scholarly journals Crimes against humanity in the works of the International Law Commission on the draft articles on the prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 9-44
Author(s):  
Krzysztof Masło
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Domestic Law ◽  
Law Commission

Crimes against humanity, besides war crimes, belong to the most frequently committed and prosecuted crimes of international law. Recently, the International Law Commission adopted draft Articles on the prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity, bridging the gap in international criminal law and in international cooperation between states. When discussing the draft Articles on the prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity, the International Law Commission did not act in a vacuum. The issue of understanding crimes against humanity and the obligations of states related to the prevention and punishment of these crimes has appeared in the works of the Commission since the 1950s, primarily in connection with the development of the draft Code of crimes against the peace and security of mankind and the statute of the International Criminal Court. Based on its previous experiences, the International Law Commission focused on four issues to be covered by the draft Articles: 1) definition of crimes against humanity; 2) the obligation of states to criminalise such crimes in domestic law; 3) the obligation of states to cooperate in the investigation, prosecution and punishment of these offences; 4) the duty of aut dedere aut judicare fortified by the perpetrator’s stay in the territory of the state party. Considering the broad support for the definition of crimes against humanity adopted in the ICC Statute and its complementary character, the International Law Commission adopted the definition of art. 7 of the ICC Statute. The works of the International Law Commission are focused on the obligations of countries related to prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity, especially: the obligation to criminalise crimes against humanity and to establish jurisdiction over those crimes. The International Law Commission also formulated a series of obligations of states with a procedural character in the draft Articles, for example, obligation to conduct prompt and efficient criminal proceedings, the purpose of which is to explain all the circumstances of the crime and to punish the guilty person or persons.

Crimes against Humanity

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beth van Schaack
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Crime ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Civilian Population

Crimes against humanity have both a colloquial and a legal existence. In daily parlance, the term is employed to condemn any number of atrocities that violate international human rights. As a legal construct, crimes against humanity encompass a constellation of acts made criminal under international law when they are committed within the context of a widespread and systematic attack against a civilian population. In the domain of international criminal law, crimes against humanity are an increasingly useful component of any international prosecutor’s toolbox, because they can be charged in connection with acts of violence that do not implicate other international criminal prohibitions, such as the prohibitions against war crimes (which require a nexus to an armed conflict) and genocide (which protects only certain human groups and requires proof of a specific intent to destroy such a group). Although the concept of crimes against humanity has deep roots, crimes against humanity were first adjudicated—albeit with some controversy—in the criminal proceedings following the World War II period. The central challenge to defining crimes against humanity under international criminal law since then has been to come up with a formulation of the offense that reconciles the principle of sovereignty—which envisions an exclusive territorial domain in which states are free from outside scrutiny—with the idea that international law can, and indeed should, regulate certain acts committed entirely within the borders of a single state. Because many enumerated crimes against humanity are also crimes under domestic law (e.g., murder, assault, and rape), it was necessary to define crimes against humanity in a way that did not elevate every domestic crime to the status of an international crime, subject to international jurisdiction. Over the years, legal drafters have experimented with various elements in an effort to arrive at a workable penal definition. The definitional confusion plaguing the crime over its life span generated a considerable amount of legal scholarship. It was not until the UN Security Council promulgated the statutes of the two ad hoc international criminal tribunals—the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda—that a modern definition of the crime emerged. These definitions were further refined by the case law of the two tribunals and their progeny, such as the Special Court for Sierra Leone. All these doctrinal developments were codified, with some additional modifications, in a consensus definition in Article 7 of the Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC). It is now clear that the offense constitutes three essential elements: (1) the existence of a widespread or systematic attack against a civilian population and (2) the intentional commission of an enumerated act (such as an act of murder or torture) (3) by an individual with knowledge that his or her act would contribute to the larger attack. A renewed effort is now afoot to promulgate a multilateral treaty devoted to crimes against humanity based on the ICC definition and these central elements. Through this dynamic process of codification and interpretation, many—but not all—definitional issues left open in the postwar period have finally been resolved. Although their origins were somewhat shaky, crimes against humanity now have a firm place in the canon of international criminal law.

