scholarly journals LEGAL IMPLICATIONS OF REGULATORY PROVISIONS ARTICLE 10 VERSE (5) LAW NO. 46 OF 2009 CONCERNING THE CORRUPTION CRIMINAL COURT

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 232
Author(s):  
Ahmad Fauzi ◽  
Abdul Madjid ◽  
Nurini Aprilianda ◽  
Prija Djatmika
Keyword(s):  
Quantitative Analysis ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Normative Approach ◽  
Legal Implications

The corruption criminal court is an institution that is given the authority to examine and decide corruption cases. The purpose of this study was to determine the juridical implications of the principle of the independence of the judicial power. This study uses a normative approach with quantitative analysis. The existence of a corruption court established on judicial power states that a special court can only be formed by a separate law. Then the corruption court is an institution that has the authority to examine and decide corruption cases. In its implementation, the composition of judges in the corruption court is divided into two, namely career judges and ad hoc judges. In its implementation, there are several things in the legislation that are contrary to the principle of independence of judicial power and violate the principle of freedom of judicial power, especially for ad hoc judges in the criminal court of corruption.

International legal immunities and privileges of the Рrosecutor amicus curiae

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 55-63
Author(s):  
EKATERINA A. KOPYLOVA ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Amicus Curiae ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Foreign Science

The article considers the international legal regime of immunities and privileges of amicus curiae prosecutors of international criminal courts which are intended to ensure independent and unhindered performance of their functions in prosecuting crimes against the administration of justice. Due to the lack of doctrinal research in this field, whether in the domestic or foreign science of international law, the study is characterized by scientific novelty. Its empirical basis is constituted of the provisions of international treaties governing the immunities and privileges of staff of the ad hoc international criminal tribunals and the International Criminal Court. It is noted that today the state of international legal regulation of immunities and privileges of amicus curiae prosecutors is not quite satisfactory as it contains significant gaps. Two possible approaches to determining the scope of the immunities and privileges of amicus curiae prosecutors are identified: the first based on their status and the second – on the functions they perform. Their critical analysis leads to the conclusion that the functional approach is more in line with the principle of equality of arms in international criminal proceedings. As a result of its application, the scope of the immunities and privileges of amicus curiae prosecutors coincides with the scope of the immunities and privileges granted to staff of the Offices of Prosecutors at the international criminal tribunals.

The African Union and Universal Jurisdiction

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Mennecke
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Universal Jurisdiction ◽  
African Union ◽  
Government Officials ◽  
African Government ◽  
Double Standards ◽  
Legal Principle ◽  
The Status

Universal jurisdiction permits states to investigate and prosecute perpetrators of certain widely condemned offences, irrespective of whether they possess any of the traditional territorial, nationality, or other jurisdictional links to the offence. As a legal principle, African states accept the principle of universal jurisdiction, but in the past decade they have pushed back against it due to the perception that the courts of various European states have unfairly targeted African government officials that they perceive as enemies. Against this background, the chapter examines the status of the universal jurisdiction debate and how it relates to the role of the International Criminal Court and that of the African Union and its member states, in addition to evaluating the proposals made by African states within the framework of the United Nations to address the African government concerns about double standards in the application of universal jurisdiction through a special ad hoc committee of the General Assembly.

scholarly journals PartSeg: a tool for quantitative feature extraction from 3D microscopy images for dummies

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Grzegorz Bokota ◽  
Jacek Sroka ◽  
Subhadip Basu ◽  
Nirmal Das ◽  
Pawel Trzaskoma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quantitative Analysis ◽  
Cell Nucleus ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Multiple Use ◽  
Entry Barrier ◽  
Multi Scale ◽  
3D Microscopy ◽  
Nuclear Structures ◽  
Bulk Processing ◽  
Microscopy Images

