Jump to content

International Criminal Court

Coordinates: 52°04′06″N 4°21′13″E / 52.068333°N 4.353611°E / 52.068333; 4.353611
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sideshow Bob Roberts (talk | contribs) at 03:12, 19 September 2007 (moved criticisms, per talk (+ misc edits)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The official logo of the ICC

The International Criminal Court (ICC) was established in 2002 as a permanent tribunal to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression, although it cannot currently exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression.[1] The court came into being on July 1 2002 — the date its founding treaty, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, entered into force[2] — and it can only prosecute crimes committed on or after that date.[3]

As of August 2007, 104 states are members of the Court; Japan will become the 105th state party on 1 October 2007.[4] A further 41 countries have signed but not ratified the Rome Statute.[5] However, a number of states, including China, India and the United States, are critical of the Court and have not joined.

The Court can generally exercise jurisdiction only in cases where the accused is a national of a state party, the alleged crime took place on the territory of a state party, or a situation is referred to the Court by the United Nations Security Council.[6] The Court is designed to complement existing national judicial systems: it can exercise its jurisdiction only when national courts are unwilling or unable to investigate or prosecute such crimes.[7][8] Primary responsibility to punish crimes is therefore left to individual states.

To date, the Court has opened investigations into four situations: Northern Uganda, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Central African Republic and Darfur.[9] The Court has issued eight arrest warrants[10] and one suspect, Thomas Lubanga, is in custody, awaiting trial.[11]

The official seat of the ICC is in The Hague, Netherlands, but its proceedings may take place anywhere.[12] The Court is separate from, and should not be confused with, the International Court of Justice (often referred to as the “World Court”), which is the United Nations organ that settles disputes between nations.[13]

"International Criminal Court" is sometimes abbreviated as ICCt to distinguish it from several other organizations abbreviated as ICC. However, the more common abbreviation "ICC" is used in this article.

History

Early development

In 1948, following the Nuremberg and Tokyo Tribunals, the United Nations General Assembly recognised the need for a permanent international court to deal with atrocities of the kind committed during World War II.[14] At the request of the General Assembly, the International Law Commission drafted two draft statutes by the early 1950s but these were shelved as the Cold War made the establishment of an international criminal court politically unrealistic.[15]

A. N. R. Robinson, then Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago, revived the idea during the forty-fourth session of the General Assembly in 1989, proposing the creation of a permanent international court to deal with the international drug trade.[15][16] While work began on a draft statute, the international community established ad hoc tribunals to try war crimes in the former Yugoslavia[17] and Rwanda,[18] further highlighting the need for a permanent international criminal court.[19]

Adoption and entry into force of the Rome Statute

Following years of negotiations, the General Assembly convened a conference in Rome, Italy, in June 1998, with the aim of finalising a treaty. On July 17 1998, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court was adopted by a vote of 120 to 7, with 21 countries abstaining. The seven countries that voted against the treaty were Iraq, Israel, Libya, the People's Republic of China, Qatar, the United States, and Yemen.[20]

The Rome Statute became a binding treaty on April 11, 2002, when the number of countries that had ratified it reached 60.[2] The Statute legally came into force on July 1, 2002,[2] and the Court can only prosecute crimes committed after that date.[3]

The first bench of 18 judges was elected by an Assembly of States Parties in February 2003. They were sworn in at the inaugural session of the Court on March 11, 2003.[21] The Court issued its first arrest warrants on 8 July 2005,[22] and the first pre-trial hearings were held in 2006.[23]

Membership

World map of ICC member states, as of August 2007
Main article: States Parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court

As of August 2007, 104 countries have ratified or acceded to the court, including nearly all of Europe and South America, and roughly half the countries in Africa.[24][5] Japan will become a state party on 1 October 2007, bringing the total number to 105.[4]

A further 41 states have signed but not ratified the treaty;[5] the law of treaties obliges these states to refrain from “acts which would defeat the object and purpose” of the treaty.[25] In 2002, two of these states, the United States and Israel, "unsigned" the Rome Statute, indicating that they no longer intend to become States Parties and, as such, they have no legal obligations arising from their signature of the statute.[5][26][27]

