scholarly journals Demystifying the Crime of Aggression: A Case for the International Criminal Court

2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 153-164
Author(s):  
Edrine Wanyama
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Justice ◽  
The Political ◽  
National Sovereignty ◽  
Political Status ◽  
The Postponement

The crime of aggression forms one of the most controversial parts of international law in contrast with the need to protect national sovereignty of a given state without undue interference. Even with the adoption of the Rome Statute in 1998, the crime of aggression seems to have been sidelined in favour of other matters of international justice concerns that did not directly touch the political status of the different states parties. Jurisdictional issues concerning aggression were left unresolved. The term „aggression‟ was nevertheless given recognition in the year 2010 at a Review Conference of the Rome Statute held in Kampala, Uganda, from 31 May to 11 June 2010. However, the concept still remains on paper due to the postponement in establishing the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court till 2017. Currently, only four states have signed and ratified the amendments to the Rome Statute 1998 and they are to be enforced over the next couple of years. This article gives an overview of the crime of aggression. It examines some of the contentious issues that may arise in relation to the crime of aggression.

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.

Part 3 General Principles of Criminal Law: Principes Généraux Du Droit Pénal, Art.27 Irrelevance of official capacity/Défaut de pertinence de la qualité officielle

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schabas William A
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Head Of State

This chapter comments on Article 27 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 27 consists two paragraphs that are often confounded but fulfil different functions. Paragraph 1 denies a defence of official capacity, i.e. official capacity as a Head of State or Government, a member of a Government or parliament, an elected representative or a government official shall not exempt a person from criminal responsibility under the Statute. Paragraph 2 amounts to a renunciation, by States Parties to the Rome Statute, of the immunity of their own Head of State to which they are entitled by virtue of customary international law. In contrast with paragraph 1, it is without precedent in international criminal law instruments.

scholarly journals Is global poverty a crime against humanity?

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 539-571 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gwilym David Blunt
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International System ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Global Poverty ◽  
Definition Of

Pogge has repeatedly compared the causes of global poverty with historical crimes against humanity. This claim, however, has been treated as mere rhetoric. This article argues that there are good reasons to take it seriously. It does this by comparing Pogge’s thesis on the causes of global poverty with the baseline definition of crimes against humanity found in international law, especially the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. It argues that the causes of global poverty are comparable with the crimes of slavery and apartheid. This has important consequences for cosmopolitan thought, as it makes the need for practical solutions to global poverty more urgent and raises questions about the global poor’s right to resist the international system by violent means.

scholarly journals "The Legal Basis for the Exercise of Jurisdiction by the International Criminal Court and the Preparatory Work of the Rome Statute (II)," Journal of International Relations and Comparative Culture, Vol. 17, No. 1 (September 2018), pp. 37-48.

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshiaki Kitano
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Territorial Jurisdiction ◽  
Concurrent Exercise ◽  
Preparatory Work

This paper aims to discuss the legal basis for the exercise of jurisdiction by the International Criminal Court while viewing the topic as one of the issues demonstrating the current status of general international law concerning the creation of obligations for non-party states. The table of contents included in this part 2 is as follows: Chapter 2 Existing Theories (Section 1 Exercise of State Jurisdiction through the ICC (1. Arguments for the Exercise of Territorial Jurisdiction through the ICC / 2. Arguments for the Concurrent Exercise of Territorial and Universal Jurisdictions through the ICC / 3. Arguments for the Exercise of Territorial or Active Personality Jurisdiction through the ICC depending on the Accepted State / 4. Arguments for the Exercise of Universal Jurisdiction through the ICC in All Cases / 5. Arguments against the Exercise of State Jurisdiction through the ICC / 6. Summary of Section 1)).

scholarly journals "The Legal Basis for the Exercise of Jurisdiction by the International Criminal Court and the Preparatory Work of the Rome Statute (I)," Journal of International Relations and Comparative Culture, Vol. 16, No. 2 (March 2018), pp. 67-74.

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshiaki Kitano
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Preparatory Work

This paper aims to discuss the legal basis for the exercise of jurisdiction by the International Criminal Court while viewing the topic as one of the issues demonstrating the current status of general international law concerning the creation of obligations for non-party states. The table of contents included in this part 1 is as follows: Chapter 1 Introduction (Section 1 Exercise of Jurisdiction by the ICC and Consent of States: Provisions of the Statute / Section 2 Rules of the Law of Treaties on Creation of Obligations for Non-Party States: Provisional Examination).

Part 9 International Cooperation and Judicial Assistance: Coopération Internationale Et Assistance Judiciaire, Art.98 Cooperation with respect to waiver of immunity and consent to surrender/Coopération en relation avec la renonciation à l’immunité et le consentement à la remise

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schabas William A
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Coopération Internationale ◽  
Military Activity ◽  
Judicial Assistance

This chapter comments on Article 98 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 98 emerged in the context of the debate on grounds to refuse surrender and assistance. The Rome Statute has the potential to conflict with other obligations of States under international law, whether pursuant to customary international law or treaty. In particular, they are required to respect the immunities of diplomats and international officials. States that allow military activity by foreign troops on their territory often have agreements, known as ‘status of forces agreements’ (SOFAs). Article 98 governs these conflicts by, in effect, making obligations of arrest and surrender under the Statute subordinate to other legal norms.

Preamble: Préambule, Preamble/Préambule

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schabas William A
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Justice ◽  
General Philosophy ◽  
Final Version ◽  
Underlying Principle ◽  
The Subject

This chapter comments on the Preamble to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The Preamble consists of eleven paragraphs and some 305 words. It addresses several of the important principles that underpin the Statute, such as complementarity and gravity, the commitment to address impunity, and the obligations of States with respect to international justice in general. The Preamble also provides an appropriate place for the Statute to make reference to such instruments as the Charter of the United Nations. Although the final version of the Preamble provides indications as to the general philosophy animating the Statute, the earlier versions actually influenced the drafting process, most notably in the debate as to whether complementarity was merely an underlying principle or whether it required specific provisions and mechanisms for its implementation, and as regards the importance of gravity or seriousness in establishing the subject-matter jurisdiction of the Court.

Part 7 Penalties: Les Peines, Art.80 Non-prejudice to national application of penalties and national laws/Le Statut, l’application des peines par les états et le droit national

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schabas William A
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Final Draft

This chapter comments on Article 80 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 80 deals with the application by States of penalties prescribed by their national law. The provision was introduced in the final draft, submitted to the Conference early in the day on 17 July 1998, as part of a compromise aimed at calming the objections of a relatively small number of States that had unsuccessfully campaigned to include capital punishment within the range of available penalties in the Rome Statue. Some of these States were concerned that the exclusion of the death penalty would be interpreted as evidence of a growing abolitionist trend internationally and possibly of an emerging norm of customary international law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document