Abstract Background Bioimaging techniques offer a robust tool for studying molecular pathways and morphological phenotypes of cell populations subjected to various conditions. As modern high-resolution 3D microscopy provides access to an ever-increasing amount of high-quality images, there arises a need for their analysis in an automated, unbiased, and simple way. Segmentation of structures within the cell nucleus, which is the focus of this paper, presents a new layer of complexity in the form of dense packing and significant signal overlap. At the same time, the available segmentation tools provide a steep learning curve for new users with a limited technical background. This is especially apparent in the bulk processing of image sets, which requires the use of some form of programming notation. Results In this paper, we present PartSeg, a tool for segmentation and reconstruction of 3D microscopy images, optimised for the study of the cell nucleus. PartSeg integrates refined versions of several state-of-the-art algorithms, including a new multi-scale approach for segmentation and quantitative analysis of 3D microscopy images. The features and user-friendly interface of PartSeg were carefully planned with biologists in mind, based on analysis of multiple use cases and difficulties encountered with other tools, to offer an ergonomic interface with a minimal entry barrier. Bulk processing in an ad-hoc manner is possible without the need for programmer support. As the size of datasets of interest grows, such bulk processing solutions become essential for proper statistical analysis of results. Advanced users can use PartSeg components as a library within Python data processing and visualisation pipelines, for example within Jupyter notebooks. The tool is extensible so that new functionality and algorithms can be added by the use of plugins. For biologists, the utility of PartSeg is presented in several scenarios, showing the quantitative analysis of nuclear structures. Conclusions In this paper, we have presented PartSeg which is a tool for precise and verifiable segmentation and reconstruction of 3D microscopy images. PartSeg is optimised for cell nucleus analysis and offers multi-scale segmentation algorithms best-suited for this task. PartSeg can also be used for the bulk processing of multiple images and its components can be reused in other systems or computational experiments.

Individual Criminal Responsibility before the International Criminal Court

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Goy
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Individual Criminal Responsibility

For more than 15 years the two ad hoc Tribunals, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), have interpreted the requirements of different forms of individual criminal responsibility. It is thus helpful to look at whether and to what extent the jurisprudence of the ICTY/ICTR may provide guidance to the International Criminal Court (ICC). To this end, this article compares the requirements of individual criminal responsibility at the ICTY/ICTR and the ICC. The article concludes that, applied with caution, the jurisprudence of the ICTY/ICTR – as an expression of international law – can assist in interpreting the modes of liability under the ICC Statute. ICTY/ICTR case law seems to be most helpful with regard to accessorial forms of liability, in particular their objective elements. Moreover, it may assist in interpreting the subjective requirements set out in Article 30 ICC Statute.

scholarly journals Ending Impunity: The Case for War Crimes Trials in Liberia

2005 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 53-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alhagi Marong ◽  
Chernor Jalloh
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Charles Taylor ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Sierra Leonean ◽  
Post Conflict

AbstractThis article argues that Liberia owes a duty under both international humanitarian and human rights law to investigate and prosecute the heinous crimes, including torture, rape and extra-judicial killings of innocent civilians, committed in that country by the warring parties in the course of fourteen years of brutal conflict. Assuming that Liberia owes a duty to punish the grave crimes committed on its territory, the article then evaluates the options for prosecution, starting with the possible use of Liberian courts. The authors argue that Liberian courts are unable, even if willing, to render credible justice that protects the due process rights of the accused given the collapse of legal institutions and the paucity of financial, human and material resources in post-conflict Liberia. The authors then examine the possibility of using international accountability mechanisms, including the International Criminal Court, an ad hoc international criminal tribunal as well as a hybrid court for Liberia. For various legal and political reasons, the authors conclude that all of these options are not viable. As an alternative, they suggest that because the Special Court for Sierra Leone has already started the accountability process for Liberia with the indictment of Charles Taylor in 2003, and given the close links between the Liberian and Sierra Leonean conflicts, the Special Court would be a more appropriate forum for international prosecutions of those who perpetrated gross humanitarian and human rights law violations in Liberia.

s.VI Narratives, Ch.22 Historical Reasoning and Judicial Historiography in International Criminal Trials

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Priemel Kim Christian
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Criminal Trials ◽  
High Profile ◽  
Historical Reasoning ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
Day To Day Operations ◽  
Post War ◽  
Nazi Era

