The African Court of Justice and Human and Peoples’ Rights ‘International Criminal Law Section’: Promoting Impunity for African Union Heads of State and Senior State Officials?

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manisuli Ssenyonjo ◽  
Saidat Nakitto
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
African Union ◽  
Criminal Jurisdiction ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Heads Of State ◽  
The Impact

On 27 June 2014 the African Union (au) Assembly adopted a protocol entitled ‘Protocol on Amendments to the Protocol on the Statute of the African Court of Justice and Human Rights’. This Protocol contains an annex entitled ‘Statute of the African Court of Justice and Human and Peoples’ Rights’. The Protocol and the Statute annexed to it provide for the establishment of a regional court in Africa to be known as the ‘African Court of Justice and Human and Peoples’ Rights’ (African Court). This Court will, among others, exercise criminal jurisdiction over a wide range of international crimes involving individual criminal responsibility and corporate criminal liability over legal persons (with the exception of States), which goes beyond any other international court or hybrid tribunal. This article considers reasons for establishing a regional court in Africa with criminal jurisdiction and examines the likely effectiveness of the African Court focussing on the wide jurisdiction conferred on the Court; the impact of immunity from criminal prosecution granted to serving au heads of State and other undefined ‘senior State officials’; and the need to strengthen national criminal jurisdictions to enable them to prosecute international crimes in Africa.

scholarly journals The End of ‘Modes of Liability’ for International Crimes

2012 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 165-219 ◽  
Author(s):  
JAMES G. STEWART
Keyword(s):  
Transitional Justice ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Unitary Theory ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Blame Attribution ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Superior Responsibility

AbstractModes of liability, such as ordering, instigation, superior responsibility, and joint criminal liability, are arguably the most-discussed topics in modern international criminal justice. In recent years, a wide range of scholars have rebuked some of these modes of liability for compromising basic concepts in liberal notions of blame attribution, thereby reducing international defendants to mere instruments for the promotion of wider sociopolitical objectives. Critics attribute this willingness to depart from orthodox concepts of criminal responsibility to international forces, be they interpretative styles typical of human rights or aspirations associated with transitional justice. Strangely, however, complicity has avoided these criticisms entirely, even though it, too, fails the tests international criminal lawyers use as benchmarks in the deconstruction of other modes. Moreover, the source of complicity's departures from basic principles is not international as previously suggested – it stems from international criminal law's emulation of objectionable domestic criminal doctrine. If, instead of inheriting the dark sides of domestic criminal law, we apply international scholars’ criticisms across all modes of liability, complicity disintegrates (as do all other modes of liability) into a broader notion of perpetration. A unitary theory could also attach to all prosecutions for international crimes, both international and domestic, transcending the long-endured fixation on modes of liability within the discipline.

The African Court with a Criminal Jurisdiction and the ICC: A Case for Overlapping Jurisdiction?

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 418-429 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zekarias Beshah Abebe
Keyword(s):  
Legal Order ◽  
African Union ◽  
Common Occurrence ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Criminal Jurisdiction ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Territorial Jurisdiction ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Large Numbers ◽  
International Legal Order

One of the issues that the current proliferation of international courts and jurisdictions raised in the international legal order is overlapping jurisdiction. On 27 June 2014, the Assembly of the African Union adopted a protocol on the Amendments to the Protocol on the Statute of the African Court of Justice and Human Rights which extends the jurisdiction of the court to cover international crimes. The decision of the AU to clothe the African court with a criminal jurisdiction has brought, once again, the issue of overlapping jurisdiction to the surface. This article is an attempt to answer the questions: to what extent does the criminal jurisdiction of the African court overlap with the jurisdiction of the ICC, and is the issue of overlapping jurisdiction a common occurrence or an imminent concern? Taking the crimes under the jurisdiction of the courts and the fact that large numbers of African states are state parties to the ICC into consideration, many tend to argue that overlapping jurisdiction is inevitable and is likely to cause friction for the primacy of jurisdiction. However, this article argues that a close scrutiny of the substantive and territorial jurisdiction of the ICC and the African Court suggests that the issue of overlapping jurisdiction is both rare and of remote concern.

