And then Two Came Along at Once: Inter-State Cooperation on Core Crimes, the ilc and the Group of Core States

Despite their fundamental importance in the effective prosecution of international crimes, inter-state judicial cooperation regimes have long been overlooked. However, two new initiatives have recently emerged. The first is the International Law Commission’s Draft Articles on Crimes against Humanity (Draft Articles), which aims to create a global convention on prevention, punishment and inter-State cooperation with respect to crimes against humanity. The second initiative, the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty for core crimes (mla Treaty), is wider in scope. It encompasses genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity and seeks the conclusion of a multilateral cooperation treaty to enable the effective provision of mutual legal assistance and extradition of suspects in relation to these crimes. The aim of this article is to critically assess the merits and shortcomings of these two initiatives in the effort to enhance inter-state cooperation in the prosecution of international crimes and their abilities to remedy current problems.

Download Full-text

Part III Epilogue and Reflections, 8 Conclusions and the Way Forward

10.1093/law/9780198823292.003.0008 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Kittichaisaree Kriangsak

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Transitional Justice ◽

International Criminal ◽

War Crimes ◽

Criminal Court ◽

Crimes Against Humanity ◽

Legal Assistance ◽

Future Prospects ◽

International Peace ◽

Draft Convention

The chapter describes international efforts to close the gaps in existing treaties on the obligation to extradite or prosecute. These include: (i) the joint initiative for the adoption of a new international instrument on mutual legal assistance and extradition for the effective investigation and prosecution of the most serious crimes of international concern, in particular, the crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes, by domestic jurisdictions; and (ii) the International Law Commission's work on a draft convention on Crimes against Humanity. The chapter also explores the issue of capacity building for the national judiciary and a regional judicial mechanism to help alleviate the burden of the International Criminal Court; national peace/reconciliation, international peace/stability, and other considerations against the implementation of the obligation to extradite or prosecute; the operation of transitional justice as an alternative to prosecution; and the implications of the atrocities in Syria for the future prospects of this obligation in the context of international criminal justice.

Download Full-text

The Agreement on the Establishment of the Extraordinary African Chambers within the Senegalese Judicial System Between the Government of the Republic Of Senegal and the African Union and the Statute of the Chambers

International Legal Materials ◽

10.5305/intelegamate.52.4.1020 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 52 (4) ◽

pp. 1020-1036 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Roland Adjovi

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

War Crimes ◽

Judicial System ◽

Crimes Against Humanity ◽

African Union ◽

International Crimes ◽

The Republic ◽

The Government

On August 22, 2012, the Republic of Senegal and the African Union (AU) signed an agreement to create a tribunal within the Senegalese judicial system to prosecute the perpetrators of international law violations in Chad between 1982 and 1990. To be called the Extraordinary African Chambers (Chambers), the tribunal is the result of years of political and judicial bargaining around Hissein Habré, the former President of Chad. The Chambers were inaugurated in February 2013, following the agreement upon a Statute of the Chambers in January 2013. On July 2, 2013, Hissein Habré was charged with crimes against humanity, torture, and war crimes, and placed in pre-trial detention. To date, Habré is the only indictee, but the Prosecutor reportedly intends to seek the indictment of five officials of Habré’s administration suspected of having committed international crimes.

Download Full-text

The international law commission’s recent work on exceptions to immunity: Charting the course for a brave new world in international law?

Leiden Journal of International Law ◽

10.1017/s0922156518000663 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 32 (01) ◽

pp. 169-187

Author(s):

Dire Tladi

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

War Crimes ◽

Crimes Against Humanity ◽

Draft Article ◽

International Crimes ◽

State Practice ◽

Brave New World ◽

Main Criticism ◽

International Law Commission ◽

Mixed Reaction

AbstractIn the summer of 2017, the International Law Commission adopted a draft article on exceptions to immunity. The Draft Article adopted provides that immunityratione materiaedoes not apply with respect to certain international crimes, namely crimes against humanity, the crime of genocide, war crimes, the crime of apartheid, torture, and enforced disappearances. These exceptions do not apply to immunityratione personae. The Draft Article was adopted after a vote and was severely criticized by some members of the Commission. It has also received mixed reaction from states, with some supporting its content while others have opposed it. In the aftermath of the adoption of the Draft Article, there has also been academic commentary, some of which has been critical. The (main) criticism levelled against the Draft Article is that it does not represent existing law and has no basis in the practice of states. This article seeks to evaluate the criticism by considering whether there is any state practice in support of the Draft Article proposed by the Commission.

