Remarks by Charles C. Jalloh

2020 ◽  
Vol 114 ◽  
pp. 210-215
Author(s):  
Charles C. Jalloh

As a preliminary remark, our starting point must be to recognize that, up until now, international criminal law has relied on what M.C. Bassiouni called “direct enforcement” by international criminal courts and “indirect enforcement” by national courts. The middle ground between the two extremes has been the use of “hybrid” courts such as the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL). The SCSL married the domestic with the international, in an effort to combine the best of the international and national in order to advance accountability for serious international crimes.

2015 ◽  
Vol 84 (3) ◽  
pp. 515-531
Author(s):  
Harmen van der Wilt

This article traces the development of the foreseeability test in the context of the nullum crimen principle. While the European Court of Human Rights has introduced the ‘accessibility and foreseeability’ criteria long ago in the Sunday Times case, the Court has only recently started to apply this standard with respect to international crimes. In the Kononov case, judges of the European Court of Human Rights exhibited strongly divergent opinions on the question whether the punishment of alleged war crimes that had been committed in 1944 violated the nullum crimen principle. According to this author, the dissension of the judges demonstrates the lack of objective foreseeability, which should have served as a starting point for the assessment of the subjective foreseeability and a – potentially exculpating – mistake of law of the perpetrator. The Court should therefore have concluded that the nullum crimen principle had been violated.


Author(s):  
Yahli Shereshevsky

When international criminal courts face violations of the right to a fair trial, they encounter a dilemma: if they provide a significant remedy, such as a stay of proceedings, the remedy inevitably undermines the ability to punish the perpetrators of international crimes; on the other hand, if they grant a minimal remedy or no remedy at all, the right to a fair trial is undermined. This dilemma has led to the adoption of an interest-balancing approach to remedies. Under this approach, sentence reduction plays a prominent role in remedying fair trial violations that do not undermine the court’s ability to accurately determine the accused’s guilt. This Article argues that sentence reduction is an inadequate remedy, since it inevitably either harms the goals of international criminal sentencing or does not provide an effective remedy for violations of the right to a fair trial. Instead, monetary compensation should be the remedy for such violations. By granting monetary compensation, the court creates a separation between the punishment and the remedy and thus can usually provide an effective remedy for the accused without harming the main goals of international criminal justice.


2007 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 367-391 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nolwenn Guibert ◽  
Tilman Blumenstock

AbstractOn 29 June 2007, the Special Court for Sierra Leone – a criminal tribunal created by an agreement between the United Nations and Sierra Leone – rendered its first judgement. The three accused, all senior members of a military junta which had ousted the elected government, were amongst other things found guilty of "new" international crimes, such as using child soldiers and collectively punishing the civilian population. This note critically analyses the achievements and shortcomings of what can be seen as a landmark ruling in international criminal law. It discusses the court's rejection of a separate crime of "forced marriages" as well as the application of "effective control" in terms of responsibility of a superior in the context of an "African conflict". Finally, this note examines the treatment of defective pleadings in the indictment in relation to particulars, crimes committed by the accused in person, and the existence of a joint criminal enterprise. It will be demonstrated that the judgement is of significance not only for assessing the success of the Special Court for Sierra Leone, but also for future criminal trials dealing with similar charges.


2021 ◽  
pp. 296-316
Author(s):  
Anders Henriksen

This chapter looks at the purposes and principles of international criminal law. International criminal law seeks to ensure that perpetrators of certain heinous acts are criminally liable for their acts, either before national or international criminal courts or tribunals. It is a fairly recent addition to international law and it was not until after the end of the Second World War that it became accepted that international law authorizes the criminal prosecution of individual perpetrators of serious offences. The chapter begins by discussing the most important sources of international criminal law. It then examines the prosecution of international crimes before international criminal courts, including the conditions for prosecuting suspected international criminals before the International Criminal Court. It also discusses the national prosecution of international crimes and the obligation found in a number of conventions to criminalize and prosecute certain conduct.


Author(s):  
Anders Henriksen

This chapter looks at the purposes and principles of international criminal law. International criminal law seeks to ensure that perpetrators of certain heinous acts are criminally liable for their act, either before national or international criminal courts or tribunals. It is a fairly recent addition to international law and it was not until after the end of the Second World War that it became accepted that international law authorizes the criminal prosecution of individual perpetrators of serious offences. The chapter begins by discussing the most important sources of international criminal law. It then examines the prosecution of international crimes before international criminal courts, including the conditions for prosecuting suspected international criminals before the International Criminal Court. It also discusses the national prosecution of international crimes and the obligation found in a number of conventions to criminalize and prosecute certain conduct.


Author(s):  
Martin Dixon ◽  
Robert McCorquodale ◽  
Sarah Williams

This chapter addresses the prosecution of crimes in international criminal courts according to international—not national—criminal law. International law has long recognised that certain conduct, for example piracy and slavery, are crimes against international law which may be tried by international bodies or by any State. This principle has been expanded to cover more substantive crimes. International mechanisms for criminal accountability may be established where national courts have failed or are unable to try offenders due to a lack of political will, insufficient resources, deficiencies in national law, and/or ongoing conflict. The establishment and jurisdiction of the existing international criminal tribunals, including the International Criminal Court, are considered.


2019 ◽  
pp. 303-323
Author(s):  
Anders Henriksen

This chapter looks at the purposes and principles of international criminal law. International criminal law seeks to ensure that perpetrators of certain heinous acts are criminally liable for their acts, either before national or international criminal courts or tribunals. It is a fairly recent addition to international law and it was not until after the end of the Second World War that it became accepted that international law authorizes the criminal prosecution of individual perpetrators of serious offences. The chapter begins by discussing the most important sources of international criminal law. It then examines the prosecution of international crimes before international criminal courts, including the conditions for prosecuting suspected international criminals before the International Criminal Court. It also discusses the national prosecution of international crimes and the obligation found in a number of conventions to criminalize and prosecute certain conduct.


Author(s):  
James Crawford

This chapter discusses the development of international criminal law and institutions, international criminal courts and tribunals, and international criminal justice in national courts. These developments respond to but also reflect repeated failures to prevent serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law. The work of the International Criminal Court, specialized criminal tribunals and ‘hybrid’ tribunals is outlined.


2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (04) ◽  
pp. 48-52
Author(s):  
Erkin Humbat Musayev Humbat Musayev ◽  

Key words: international law, international criminal law, genocide, war crimes, transnational crime


2015 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 953-975 ◽  
Author(s):  
ATHANASIOS CHOULIARAS

AbstractThe article focuses on one of the most intriguing and, at the same time, controversial issues of international criminal law: whether the state policy requirement should be considered as a constitutive element in core international crimes. Adopting a criminal policy perspective, my intention is to contribute to the ongoing discussion by offering a doctrinal and criminological corroboration of the position that answers in the affirmative. Nevertheless, I am not necessarily promoting a normative choice entailing the amendment of the definition of core international crimes, but I rather call for a policy choice of focusing on cases that presume a state policy component.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document