Part III Security Governance Tools, Ch.41 Criminal Prosecution

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pocar Fausto
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
Governance Tools ◽  
Domestic Law

This chapter focuses on criminal prosecution. Traditionally, in domestic law, criminal prosecution has been regarded as a tool capable of contributing to peaceful and secure governance. Under international law, however, recourse to criminal prosecution as a safeguard for maintaining international peace and security is very recent and still limited, and in many respects disputed. This is the case both when international rules are applied by international jurisdictions and when they are directed at soliciting the exercise of criminal prosecution by domestic courts. The chapter looks at the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC Statute), which expressly provides that the jurisdiction of the Court ‘shall be limited to the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole’, and identifies these crimes as the crime of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. Given that the ICC Statute does not merely codify customary international law, but also partially develops or restricts it, its adoption has produced some degree of fragmentation of international criminal law, which further impacts on the existing international case law.

Visits to the ICRC

1990 ◽  
Vol 30 (277) ◽  
pp. 345-346
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
United Nations General ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
United Nations General Assembly ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

• ICRC President Comelio Sommaruga received the members of the International Law Commission (ILC) at ICRC headquarters on 7 June 1990.The Commission is a subsidiary body of the United Nations General Assembly. Its 34 members are elected from among the most eminent representatives of the world's different legal systems. The Commission is entrusted with the task of promoting the codification and development of international law. It is currently working on the codification of offences against the peace and security of mankind (which include war crimes) and the setting up of an international criminal court.

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.

“Revolution is glorious! Revolution is no crime!” International Crimes and Chinese Domestic Law, and the Gang of Four Trial

2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 313-343 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melanie O’Brien
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Modern China ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Glorious Revolution ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Domestic Law

China was active in the drafting of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, but has not become a state party, and the Chinese relationship with international criminal law is not strong. Given this, an examination of China’s own abilities and actions with regard to accountability for international crimes is warranted. China does not have any legislation proscribing violations of international humanitarian law, or war crimes, genocide, or crimes against humanity. This article will examine some of the options under current Chinese Criminal Law of 1997 that could be used to prosecute international crimes in lieu of express provisions. The second part of the article undertakes an international criminal law and human rights analysis of the Gang of Four trial, as the only trial of leaders linked to the mass crimes of the Cultural Revolution and thus the only real example of an attempt at accountability for mass crimes in modern China. These two parts of the article combine together to provide an analysis of China’s ability to enact and attempts at accountability for international crimes committed in China.

Cognitive Bias, Privacy Rights, and Digital Evidence in International Criminal Proceedings: Demystifying the Double-Edged ai Revolution

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-38
Author(s):  
Riccardo Vecellio Segate
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Digital Evidence ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Privacy Rights ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
High Profile ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Domestic Law

Abstract International criminal tribunals (ict s) have found, almost consistently, that unlawfully and/or secretly obtained evidence is admissible. De facto, defendants in international criminal law (icl) enjoy no privacy-related procedural safeguards under either the applicable domestic law or international human rights law (ihrl). Privacy violations are not confined to those impairing defendants’ rights; they might result in premature acquittals or in misconducts vis-à-vis the victims, too. While this is practically unescapable a compromise due to the ‘high profile’ of the accused and the complexity, length, momentousness, and ‘political charge’ of these trials, over-relaxed admissibility rules become unsustainable as far as digital evidence is concerned, in that they add to the latter’s inherently low reliability and heavy cognitive impact. Facing this issue, it is legit to wonder whether artificial intelligence (ai) might mitigate privacy violations or render them no longer necessary, thus improving the fairness record of the International Criminal Court (icc) and other ict s.

