scholarly journals Piracy Prosecutions in National Courts

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maggie Gardner
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
Key Questions

10 Journal of International Criminal Justice 797 (2012)At least for the time being, the international community must rely on national courts to prosecute modern-day pirates. The first wave of domestic piracy prosecutions suggests, however, that domestic courts have yet to achieve the necessary consistency and expertise in resolving key questions of international law in these cases. This article evaluates how courts trying modern-day pirates have addressed common questions of international law regarding the exercise of universal jurisdiction, the elements of the crime of piracy, and the principle of nullum crimen sine lege. In doing so, it evaluates five decisions issued in 2010 by courts in Kenya, the Netherlands, the Seychelles and the United States, and it proposes some clear answers to these recurrent questions of international law in domestic piracy prosecutions.

scholarly journals A Horizontal Treaty on Cooperation in International Criminal Matters: The Next Step for the Evolution of a Comprehensive International Criminal Justice System?

2017 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 368-387
Author(s):  
Dire Tladi
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
International Law ◽  
Justice System ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Interstate Cooperation ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
Key Concepts ◽  
Criminal Matters

This paper addresses the intersection between two key concepts in international criminal justice, namely cooperation and complementarity. While it is recognised that domestic courts carry main responsibility for ensuring accountability for the commission of international crimes, there appears to be gaps in two areas. First, international law does not make provision for a comprehensive obligation to investigate and prosecute such crimes. Second, there is no comprehensive and robust interstate cooperation obligation, necessary to ensure successful domestic investigations and prosecutions. The paper assess two initiatives designed to fill these gaps, and considers their strengths, weaknesses and the possible synergies between them.

scholarly journals United States Visa Ban on Officials of the ICC: International Criminal Justice on Trial

2020 ◽  
pp. 468-475
Author(s):  
James E. Archibong
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
The United States ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Un Peacekeeping ◽  
The Us ◽  
Court Proceedings

The isolation of the United States (US) from the International Criminal Court (ICC) treaty has dealt a heavy blow on the potency of the Court. By making efforts to frustrate the ICC’s activities and withholding support for United Nations (UN) peacekeeping unless United States (US) citizens are exempted from international enforcement arising out of such operations; and mandating other countries to sign treaties such as the "bilateral immunity agreements" that exempts the US citizens from Court proceedings as a criteria for rendering assistance or giving aids, the US makes it more difficult to enforce the laws prohibiting genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. The recent decision by the US to deny officials of the ICC access to its territory, even to the UN headquarters places a further strain on the Court’s efforts to achieve international justice. This paper highlights the implications of the US antagonism to the ICC on international criminal justice.

International Criminal Justice History Writing as Anachronism

2019 ◽  
pp. 72-89
Author(s):  
Frédéric Mégret
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
History Writing ◽  
Long Time ◽  
Individual Accountability

This chapter focuses on the extent to which the contemporary project of international criminal justice cannot easily lay claim to what it imagines to be its past, because that past, despite superficial similarities, often exhibited fundamentally different concerns. It highlights three areas in which international criminal justice today is arguably dramatically different from how it was understood up to the 1990s. First, international criminal justice was for a long time much less obsessed with the criminalization of international law prohibitions specifically, and much more interested in the transnational dimensions of the criminal law. Second, it was much less committed to a strict model of individual accountability under international law and much more willing to see the state as the central pivot of international criminal responsibility. Third, it was intimately linked to peace projects whereas it has become intimately associated to the fight against atrocities and mass human rights violations.

