Non-Permanent Members of the Security Council and International Criminal Justice: A Proposal for Revitalization

This article addresses an issue henceforth well-known as one of the most topical challenges international criminal justice is subject to: the relocation of acquitted in their home countries. It starts with a mere factual finding on the contextual differences between the situation at the icty, the ictr and the icc while analyzing the legal issues surrounding returning home (unfair trials, personal safety, double jeopardy) before leaving room to a gripping and dialectical discussion on the applicability of the non-refoulement to international organizations. Are legal non-state entities – such as icc and ictr as a subsidiary body of the un Security Council – legally liable for returning an acquitted person back to his country where his life would be threatened because of his political opinions or his membership to a particular group? The article identifies diplomatic assurances as a possible avenue, while listing the indicators and the conditions of validity of such assurances.

Download Full-text

Sudan, Resolution 1593, and International Criminal Justice

Leiden Journal of International Law ◽

10.1017/s0922156505003237 ◽

2006 ◽

Vol 19 (1) ◽

pp. 195-222 ◽

Cited By ~ 16

Author(s):

ROBERT CRYER

Keyword(s):

Criminal Justice ◽

Security Council ◽

International Criminal ◽

International System ◽

Criminal Court ◽

Point Of View ◽

International Criminal Law ◽

International Criminal Justice ◽

Un Security Council ◽

Incomplete Reaction

The UN Security Council has recently referred the situation in Darfur, Sudan, to the International Criminal Court. This has been hailed as a breakthrough in international criminal justice. However, aspects of the referral resolution can be criticized from the point of view of their consistency with both the Rome Statute and the UN Charter. The limitations of the referral with respect to whom the Court may investigate also raise issues with respect to the rule of law. In addition, Sudan has accused the Security Council of acting in a neo-colonial fashion by referring the situation in Darfur to the Court. This article investigates these criticisms against the background of the international system in which international criminal law operates, and concludes that although the referral cannot be considered neo-colonial in nature, the referral can be criticized as selective and as an incomplete reaction to the crisis in Darfur. The referral remains, however, a positive step.

Download Full-text

The African Union, the Security Council, and the International Criminal Court

10.1093/oso/9780198810568.003.0009 ◽

2017 ◽

Author(s):

Charles Chernor Jalloh

Keyword(s):

Criminal Justice ◽

Security Council ◽

International Criminal Court ◽

Rome Statute ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Court ◽

International Criminal Justice ◽

African Union ◽

Post Cold War ◽

History Of

This chapter analyses the controversies surrounding the work of the African Union, the Security Council, and the International Criminal Court. It examines whether the legal justifications offered for the Security Council’s involvement in matters of international criminal justice, as administered by the ICC, match the emerging practice. The chapter reviews the drafting history of the Rome Statute to identify the initial benchmark against which to assess the Chapter VII referral and deferral resolutions and their impacts, if any, on the world’s only permanent international penal tribunal. The chapter situates the ICC within a new post-Cold War global paradigm that is not only concerned with ensuring the collective peace, which is the classical responsibility of the UN, but also ensures that international criminal justice is meted out to at least some of the leaders who foment the world’s worst atrocities.

Download Full-text

A Special Tribunal for Lebanon: The UN Security Council and the Emancipation of International Criminal Justice

Leiden Journal of International Law ◽

10.1017/s0922156508005062 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 21 (2) ◽

pp. 485-512 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

FRÉDÉRIC MÉGRET

Keyword(s):

Criminal Justice ◽

Security Council ◽

International Criminal ◽

International Criminal Justice ◽

International Peace ◽

Un Security Council ◽

Peace And Security ◽

The Creation

AbstractDiscussions on the creation of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon have focused on its impact on Lebanese sovereignty and, specifically, the fact that a Chapter VII resolution seems to bypass Lebanese democracy. Simply relying on the idea of a ‘breach of international peace and security’ to overcome these arguments is not helpful. It is more useful to locate the creation of the Tribunal within evolving international criminal justice practices. These practices are increasingly constraining the Security Council's own work rather than the contrary, as international criminal justice gradually emancipates itself from the confines of ‘international peace and security’ and becomes a logic unto itself.

Download Full-text

The Role of the UN Security Council vis-à-vis the International Criminal Court – Resolution 1970 (2011) and its Challenges to International Criminal Justice

International and Comparative Law Review ◽

10.1515/iclr-2016-0048 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 14 (2) ◽

pp. 7-23

Author(s):

Gabriel M. Lentner

Keyword(s):

Criminal Justice ◽

Security Council ◽

International Criminal Court ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Court ◽

International Criminal Justice ◽

International Crimes ◽

Un Security Council ◽

Principle Of Legality

Abstract On February 26 2011, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1970 referring the situation concerning Libya to the International Criminal Court (ICC). Th is unprecedented support for and acknowledgment of the ICC did not come without a price: conditio sine qua non for Council members not party to the ICC was the inclusion of operative § 6 into the resolution, which exempts certain categories of nationals of non-parties from ICC jurisdiction. Th e same highly controversial exemption was included in the Security Council’s referral of the situation in Darfur to the ICC in 2005. Deviating from the Rome Statute’s jurisdiction regime such practice not just poses challenges to principles of international criminal justice but raises the question whether the Rome Statute is altered by the resolution containing the referral to the effect that the ICC is being bound to the exemptions contained in its exercise of jurisdiction. Addressing these issues, the present paper elaborates firstly on the jurisdictional exemption of § 6 and its effect on the ICC, followed by a discussion of resulting challenges to the principle of legality, the principle of universal jurisdiction for international crimes, the equality of individuals before the law and the principle of independence of the court.

Download Full-text