See also: United States and the International Criminal Court

Jurisdiction

Crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court

Article 5 of the Rome Statute grants the Court jurisdiction over four groups of crimes, which it refers to as the “most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole”: the crime of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. The statute defines each of these crimes except for aggression: it provides that the Court will not exercise its jurisdiction over the crime of aggression until such time as the states parties agree on a definition of the crime and set out the conditions under which it may be prosecuted.[1]

Many states wanted to add terrorism and drug trafficking to the list of crimes covered by the Rome Statute; however, the states were unable to agree on a definition for terrorism and it was decided not to include drug trafficking as this might overwhelm the Court's limited resources.[14] India lobbied to have the use of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction included as war crimes but this move was also defeated.[28] India has expressed concern that “the Statute of the ICC lays down, by clear implication, that the use of weapons of mass destruction is not a war crime. This is an extraordinary message to send to the international community.”[28]

Some commentators have argued that the Rome Statute defines crimes too broadly or too vaguely. For example, China has argued that the definition of ‘war crimes’ goes beyond that accepted under customary international law.[29]

Article 123 of the Rome Statute provides that a Review Conference shall be convened in 2009, and that this conference may review the list of crimes contained in Article 5.[30] The final resolution on adoption of the Rome Statute specifically recommended that terrorism and drug trafficking be reconsidered at this conference.[31]

Territorial jurisdiction

During the negotiations that led to the Rome Statute, a large number of states argued that the Court should be allowed to exercise universal jurisdiction. However, this proposal was defeated due in large part to opposition from the United States.[32] A compromise was reached, allowing the Court to exercise jurisdiction only under certain limited circumstances, namely:

  1. Where the person accused of committing a crime is a national of a state party (or where the person's state has accepted the jurisdiction of the Court); or
  2. Where the alleged crime was committed on the territory of a state party (or where the state on whose territory the crime was committed has accepted the jurisdiction of the Court); or
  3. Where a situation is referred to the Court by the UN Security Council.[6]

Temporal jurisdiction

The Court's jurisdiction does not apply retroactively: it can only prosecute crimes committed on or after 1 July 2002 (the date on which the Rome Statute entered into force). Where a state becomes party to the Rome Statute after that date, the Court can exercise jurisdiction automatically with respect to crimes committed after the statute enters into force for that state.[3]

Complementarity

The Court is intended as a court of last resort, investigating and prosecuting only where national courts have failed. Article 17 of the Statute provides that a case is inadmissible if:

‘(a) The case is being investigated or prosecuted by a State which has jurisdiction over it, unless the State is unwilling or unable genuinely to carry out the investigation or prosecution;
(b) The case has been investigated by a State which has jurisdiction over it and the State has decided not to prosecute the person concerned, unless the decision resulted from the unwillingness or inability of the State genuinely to prosecute;
(c) The person concerned has already been tried for conduct which is the subject of the complaint, and a trial by the Court is not permitted under article 20, paragraph 3;
(d) The case is not of sufficient gravity to justify further action by the Court.’[7]

Article 20, paragraph 3, specifies that, if a person has already been tried by another court, the ICC cannot try them again for the same conduct unless the proceedings in the other court:

‘(a) Were for the purpose of shielding the person concerned from criminal responsibility for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court; or
(b) Otherwise were not conducted independently or impartially in accordance with the norms of due process recognized by international law and were conducted in a manner which, in the circumstances, was inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice.’[8]

Structure

Philippe Kirsch, President of the Court

The Court consists of four organs: the Presidency, the Judicial Divisions, the Office of the Prosecutor, and the Registry.[33]

Presidency

The Presidency is responsible for the proper administration of the Court (apart from the Office of the Prosecutor).[34] It comprises the President and the First and Second Vice-Presidents — three judges of the Court who are elected to the Presidency by their fellow judges for a maximum of two three-year terms.[35] The current President of the Court is Philippe Kirsch.[33] Akua Kuenyehia is First Vice-President and René Blattmann is Second Vice-President.[33] All three were elected to their current terms on 11 March 2006.[34]

