The Prosecution of International Crimes in Argentina

2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 491-507 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pablo Parenti
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Case Law ◽  
International Norms ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Principle Of Legality

AbstractIn recent years, the Argentine courts have developed a rich case law surrounding the prosecution of international crimes. In particular, the courts have handed down judgments regarding the limits to amnesties and pardons, and the inapplicability of statutory limitations for crimes against humanity, invoking several sources of international law in the process. However, applying these international norms has caused debate about constitutional matters such as the reach of the principle of legality, the use of customary law, and whether domestic criminal norms are compatible—or could even be combined—with international criminal norms.

Prosecuting Crimes against Humanity and Genocide at the International Crimes Tribunal Bangladesh: An Approach to International Criminal Law Standards

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maruf Billah
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Critical Evaluation ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Genocide Convention ◽  
International Crimes

Bangladesh is recently prosecuting and punishing the perpetrators of crimes against humanity and genocide committed in the Liberation War of 1971 via a domestically operated International Crimes Tribunal Bangladesh (‘ICTB’). Though the Tribunal is preceded under the municipal law, it's material jurisdiction, i.e., crimes against humanity and genocide are originated from international criminal law. Therefore, this study purposes to examine several legal obligations of the ICTB in defining crimes against humanity and genocide as the core international crimes. Firstly, I scrutinize what is the legal status of international law (treaty and customary law) in Bangladesh's legal system? Secondly, by applying international criminal law standards, I focus on that is it one of the obligations of Bangladesh to apply international criminal law definitions of genocide under the treaty obligation as the contracting parties to Genocide Convention 1948, and the ICC Statute 1998? Thirdly, I also discuss whether Bangladesh has any obligation to apply customary international law definitions of crimes against humanity because crimes against humanity are considered as jus cogens offense in general international law, from which no derogation is permitted. Lastly, after a critical evaluation of domestic and international criminal law instruments, I conclude that Bangladesh certainly failed to fulfill its legal obligation to define international crimes under a treaty and customary laws, which is one of the fatal errors of the ICTB, a government-sponsored criminal tribunal, to secure criminal justice to the accused.

Limitations of the Ordinary-Crimes Approach to the International Crime of Rape: the Case of Uganda

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 266-297
Author(s):  
Emma Charlene Lubaale
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Crime ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Principle Of Legality

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.

scholarly journals The Crisis of International Criminal Law in Africa: A Regional Regime in Response?

2019 ◽  
Vol 66 (2) ◽  
pp. 287-311
Author(s):  
Eki Yemisi Omorogbe
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
International Crimes

Abstract This article considers the African Union’s (AU) proposal for a regional court for international crimes under the Malabo Protocol 2014 (Protocol). It places that within the AU’s rejection of the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) arrest warrants for African Heads of States that are not party to the Rome Statute and a more general protection of incumbents. It argues that the enthusiasm for establishing a regional criminal court, which lacks jurisdiction to prosecute incumbents, has not been sustained and African states remain committed to the ICC. It shows that nevertheless the Protocol’s provisions on genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, although imperfect, better address the specific character of armed conflicts in Africa than current international law, including the Rome Statute of the ICC. It concludes that the regional court for international crimes is unlikely to be established unless the ICC takes further action against incumbent leaders but that the Protocol’s provisions could be used in the development of a more Africa-centric international law.

scholarly journals TERMINOLOGI KEJAHATAN DALAM HUKUM PIDANA INTERNASIONAL

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Dewi Bunga ◽  
Dewi Bunga
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
International Peace ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
The People ◽  
International Conventions

The globalization of crime incised a social reality where crimes can be committed across national borders and have an impact not only on the people of a country, but on the international community. Theoretically, there are several terms that are known to describe acts which are called crimes under international law, namely international crimes, transnational crimes, and national crimes with international dimensions. International crimes are crimes that threaten both directly and indirectly to international peace and security, affect many countries and have universal jurisdiction. The qualification of international crimes refers to crimes regulated in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Rome Statute circulated as document A / CONF.183 / 9 of 17 July 1998), namely crimes of genocide; crimes against humanity; war crimes; and crime of aggression. Transnational crimes are transnational crimes regulated in international conventions.

The Diplomacy of Universal Jurisdiction: The Political Branches and the Transnational Prosecution of International Crimes

2011 ◽  
Vol 105 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Máximo Langer
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
Universal Jurisdiction ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals

Under universal jurisdiction, any state in the world may prosecute and try the core international crimes— crimes against humanity, genocide, torture, and war crimes—without any territorial, personal, or national-interest link to the crime in question whenit was committed.The jurisdictional claim is predicated on the atrocious nature of the crime and legally based on treaties or customary international law. Unlike the regime of international criminal tribunals created by the United Nations Security Council and the enforcement regime of the International Criminal Court (ICC), the regime of universal jurisdiction is completely decentralized.

scholarly journals REGULASI PENDAFTARAN MEREK INTERNASIONAL DALAM UNDANG-UNDANG REPUBLIK INDONESIA NOMOR 20 TAHUN 2016 TENTANG MEREK DAN INDIKASI GEOGRAFIS

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-77
Author(s):  
Cokorda Istri Dian Laksmi Dewi
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
International Peace ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
The People ◽  
International Conventions

The globalization of crime incised a social reality where crimes can be committed across national borders and have an impact not only on the people of a country, but on the international community. Theoretically, there are several terms that are known to describe acts which are called crimes under international law, namely international crimes, transnational crimes, and national crimes with international dimensions. International crimes are crimes that threaten both directly and indirectly to international peace and security, affect many countries and have universal jurisdiction. The qualification of international crimes refers to crimes regulated in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Rome Statute circulated as document A / CONF.183 / 9 of 17 July 1998), namely crimes of genocide; crimes against humanity; war crimes; and crime of aggression. Transnational crimes are transnational crimes regulated in international conventions.  

