Shifting Priorities: Are Attitudes Changing at the International Criminal Court about Trials in absentia?

Rome Statute ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Court ◽

Future Trial ◽

The Right

Abstract A recent decision by the International Criminal Court’s Appeals Chamber in the Gbagbo and Blé Goudé case raised the possibility of a shift away from the long-standing practice of only holding trial in the presence of the accused. The final paragraphs of the 28 May 2020 decision asserts that any future trial proceedings in the Gbagbo et al. case could be held in the absence of the defendants should Mr Gbagbo and Mr Blé Goudé be released from custody and then later fail to appear for trial. This article examines the Appeals Chamber’s decision in light of the Court’s Statute, existing jurisprudence at the icc and within the larger context of international criminal law. It concludes that the Appeals Chamber’s decision fails to properly understand the right to be present at trial as it exists in the Rome Statute nor does it comply with any identified general principle of law.

Broadening International Criminal Jurisdiction?

International Human Rights Law Review ◽

10.1163/22131035-00401006 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 4 (1) ◽

pp. 53-80

Author(s):

Solon Solomon

Keyword(s):

Security Council ◽

Criminal Law ◽

Rome Statute ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Court ◽

Criminal Jurisdiction ◽

Broad Interpretation ◽

The Right

The interests of justice are embedded in Article 53 (1) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Rome Statute). They give the Prosecutor the right to decline to initiate an investigation or suspend a prosecution. In these cases, the interests of justice act as a basis for the Prosecutor to refrain from any action. This article argues that due to their non-positivist character, the interests of justice could serve as the platform also of prosecutorial action, acting as the legal vehicle for a broad interpretation of the Rome Statute in the name of justice. Nevertheless, such broad, interests of justice-instigated interpretation, cannot but have positivism as its outmost limit. The Rome Statute is an international criminal law instrument and international criminal law is governed by the legality principle, which narrows any hermeneutical endeavors. Along these lines, this article examines the nexus between the expansive interpretational interests of justice function and its limits by referring to cases where the International Criminal Court (icc) was called to endorse or not a broad interpretation of notions included in the Rome Statute. The article examines cases arising from situations referred to the icc by States and by the un Security Council.

The Contestation of Value-Based Norms: Confirmation or Erosion of International Law?

The International Rule of Law ◽

10.1093/oso/9780198843603.003.0020 ◽

2019 ◽

pp. 311-334

Author(s):

Tiyanjana Maluwa

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Security Council ◽

Criminal Law ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Court ◽

The Right ◽

First Time ◽

Normative Powers

The chapter discusses the concepts of shared values and value-based norms. It examines two areas of international law that provide illustrative examples of contestation of value-based norms: the fight against impunity under international criminal law and the debates about the responsibility to protect. It argues that the African Union’s (AU) difference of view with the International Criminal Court (ICC) over the indictment of Omar Al-Bashir is not a rejection of the non-impunity norm, but of the context and sequencing of its application. As regards the right of intervention codified in the Constitutive Act of the AU, Africans states responded to the failure of the Security Council to invoke its existing normative powers in the Rwanda situation by establishing a treaty-based norm of intervention, the first time that a regional international instrument had ever done so. Thus, in both cases one cannot speak of a decline of international law.

The Legacy of the ICTY and ICTR in China

AJIL Unbound ◽

10.1017/s2398772300009107 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 110 ◽

pp. 245-250

Author(s):

Bing Bing Jia

Keyword(s):

