African Union and International Criminal Court: The Trajectory to Peace and Security in Africa

Subject Regional risks posed by the crisis in Burundi. Significance On January 31, the African Union (AU) heads of state voted against deploying a proposed 5,000-strong peacekeeping force to Burundi to quell violence triggered by President Pierre Nkurunziza's successful bid for a third term in office. The decision indicates tacit support by many leaders, some of whom are planning similar bids. Yet they remain concerned for the wider security implications should a full civil war erupt. Impacts Tanzania's new president, John Magufuli, is best placed to lead future peace talks given his strong standing regionally and internationally. If the crisis becomes genocidal, the UNSC may consider extending its DRC peacekeeping mission's mandate to include Burundi. AU opposition to the International Criminal Court means that Nkurunziza is unlikely to face charges if he steps down or is removed.

Download Full-text

‘Interests of justice’: Defining the scope of Prosecutorial discretion in Article 53(1)(c) and (2)(c) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court

Leiden Journal of International Law ◽

10.1017/s092215651700022x ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 30 (3) ◽

pp. 731-751 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

TALITA DE SOUZA DIAS

Keyword(s):

International Criminal Court ◽

Rome Statute ◽

International Criminal ◽

International Community ◽

Criminal Court ◽

Vienna Convention ◽

Prosecutorial Discretion ◽

New Developments ◽

Policy Paper ◽

Peace And Security

AbstractThe International Criminal Court (ICC) was established with the aim of prosecuting individuals for the gravest crimes of concern to the international community. Yet some provisions of its Statute (the Rome Statute) recognize the need for temporarily setting aside criminal investigations or prosecutions in favour of different considerations. Two of these provisions are Article 53(1)(c) and (2)(c) of the Statute. They allow the Prosecutor of the Court to use his or her discretion in deciding not to initiate an investigation or a prosecution in the ‘interests of justice’. Nonetheless, the ambiguity of this phrase, coupled with an absent definition, have given rise to a polarized debate about its meaning and the Prosecutor's ensuing margin of discretion: some consider matters of peace and security and alternative justice mechanisms as possible ‘interests of justice’, while others exclude them. Among those adopting the latter view is the ICC's Office of the Prosecutor (OTP), as can be inferred from a 2007 Policy Paper on the Interests of Justice and a 2013 Policy Paper on Preliminary Examinations, which continue to be upheld by the Office. Against this backdrop and amid new developments at the ICC which call into question the OTP's position, the purpose of this article is to develop a comprehensive interpretation of Article 53(1)(c) and (2)(c) of the Rome Statute, using all the interpretative tools provided by Articles 31 to 33 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

Download Full-text

The Selection of Situations by the ICC: An Empirically Based Evaluation of the otp’s Performance

International Criminal Law Review ◽

10.1163/15718123-01406002 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 15 (1) ◽

pp. 1-39 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Alette Smeulers ◽

Maartje Weerdesteijn ◽

Barbora Hola

Keyword(s):

International Criminal Court ◽

International Criminal ◽

International Community ◽

Criminal Court ◽

African Union ◽

Political Leaders ◽

International Crimes ◽

Explorative Study ◽

Selection Policy ◽

Selection Of

The main aim of the International Criminal Court (icc) is to prosecute the most serious crimes of concern to the international community. One of the most valued features of the icc is the independent position of the Prosecutor in selecting situations and cases to investigate. The Prosecutor, however, has been heavily criticized for his selection policy and countries from the African Union even threatened to withdraw from the icc because of its alleged bias and unfair focus on African political leaders. In this article we present the results of our explorative study in which we empirically evaluate the situations selection policy of the icc Prosecutor. We conclude that given the icc’s limited jurisdictional reach, the Prosecutor is generally focusing on the gravest situations where international crimes are supposedly committed.

Download Full-text

The African Union, the United Nations Security Council and the Politicisation of International Justice in Africa

African Journal of Legal Studies ◽

10.1163/17087384-12342051 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 7 (3) ◽

pp. 351-379 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Benson Chinedu Olugbuo

Keyword(s):

United Nations ◽

Security Council ◽

International Criminal Court ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Court ◽

United Nations Security Council ◽

African Union ◽

African Countries ◽

The United Nations ◽

The Relationship

There are two questions with multiple answers regarding the relationship between Africa and the International Criminal Court. The first is whether the International Criminal Court is targeting Africa and the second is if politics plays any role in the decision to investigate and prosecute crimes within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. For the African Union, the International Criminal Court has become a western court targeting weak African countries and ignoring the atrocities committed by big powers including permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. The accusation by the African Union against the International Criminal Court leads to the argument that the International Criminal Court is currently politised. This is a charge consistently denied by the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court. The aim of this paper is to discuss the relationship between the United Nations Security Council, the International Criminal Court and the African Union. It articulates the role of the three institutions in the fight against impunity and the maintenance of international peace and security with reference to the African continent. The paper argues that complementarity should be applied to regional organisations and that the relationship between the African Union and the International Criminal Court should be guided by the application of positive complementarity and a nuanced approach to the interests of justice. This offers the International Criminal Court and the African Union an opportunity to develop mutual trust and result-oriented strategies to confront the impunity on the continent. The paper further argues that the power of the United Nations Security Council to refer situations to the International Criminal Court and defer cases before the Court is a primary source of the disagreement between the prosecutor and the African Union and recommends a division of labour between the International Criminal Court and the United Nations Security Council.

Download Full-text