An Analysis of the Cooperation Regime of the International Criminal Court and its Effectiveness in the Court’s Objective in Securing Suspects in its Ongoing Investigations and Prosecutions

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 937-962 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rita Mutyaba
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
The State ◽  
State Party ◽  
Enforcement Mechanism ◽  
Enforcement Mechanisms

The International Criminal Court (ICC) has to rely on the cooperation of State Parties and non-party States in the arrest and surrender of accused persons who commit crimes within the court’s jurisdiction because it lacks an enforcement mechanism to apprehend those individuals. However, a State can refuse to cooperate with the Court based on competing requests for extradition of an accused, incompatibility of the cooperation request with international law, when the execution of the cooperation request is prohibited by national law, concern that the suspect’s human rights will be violated, the cooperation request has problems that may impede or prevent the State Party from executing the request; sovereignty claims. Notwithstanding these reasons, the cases before the Court show that the ICC has been largely successful in securing the arrest and surrender of accused persons. However, alternative enforcement mechanisms of cooperation requests should be considered as a means of apprehending suspects.

Dual Nationality and International Criminal Court Jurisdiction

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Wolman
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Functional Approach ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
State Party ◽  
South Korean ◽  
Dual Nationality ◽  
Municipal Law ◽  
Domestic Law

Abstract The International Criminal Court (ICC) can exercise jurisdiction over nationals of states parties. However, it has never been clear whether the Court will automatically recognize a nationality that has been conferred by a state party under its domestic law, nor what criteria it would use to evaluate that nationality should it not be automatically accepted. In December 2019, the Office of the Prosecutor made its first formal pronouncement on the question, finding that the ICC does not have jurisdiction over North Koreans, despite their being South Korean nationals under South Korean law, because North Koreans are not able to exercise their rights as South Koreans until accepted as such by application, and on occasion their applications might be refused. In this article, I reject the Prosecutor’s analysis as misguided. I also reject the other main approaches to nationality recognition suggested by scholars, namely a ‘genuine link’ requirement, a deferral to municipal law, and a deferral to municipal law except where a conferral of nationality violates international law. Instead, I propose a functional approach that would respect municipal conferral of nationality unless that conferral unreasonably interferes with the sovereign interests of a non-state party.

ACCIDENT AND DESIGN: RECOGNISING VICTIMS OF AGGRESSION IN INTERNATIONAL LAW

2021 ◽  
Vol 70 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-132
Author(s):  
Shane Darcy
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Future Application ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Civil And Political Rights

AbstractInternational law has not traditionally recognised individuals as victims of the crime of aggression. Recent developments may precipitate a departure from this approach. The activation of the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court over the crime of aggression opens the way for the future application of the Court's regime of victim participation and reparation in the context of prosecutions for this crime. The determination by the United Nations Human Rights Committee in General Comment No. 36 that any deprivation of life resulting from an act of aggression violates Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights serves to recognise a previously overlooked class of victims. This article explores these recent developments, by discussing their background, meaning and implications for international law and the rights of victims.

Part 13 Final Clauses: Clauses Finales, Art.127 Withdrawal/Retrait

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schabas William A
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
The State ◽  
Secretary General ◽  
State Party ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
One Year

This chapter comments on Article 127 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 127 addresses the withdrawal of a State Party from this Statute. A State may withdraw from the Rome Statute by providing a written notification to the depositary, the Secretary-General of the United Nations. The withdrawal takes effect one year after receipt of the notification by the Secretary-General, unless a later date is specified. There have been no notifications of withdrawal from the Rome Statute. The Statute does not indicate whether a notice of withdrawal can itself be withdrawn, thereby returning the State to ordinary status as a Party. Withdrawal does not affect the continuation of the Statute with respect to other States Parties, even if the number of them falls below the threshold of sixty.

Part 10 Enforcement: Exécution, Art.106 Supervision of enforcement of sentences and conditions of imprisonment/Contrôle de l’exécution de la peine et conditions de détention

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schabas William A
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
The State ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
International Standards ◽  
National Treatment ◽  
Receive Treatment

This chapter comments on Article 106 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 106 strikes a balance between the general carceral system applicable in the State of enforcement that applies to the Court's prisoner, and the requirement of generally accepted international standards drawn from human rights instruments. This ‘national treatment’ clause was originally introduced to ensure that prisoners of the Court would not receive treatment that was worse than that of ordinary prisoners. The primary function of the provision is protecting the fundamental rights of the prisoner. The article also declares that Communications between a sentenced person and the Court shall be unimpeded and confidential.