Judicial Divisions

Main article: Judges of the International Criminal Court

The Judicial Divisions consist of the 18 judges of the Court, organized into three divisions — the Pre-Trial Division, Trial Division and Appeals Division — which carry out the judicial functions of the Court.[36]

Judges are elected to the Court by the Assembly of States Parties.[36] They serve nine-year terms and are not generally eligible for re-election.[36] All judges must be nationals of States Parties to the Rome Statute, and no two judges may be nationals of the same state.[37] They must be “persons of high moral character, impartiality and integrity who possess the qualifications required in their respective States for appointment to the highest judicial offices”.[37]

The Pre-Trial Division (which comprises the First Vice President and six other judges)[36] confirms indictments and issues international arrest warrants. The Trial Division (the Second Vice President and five other judges) presides over trials. Decisions of the Pre-Trial and Trial Divisions may be appealed to the Appeals Division (the President and four other judges). Judges are assigned to divisions according to their qualifications and experience.[33]

Office of the Prosecutor

The Office of the Prosecutor is responsible for conducting investigations and prosecutions.[38] It is headed by the Prosecutor, who is assisted by two Deputy Prosecutors.[33] The Rome Statute provides that the Office of the Prosecutor shall act independently;[39] as such, no member of the Office may seek or act on instructions from any external source, such as states, international organisations, non-governmental organisations or individuals.[38]

The prosecutor can inititate a preliminary investigation in three circumstances:

  • Upon referral from a member country
  • Upon referral from the United Nations Security Council
  • Where information is provided from other sources including individuals

In all cases the prosecutor must first conduct a preliminary examination and then apply to a pre-trial chamber of judges for permission to start an investigation.[38]

Critics of the Court argue that there are “insufficient checks and balances on the authority of the ICC prosecutor and judges” and “insufficient protection against politicized prosecutions or other abuses”.[40] Henry Kissinger says the checks and balances are so weak that the prosecutor “has virtually unlimited discretion in practice”.[41]

The current Prosecutor is Luis Moreno-Ocampo of Argentina, who was elected by the Assembly of States Parties on 21 April 2003[42] for a term of nine years.[38]

Registry

The Registry is responsible for the non-judicial aspects of the administration and servicing of the Court.[43] This includes, among other things, “the administration of legal aid matters, court management, victims and witnesses matters, defence counsel, detention unit, and the traditional services provided by administrations in international organisations, such as finance, translation, building management, procurement and personnel”.[43]

The Registry is headed by the Registrar, who is elected by the judges to a five-year term.[33] The current Registrar is Bruno Cathala.[33]

Rights of the accused

The Rome Statute provides that all persons are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt,[44] and establishes certain rights of the accused and persons during investigations.[45] These include the right to be fully informed of the charges against him or her; the right to have a lawyer appointed, free of charge; the right to a speedy trial; and the right to examine the witnesses against him or her and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his or her behalf.

Some argue that the protections offered by the ICC are insufficient. According to the Heritage Foundation, “Americans who appear before the court would be denied such basic constitutional rights as trial by a jury of one's peers, protection from double jeopardy, and the right to confront one's accusers.”[27] However, Human Rights Watch argues that “the ICC has one of the most extensive lists of due process guarantees ever written”, including “presumption of innocence; right to counsel; right to present evidence and to confront witnesses; right to remain silent; right to be present at trial; right to have charges proved beyond a reasonable doubt; and protection against double jeopardy”.[46] According to David Scheffer, who led the US delegation to the Rome Conference (and who voted against adoption of the treaty), “when we were negotiating the Rome treaty, we always kept very close tabs on, ‘Does this meet U.S. constitutional tests, the formation of this court and the due process rights that are accorded defendants?’ And we were very confident at the end of Rome that those due process rights, in fact, are protected, and that this treaty does meet a constitutional test.”[47]