Criminal law measures to combat provocation of crimes and falsification of criminals

2021 ◽  
pp. 127
Author(s):  
Viktor N. Borkov
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Actual Problem ◽  
The Individual

The article examines the criminal-legal aspects of the actual problem of protecting the inviolability of the individual from the unacceptable activity of state representatives in the exercise of law enforcement functions. Topical issues for theory and practice of the legal nature of the provocation of crime and the falsification of criminals remain debatable. There are no unified approaches to the qualification of provocative and inflammatory actions and cases of "throwing" objects to citizens, for the turnover of which criminal responsibility arises, there is no theoretical justification for the criminal legal status of persons provoked to commit a crime. The article shows that the qualification of common cases of provocation of crimes and falsification of criminals according to the norms providing for liability for abuse of official authority, falsification of evidence or the results of operational investigative activities should be recognized as not accurate. At the same time, responsibility for these actions committed by subjects who are not officials, and without the participation of the latter, has not been established at all. The author proposes a draft criminal law provision providing for liability for inducing to commit a crime or its staging in order to illegally create grounds for criminal prosecution. The paper questions the approach according to which a person provoked by law enforcement officers to commit a crime is not subject to criminal liability regardless of the specifics of the encroachment.

ICC POLICY ON CHILDREN: OVERVIEW

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katarina Bebiya ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Practical Significance ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Preliminary Examination ◽  
Essential Components ◽  
The Impact

The article examines the basics of the International Criminal Court (ICC) Prosecutor's activity concerning children, set out in a document entitled "Policy on Children" issued in 2016 (hereinafter - Policy). The Policy has made a significant contribution to the development of international criminal prosecution of persons responsible for harming children during an armed conflict or a situation of violence. The ICC's policies and practice primarily consider the interests of children who have been victims of international crimes or who interact with the ICC as witnesses. The author draws attention to the fact that the Policy reflects the personal jurisdiction of the ICC, according to which the Court prosecutes only persons who have reached 18 years. Therefore, younger children involved in international crimes are considered victims of the ICC regardless of their motives. The author demonstrates how the essential components of international criminal justice - complementarity and promotion of the interests of victims - find their practical significance in the Policy. These principles are fundamental at the stage of the ICC's preliminary examination of a situation where the Prosecutor takes special care to assess the impact of a particular context of armed conflict or violence on the rights and interests of children. It is crucial to respect the interests of the child at the stage of investigation when the Court interacts with children victims and children witnesses. The author shows that the Policy has fully absorbed the international legal framework of justice for children, in particular those developed within the UN, and focused on providing necessary guarantees to children victims and children witnesses, taking into account their vulnerability and special needs. An analysis of the Court's case-law shows that analysing the ICC's decisions in cases where children have been victims of international crimes, the guaranteeing of the children victims’ rights to reparations remains a pressing issue and challenge for the ICC.

Recent Developments in the African Human Rights System 2011/12

2012 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 158-172
Author(s):  
Gina Bekker
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
African Union ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Welfare Of The Child ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
African Commission

A number of important developments have taken place in the African regional human rights system. This article surveys some of the key developments with respect to human rights within the African Union covering the period from 1 January 2011 to 31 January 2012. Consideration in this regard is given to a number of matters including the extension of the jurisdiction of the African Court of Justice and Human Rights to try international crimes, the issue of lack of individual access to the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights as well as the promotional and protectional work of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the African Committee on the Rights and Welfare of the Child.

scholarly journals Criminal Liability for Knowingly Unlawful Sentence, Decision or Other Judicial Act

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 93-102
Author(s):  
Pavel Metelsky ◽  
Nadezhda Verchenko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
The Public ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Considerable Complexity

