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.

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.

An Attempt to Prosecute: The Muslim Brotherhood’s Communication to the International Criminal Court Relating to the Alleged Crimes in Egypt

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 733-762
Author(s):  
Hossam ElDeeb
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Muslim Brotherhood ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Political Debates ◽  
Legal Position ◽  
The Muslim Brotherhood

The article analyses a communication submitted by the Muslim Brotherhood group (mb) to the International Criminal Court (icc) relating to alleged crimes in Egypt. After the ousting of Morsi, hundreds of Morsi supporters were killed during the dispersal of two sit-in camps. The mb lawyers argued that the ousted, Morsi, is still the legitimate president of Egypt and hence can accept the Court’s jurisdiction pursuant to Article 12(3) of the Rome Statute. It is argued that such controversial communications submitted to the Court have serious implications other than the intended purpose of communications. The article briefly reviews the situation of Egypt’s criminal justice system in relation to the alleged crimes and the legal position of the mb, then analyses the scope of Article 12(3) before it critically argues that the communication submitted to the icc was for political gain and the Court should restrain itself from entering into political debates.

scholarly journals Trial and (Potential) Error: Conflicting Visions on Reparations Within the ICC System

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 221-248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alina Balta ◽  
Manon Bax ◽  
Rianne Letschert
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Criminal Trials ◽  
Conflict Situations ◽  
International Criminal Trials

Twenty years ago, the International Criminal Court (hereinafter ICC or the Court) was established holding the aim of placing victims at the heart of international criminal justice proceedings and delivering justice to them through, among others, reparations. Article 75 of the Rome Statute lays out the reparations regime, and, in practice, court-ordered reparations are a means of delivering such justice. Focusing on Court decisions on reparations, our analysis takes stock of all developments before the ICC and attempts to highlight the mismatch between characteristics inherent to the objectives of international criminal trials such as providing accountability and punishment of the accused and delivering justice for victims of mass crimes—the so-called procedural challenges. We also submit that the Court is facing conceptual challenges, related to an apparent misunderstanding of the various concepts at stake: reparations as such and the various modalities and channels of enforcing them. We conclude that although the ICC’s reparation regime may not be the best reparative response to provide justice to victims in conflict situations affected by mass victimization, we suggest that improving the ICC’s approach includes, at a minimum, tackling these challenges.

Rome’s Legacy: Negotiating the Reparations Mandate of the International Criminal Court

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 351-377 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christoph Sperfeldt
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Fresh Perspective ◽  
Rules Of Procedure ◽  
Victim Reparations

This article examines the negotiations that led to the incorporation of reparations provisions into the legal framework of the International Criminal Court (icc). Building upon a review of the travaux préparatoires and interviews, it traces the actors and main debates during the lead-up to the Rome Conference and the drafting of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, explaining how and why reparations were included into the Rome Statute. In doing so, the article shows how the reparations mandate was produced at the intersection of a set of different agendas and actors. From this account, it identifies a number of key themes that were at the centre of the negotiations and often galvanised contestations among delegations or with ngos. The article concludes with a fresh perspective on the origin of victim reparations in the Rome Statute and its relevance for understanding many of today’s debates around reparations in international criminal justice.

Part 3 General Principles of Criminal Law: Principes Généraux Du Droit Pénal, Art.31 Grounds for excluding criminal responsibility/Motifs d’exonération de la responsabilité pénale

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schabas William A
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Criminal Justice Systems ◽  
A Charge ◽  
General Provision ◽  
Self Defence

This chapter comments on Article 31 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 31 describes what is known in most criminal justice systems by the terms ‘defences’, ‘excuses’, and ‘justifications’ for excluding criminal responsibility. It addresses several defences: insanity, intoxication, self-defence, duress, and necessity. It is followed by two other provisions, articles 32 and 33, defining specific defences. It is not apparent why articles 32 and 33 were not consolidated into the general provision, article 31. To the extent that they refute a charge, age (article 26), immunity (article 27), statutory limitation (article 29), and lack of mens rea (article 30) also operate as defences.

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

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.

India, the Rome Statute, and the International Criminal Court

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 460-482
Author(s):  
Ian Hall ◽  
Renée Jeffery
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
New Delhi

Abstract Despite its long-standing rhetorical support for an international criminal justice regime, India continues to resist signing the 1998 Rome Statute that created the International Criminal Court. This article explores the reasons for this reluctance. It observes that during the negotiations that led to the Rome Statute, India voiced multiple objections to the design of the ICC, to how it was to function, and to the crimes that it was to address. It argues that analyzing the negotiating strategy India employed during those talks allows us to discern which reasons mattered more to New Delhi and what accounts for India’s ongoing refusal to sign the Rome Statute.

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.

Africa and the International Criminal Court: (Re)constructing the Narrative

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-39
Author(s):  
Sarah P. Nimigan
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Ivory Coast ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Institutional Development ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Normative Factors

Abstract African support for the International Criminal Court (icc) from its earliest stages of institutional development is often referenced in the international criminal justice literature with limited explanation. The aim of this article is to establish a holistic account of African support for an international criminal court in the pre-Rome period, during the Rome Diplomatic Conference, and after the establishment of the icc. This analysis uses rational choice and constructivist international relations (ir) theory to help explain levels of African commitment to the Rome Statute using Kenya and Ivory Coast as case studies. While the icc has been criticized on neocolonial bases, it is important to reconstruct the narrative to more accurately reflect African agency over the international criminal justice project, and the icc in particular. African resistance to the institutional behaviour of the icc is situated in its broader political context(s): domestically and internationally, using rational and normative factors to explain various levels of African commitment to the Rome Statute.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document