In order to ensure “equality of arms” between defence and prosecution teams, the ICC has established an independent Office of Public Counsel for the Defence (OPCD) to provide logistical support, advice and information to defendants and their counsel.[48][49] The OPCD also helps to safeguard the rights of the accused during the initial stages of an investigation.[50] However, Thomas Lubanga's defence team say they have been given a smaller budget than the Prosecutor and that evidence and witness statements have been slow to arrive.[51]

Victim participation and reparations

The Rome Statute provides for victim participation in the Court's proceedings.[52][53] Article 43(6) establishes a Victims and Witnesses Unit to provide "protective measures and security arrangements, counseling and other appropriate assistance for witnesses, victims who appear before the Court, and others who are at risk on account of testimony given by such witnesses."[54] Article 68 sets out procedures for the "Protection of the victims and witnesses and their participation in the proceedings."[55] The Court has also established an Office of Public Counsel for Victims, to provide support and assistance to victims and their legal representatives.[11]

Article 78 of the Rome Statute establishes a Trust Fund to make financial reparations to victims and their families.[56]

Relationship with the United Nations

The United Nations Security Council may refer situations to the ICC

Unlike the International Court of Justice, the ICC is legally and functionally independent from the United Nations. Nonetheless, the Rome Statute grants the UN a clear role in relation to the Court. The Security Council may refer to the Court situations that would not otherwise fall under the Court's jurisdiction (as it did in relation to the situation in Darfur, which the Court could not otherwise have prosecuted as Sudan is not a state party). Article 16 of the Rome Statute also allows the Security Council to require the Court to defer from investigating a case for a period of 12 months.[57] Such a deferral may be renewed indefinitely by the Security Council.

The Court cooperates with the UN in many different areas, including the exchange of information and logistical support.[58] The Court reports to the UN each year on its activities,[58][59] and some meetings of the Court's governing body, the Assembly of States Parties, are held at UN facilities. The relationship between the Court and the UN is governed by a “Relationship Agreement between the International Criminal Court and the United Nations”.[60][61]

Amnesties and national reconciliation processes

It is unclear to what extent the Court is compatible with reconciliation processes that grant amnesty to human rights abusers as part of agreements to end conflict.[62] Article 16 of the Rome Statute allows the Security Council to prevent the Court from investigating or prosecuting a case,[57] and Article 53 allows the Prosecutor the discretion not to initiate an investigation if he or she believes that “an investigation would not serve the interests of justice”.[63] The President of the ICC, Philippe Kirsch, has said that "some limited amnesties may be compatible" with a country's obligations genuinely to investigate or prosecute under the statute.[62]

It is sometimes argued that amnesties are necessary to allow the peaceful transfer of power from abusive regimes. By denying states the right to offer amnesty to human rights abusers, the International Criminal Court may make it more difficult to negotiate an end to conflict and a transition to democracy. For example, the outstanding arrest warrants for four leaders of the Lord's Resistance Army are regarded as an obstacle to ending the insurgency in Uganda.[64][65] Czech politician Marek Benda argues that “[t]he ICC as a deterrent will in our view only mean the worst dictators will try to retain power at all costs.”[66] However, the United Nations[67] and the International Committee of the Red Cross[68] maintain that granting amnesty to those accused of war crimes and other serious crimes is a violation of international law.

File:Internationaal Strafhof.jpg
The ICC's interim premises in The Hague

Headquarters and detention unit

As of 29 September 2006, the ICC’s staff consisted of 444 persons from 74 states.[11] The official seat of the Court is in The Hague, Netherlands, but its proceedings may take place anywhere.[12][69]

The Court is currently housed in interim premises on the eastern edge of The Hague.[70] A number of options are being considered for the Court's permanent headquarters; the Court is currently focusing on a proposal to construct a facility in Alexanderkazerne, on a site currently used as a Dutch army barracks near a beach on the north of The Hague.[70][71]

The ICC currently has twelve detention cells in Scheveningen, a Dutch prison near The Hague.[72] Suspects held by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia are held in the same prison and share some facilities, like the fitness room, but have no contact with suspects held by the ICC.[72] The detention unit is close to the ICC's proposed permanent headquarters in Alexanderkazerne.[73]