13. International criminal law

2021 ◽  
pp. 178-190
Author(s):  
Ilias Bantekas ◽  
Efthymios Papastavridis
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals

This chapter examines the fundamental concepts and notions of international criminal law, which is linked to other key areas of international law, particularly human rights, international humanitarian law, immunities, and jurisdiction. In particular, there is a focus on the concept of individual criminal responsibility under international law. The four core crimes are considered; namely, genocide, crimes against humanity, grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, and the crime of aggression. Moreover, attention is paid to two unique forms of participation in international crimes, namely, command responsibility and joint criminal enterprise. Finally, the chapter addresses enforcement of international criminal law, particularly through international criminal tribunals, with an emphasis on the International Criminal Court (ICC).

scholarly journals La protección de los derechos humanos en la justicia penal internacional: el caso particular del Tribunal Penal Internacional para la ex-Yugoslavia en relación con el derecho consuetudinario y el principio de legalidad = The protection of human rights in international Criminal Justice: the particular case of the international criminal tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in relation to customary law and the principle of legality

2018 ◽  
pp. 70
Author(s):  
Elena C. Díaz Galán ◽  
Harold Bertot Triana
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Derechos Humanos ◽  
Principle Of Legality

RESUMEN: La labor del Tribunal Penal Internacional para la Ex-Yugoslavia tuvo un momento importante en la compresión del principio de legalidad, como principio básico en la garantía de los derechos humanos, al enfrentar no sólo el derecho consuetudinario como fuente de derecho sino también diferentes modos o enfoques en la identificación de este derecho consuetudinario. Esta relación debe ser analizada a la luz de las limitaciones que tiene el derecho internacional y, sobre todo, de los procedimientos de creación de normas. No resulta fácil exigir responsabilidad en el cumplimiento del derecho internacional humanitario y de los derechos humanos. La práctica de este Tribunal abre una vía para la reflexión con la finalidad de asegurar el respeto de los derechos humanos en cualquier circunstancia, incluso de aquellos que llevaron a cabo la comisión de graves crímenes contra la comunidad internacional.ABSTRACT: The work of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia was important for understanding the principle of legality as a key principle on the guarantee of Human Rights. The former was due to the Tribunal’s work on having faced the customary law as a source of law using different perspectives for its identification. The link between customary law, principle of legality and human rights has to be analyzed taking in account the limits of International law and the procedures for creating legal norms. It is not easy to invoke responsibility in the fulfillment of international humanitarian law and international law of human rights. The practice developed by this Tribunal provides an avenue for thinking about ensuring the respect of the human rights in any case including the commission of grave crimes against international community. PALABRAS CLAVE: derecho internacional de los derechos humanos, principio de legalidad, derecho internacional humanitario, costumbre internacionalKEYWORDS: international law of human rights, principle of legality, international humanitarian law, international custom

The problematic aspects of International core crimes and transnational crimes accordingly to International Law

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (31) ◽  
pp. 376-388
Author(s):  
Nadiia Shulzhenko ◽  
Snizhana Romashkin ◽  
Mykola Rubashchenko ◽  
Hаlyna Tatarenko
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Small Range ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
International Conventions

Today, the boundaries of international crime involving states and transnational organized crime are slowly blurring, and as a result, the number of international crimes is steadily growing. The article analyzes two key groups of crimes: crimes indicated in the Rome Statute and transnational crimes under international conventions. This article is based on the analysis of the main groups of crimes: the first group of international crimes committed with state actors, which includes crimes against humanity, war crimes, crimes of aggression, crimes of genocide; and the second group, crimes committed by criminal groups organized in more than one country with the "international" or "transnational" character of such acts. The authors emphasize the norms of international law, according to which the International Criminal Court, together with international criminal tribunals, have jurisdiction over a small range of key international crimes, including genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity, aggression, committed by state officials. The main objective of this research is to compare the mechanism for investigating crimes in the jurisdiction of international criminal tribunals and the International Criminal Court, together with the national procedure for investigating transnational crimes, through the ratification of international conventions and the establishment of the International cooperation. The article was made with the following methods: induction, deduction, analogy, as well as historical, dialectical and formal legal methods.

Individual Criminal Responsibility before the International Criminal Court

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Goy
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Individual Criminal Responsibility

For more than 15 years the two ad hoc Tribunals, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), have interpreted the requirements of different forms of individual criminal responsibility. It is thus helpful to look at whether and to what extent the jurisprudence of the ICTY/ICTR may provide guidance to the International Criminal Court (ICC). To this end, this article compares the requirements of individual criminal responsibility at the ICTY/ICTR and the ICC. The article concludes that, applied with caution, the jurisprudence of the ICTY/ICTR – as an expression of international law – can assist in interpreting the modes of liability under the ICC Statute. ICTY/ICTR case law seems to be most helpful with regard to accessorial forms of liability, in particular their objective elements. Moreover, it may assist in interpreting the subjective requirements set out in Article 30 ICC Statute.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document