The Progress and Convergence of the icc and R2P Norms in a Rules-Based Global Order

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 372-375
Author(s):  
Fatou Bensouda
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
World Summit ◽  
Global Order ◽  
Multilateral Institutions ◽  
The World

Abstract In this contribution, the author reflects on the Forum topic ‘R2P 15 Years after the World Summit: Progress, Problems and Prospects’, and provides her perspective as Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (icc) on the correlation between R2P and the principles and goals of the icc Rome Statute, against the backdrop of increasing pressures on multilateralism and multilateral institutions.

scholarly journals Theorizing the International Criminal Court’s Model of Justice: The Victims’ Court?

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Isha Jain
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Theoretical Models ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Value Systems ◽  
Criminal Justice Systems ◽  
The World ◽  
Theoretical Standpoint

Theoretical models of criminal justice are important tools for identifying the value systems that underpin the various criminal justice systems of the world. Hailed as the ‘victims’ court’ for conferring wide-ranging participatory rights to victims at all stages of the criminal process, the International Criminal Court and its constitutive treaty, the Rome Statute, offer an interesting subject matter of analysis from this theoretical standpoint. The focus of this article will be on studying the ICC’s practice and procedure in relation to victim participation, in order to identify the values of criminal justice that influence these processes.

Searching for Deterrence at the International Criminal Court

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 625-655 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geoff Dancy
Keyword(s):  
Violence Prevention ◽  
Civil Wars ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
General Deterrence ◽  
Specific Deterrence ◽  
The World ◽  
Atrocity Crimes

Does the International Criminal Court (icc) deter acts of violence in the world? To answer this question, this article first distinguishes between three phenomena that are often confusingly grouped together under the heading of ‘deterrence’. These include the termination of ongoing civil wars (compellence), the prevention of atrocity crime recidivism (specific deterrence), and the overall prevention of war and atrocity crimes (general deterrence). The article then assesses whether state commitments to the Rome Statute and icc intervention in specific contexts can promote these three aims. It presents evidence that the icc can indeed contribute to violence prevention, though not because of its ability to sanction abusive actors. Instead, the Court’s role as a ‘stigmatizer’ in the international community has likely contributed to declines in certain types of violence over time. As such, the article concludes that the icc is more important for what it is than what it does.

The International Criminal Court And Its Major Obstacles Since Formation

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (9) ◽  
pp. 76-86
Author(s):  
Barinaadaa Nwinkol ◽  
Bariledum Kia
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
The United States ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Factors Affecting ◽  
Realist Theory ◽  
The World

Global quest for the prosecution of heinous crimes of concern to the international community as a whole especially genocide, war crime, crime against humanity, and the crime of aggression committed by individuals led to the establishment of the International Criminal Court (ICC) on July 1, 2002. The court had however, not performed optimally due to some challenges. This paper set out to discuss the militating factors in the execution of the court’s mandate. Using the realist theory, the rational behind the attitude of India, China, Russia and the United State (all major non-state parties) in sabotaging the court’s effort is succinctly assessed. After pointing out other factors affecting the court, its way out of some of these problems was laid bare. The paper concludes that the court must make concerted efforts to replicate criminal prosecution in other parts of the world other than Africa to earn the required credibility and legitimacy it sorts. At the same time, it would have to lobby to ensure that major non-state parties, especially the United States, etc. accede to the Rome statute.

scholarly journals The International Criminal Court and Non-Party States

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
William A. Schabas
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
United Nations Security Council ◽  
The World ◽  
The United Nations

Although more than half of the States in the world are parties tothe Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, morethan eighty have yet to ratify. The article considers the relationshipof the Court with these non-party States. It examines theexercise of jurisdiction over their nationals, arguing that internationallaw immunities continue in force despite the terms ofthe Statute. Declarations of jurisdiction by non-party States arealso studied, including the declaration formulated by the PalestinianAuthority with respect to Gaza in January 2009. NonpartyStates may be asked to cooperate with the Court and, whereso ordered by the United Nations Security Council, they may berequired to do this.Quoique plus de la moitié des États du monde soient Partiesau Statut de Rome de la Cour pénale internationale, plus dequatre-vingt d’entre eux ne l’ont pas encore ratifié. Cet articleconsidère le rapport de la Cour avec ces États qui n’y sont pasParties. Il examine l’exercice de sa compétence à l’égard de leursressortissants, soutenant que les immunités du droit internationaldemeurent en vigueur malgré la teneur du Statut. L’article étudieaussi les déclarations de compétence d’États qui ne sont pas Partiesau Statut, y compris la déclaration formulée par l’Autorité palestinienneen rapport à Gaza en janvier 2009. On peut demanderaux États qui ne sont pas Parties au Statut de coopérer avec laCour, et, lorsque cela est ordonné par le Conseil de Sécurité desNations Unies, il peut être exigé qu’ils le fassent.