The ICC's detention unit currently houses two suspects: Thomas Lubanga and former Liberian President Charles Taylor.[11][74] Taylor is being tried under the mandate and auspices of the Special Court for Sierra Leone, but his trial is being held at the ICC's facilities in the Hague because of political and security concerns about holding the trial in Freetown.[75]

Situations before the Court

Template:ICC summary table

Main article: Cases before the International Criminal Court

As of 1 February 2006, the Office of the Prosecutor had received 1732 communications about alleged crimes in 139 countries.[76] After initial review, however, 80% of these communications were found to be “manifestly outside the jurisdiction of the Court”.[76] The Prosecutor has so far opened investigations into just four situations: Uganda, Democratic Republic of Congo, Central African Republic and Darfur.[9]

Uganda

In December 2003, the government of Uganda, a state party, referred to the Prosecutor the situation concerning the Lord’s Resistance Army in Northern Uganda.[77] On 8 July 2005, the Court issued its first arrest warrants for the Lord's Resistance Army leader Joseph Kony, his deputy Vincent Otti, and LRA commanders Raska Lukwiya, Okot Odiambo, and Dominic Ongwen.[22] The LRA's leaders have repeatedly demanded immunity from ICC prosecution in return for an end to the insurgency,[78] and the government of Uganda has promised not to turn them over to the ICC if they sign a peace deal.[78]

Democratic Republic of Congo

In March 2004, the government of the Democratic Republic of Congo, a state party, referred to the Prosecutor “the situation of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court allegedly committed anywhere in the territory of the DRC since the entry into force of the Rome Statute, on 1 July 2002.”[79][80] On 17 March 2006, Thomas Lubanga, former leader of the Union of Congolese Patriots militia in Ituri, became the first person to be arrested under a warrant issued by the court, for allegedly “conscripting and enlisting children under the age of fifteen years and using them to participate actively in hostilities”.[81]

Central African Republic

In December 2004, the government of the Central African Republic, a state party, referred to the Prosecutor “the situation of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court committed anywhere on the territory of the Central African Republic since 1 July 2002, the date of entry into force of the Rome Statute.”[82] On 22 May 2007, the Prosecutor announced his decision to open an investigation,[83][84] focusing on allegations of killing and rape in 2002 and 2003, a period of intense fighting between government and rebel forces.[85]

Darfur, Sudan

On 31 March 2005, the United Nations Security Council passed Resolution 1593, referring “the situation prevailing in Darfur since 1 July 2002” to the Prosecutor.[86] In February 2007 the Prosecutor announced that two men — Sudanese humanitarian affairs minister Ahmad Muhammad Harun and Janjaweed militia leader Ali Kushayb — had been identified as key suspects, accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity.[87] On 2 May 2007, the Court issued arrest warrants for the two men.[88] However, Sudan says the court has no jurisdiction over this matter,[87] and refuses to hand over the suspects.[88]

Other situations

On 10 February 2006, the Prosecutor published a letter answering complaints connected with the 2003 invasion of Iraq.[89] He noted that the Court's jurisdiction in Iraq was limited to the actions of nationals of States Parties, and that he did not have authority to consider complaints about the legality of the invasion. He concluded that the available information constituted a reasonable basis to believe that a limited number of instances of wilful killing and/or inhuman treatment had occurred, but that the crimes allegedly committed by nationals of States Parties in Iraq did not appear to meet the gravity threshold required for an ICC investigation.[11]

