Ratifying the Amendments to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court on the Crime of Aggression

2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 176-215
Author(s):  
Meagan S. Wong

The Review Conference of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court in Kampala adopted amendments to the Rome Statute, providing for a definition and conditions for the jurisdiction of the crime of aggression (‘Kampala Amendments’). At present, the jurisdiction over crime of aggression has not come into effect at the International Criminal Court (ICC). For the activation of the Court’s jurisdiction over the crime of aggression, two cumulative conditions must be met: first, a minimum of 30 ratifications of the Kampala Amendments must take place; second, a majority of two thirds of States Parties have to make a decision to activate the Court’s jurisdiction after 1 January 2017. This paper analyses salient legal aspects of the activation of the Court’s jurisdiction over the crime of aggression. First, the question whether the requirements of 30 ratifications will be met will be considered. Second, the relationship of the entry into force mechanism of the amendments and the conditions for the exercise of jurisdiction will be analysed. Third, the procedure of ascertainment of the jurisdictional regime of the ICC over the crime of aggression, with particular reference to State referrals and proprio motu investigations, will be dealt with. Fourth, the need for States Parties intending to ratify the Kampala Amendments to implement the crime of aggression into their domestic legislation will be explored. Finally, the paper will explore the question whether the aggressor State (party) must ratify the Kampala Amendments in order for the jurisdictional regime over the crime of aggression to apply, or whether it suffices that the aggressed State is a ratifying State Party. A qualified solution will be suggested: while the latter reading of the law is the better one, consent of the aggressor State (party) is nevertheless upheld pursuant to the sui generis jurisdictional regime of the ICC over the crime of aggression.

2021 ◽  
pp. 220-228
Author(s):  
T. S. Sadova

The article is devoted to the study of military (crimes against the established order of military service) and war crimes. Particular attention is paid to the concept and features of these phenomena. The sources of both international and national law were also considered for the comparative characteristics of military and war crimes in order to understand their meaning and avoid the shift of these concepts. We have explored various aspects of the concept of war crimes. They are violations of the laws and customs of war. War crimes are serious violations of international law. They are violations of the Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949. There is a list of war crimes in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. This list is contained in Аrt. 8. The list of war crimes is contained in Art. 18 of the Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Humanity too. International jurisprudence shows that there is a special subject of war crimes. The author of the article studied the draft Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of Ukraine on the Application of International Criminal and Humanitarian Law”. This bill proposes to exclude certain articles on military crimes and to introduce new articles on war crimes into the Criminal Code of Ukraine. The new war crimes articles contain a list of war crimes. This list is substantially similar to the list of war crimes contained in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The concept of war and military crimes is given. The main differences between military and military crimes are revealed. Identical signs of war and military crimes have been studied. As a result, the author of the article has made a conclusion about the relationship between war and military crimes under international and national law.


Author(s):  
Schabas William A

This chapter comments on Article 8bis of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 8bis defines the crime of aggression, one of four categories of offence within the subject-matter jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. The provision is part of a package of amendments adopted at the Kampala Review Conference in 2010. It entered into force in accordance with article 121(5) one year after ratification of the amendments by the first State Party. Liechtenstein was the first State Party to ratify the amendments, on May 8, 2012. Consequently, the amendment entered into force on May 8, 2013. On that date, the amendment was registered by the depository, the Secretary-General of the United Nations. However, exercise of jurisdiction by the Court over article 8bis is subject to article 15bis and article 15ter.


Author(s):  
Schabas William A

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.


2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 223-246
Author(s):  
Tamara Cummings-John

As contemplated by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (‘Court’), the United Nations and the Court entered into a Relationship Agreement in 2004. The Relationship Agreement provides a framework for cooperation between the United Nations and the Court, including through logistical or administrative support to the Court, in particular in countries where the Prosecutor has opened investigations or is conducting preliminary examinations. The United Nations also provides substantive support and judicial assistance to the Court’s organs, in particular to the Prosecutor, but also increasingly now to the Defence, by making available documents and information generated or obtained by the United Nations and its various field presences. United Nations staff and experts have also been made available to the Court for interview and some have testified before the Court, for which the United Nations Secretary-General has to waive their immunity. This commentary provides an update on recent developments in two areas of cooperation between the United Nations and the court: information sharing, and contact with persons subject to warrants or summonses.


Author(s):  
Schabas William A

This chapter comments on Article 14 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 14 is really the completion of article 13(a). Article 13 lists three sources of ‘triggering’ or authorization for exercise of jurisdiction: the Security Council, a State Party, and the propriomotu initiative of the Prosecutor. Article 14 contrasts with the brief text governing Security Council referral found in article 13(b). Arguably, the two processes are similar, and the different formulations of the concept of referral in articles 13(b) and 14 are puzzling. It would have been preferable to use equivalent language and terminology, given the substantive similarities. The differences can be explained by the complex drafting process, and the fact that the two concepts originate in different provisions within the early versions of the Statute.


Author(s):  
Schabas William A

Established as one of the main sources for the study of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, this volume provides a detailed analysis of the Statute; the detailed analysis draws upon relevant case law from the Court itself, as well as from other international and national criminal tribunals, academic commentary, and related instruments such as the Elements of Crimes, the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, and the Relationship Agreement with the United Nations. Each chapter includes accompanied by an overview of the drafting history as well as a bibliography of academic literature relevant to the provision. The text aims to avoid duplication and inconsistency, providing a comprehensive presentation to assist those who must understand, interpret, and apply the complex provisions of the Rome Statute. The fully updated second edition of this book incorporates new developments in the law, including discussions of recent judicial activity and the amendments to the Rome Statute adopted at the Kampala conference.


2019 ◽  
Vol 113 (2) ◽  
pp. 368-375 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michail Vagias

On September 6, 2018, Pre-Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court (ICC or Court) ruled by a majority—Judge Perrin de Brichambaut dissenting—that it has jurisdiction to hear cases concerning crimes that occurred only in part within the territory of a state party to the Rome Statute. In so ruling, the Court granted the ICC prosecutor's request to rule on jurisdiction and confirmed its territorial jurisdiction over the alleged deportation of Rohingya people from the territory of Myanmar (a state not party to the Rome Statute) to Bangladesh (a state party). The Court also affirmed unequivocally its objective international legal personality vis-à-vis non-party states and hinted strongly that the prosecutor should consider the possible prosecution of at least two additional crimes in connection with this situation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document