Criminal Law ◽

Rome Statute ◽

Ad Hoc ◽

International Criminal ◽

International Criminal Tribunal ◽

Criminal Court ◽

Decision Makers ◽

International Tribunal

Legacy is a matter that may become topical when its creator finally stops producing. Normally, the silent years would be many before the thought of legacy enters into open, formal discourse among lawyers and decision-makers. This comment treats the meaning of the word as relative to the circumstances in which it is invoked. The more closely it is used in relation to the present, the more distant it drifts from its literal meaning, to the extent that it denotes what the word “impact” signifies. This essay questions whether the word “legacy” is apt in describing the footprint of the work of the two ad hoctribunals in China, where its influence has, as a matter of fact, been waning ever since the adoption of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court in 1998 (“Rome Statute” ). The Chinese example suggests that the work of the tribunals is (at least so far) no more significant to international criminal law than the illustrious Nuremberg and Tokyo Trials of the 1940s. The most major impact (a more apposite term than legacy) of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) for China may be that China’s policy with regard to the tribunals, manifested mostly in the United Nations, has determined its approach to the International Criminal Court (“ICC” ). For that, the work of the tribunals could be considered as having left China something in the nature of an indirect legacy.

Part 3 General Principles of Criminal Law: Principes Généraux Du Droit Pénal, Art.27 Irrelevance of official capacity/Défaut de pertinence de la qualité officielle

10.1093/law/9780198739777.003.0032 ◽

2016 ◽

Author(s):

Schabas William A

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Criminal Law ◽

Rome Statute ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Responsibility ◽

Criminal Court ◽

Customary International Law ◽

Head Of State

This chapter comments on Article 27 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 27 consists two paragraphs that are often confounded but fulfil different functions. Paragraph 1 denies a defence of official capacity, i.e. official capacity as a Head of State or Government, a member of a Government or parliament, an elected representative or a government official shall not exempt a person from criminal responsibility under the Statute. Paragraph 2 amounts to a renunciation, by States Parties to the Rome Statute, of the immunity of their own Head of State to which they are entitled by virtue of customary international law. In contrast with paragraph 1, it is without precedent in international criminal law instruments.

Sexual Exploitation and Beyond: Using the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court to Prosecute UN Peacekeepers for Gender-based Crimes

International Criminal Law Review ◽

10.1163/157181211x587661 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 11 (4) ◽

pp. 803-827 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Melanie O'Brien

Keyword(s):

Criminal Law ◽

Rome Statute ◽

International Criminal ◽

Sexual Exploitation ◽

Real Life ◽

Criminal Court ◽

Applicable Law ◽

Gender Based

AbstractAllegations and confirmed cases of misconduct by peacekeeping personnel have been revealed by non-governmental organisations, the press and UN investigations. The majority of misconduct has fallen under the term 'sexual exploitation and abuse'. Sexual exploitation and abuse has encompassed rape, sex with minors, trafficking, prostitution-related conduct, sexual exploitation, and other sexual abuse. This article discusses accountability in international criminal law for such conduct, first exploring the development of gender-based crime in international criminal law. The core of this article consists of an examination of the applicable law under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, to determine whether or not the provisions could be used to prosecute peacekeepers for the crimes of rape, sexual slavery, sexual exploitation, prostitution-related conduct, and trafficking. Real life examples of criminal conduct by peacekeeping personnel will be given to test the applicability of the Rome Statute provisions.

Implications of Stripping Immunities of Heads of States on State Cooperation and the Effectiveness of Trial

Strathmore Law Review ◽

10.52907/slr.v1i2.77 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 1 (2) ◽

pp. 71-93

Author(s):

Patrick Kimani

Keyword(s):

Criminal Law ◽

Rome Statute ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Court ◽

Head Of State ◽

Invisibility Cloak ◽

The Hague ◽

State Cooperation

The development of international criminal law in the last seven decades has seen a gradual erosion of the integrity of immunities for heads of states. The journey from Nuremberg to The Hague has resulted in a permanent international criminal court. Article 27(2) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (the Rome Statute) disregards immunities as an effective bar to the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Heads of states have been stripped of their ‘invisibility cloak’ from international criminal prosecutions. The Rome Statute places its reliance on the situation state’s authorities to cooperate with the ICC in its investigation and prosecution of crimes. A special tension is noticeable in circumstances where an incumbent head of state is accused at ICC while his or her state is placed under the general cooperation obligation. This tension is clearly manifest in the two criminal processes against Uhuru Kenyatta and Al Bashir. Bearing in mind the significant political muscle a sitting head of state wields in their state, it is quite likely that their state’s authorities will be very reluctant to discharge their cooperation obligations. The prosecution of sitting heads of states remains a challenge. Is it time to rethink the structure of the ICC or the implementation of the Statute?