See also: The International Criminal Court and the 2003 invasion of Iraq

See also

References

  1. ^ a b Article 5 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 2006-11-23.
  2. ^ a b c Amnesty International, 11 April 2002. The International Criminal Court — a historic development in the fight for justice. Accessed 2007-06-18.
  3. ^ a b c Article 11 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 2006-11-23.
  4. ^ a b International Criminal Court. Accession of Japan to the Rome Statute. Accessed 2007-07-19.
  5. ^ a b c d United Nations. Multilateral treaties deposited with the Secretary-General: Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Accessed 2007-06-08.
  6. ^ a b Articles 12 & 13 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 2006-11-23.
  7. ^ a b Article 17 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 2006-12-04.
  8. ^ a b Article 20 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 2006-12-04.
  9. ^ a b International Criminal Court, 2007. Situations and Cases. Accessed 2007-05-31.
  10. ^ "How the mighty are falling". The Economist. 2007-07-05. Retrieved 2007-07-17. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  11. ^ a b c d e International Criminal Court, 17 October 2006. Template:PDFlink. Accessed 2007-06-18.
  12. ^ a b Article 3 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 2007-05-03.
  13. ^ International Criminal Court. Frequently asked questions. Accessed 2007-09-18.
  14. ^ a b United Nations Department of Public Information, December 2002. The International Criminal Court. Accessed 2006-12-05.
  15. ^ a b Gary T. Dempsey, 16 July 1998. Reasonable Doubt: The Case Against the Proposed International Criminal Court. The Cato Institute. Accessed 31 December 2006.
  16. ^ International Criminal Court, 20 June 2006. Election of Mr Arthur N.R. Robinson to the Board of Directors of the Victims Trust Fund. Accessed 2007-05-03.
  17. ^ The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, established in 1993.
  18. ^ The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, established in 1994.
  19. ^ Coalition for the International Criminal Court. History of the ICC. Accessed 2006-12-31.
  20. ^ Michael P. Scharf, August 1998. Results of the Rome Conference for an International Criminal Court. The American Society of International Law. Accessed 2006-12-04.
  21. ^ Coalition for the International Criminal Court. Judges and the Presidency. Accessed 2006-12-05.
  22. ^ a b International Criminal Court, 14 October 2005. Warrant of Arrest unsealed against five LRA Commanders. Accessed 2006-12-05.
  23. ^ International Criminal Court, 9 November 2006. Prosecutor presents evidence that could lead to first ICC trial. Accessed 2006-12-05.
  24. ^ International Criminal Court, 2006. The States Parties to the Rome Statute. Accessed 2006-11-23.
  25. ^ The 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Article 18. Accessed 2006-11-23.
  26. ^ John R Bolton, 6 May 2002. International Criminal Court: Letter to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan. US Department of State. Accessed 2006-11-23.
  27. ^ a b Brett D. Schaefer, 9 January 2001. Overturning Clinton's Midnight Action on the International Criminal Court. The Heritage Foundation. Accessed 2006-11-23.
  28. ^ a b Dilip Lahiri, 17 July 1998. Explanation of vote on the adoption of the Statute of the International Criminal Court. Embassy of India, Washington, D.C. Accessed 31 December 2006.
  29. ^ Lu Jianping and Wang Zhixiang. “China's Attitude Towards the ICC” in Journal of International Criminal Justice, July 2005.
  30. ^ Article 123 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 2006-12-05. (See also Rolf Einar Fife, 21 November 2006, Template:PDFlink. Accessed 2006-12-05.)
  31. ^ Amnesty International, 2 November 2006. International Criminal Court: Concerns at the fifth session of the Assembly of States Parties. Accessed 2006-12-05.
  32. ^ Elizabeth Wilmhurst, 1999. ‘Jurisdiction of the Court’, p. 136. In Roy S Lee (ed.), The International Criminal Court: The Making of the Rome Statute. The Hague: Kluwer Law International. ISBN 90-411-1212-X.
  33. ^ a b c d e f g International Criminal Court. Structure of the Court. Accessed 2006-11-23.
  34. ^ a b International Criminal Court. The Presidency. Accessed 2007-07-21.
  35. ^ Article 38 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 2007-07-21.
  36. ^ a b c d International Criminal Court. Chambers. Accessed 2007-07-21.
  37. ^ a b Article 36 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 2006-11-23.
  38. ^ a b c d International Criminal Court. Office of the Prosecutor. Accessed 2007-07-21.
  39. ^ Article 42 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 2007-07-21.
  40. ^ US Department of State, 30 July 2003. Frequently Asked Questions About the U.S. Government's Policy Regarding the International Criminal Court (ICC). Accessed 31 December 2006.
  41. ^ Henry A. Kissinger. “The Pitfalls of Universal Jurisdiction”. Foreign Affairs, July/August 2001, p. 95. Accessed 31 December 2006.
  42. ^ International Criminal Court, 24 April 2003. Election of the Prosecutor. Accessed 2007-07-21.
  43. ^ a b International Criminal Court. The Registry. Accessed 2007-07-21.
  44. ^ Article 66 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 2007-05-03.