Download Full-text

Methodological Flaws in the ILC's Study on Exceptions to Immunity Ratione Materiae of State Officials from Foreign Criminal Jurisdiction

AJIL Unbound ◽

10.1017/aju.2018.9 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 112 ◽

pp. 9-15 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Qinmin Shen

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

War Crimes ◽

Crimes Against Humanity ◽

General Assembly ◽

Draft Article ◽

Criminal Jurisdiction ◽

International Crimes ◽

The Core ◽

Un General Assembly ◽

International Law Commission

In July 2017, the UN International Law Commission (ILC) provisionally adopted Draft Article 7 on exceptions to immunity ratione materiae of state officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction, by a recorded vote of twenty-one votes in favor, eight votes against, and one abstention. In the view of the majority of ILC members, immunity ratione materiae does not apply to the six international crimes listed in the draft article—genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, apartheid, torture, and enforced disappearance—either because of a limitation or because of an exception. The unusual practice of adopting a draft article by recorded vote demonstrated the deep controversy among the ILC members themselves. After all, exceptions to official immunity lie at the core of the project of “Immunity of State Officials from Foreign Criminal Jurisdiction” that was started a decade ago by the ILC. This divisive Draft Article 7 naturally garnered criticism and equally deep controversy among states in discussions on the ILC's work report at UN General Assembly Sixth Committee in late October 2017.

Download Full-text

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

Netherlands International Law Review ◽

10.1007/s40802-019-00143-5 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

TERMINOLOGI KEJAHATAN DALAM HUKUM PIDANA INTERNASIONAL

Jurnal Aktual Justice ◽

10.47329/aktualjustice.v3i1.440 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

The Development of Individual Criminal Responsibility Under International Law: Lessons from Nuremberg and Tokyo War Crimes Trials

Journal of Legal Studies ◽

10.2478/jles-2020-0005 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 25 (39) ◽

pp. 69-97

Author(s):

William Edward Adjei

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Criminal Responsibility ◽

War Crimes ◽

Criminal Court ◽

Crimes Against Humanity ◽

New Era ◽

International Crimes ◽

Abstract Entities ◽

War Crimes Trials ◽

Nuremberg Trials

AbstractOne of the most significant developments in international law was the establishment of Special Tribunals that could bring to justice individuals allegedly responsible for “grave breaches” and violations of the law against humanity. This is, undoubtedly, a recent global development that has challenged the issues of impunity and sovereignty. Since the Nazis’ atrocities and the Nuremberg trials, war crimes law has broadened its scope and has recognized a number of offenses considered as “international crimes” and which have also come to be described as “genocide”. However, although intended to put an end to the politics of impunity for the perpetrators of these crimes, a number of signatory states are reluctant to bring to justice those responsible for these defined international crimes. Indeed, the jurisprudence developed in these Special Tribunals provided an impetus for the development of the Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court (ICC). More specifically, it has been argued that war crimes and crimes against humanity are committed by men, not by abstract entities, and only by punishing individuals who commit such heinous crimes can the provisions of international law be enforced and realized. However, a perfectly reasonable case can be made that the creation of these tribunals does represent a new era in international law.

Download Full-text

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

The American Journal of International Law ◽

10.5305/amerjintelaw.105.1.0001 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 105 (1) ◽

pp. 1-49 ◽

Cited By ~ 23

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.

Download Full-text

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

Jurnal Aktual Justice ◽

10.47329/aktualjustice.v3i1.455 ◽

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

Download Full-text

Parties to Offences under the Canadian Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes Act : an Analysis of Principal Liability and Complicity

Les Cahiers de droit ◽

10.7202/039346ar ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 50 (3-4) ◽

pp. 967-1014 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Fannie Lafontaine

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

War Crimes ◽

Criminal Code ◽

International Criminal Law ◽

Individual Responsibility ◽

Crimes Against Humanity ◽

International Crimes ◽

Canadian Law ◽

Legislative Choice ◽

Domestic Law

The Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes Act presents an interesting mosaic of law applicable to the domestic prosecution of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. The definitions of offences refer essentially to international law, whereas the available defences, justifications and excuses are those of both Canadian law and international law, and the modes of participation in offences are exclusively those of Canadian law. This raises the question of the relevance and effectiveness of the legislative choice to apply domestic law to the principles of liability for international crimes. The present study offers a preliminary and limited analysis of certain modes of participation in offences provided for by the Act, namely perpetration and complicity pursuant to section 21 of the Criminal Code. This analysis aims at assessing, in light of the principles developed in international criminal law with respect to individual responsibility, whether and how Canadian law may be adapted to the particular — collective — nature of international crimes.

Download Full-text