Civil Suits

2020 ◽  
pp. 315-339
Author(s):  
Beth Van Schaack
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
The United States ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Sovereign State ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
The Icj ◽  
Convention Against Torture

Rounding out the matrix of accountability, chapter 8 presents several nonpenal options to bring justice to Syria, including civil suits in domestic courts against responsible individuals and entities and options for exercising jurisdiction over the sovereign state of Syria. Because there is no notion of state criminality under international law, only civil claims seeking money damages can be advanced against sovereign states. Jurisdiction over Syria exists before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) under the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; however, so far no state has been willing to take Syria to task before the ICJ. And so, victims must bear this burden. In this regard, some tort law options exist in domestic courts, especially in the United States with its suite of statutes giving its domestic courts jurisdiction over certain international law violations in certain circumstances. This chapter features a groundbreaking suit against Syria under the United States’ Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, which resulted in a $300 million judgment for the surviving family members of Marie Colvin, the intrepid war correspondent assassinated by the Syrian regime. The chapter observes that although civil remedies are no substitute for vigorous criminal liability, these suits do extend victims some dignitary benefits that may not accrue with participation in a criminal process, even as a partie civile, including the opportunity to control the litigation process and act where the public authorities may be unable or unwilling to do so.

Types of Injury in Inter-State Reparation Claims: A Guide for the International Criminal Court

2015 ◽  
Vol 30 (02) ◽  
pp. 259-276
Author(s):  
Hirad Abtahi
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
Inter State

Abstract In determining “the scope and extent of any damage, loss and injury to, or in respect of, victims” under article 75(1) of the International Criminal Court (“ICC”) Statute, the ICC will progressively lay the foundation of reparations in international criminal justice. In the process of establishing the typology of harms sustained by natural and—under some qualifications—legal persons, inter-state claims practice may prove to be of assistance to the judges in light of the particular circumstances of each case. In addition, such an exercise illuminates how the doctrinal methods adopted in public international law scholarship categorize and describe the harms that have given rise to reparation claims during both war and peacetime.

Part VI The Post-Award Phase, 28 Review of non-ICSID Awards by National Courts

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hobér Kaj ◽  
Eliasson Nils
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Czech Republic ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Foreign Investment ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Investment Treaty ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
Energy Charter Treaty ◽  
Investment Law

In investment arbitration, just as in private commercial, the final award is often merely the starting shot for challenge and/or enforcement proceedings that may take as long as, or even longer than, the prior proceedings. This chapter discusses the challenge and review of investment treaty awards in municipal courts, based on 38 cases from 12 different jurisdictions: Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, England, France, Germany, The Netherlands, Russia, Sweden, Switzerland, Singapore, and the United States. Most Canadian and US cases challenge NAFTA awards, whereas most European cases challenge bilateral investment treaty awards. The remaining cases challenge awards under the Energy Charter Treaty, one challenge of a decision on jurisdiction under the Kyrgyz Foreign Investment Law, and two challenges of awards under the CIS Convention for the Protection of Investors Rights. These jurisdictions are frequently chosen as the seat of non-ICSID arbitrations.

Part V Fairness and Expeditiousness of ICC Proceedings, 43 Testifying behind Bars—Detained ICC Witnesses and Human Rights Protection

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wijk Joris van ◽  
Cupido Marjolein
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Protective Measures ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Video Link ◽  
Alternative Solutions

This Chapter discusses the competing responsibilities of the ICC and the host State in relation to detained witnesses, with a particular focus on asylum applications. As shown by the example of Congolese witnesses, testimony before the Court can lead to conflicting human rights obligations. The Court is obliged to return detained witnesses to the requested state after they have testified. The ICC and the Netherlands need to respect internationally recognized human rights and protect persons from persecution. Attempts to reconcile these competing obligations have resulted in lengthy proceedings before the ICC and Dutch courts. This Chapter examines the problems that arose in this context, and argues that the threat of more asylum applications could have serious implications for the future functioning of international criminal justice. It explores three possible alternative solutions: anticipatory protective measures, video-link testimony, and rogatory commissions, all of which come with their own complications.

Remarks from the Panel

2019 ◽  
Vol 113 ◽  
pp. 279-285
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
Policy Practice ◽  
Legal Adviser ◽  
The University ◽  
Global Law

Chimène Keitner, Alfred & Hanna Fromm Professor of International Law at UC Hastings Law, moderated a discussion among John B. Bellinger III, former U.S. State Department legal adviser and current head of Arnold & Porter's global law and public policy practice; Marko Milanovic, professor of public international law at the University of Nottingham School of Law; and Angela Mudukuti, senior international criminal justice lawyer at the Wayamo Foundation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document