  45. ^ The rights of persons during an investigation are provided in Article 55. Rights of the accused are provided in Part 6, especially Article 67. See also Amnesty International, 1 August 2000. “The International Criminal Court: Fact sheet 9 — Fair trial guarantees”. Accessed 2007-05-03.
  46. ^ Human Rights Watch. Myths and Facts About the International Criminal Court. Accessed 31 December 2006.
  47. ^ CNN, 2 January 2000. Burden of Proof transcript. Accessed 31 December 2006.
  48. ^ Katy Glassborow, 21 August 2006. Defending the Defenders. Global Policy Forum. Accessed 2007-05-03.
  49. ^ International Criminal Court. Rights of the Defence. Accessed 2007-05-03.
  50. ^ International Criminal Court, 2005. Report of the International Criminal Court for 2004. Accessed 2007-05-03.
  51. ^ Stephanie Hanson, 17 November 2006. Africa and the International Criminal Court. Council on Foreign Relations. Accessed 2006-11-23.
  52. ^ International Criminal Court. Victims and witnesses. Accessed 2007-06-22.
  53. ^ Ilaria Bottigliero, April 2003. "The International Criminal Court — Hope for the Victims", 32 SGI Quarterly, pp. 13-15. Accessed 2007-07-24.
  54. ^ Article 43(6) of the Rome Statute. Accessed 2006-11-23.
  55. ^ Article 68 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 2006-11-23.
  56. ^ International Criminal Court. Trust Fund for Victims. Accessed 2007-06-22.
  57. ^ a b Article 16 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 2006-11-23.
  58. ^ a b International Criminal Court, 1 February 2007. UN Secretary-General visits ICC. Accessed 2007-02-01.
  59. ^ International Criminal Court, August 2006. Template:PDFlink. Accessed 2007-05-14.
  60. ^ Template:PDFlink. Accessed 2006-11-23.
  61. ^ Coalition for the International Criminal Court, 12 November 2004. Template:PDFlink. Accessed 2006-11-23.
  62. ^ a b Anthony Dworkin, December 2003. "Introduction" in The International Criminal Court: An End to Impunity? Crimes of War Project. Accessed 2007-09-18.
  63. ^ Article 53 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 2006-12-31.
  64. ^ Tim Cocks, 30 May 2007. “Uganda urges traditional justice for rebel crimes”. Reuters. Accessed 31 May 2007.
  65. ^ Alasdair Palmer, 14 January 2007. “When victims want peace, not justice”. The Sunday Telegraph. Accessed 15 January 2007.
  66. ^ Alena Skodova, “Czech parliament against ratifying International Criminal Court”. Radio Prague, 12 April 2002. Accessed 11 January 2007.
  67. ^ See, for example, Kofi Annan, 4 October 2000. Report of the Secretary-General on the establishment of a Special Court for Sierra Leone, para. 22. Accessed 31 December 2006.
  68. ^ Jean-Marie Henckaerts & Louise Doswald-Beck, 2005. Customary International Humanitarian Law, Volume I: Rules, pp. 613-614. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521005280
  69. ^ The legal relationship between the ICC and the host state will be governed by a headquarters agreement, see International Criminal Court, 9 November 2006: Template:PDFlink. Accessed 2007-06-18.
  70. ^ a b Coalition for the International Criminal Court, 2006. Building — ICC Premises. Accessed 2007-06-18.
  71. ^ Assembly of States Parties, 7 December 2006. Template:PDFlink. Accessed 2007-06-18.
  72. ^ a b Emma Thomasson, 28 February 2006. ICC says cells ready for Uganda war crimes suspects. Reuters. Accessed 2007-06-18.
  73. ^ International Criminal Court, 18 October 2005. Template:PDFlink, p. 23. Accessed 2007-06-18.
  74. ^ Alexandra Hudson, 31 May 2007. "Warlord Taylor's home is lonely Dutch prison". Reuters. Accessed 2007-07-27.
  75. ^ BBC News, 20 June 2006. Q&A: Trying Charles Taylor. Accessed 2007-01-11.
  76. ^ a b International Criminal Court, 10 February 2006. Template:PDFlink. Accessed 2007-06-22.
  77. ^ International Criminal Court, 29 January 2004. President of Uganda refers situation concerning the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) to the ICC. Accessed 2007-01-11.
  78. ^ a b Associated Press, 30 May 2007. “Human Rights Watch: Ugandan rebels must face justice, even if not before international court”. Accessed 2007-05-31.
  79. ^ International Criminal Court, 19 April 2004. Prosecutor receives referral of the situation in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Accessed 2007-01-11.
  80. ^ International Criminal Court, 23 June 2004. The Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court opens its first investigation. Accessed 2007-01-11.
  81. ^ International Criminal Court, 17 March. First arrest for the International Criminal Court. Accessed 2007-01-11.
  82. ^ International Criminal Court, 15 December 2006. Template:PDFlink. Accessed 2007-01-11.
  83. ^ International Criminal Court, 22 May 2007. Prosecutor opens investigation in the Central African Republic. Accessed 2007-05-31.
  84. ^ International Criminal Court, 22 May 2007. Template:PDFlink. Accessed 2007-05-31.
  85. ^ Nora Boustany, 23 May 2007. “Court Examines Alleged Abuses in Central African Republic”, The Washington Post, p. A16. Accessed 2007-05-31.
  86. ^ United Nations Security Council, 31 March 2006. Security Council Refers Situation in Darfur, Sudan, To Prosecutor of International Criminal Court. Accessed 2007-01-11.
  87. ^ a b International Court Names Top Suspects in Darfur War Crimes, Voice of America, 2007-02-27, accessed on 2007-02-27
  88. ^ a b Alexandra Hudson, 2 May 2007. ICC judges issue arrest warrants for Darfur suspects. Reuters. Accessed 3 May 2007.
  89. ^ Luis Moreno-Ocampo, 9 February 2006. Template:PDFlink. Accessed 2006-11-23.

