Universal jurisdiction: concept, logic and reality

2015 ◽  
pp. 76-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sienho Yee
Keyword(s):  
Universal Jurisdiction ◽  
Concept Logic

Rights, Authority, and Workability: An Examination of Universal Jurisdiction

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 7-17
Author(s):  
Srdan Durica
Keyword(s):  
Universal Jurisdiction ◽  
Scholarly Work ◽  
Contemporary State ◽  
The Core ◽  
Core Areas ◽  
The Subject

In this paper, I conceptualize ‘universal jurisdiction’ along three axes: rights, authority, and workability to reduce the compendium of scholarly work on the subject into three prominent focus areas. I then review the longstanding debates between critics and supports, and ultimately show the vitality of this debate and persuasiveness of each side’s sets of arguments. By using these three axes as a sort of methodological filter, one can develop a richer understanding of universal jurisdiction, its theoretical pillars, practical barriers, and the core areas of contention that form the contemporary state of knowledge.

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.

Genocide in Rwanda – Is It Really Finland's Concern?

2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 155-176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Minna Kimpimäki
Keyword(s):  
National Court ◽  
Universal Jurisdiction ◽  
Life Imprisonment ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Court Of First Instance ◽  
First Time

AbstractIn June 2010, a Rwandan citizen, Francois Bazaramba, was sentenced in a Finnish court of first instance, to life imprisonment for acts of genocide committed in Rwanda in 1994. This was the first time that the provisions of Finnish law dealing with genocide had ever been applied in a court. This article examines the details of this case, as well as the Finnish legislation on genocide, jurisdiction and extradition. Many of the questions considered in this article are not only typical for Finland, but have a more general bearing as well. For instance, the issues relating to the transfer or extradition of fugitives to Rwanda have recently been considered in several national and international jurisdictions. A trial conducted in a national court on the basis of universal jurisdiction reveals in a concrete way the advantages and disadvantages of this form of prosecution.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document