India’s Tryst with International Criminal Law: Why Delhi Cannot Digest the Roman Pasta?

Christ University Law Journal ◽

10.12728/culj.4.7 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 3 (1) ◽

pp. 95-109

Author(s):

Arjun Bhagi

Keyword(s):

Criminal Law ◽

Rome Statute ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Court ◽

Crimes Against Humanity ◽

Member Nation ◽

Legal Research ◽

Nuclear Warfare

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court of 1998 (the statute) establishing the International Criminal Court (ICC) seeks to provide an international criminal law regime to deal with crimes against humanity. Despite the path breaking structure of this statute, India has refrained from being a signatory to it. This paper deals extensively with India’s unhappiness over a universally important and well drafted law like the Rome Statute. This paper debates two major concerns of India with respect to the statute: abuse of referrals by the Security Council and the challenge to its sovereignty. It also features an exhaustive discussion of India’s eagerness to include terrorism and ‘use of nuclear warfare’ as crimes under the statute. Based on an extensive legal research, the author concludes that India must make no further delay in becoming a member nation of thestatute.

International criminal court as an international judical body acting on a complementary basis

SCIENTIFIC WORK ◽

10.36719/2663-4619/64/97-101 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 15 (3) ◽

pp. 97-101

Author(s):

Nihad Fərhad oğlu Qəyayev ◽

Keyword(s):

Criminal Law ◽

Rome Statute ◽

International Criminal ◽

International Crime ◽

Criminal Court ◽

Policy Paper ◽

Rules Of Procedure ◽

Principle Of Complementarity

The functioning of the International Criminal Court is carried out on the basis of the principle of complementarity. Thus, in the Preamble and Article 1 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court explicitly states that “the International Criminal Court….complements the national criminal justice authorities”. The principle of complementarity is revealed in Art. 17-20 of the Statute. This article discusses the algorithm and the criteria for evaluating the performance of the complementarity based on the analysis of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Statute), the Rules of Procedure and Evidence (2000), the Policy Paper on Case Selection and Prioritisations of 2016, the Policy Paper Preliminary Examinations of 2013. Key words: International Criminal Court, principle of complementarity, Rome Statute, international crime, state sovereignty, criminal law jurisdiction, international criminal law, principles of criminal procedure

Preliminary Proceedings of the International Criminal Court functions and powers

SCIENTIFIC WORK ◽

10.36719/2663-4619/65/249-252 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 65 (04) ◽

pp. 249-262

Author(s):

Nihad Fərhad oğlu Qəyayev ◽

Keyword(s):

Criminal Law ◽

Rome Statute ◽

International Criminal ◽

International Crime ◽

Criminal Court ◽

State Sovereignty ◽

Criminal Investigation ◽

Court Of Appeals

The Preliminary Division is a court unit that has important functions and powers within the structural links of the International Criminal Court and provides a link between criminal investigation, prosecution and trial procedures. In fact, this Department filters out whether the criminal act that took place during the period before the criminal case reached the Judicial Department falls within the jurisdiction of the Court, and such important nuances, and transfers the so-called "finished product" to the Judicial Department. The BCM stage of the proceedings has a very important role to play in the termination of the proceedings and in the issuance of the relevant decision (sentence). This stage involves an inseparable process, with the Prosecutor referring the case to the Preliminary Chamber, referring it to the Court of Appeals, and finally appealing to the Chamber of Appeals against the decisions and proceedings of those chambers. Key words: International Criminal Court, Rome Statute, international crime, state sovereignty, criminal law jurisdiction, principles of criminal procedure, international criminal law