This chapter explores the overlaps and differences between historical reasoning and judicial historiography. It takes the reader from Nuremberg to the International Criminal Court to show that judicial proceedings have been a major site for the development of both micro- and macro-level histories, sometimes problematically so. The chapter addresses if, how, and to what extent macro-historical interpretations permeated the high-profile proceedings at Nuremberg and Tokyo and helps explain their dynamics and outcomes. This pattern was repeated in domestic trials of Nazi-era crimes throughout the post-war decades, yet largely overlooked in the creation and day-to-day operations of the ad hoc tribunals that sprang to life in the 1990s and early 2000s. To conclude, the chapter suggests that this unawareness may explain some of the Tribunals’ shortcomings and needs to be reflected by both lawyers and historians if the ICC is to avoid even more criticism than that levelled against it since its inception.

s.II Spaces, Ch.6 Legitimacy in War and Punishment: The Security Council and the ICC

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dannenbaum Tom
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Structure And Function ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Core Function ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
And Function

UN Security Council referrals are a legally sufficient basis for International Criminal Court (ICC) action under the Rome Statute and the United Nations (UN) Charter. However, the fact that each permanent member of the Security Council can veto any such referral and that three of those states have declined to ratify the Statute poses a legitimacy problem for the Court. Specifically, it undermines the Court’s moral standing to judge and thus its capacity to deliver on its core function. Because of both the structure and function of the Court, the privileged position of the Council’s permanent members is more undermining of ICC legitimacy than it is of Council-authorized military action in response to atrocity, and even than it was of the ad hoc tribunals created by the Council. One way to remedy this situation would be to vest the ICC with universal jurisdiction. Alternatively, the Court’s legitimacy would be enhanced if Security Council referrals were removed from the Statute. Those, however, are unlikely amendments. More modestly, the Prosecutor should decline all Security Council referrals under the ‘interests of justice’ test.

scholarly journals The Legacy of the ICTY and ICTR in China

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 110 ◽  
pp. 245-250
Author(s):  
Bing Bing Jia
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Tribunal

Legacy is a matter that may become topical when its creator finally stops producing. Normally, the silent years would be many before the thought of legacy enters into open, formal discourse among lawyers and decision-makers. This comment treats the meaning of the word as relative to the circumstances in which it is invoked. The more closely it is used in relation to the present, the more distant it drifts from its literal meaning, to the extent that it denotes what the word “impact” signifies. This essay questions whether the word “legacy” is apt in describing the footprint of the work of the two ad hoctribunals in China, where its influence has, as a matter of fact, been waning ever since the adoption of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court in 1998 (“Rome Statute” ). The Chinese example suggests that the work of the tribunals is (at least so far) no more significant to international criminal law than the illustrious Nuremberg and Tokyo Trials of the 1940s. The most major impact (a more apposite term than legacy) of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) for China may be that China’s policy with regard to the tribunals, manifested mostly in the United Nations, has determined its approach to the International Criminal Court (“ICC” ). For that, the work of the tribunals could be considered as having left China something in the nature of an indirect legacy.

Expediting the ICC Criminal Process: Striking the Right Balance between the ICC and States Parties

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 383-425
Author(s):  
Hirad Abtahi ◽  
Shehzad Charania
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Common Goal ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
State Involvement ◽  
Rules Of Procedure ◽  
The Right

When establishing the ICC, the sole permanent international criminal court, States ensured that they would play a legislative role larger and more direct than the ad hoc and hybrid courts and tribunals. States Parties have, however, acknowledged that, given the time they spend interpreting and applying the ICC legal framework, the judges are uniquely placed to identify and propose measures designed to expedite the criminal process. Accordingly, the ICC has followed a dual track. First, it has pursued an amendment track, which requires States Parties’ direct approval of ICC proposed amendments to the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Second, it has implemented practices changes that do not require State involvement. This interactive process between the Court and States Parties reflects their common goal to expedite the criminal proceedings. The future of this process will rely on striking the right equilibrium between the respective roles of States Parties and the Court.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document