The International Criminal Court and the Maintenance of International Peace and Security: A Marriage of Convenience?

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miroslav Baros
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Peace And Security

scholarly journals THE JURISDICTION OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT (ICC) WITH CRIMES OF INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM (BETWEEN THE POSSIBILITY OF EXTENDING THE COURT’S CURRENT JURISDICTION AND THE NEED FOR FUTURE AMENDMENT OF THIS JURISDICTION)

2021 ◽  
Vol 03 (06) ◽  
pp. 445-452
Author(s):  
Ikhlas BENABID
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Human Security ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Research Paper ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Terrorism ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
Widespread Phenomenon

Terrorism is now a widespread phenomenon of concern that threatens international peace and security and that its crimes constitute one of the most serious crimes against the peace and well-being of mankind. In this regard, we would like to highlight the study’ importance, since all the circumstances and facts of reality have made it necessary to include the crimes of international terrorism within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court, which was established as a basis for the maintenance of international peace and security by prosecuting and punishing the perpetrators of the most serious crimes against peace and human security. There is no doubt that the crimes of international terrorism are among the most serious, if not the most dangerous crimes at present. Through this research paper, we have tried to explain and clarify the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to deal with crimes of international terrorism and whether this jurisdiction can be exercised in accordance with the current Statute of the Court or in the context of future amendments to the ICC, to conclude the study with a set of findings and recommendations that we consider necessary to counter this type of crime.

The United States and the International Criminal Court

1999 ◽  
Vol 93 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
David J. Scheffer
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International System ◽  
The United States ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Peace ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
Special Responsibilities

The United States has had and will continue to have a compelling interest in the establishment of a permanent international criminal court (ICC). Such an international court, so long contemplated and so relevant in a world burdened widi mass murderers, can both deter and punish diose who might escape justice in national courts. Since 1995, the question for the Clinton administration has never been whether there should be an international criminal court, but rather what kind of court it should be in order to operate efficiently, effectively and appropriately within a global system that also requires our constant vigilance to protect international peace and security. At the same time, the United States has special responsibilities and special exposure to political controversy over our actions. This factor cannot be taken lightly when issues of international peace and security are at stake. We are called upon to act, sometimes at great risk, far more than any other nation. This is a reality in the international system.

Aggression under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court

2002 ◽  
Vol 71 (4) ◽  
pp. 497-521 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Security Council ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Primary Responsibility ◽  
Peace And Security

AbstractThe Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court includes aggression among the crimes within the Court's jurisdiction. It mandates the Assembly of States Parties to define the crime and to set out the conditions under which the Court shall exercise jurisdiction over it. Both the definition and the conditions must be consistent with the UN Charter provisions. The most pertinent of these provisions is Article 39, which empowers the Security Council to determine ‘the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression’. Based on the context of this provision the article discusses the envisaged role of the Security Council vis-á-vis the International Criminal Court in the prosecution of aggression. The author acknowledges the Council's primary responsibility in matters relating to the maintenance of international peace and security, but asserts that such responsibility is not exclusive. The author also concedes the Council's prerogative under Article 39 to determine whether a state has committed an act of aggression for purposes of making recommendations or taking enforcement measures against such a state. Nevertheless the author contends that such determination does not preclude the Court from making its own determination for the purpose of assigning criminal responsibility on individuals. The author argues that the Court is an independent, impartial judicial body. It should not be bound by determinations of the Council, a political body that is often guided more by political considerations than by the law and evidence. The author maintains that subjecting the Court's jurisdiction over aggression to Security Council determinations would eviscerate the Court's effectiveness and credibility.

