The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court

1999 ◽  
Vol 93 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahnoush H. Arsanjani
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
The United States ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Intergovernmental Organizations ◽  
Food And Agriculture ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Food And Agriculture Organization ◽  
The Russian Federation

The United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court (ICC) took place in Rome at the headquarters of the Food and Agriculture Organization from June 15 to July 17, 1998. The participants numbered 160 states, thirty-three intergovernmental organizations and a coalition of 236 nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). The conference concluded by adopting the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court by a nonrecorded vote of 120 in favor, 7 against and 21 abstentions. The United States elected to indicate publicly that it had voted against the statute. France, the United Kingdom and the Russian Federation supported the statute.

Status and Intervention in Darfur, Sudan 2004–2008

2019 ◽  
pp. 63-87
Author(s):  
Courtney J. Fung
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
The United States ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Beijing Olympic Games ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Peace Operation ◽  
Domestic Affairs ◽  
2008 Beijing Olympic Games

Chapter 4 analyzes China’s decision to shift its position on intervention in Sudan over the Darfur crisis. China went from viewing Sudan’s problems as domestic affairs not for the UN Security Council’s purview, to actively supporting intervention. China wrangled and effectively “enforced” consent from Khartoum for a UN Charter Chapter VII peacekeeping mission, and acquiesced to a referral of the Sudan case to the International Criminal Court, which led to an indictment of sitting President Omar al-Bashir. Though this case is popularly understood as being determined by material drivers—like shielding the Sino-Sudanese economic relationship, or addressing the reputational threat of the “Genocide Olympics” to the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games—the chapter demonstrates that status is the key variable to explain China’s shifting position. Under mounting pressure from both the great powers (the “P3” of the United States, the United Kingdom, France) and the African Union, in particular, China gravitated to supporting and permitting intervention with a yes vote for the UN-AU Hybrid Peace Operation (UNAMID) and an abstention vote for an International Criminal Court referral in 2005, and again in 2008.

The Crime of Aggression: The United States Perspective

2015 ◽  
Vol 109 (2) ◽  
pp. 257-295 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harold Hongju Koh ◽  
Todd F. Buchwald
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
The United States ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Obama Administration ◽  
One Year

At the 2010 Review Conference in Kampala, the states parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) decided to adopt seven amendments to the Rome Statute that contemplate the possibility of the Court exercising jurisdiction over the crime of aggression subject to certain conditions. One condition was that the exercise of jurisdiction would be “subject to a decision to be taken after 1 January 2017 by the same majority of States Parties as is required for the adoption of an amendment to the Statute,” and another was that such jurisdiction could be exercised “only with respect to crimes of aggression committed one year after the ratification or acceptance of the amendments by thirty States Parties.” As these dates approach, we—two lawyers who represented the United States at the Kampala conference and who worked many hours on the United States’ reengagement with the ICC during the Obama administration—thought it an appropriate moment to take stock of where we are, how we got here, and where we might or should be headed with respect to the crime of aggression.

scholarly journals Tinjauan Hukum Humaniter Internasional dalam Operasi Enduring Freedom Amerika Serikat ke Afghanistan dan Peran International Criminal Court (ICC)

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-24
Author(s):  
Reno Ismadi ◽  
Awatar Bayu Putranto ◽  
Tiffany Setyo Pratiwi
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
World Trade Center ◽  
The United States ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Military Operations ◽  
Us Military ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Military

The US military invasion to Afghanistan took place when the War on Terror declared by the United States after the incident in September, 2001 at World Trade Center. One of the military operations in this invasion was called Enduring Freedom. This research will discuss the violations committed by America in the invasion of Afghanistan, particularly during the Enduring Freedom operation, which it was reviewed through Geneva Law and The Rome Statute. The author using literature studies with qualitative methods. The author found that the violations of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and The Rome Statute Article 8 and 11 were carried out by America during the deliberate Enduring Freedom Operation. The violation was proven but the International Criminal Court (ICC) did nothing.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document