set of events, which concern the violence to which those in the group that self-identifies as the Rohingya have been subjected in Myanmar, and that has prompted their mass exodus to Bangladesh. Before both courts, proceedings are at a preliminary stage.

The Special Tribunal for Lebanon: Is a ‘Tribunal of an International Character’ Equivalent to an ‘International Criminal Court’?

2008 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 513-528 ◽  
Author(s):  
WILLIAM A. SCHABAS
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Sovereign Immunity ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
History Of ◽  
International Character

AbstractThe Special Tribunal for Lebanon is the latest international criminal tribunal to be established by the United Nations. Similar in many respects to the earlier institutions – for the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda, and Sierra Leone – it stands alone in the fact that its subject-matter jurisdiction does not contain any international crimes. It is thus international in some respects, but it is arguably not an international criminal tribunal in the sense that was intended by the International Court of Justice in the Yerodia case. The drafting history of the Statute of the Special Tribunal is examined with a view to determining whether the new court should treat sovereign immunity in the same manner as the other three UN criminal tribunals.

scholarly journals RETURN TO SENDER: LET THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE JUSTIFY OR QUALIFY INTERNATIONAL-CRIMINAL-COURT EXCEPTIONALISM REGARDING PERSONAL IMMUNITIES

2019 ◽  
Vol 78 (3) ◽  
pp. 596-611
Author(s):  
Sarah M.H. Nouwen
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court

AbstractThis article argues that it is important for the International Court of Justice to be given an opportunity, for instance through a request for an Advisory Opinion, to explain what exactly it meant when it suggested that the ordinarily applicable international law on immunities need not be an obstacle “before certain international criminal courts, where they have jurisdiction”. Two international criminal courts have built a structure of case law on this one obiter comment, which it seems unable to support.

Rethinking Aggression as a Crime and Formulating Its Elements: The Final Work-Product of the Preparatory Commission for the International Criminal Court

2002 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 859-890 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger S. Clark
Keyword(s):  
Security Council ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
The Political ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Final Work

The crime of aggression will be included within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court once agreement is reached on its definition and the conditions for exercising jurisdiction. The author discusses the ultimately unsuccessful efforts of the now concluded Preparatory Commission for the Court to complete the drafting. He suggests how the mental and material elements of the offense might be structured consistently with other offenses in the Statute of the Court. Probably the biggest intellectual hurdle is that of “conditions.” A number of states, notably the Permanent Members of the Security Council, insist that there must be a predetermination of an act of aggression by a state made by the Security Council. Others believe that the predetermination can be made by the General Assembly or the International Court of Justice. Yet others claim that all decisions must be made by the International Criminal Court. The political choice between these positions has still to be made.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document