The Rome Statute of the icc and the Recent Works of the International Law Commission

2018 ◽  
pp. 27-41 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

Immunities of State Officials and the Responsibility for the International Crimes: International and National Law

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Светлана Глотова ◽  
Svetlana Glotova
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
State Practice ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Jus Cogens ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

The immunities of high-rank officials regarding to the responsibility of serious crimes of international community concern are analysed in the present paper. Relevance of the topic is maintained in its consideration of the International Law Commission. Principle of the irrelevance of official capacity (Art. 7 IMT, Principle III of the Nuremberg principles, art. 27 Rome Statute of ICC) is universally recognized and has the character of jus cogens. We critically examine the state practice (Pinochet case, Georgia case). The international documents, Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and doctrine are analyzed. By virtue of the constitutional priority of universally recognized principles and norms of International law (Art. 15.4 Constitution), the provisions of the Criminal Code must be fixed in accordance with the Nuremberg principles. This concerns especially principle of irrelevance of official capacity. In case of conflict, the principle of interpretation in accordance with international law should be applied.

Canadian Implementing Legislation for the Rome Statute

2000 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 337-346 ◽  
Author(s):  
William A. Schabas
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Ongoing Work ◽  
Preparatory Committee ◽  
Draft Statute ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

Canada has been very much at the centre of the establishment of the International Criminal Court (ICC) since the momentum shifted in late-1994 from the International Law Commission (ILC) to more broadly representative bodies established by the General Assembly. It was Canada that chaired the ‘like-minded’, a group of states active during the several sessions of the Preparatory Committee and during the Diplomatic Conference in Rome from 15 June to 17 July 1998. The ‘like-minded’ were committed to invigorating the ILC's draft statute by enhancing the independence of the Prosecutor and trimming the sails of the Security Council. At Rome, Canadian diplomat Philippe Kirsch was elected chair of the Committee of the Whole, and he directed the intense negotiations throughout the five-week session. Kirsch crafted the final package of compromises that was submitted to the Conference at its close, on the morning of 17 July, and that succeeded in rallying the vast majority of delegations when put to a vote later that day. Since then, Kirsch and his team have presided over the ongoing work of the Preparatory Commission.

Part 3 General Principles of Criminal Law: Principes Généraux Du Droit Pénal, Art.32 Mistake of fact or mistake of law/Erreur de fait ou erreur de droit

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schabas William A
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
General Rule ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

This chapter comments on Article 32 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 32 addresses defences of mistake of fact or mistake of law. The drafters of the Statute did not want to leave the determination of defences to the discretion of judges, an approach used in all of the earlier models including the final draft Code of Crimes adopted by the International Law Commission in 1996. In general, the purpose of codifying defences in the Rome Statute is not to authorize them but rather to confine them. Thus, article 32 admits defences of mistake of fact and law but under certain conditions. If article 32 were not in the Statute, the general rule on mens rea set out in article 30 would apply without restriction, possibly subject to limitation by the Elements of Crimes.

On the Road to Vienna

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kai Bruns
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
International Law ◽  
The Road ◽  
Progressive Development ◽  
History Of ◽  
On The Road ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

This chapter focuses on the negotiations that preceded the 1961 Vienna Conference (which led to the conclusion of the VCDR). The author challenges the view that the successful codification was an obvious step and refers in this regard to a history of intense negotiation which spanned fifteen years. With particular reference to the International Law Commission (ILC), the chapter explores the difficult task faced by ILC members to strike a balance between the codification of existing practice and progressive development of diplomatic law. It reaches the finding that the ILC negotiations were crucial for the success of the Conference, but notes also that certain States supported a less-binding form of codification. The chapter also underlines the fact that many issues that had caused friction between the Cold War parties were settled during the preparatory meetings and remained largely untouched during the 1961 negotiations.

Approaches for Analysing Norm Relationships

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henning Grosse Ruse-Khan
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
International Law ◽  
Structure Building ◽  
Analytical Structure ◽  
Rules And Principles ◽  
Logical Order ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Rule Systems ◽  
Law Commission

This chapter discusses conflict-resolution tools and develops an analytical structure building on rules and principles in international intellectual property (IP) treaties, other rule-systems, and general international law to define norm relationships of interpretation and of conflict. Several tools are taken from the ‘toolbox’ developed in the Fragmentation Report of the International Law Commission and other fragmentation literature. Depending on the type of relationship at stake, the most appropriate legal tools to address them may vary. The ILC Report and Conclusions provide for some of the tools and to some extent for an analytical structure, a logical order for examining these relationships. As the chapter shows, for some types of legal relations other approaches are more adequate. They hence complement the ILC principles and need to be integrated in the set of tools available.

Due diligence as a secondary rule of general international law

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-30
Author(s):  
Richard Mackenzie-Gray Scott
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Legal Practice ◽  
Formed Part ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Domestic Law ◽  
Secondary Rule ◽  
Law Making ◽  
Law Commission ◽  
Do So

Abstract The conventional understanding of due diligence in international law appears to be that it is a concept that forms part of primary rules. During the preparatory stages in creating the Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (ARSIWA), the International Law Commission (ILC) focused on due diligence as though it could have formed part of secondary rules. Despite this process, no due diligence provision forms part of the ARSIWA. Yet a number of the final provisions are based on primary rules. This is because the ILC relied on the method of extrapolation in attempts to create secondary rules. Extrapolation is a method of international law-making by which the output of an analytical process is reproduced in a different form following an examination of its content that exists in other forms. In using this method, the ILC attempted to create secondary rules by extrapolating from primary rules. Yet it did not do so with respect to due diligence. However, due diligence can be formulated and applied differently by using this same method. This article analyses the steps of this process to construct a vision of where international legal practice should venture in the future. In learning from and amalgamating the dominant trends in different areas of international and domestic law, this article proposes that due diligence could exist as a secondary rule of general international law. By formulating and applying due diligence as a secondary rule, there is potential to develop the general international law applicable to determining state responsibility for the conduct of non-state actors.

The Fifty-Sixth Session of the International Law Commission

2005 ◽  
Vol 99 (1) ◽  
pp. 211-221 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Matheson
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Diplomatic Protection ◽  
Sixth Session ◽  
International Liability ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Fragmentation Of International Law ◽  
Law Commission

The International Law Commission held its fifty-sixdi session in Geneva from May 3 to June 4, and from July 5 to August 6, 2004, under the chairmanship of Teodor Melescanu of Romania. The Commission completed its first reading of draft principles on international liability for transboundary harm and draft articles on diplomatic protection, which have now been submitted for comment by states with a view to their completion in 2006. The Commission also continued its work on reservations to treaties, responsibility of international organizations, unilateral acts of states, fragmentation of international law, and shared natural resources. In addition, the Commission decided to start work next year on the effect of armed conflict on treaties and the expulsion of aliens, and to recommend adding a new topic—the obligation to prosecute or extradite—to its long-term program. The following is a summary of where each topic stands and what issues are likely to be most prominent at the Commission's 2005 session.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document