The Evolution and Establishment of the International Criminal Court (ICC)

2002 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 92-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosaria Vigorito
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
The United States ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
World Community ◽  
The World ◽  
First Time

On July 17, 1998, the world community voted on the Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court (ICC,) which, if ratified by 60 countries, would establish for the first time in history, a permanent international criminal tribunal. The outcome was an overwhelmingly favorable vote, with 120 countries voting in favor, 21 abstentions, and 7 countries, including the United States, against. The idea of an international criminal court appeared to be in the making.

The Sui Generis Trial Proceedings of the International Criminal Court

2007 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 343-354
Author(s):  
Colin McLaughlin
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Trial Chamber ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
The World

AbstractIt may be difficult to place trial proceedings of international criminal tribunals on the spectrum of classical trial paradigms even though common law and Romano-Germanic law differences are most obvious in that phase of a trial. It is important to understand the history, and compare the procedural underpinnings, of the different aspects of the International Criminal Court (ICC) trial proceedings. This article will highlight the sui generis nature of the ICC trial proceedings. In doing so, it will show how the two main legal systems of the world have been combined to create pertinent articles in the Rome Statute. This review makes clear that the drafters of the Rome Statute devised a procedure that will best assist the ICC in accomplishing its tasks as an international judicial body. The judges of the trial chamber, whether from a Romano-Germanic or common law background, will conduct proceedings and administer justice based on the combinations of the world's most influential legal systems.

The Denial of the Right of Return as a Rome Statute Crime

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Micheal G Kearney
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
Final Section ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Trial Chamber ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Central Importance ◽  
Right Of Return ◽  
The Right

Abstract In 2018, Pre-Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court (ICC) held that conduct preventing the return of members of the Rohingya people to Myanmar could fall within Article 7(1)(k) of the Statute, on the grounds that denial of the right of return constitutes a crime against humanity. No international tribunal has prosecuted this conduct as a discrete violation, but given the significance of the right of return to Palestinians, it can be expected that such an offence would be of central importance should the ICC investigate the situation in Palestine. This comment will review the recognition of this crime against humanity during the process prompted by the Prosecutor’s 2018 Request for a ruling as to the Court’s jurisdiction over trans-boundary crimes in Bangladesh/Myanmar. It will consider the basis for the right of return in general international law, with a specific focus on the Palestinian right of return. The final section will review the elements of the denial of right of return as a crime against humanity, as proposed by the Office of the Prosecutor in its 2019 Request for Authorization of an investigation in Bangladesh/Myanmar.

scholarly journals The International Criminal Court and Sexual Violence: Between Aspirations and Reality

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. 878-893
Author(s):  
Tanja Altunjan
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Violence ◽  
Conceptual Understanding ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Full Potential ◽  
Sexual Crimes ◽  
Track Record

AbstractThe adoption of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) was widely lauded as a success with regard to the recognition and potential prosecution of conflict-related sexual violence. More than twenty years later, however, many observers are disillusioned with the ICC’s dire track record concerning the implementation of its progressive legal framework. In many cases, the Court and particularly its Prosecutor have been criticized for failing to adequately address and prioritize sexual violence, culminating in only a single final conviction since 2002. Nevertheless, the ICC’s emerging practice shows progress with regard to the conceptual understanding of conflict-related sexual violence and the realization of the Statute’s full potential in ensuring accountability for sexual crimes. Taking into account the evolving jurisprudence, the Article explores the persisting challenges and the perceived gap between aspirations and reality regarding the prosecution of sexual violence at the ICC.

scholarly journals Tilting at windmills: Reparations and the International Criminal Court

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
Luke Moffett ◽  
Clara Sandoval
Keyword(s):  
Transitional Justice ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Crimes

Abstract More than 20 years on from the signing of the Rome Statute, delivering victim-centred justice through reparations has been fraught with legal and practical challenges. The Court’s jurisprudence on reparations only began to emerge from 2012 and struggles to find purchase on implementation on the ground. In its first few cases of Lubanga, Katanga, and Al Mahdi the eligibility and forms of reparations have been limited to certain victims, subject to years of litigation, and faced difficulties in delivery due to ongoing insecurity. This is perhaps felt most acutely in the Bemba case, where more than 5,000 victims of murder, rape and pillage were waiting for redress, and the defendant was not indigent, but where he was later acquitted on appeal, thereby extinguishing reparation proceedings. This article critically appraises the jurisprudence and practice of the International Criminal Court (ICC) on reparations. It looks at competing principles and rationales for reparations at the Court in light of comparative practice in international human rights law and transitional justice processes to consider what is needed to ensure that the ICC is able to deliver on its reparations mandate. An underpinning argument is that reparations at the ICC cannot be seen in isolation from other reparation practices in the states where the Court operates. Reparative complementarity for victims of international crimes is essential to maximize the positive impact that the fulfilment of this right can have on victims and not to sacrifice the legitimacy of the Court, nor quixotically strive for the impossible.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document