scholarly journals A tale of many jurisdictions: how universal jurisdiction is creating a transnational judicial space

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
SANDRINE LEFRANC
Keyword(s):  
Universal Jurisdiction

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.

scholarly journals Will Universal Jurisdiction Advance Accountability for Sexualized and Gender-based Crimes? A View from Within on Progress and Challenges in Germany

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. 894-913
Author(s):  
Silke Studzinsky ◽  
Alexandra Lily Kather
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Critical Evaluation ◽  
Federal Court ◽  
Universal Jurisdiction ◽  
Professional Experiences ◽  
Sexualized Violence ◽  
Gender Based ◽  
And Gender ◽  
Trial Monitoring ◽  
Federal Prosecutor

AbstractThis Article is based on the professional experiences of the authors working as lawyers and activists towards accountability for sexualized and gender-based crimes under international law. It provides a critical evaluation of universal jurisdiction cases in Germany addressing conflict-related sexualized violence. In particular, the article looks deeper into the Office of the German Federal Prosecutor General of the Federal Court of Justice’s (GBA) approach to gender while taking note of the barriers in the way of investigating and adjudicating crimes under international law. Both authors have been following universal jurisdiction developments in Germany closely, particularly in relation to the investigation and prosecution of sexual and gender-based crimes. With regard to the proceedings against two high-rank representatives of the armed rebel group Forces Démocratiques de liberation du Rwanda (FDLR), the findings in this article are informed by trial monitoring reports organized and conducted by a group of organisations and institutions, namely Medica Mondiale, the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR), and the Hamburger Institut für Sozialforschung. In light of the fact that German trial records are absent of publicly accessible records of what was said in the court room, the consortium of groups co-monitored the FLDR trial.

United Kingdom Policy Towards Universal Jurisdiction Since the Post-War Period

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-39
Author(s):  
Amina Adanan
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Universal Jurisdiction ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Leading Role ◽  
National Archives ◽  
Slave Traders ◽  
History Of ◽  
Post War ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Atrocity Crimes

Abstract From the 17th century onwards, Britain played a leading role in asserting the application of the universality principle to international piracy, the first crime to which the principle applied. Thereafter, during the quest for abolition, it exercised universality over slave traders at sea. With the exercise of universal jurisdiction over atrocity crimes in the post-War period there was a notable shift in the UK position to the principle. This article traces the history of UK policy towards the application of the universality principle to atrocity crimes since wwii. Using archival research from the UK National Archives and the travaux préparatoires to international treaties, it analyses UK policy towards the inclusion of universal jurisdiction in international treaties concerning atrocity crimes. It argues that historically, the UK supported the application of the principle to atrocity crimes committed during an international armed conflict, as this position supported its interests. The nexus between universal jurisdiction and international armed conflict shielded colonial abuses from prosecution in foreign courts. Once the colonial period had come to an end, there was a shift in UK support for the inclusion of universal jurisdiction in international treaties, which is evident since the negotiation of uncat and the Rome Statute.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document