Introduction. The publication is devoted to the corpus delicti, provided for by Art. 305 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which, being, in fact, a special type of official abuse, stands out as the direct object of a criminal assault and a special subject, since it can be committed exclusively by professional judges. The main features of the objective and subjective parties, qualifying signs of the offense are revealed, some problems that arise when applying this criminal law are outlined. Purpose. The goal is to analyze the design features of the crime and issues that arise when applying this rule. Methodology. The method of a formal legal analysis of the norms of the criminal law and theoretical provisions on problems directly related to the application of this rule was used. Results. The public danger of a criminal act that undermines the very foundations of justice is obvious, in connection with which it stands out as an independent crime by all the Russian Criminal Codes, starting in 1922, the history of criminal responsibility for its commission can be traced in our country in general since the 16th century. The current criminal law prohibition is characterized by considerable complexity, due to both the blanket nature of the disposition of the norm itself and the presence of discrepancies in the understanding of the signs embodied in it. Conclusion. The implementation of criminal liability for this crime involves the establishment of not only circumstances directly related to the corpus delicti that lie in the criminal law field. The subject of an infringement, a judicial act, must be subjected to procedural review without fail, after which, subject to the consent of the Higher Qualification Collegium of Judges of the Russian Federation, in fact, and the mechanism of criminal prosecution is “launched”. That is, a truly “multi-way” combination of actions is necessary, carried out in several stages, and the problem itself to some extent becomes interdisciplinary, going beyond only criminal law.

Part I Context, Challenges, and Constraints, 4 The ICC and the AU

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maunganidze Ottilia Anna ◽  
du Plessis Anton
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
African Countries ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
State Immunity ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Head Of State ◽  
Political Background ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Relationship

The relationship between the ICC and the AU has become a frequent bone of contention. The impact is naturally political, but it has also had an appreciable influence on ICC practice. This chapter analyses the legal and political background to the persistent disagreement, including the origin and foundation of divergent positions, such as, for instance, on head of state immunity and cooperation duties. It cautions against an oversimplification of ‘African’ views while also highlighting the progress made by some African countries in investigating, prosecuting, and adjudicating international crimes. It further examines the proposed expansion of the African Court of Justice and Human Rights’ jurisdiction to deal with serious crimes, including international crimes, and the implications thereof.

History of development of modern concepts of criminal responsibility of artificial intelligence in Spain

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (03) ◽  
pp. 259-264
Author(s):  
Viktor Shestak
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Cyber Security ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Legal Capacity ◽  
History Of Development ◽  
History Of ◽  
Legal Entities

This research proves the failure to address theoretically fundamental issues of robots' legal capacity and cyber security and as a result crudity of issues concerning criminal liability of robots for their actions. The proposals of a number of Spanish scientists on the possibility of non-proliferation of the sphere of criminal law on robots in connection with the existing possibility of criminal prosecution of legal entities in Spain have been worked out. In retrospect, the Spanish concepts of criminal responsibility of artificial intelligence were studied: their novels, shortcomings and problems of application in modern conditions were revealed.

‘Saddling’ the New African Regional Human Rights Court with International Criminal Jurisdiction: Innovative, Obstructive, Expedient?

2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vincent O. Nmehielle
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
African Union ◽  
Political Commitment ◽  
Member States ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Recent Initiative

Abstract This article examines the recent initiative of the African Union (au) to amend the Protocol on the Statute of the African Court of Justice and Human Rights that initially merged the African Court of Human Peoples’ Rights with the African Court of Justice of the African Union and to now create a new and holistic regional court – the African Court of Justice and Human and Peoples’ Rights – and endow it with jurisdiction for international crimes. The article principally interrogates three issues: (1) the legality and novelty of the au initiative, (2) the question whether the plan is in any way obstructive or a distraction, and (3) whether the initiative is actually necessary when considered against the wider scheme of effective functioning of the au and its human rights protection regimes. The article finds that while the au’s desire to establish an international crimes chamber within its human rights court may have largely been influenced by the politicisation of the international criminal justice system and its concerns about the icc’s nearly exclusive focus on Africa, there is nothing in international law that prevents the au from embarking on such initiative. However, it is essential for the au to conduct a necessity test, taking a number of issues into account such as adequate resources, credible legal and political commitment, and the opportunity available to member states in the complementarity principle of the Rome Statute of the icc. It is submitted that since Africa, as a regional block, has accepted the Rome Statute regime in large numbers, the au needs to engage with that system in ways that give African states parties credible ownership of justice, as addressing atrocity crimes would largely be achieved within the domestic systems of member states.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document