Using the International Criminal Court to Denounce Disappearances: Crimes against Humanity in Coahuila, Mexico

2021 ◽  
pp. 242-250
Author(s):  
Michael W. Chamberlin
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Sexual Violence ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Federation ◽  
The State ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Civilian Population

In 2017, the International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH), supported by 100 other organisations, submitted a communication to the ICC detailing crimes committed against the civilian population from 2009-16 in the State of Coahuila de Zaragoza, Mexico, including murder, illegal imprisonment, enforced disappearance, torture, and sexual violence. This chapter explains the procedural and substantive basis of their complaint as a model for others who may seek the ICC’s involvement in the investigation and prosecution a pattern of enforced disappearances.

scholarly journals Hukum Internasional tentang Genosida dalam Perspektif Fikih Dauly

2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (01) ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Nimas Masrullail Miftahuddini Ashar
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
The State

Abstract: This article discusses about the genocide in international law on the dauliy jurisprudence perspective. International law governs the genocide crime in the Rome Statute which is applied for the state parties. The Rome Statute becomes the basis for the International Criminal Court (ICC) which is responsible for handling the case of genocide and other cases listed in the Rome Statute. Based on article 77 of the Rome Statute, genocide perpetrator will be liable to imprison of not more than 30 years, or a lifetime (under certain condition). In addition, the offender will be liable to fine and confiscation. Based on this, international law governing the genocide can be quite fair because there is no difference in the position of judge and imposing sanction, but when it is viewed from the dauliy jurisprudence perspective, sanction given to the perpetrator of genocide is considered not to be commensurate with the conducted crime.Keywords: Dauliy Jurisprudence, Genocide, International Law

scholarly journals "The Legal Basis for the Exercise of Jurisdiction by the International Criminal Court and the Preparatory Work of the Rome Statute (V)," Journal of International Relations and Comparative Culture, Vol. 18, No. 2 (March 2020), pp. 37-48.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshiaki Kitano
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
The State ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
State Consent ◽  
Preparatory Work

This paper aims to discuss the legal basis for the exercise of jurisdiction by the International Criminal Court while viewing the topic as one of the issues demonstrating the current status of general international law concerning the creation of obligations for non-party states. The table of contents included in this part 5 is as follows: Chapter 3 Examination of the Preparatory Work of the Statute (Continued) (Section 2 Analysis of the Relevant Discussions Conducted in the Preparatory Work of the Statute (Continued) (2. Discussions on the State-Consent Requirements and Legal Basis for the Proposed ICC’s Exercise of Jurisdiction ((A) Exercise of Jurisdiction in the Cases of the State Parties’ Referral or Prosecutor’s Initiative))).

scholarly journals A New Perspective on the International Criminal Court: Why the Right Should Embrace the ICC and How America Can Use It

2006 ◽  
Vol 68 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ron Sievert
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Global Solutions ◽  
Romantic Attachment ◽  
The United States ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Left Wing ◽  
The Right

In examining the response of the U.S. to the development of international law and institutions, one observes that the proponents of an international approach are traditionally idealists and those representing the left wing of American politics. The opposition tends to be led by conservatives and nationalists. A review of public statements surrounding the creation of the ICC reveals that it is no exception. The Court was formed, in the words of Kofi Annan, to help “ensure that no ruler, no State, no junta and no army anywhere can abuse human rights with impunity . . . that those who violate those rights will be punished.” Organizations such as Human Rights First, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and Citizens for Global Solutions have heavily promoted the ICC, and many international lawyers have expressed a “romantic attachment” to the idea that the Court can efficiently judge and deter war criminals and those who abuse human rights. However, as early as 1998, members of America’s political right wing, such as Senators Jessee Helms and John Ashcroft, have made it clear that they viewed the ICC as a threat to U.S. national sovereignty and our preeminence in world affairs. Senator Ashcroft stated that the Court was a “continuing threat to the national interest,” while Senator Helms declared that “the United States will never—and I repeat, never—allow its national security decisions to be judged by any international criminal court.” AmbassadorJohn Bolton and the Cato Institute also took strong and early stands against the Court, with Ambassador Bolton declaring that the adoption of the ICC breaches “the American citadel . . . , advocates of binding international law will be well on the way toward ultimate elimination of the ‘nation state.’”

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document