Further reading

  • Bruce Broomhall, International Justice and the International Criminal Court: Between Sovereignty and the Rule of Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press (2003). ISBN 019927424X
  • Anne-Marie de Brouwer, Supranational Criminal Prosecution of Sexual Violence: The ICC and the Practice of the ICTY and the ICTR. Antwerp - Oxford: Intersentia (2005). ISBN 90-5095-533-9
  • Hans Köchler, Global Justice or Global Revenge? International Criminal Justice at the Crossroads. Vienna/New York: Springer, 2003, ISBN 3-211-00795-4
  • Roy S Lee (ed.), The International Criminal Court: The Making of the Rome Statute. The Hague: Kluwer Law International (1999). ISBN 90-411-1212-X
  • Roy S Lee & Hakan Friman (eds.), The International Criminal Court: Elements of Crimes and Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Ardsley, NY: Transnational Publishers (2001). ISBN 1-57105-209-7
  • Madeline Morris (ed.), "The United States and the International Criminal Court", Law and Contemporary Problems, Winter 2001, vol. 64, no. 1. Accessed 2007-07-24.
  • William A Schabas, An Introduction to the International Criminal Court (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (2004). ISBN 0-521-01149-3
  • Nicolaos Strapatsas, "Universal Jurisdiction And The International Criminal Court", Manitoba Law Journal, 2002, vol. 29, p. 2.
  • Lyal S. Sunga, "The Crimes within the Jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (Part II, Articles 5-10)", European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 377-399 (April 1998).

External links

Wikisource has original text related to this article:

Official websites

Non-governmental organisations

Weblogs

52°04′06″N 4°21′13″E / 52.068333°N 4.353611°E / 52.068333; 4.353611

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=International_Criminal_Court&oldid=158873809"