‘With or Without You’: Why Italy Should Incorporate Crimes Against Humanity and Genocide Into Its National Legal System

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 698-714
Author(s):  
Luigi Prosperi
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Genocide Convention ◽  
International Obligation ◽  
Draft Convention ◽  
International Law Commission

Abstract By ratifying the Genocide Convention, Italy undertook an obligation to enact legislation ‘to provide effective penalties for persons guilty of genocide’. Accordingly, in 1967 the legislator incorporated the offences enumerated in the convention into the domestic legal system. As it was under no such obligation with regard to crimes against humanity, Italy has not criminalized them. Two major legal issues arise from this decision. First, Italy may be unable to execute cooperation requests submitted by the International Criminal Court, and thus breach an international obligation. Furthermore, domestic authorities can only charge suspects with ‘corresponding’ ordinary offences, which are subject to statutes of limitations. Both issues are addressed in the Draft Convention on Crimes Against Humanity adopted by the International Law Commission, whose provisions require States Parties to enact legislation to ensure that under domestic criminal law such crimes constitute offences and are not subject to a statute of limitations.

The Forty-Sixth Session of the International Law Commission

1995 ◽  
Vol 89 (2) ◽  
pp. 390-395 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Rosenstock
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
State Responsibility ◽  
Current Term ◽  
Sixth Session ◽  
State Succession ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

The International Law Commission of the United Nations held its forty-sixth session from May 2 to July 22, 1994, under the chairmanship of Professor Vladlin Vereshchetin of Russia.The Commission had one of its most productive sessions. It completed a second draft of a statute for an international criminal court; completed its second reading on nonnavigational uses of international watercourses; completed, provisionally on first reading, a discrete portion of its work on liability for injurious consequences arising out of acts not prohibited by international law; considered aspects of state responsibility; began its second reading on the Draft Code of Crimes; and appointed Vaclav Mikulka and Alain Pellet, respectively, as special rapporteurs for the new topics of “State succession and its impact on the nationality of natural and legal persons” and “the law and practice relating to reservations to treaties.” It is the intention of the Commission to conclude its work on these two topics during the current term, i.e., by 1996.

scholarly journals The Crisis of International Criminal Law in Africa: A Regional Regime in Response?

2019 ◽  
Vol 66 (2) ◽  
pp. 287-311
Author(s):  
Eki Yemisi Omorogbe
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
International Crimes

Abstract This article considers the African Union’s (AU) proposal for a regional court for international crimes under the Malabo Protocol 2014 (Protocol). It places that within the AU’s rejection of the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) arrest warrants for African Heads of States that are not party to the Rome Statute and a more general protection of incumbents. It argues that the enthusiasm for establishing a regional criminal court, which lacks jurisdiction to prosecute incumbents, has not been sustained and African states remain committed to the ICC. It shows that nevertheless the Protocol’s provisions on genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, although imperfect, better address the specific character of armed conflicts in Africa than current international law, including the Rome Statute of the ICC. It concludes that the regional court for international crimes is unlikely to be established unless the ICC takes further action against incumbent leaders but that the Protocol’s provisions could be used in the development of a more Africa-centric international law.

Completing the ``International Criminal Order''

1998 ◽  
Vol 67 (2) ◽  
pp. 107-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Community ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Criminal Jurisdiction ◽  
Draft Statute ◽  
Domestic Jurisdiction ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

AbstractRecent efforts in the United Nations to establish a comprehensive system of international criminal repression by creating a permanent international criminal court are by no means free from doubts regarding the possibility ever to enforce such law. The preamble of the draft statute prepared by the International Law Commission states the basis on which the court is to assert jurisdiction in an ambitious manner: it is the ``International Community'', joining against ``the most serious crimes of international concern''. The project cannot, however, ignore decades of realist criticism against the assumption of the existence of an international community that is ready to accept an international criminal jurisdiction. In the negotiations, this contradiction is dealt with by a technique provided with an ambiguous name: ``complementarity'', i.e. the coordination of the tasks of the international and domestic jurisdiction. The writer discusses the various ideas and proposals presented under the heading of ``complementarity'' in order to examine the tension between communitarian and sovereignty-based strands in the international project to create an effective criminal jurisdiction.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document