‘Interests of justice’: Defining the scope of Prosecutorial discretion in Article 53(1)(c) and (2)(c) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court

2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 731-751 ◽  
Author(s):  
TALITA DE SOUZA DIAS
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Community ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Prosecutorial Discretion ◽  
New Developments ◽  
Policy Paper ◽  
Peace And Security

AbstractThe International Criminal Court (ICC) was established with the aim of prosecuting individuals for the gravest crimes of concern to the international community. Yet some provisions of its Statute (the Rome Statute) recognize the need for temporarily setting aside criminal investigations or prosecutions in favour of different considerations. Two of these provisions are Article 53(1)(c) and (2)(c) of the Statute. They allow the Prosecutor of the Court to use his or her discretion in deciding not to initiate an investigation or a prosecution in the ‘interests of justice’. Nonetheless, the ambiguity of this phrase, coupled with an absent definition, have given rise to a polarized debate about its meaning and the Prosecutor's ensuing margin of discretion: some consider matters of peace and security and alternative justice mechanisms as possible ‘interests of justice’, while others exclude them. Among those adopting the latter view is the ICC's Office of the Prosecutor (OTP), as can be inferred from a 2007 Policy Paper on the Interests of Justice and a 2013 Policy Paper on Preliminary Examinations, which continue to be upheld by the Office. Against this backdrop and amid new developments at the ICC which call into question the OTP's position, the purpose of this article is to develop a comprehensive interpretation of Article 53(1)(c) and (2)(c) of the Rome Statute, using all the interpretative tools provided by Articles 31 to 33 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

scholarly journals Consideraciones en torno a la Corte Penal Internacional

Justicia ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (27) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Cristina Garc
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Organization ◽  
La Paz ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
Siglo Xx

ResumenLa creación de la Corte Penal Internacional -cuyo Estatuto fue aprobado el 17 de julio de 1998-, como Tribunal permanente de justicia penal internacional, es de los sucesos mas trascendentales del siglo XX. Tal creación debe ser vista como la culminación de un proceso formalmente iniciado alrededor de medio siglo antes. Con la Resolución de las Naciones Unidas de diciembre de 1946 -fresca at'.n en la memoria la catastrofe que significó la Segunda Guerra Mundial-, mediante la cual este organismo internacional condenó el delito de genocidio como un crimen contra el Derecho Internacional. El propósito de contar con un Tribunal internacional permanente que juzgue los delitos que atenten contra la paz y seguridad, no ha estado libre de obstáculos. Los antecedentes de los tribunales internacionales penales que hasta hoy han existido, no coinciden, ni mucho menos, con la expedición de la Resolución de las Nacio- nes Unidas que se ha referido -objetivo alcanzado el 1 de julio de 2002, con la entrada en vigor del Estatuto de la CPI, al completarse las sesenta ratificaciones necesarias–, sino que son anteriores a la Segunda Guerra Mundial. AbstractThe creation of the International Criminal Court -which Statute was ap- proved on July 17, 1998- as a permanent international criminal court of jus- tice, is one of the most important events of the XX century. This event should be seen as the culmination of a process which formally started about half a century before. Indeed, it was through the Resolution adopted by the UN on December 1946 -still fresh in people's memory due to the catastrophe that WWII meant- by which this international organization condemned genocide as a crime against International Law. The purpose of having a permanent in- ternational Tribunal to judge the crimes that threaten the peace and security of humanity has not been pursued without obstacles. The previous attempts to create international criminal tribunals do not match what was established in the Resolution of the UN aforementioned -its purpose seems to have been reached on July 1, 2002, with the entry into force of the Statute of the Inter- national Criminal Court, on completion of the sixty ratifications needed- but that predate WWII.

scholarly journals Building criminal accountability at the global level: the ICC and its discontents

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Gallavin ◽  
Kennedy Graham
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Global Level ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
Age Of Accountability ◽  
United Nations Charter

With the negotiation of the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), we all believed we had entered a new age: an age of unheralded peace and security, of justice, of an end to impunity; an age of accountability.  At the time we believed the statute to be the biggest advance for peace and security through the rule of law since the United Nations Charter of 1945. 

The Forty-Second Session of the International Law Commission

1990 ◽  
Vol 84 (4) ◽  
pp. 930-943 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen C. McCaffrey
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
State Responsibility ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
International Liability ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

The International Law Commission of the United Nations held its forty-second session from May 1 to July 20, 1990, under the Chairmanship of Professor Shi Jiuyong. In the context of its work on the Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind, the Commission considered the establishment of an international criminal court and adopted three articles of the code. Also at the forty-second session, the Commission adopted six articles on the law of the non-navigational uses of international watercourses and discussed reports on state responsibility, relations between states and international organizations, international liability for injurious consequences arising out of acts not prohibited by international law and jurisdictional immunities of states and their property.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document