International Criminal Court

The International Criminal Court (ICC or ICCt)[2] is an intergovernmental organization and international tribunal that sits in The Hague in the Netherlands. The ICC has the jurisdiction to prosecute individuals for the international crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and crimes of aggression. The ICC is intended to complement existing national judicial systems and it may therefore exercise its jurisdiction only when certain conditions are met, such as when national courts are unwilling or unable to prosecute criminals or when the United Nations Security Council or individual states refer situations to the Court. The ICC began functioning on 1 July 2002, the date that the Rome Statute entered into force. The Rome Statute is a multilateral treaty which serves as the ICC's foundational and governing document. States which become party to the Rome Statute, for example by ratifying it, become member states of the ICC. As of March 2019, there are 124 ICC member states.

The ICC has four principal organs: the Presidency, the Judicial Divisions, the Office of the Prosecutor, and the Registry. The President is the most senior judge chosen by his or her peers in the Judicial Division, which hears cases before the Court. The Office of the Prosecutor is headed by the Prosecutor who investigates crimes and initiates proceedings before the Judicial Division. The Registry is headed by the Registrar and is charged with managing all the administrative functions of the ICC, including the headquarters, detention unit, and public defense office.

The Office of the Prosecutor has opened ten official investigations and is also conducting an additional eleven preliminary examinations. Thus far, 44 individuals have been indicted in the ICC, including Ugandan rebel leader Joseph Kony, Sudanese president Omar al-Bashir, Kenyan president Uhuru Kenyatta, Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, Ivorian president Laurent Gbagbo, and DR Congo vice-president Jean-Pierre Bemba.

The ICC has faced a number of criticisms from states and civil society, including objections about its jurisdiction, accusations of bias, questioning of the fairness of its case-selection and trial procedures, and doubts about its effectiveness.

International Criminal Court
Cour pénale internationale  (French)
Official logo of International Criminal Court Cour pénale internationale  (French)
Official logo
Parties and signatories of the Rome Statute   State party   Signatory that has not ratified   State party that subsequently withdrew its membership   Signatory that subsequently withdrew its signature   Non-state party, non-signatory
Parties and signatories of the Rome Statute
  State party
  Signatory that has not ratified
  State party that subsequently withdrew its membership
  Signatory that subsequently withdrew its signature
  Non-state party, non-signatory
SeatThe Hague, Netherlands
Working languagesEnglish
French
Official languages[1]
Member states125
Leaders
• President
Chile Eboe-Osuji
Robert Fremr
Fatou Bensouda
• Registrar
Peter Lewis
Establishment
• Rome Statute adopted
17 July 1998
• Entered into force
1 July 2002
International Criminal Court Headquarters, Netherlands
The premises of the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Netherlands. The ICC moved into this building in December 2015

History

The establishment of an international tribunal to judge political leaders accused of international crimes was first proposed during the Paris Peace Conference in 1919 following the First World War by the Commission of Responsibilities. The issue was addressed again at a conference held in Geneva under the auspices of the League of Nations in 1937, which resulted in the conclusion of the first convention stipulating the establishment of a permanent international court to try acts of international terrorism. The convention was signed by 13 states, but none ratified it and the convention never entered into force.

Following the Second World War, the allied powers established two ad hoc tribunals to prosecute axis power leaders accused of war crimes. The International Military Tribunal, which sat in Nuremberg, prosecuted German leaders while the International Military Tribunal for the Far East in Tokyo prosecuted Japanese leaders. In 1948 the United Nations General Assembly first recognised the need for a permanent international court to deal with atrocities of the kind prosecuted after the Second World War.[3] At the request of the General Assembly, the International Law Commission (ILC) drafted two statutes by the early 1950s but these were shelved during the Cold War, which made the establishment of an international criminal court politically unrealistic.[4]

Benjamin B. Ferencz, an investigator of Nazi war crimes after the Second World War, and the Chief Prosecutor for the United States Army at the Einsatzgruppen Trial, became a vocal advocate of the establishment of international rule of law and of an international criminal court. In his first book published in 1975, entitled Defining International Aggression: The Search for World Peace, he advocated for the establishment of such a court.[5] A second major advocate was Robert Kurt Woetzel, who co-edited Toward a Feasible International Criminal Court in 1970 and created the Foundation for the Establishment of an International Criminal Court in 1971.

In June 1989 Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago A. N. R. Robinson revived the idea of a permanent international criminal court by proposing the creation of such a court to deal with the illegal drug trade.[4][6] Following Trinidad and Tobago's proposal, the General Assembly tasked the ILC with once again drafting a statute for a permanent court.[7] While work began on the draft, the United Nations Security Council established two ad hoc tribunals in the early 1990s. The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia was created in 1993 in response to large-scale atrocities committed by armed forces during Yugoslav Wars, and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda was created in 1994 following the Rwandan Genocide. The creation of these tribunals further highlighted the need for a permanent international criminal court.[8]

In 1994, the ILC presented its final draft statute for the International Criminal Court to the General Assembly and recommended that a conference be convened to negotiate a treaty that would serve as the Court's statute.[9] To consider major substantive issues in the draft statute, the General Assembly established the Ad Hoc Committee on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, which met twice in 1995. After considering the Committee's report, the General Assembly created the Preparatory Committee on the Establishment of the ICC to prepare a consolidated draft text. From 1996 to 1998, six sessions of the Preparatory Committee were held at the United Nations headquarters in New York City, during which NGOs provided input and attended meetings under the umbrella organisation of the Coalition for the International Criminal Court (CICC). In January 1998, the Bureau and coordinators of the Preparatory Committee convened for an Inter-Sessional meeting in Zutphen in the Netherlands to technically consolidate and restructure the draft articles into a draft.

Finally the General Assembly convened a conference in Rome in June 1998, with the aim of finalizing the treaty to serve as the Court's statute. On 17 July 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 China, Iraq, Israel, Libya, Qatar, the United States, and Yemen.[10] Israel's vote against was due to the inclusion in the list of war crimes "the action of transferring population into occupied territory".[11]

Following 60 ratifications, the Rome Statute entered into force on 1 July 2002 and the International Criminal Court was formally established.[12] The first bench of 18 judges was elected by the Assembly of States Parties in February 2003. They were sworn in at the inaugural session of the Court on 11 March 2003.[13]

The Court issued its first arrest warrants on 8 July 2005,[14] and the first pre-trial hearings were held in 2006.[15] The Court issued its first judgment in 2012 when it found Congolese rebel leader Thomas Lubanga Dyilo guilty of war crimes related to using child soldiers.[16]

In 2010 the states parties of the Rome Statute held the first Review Conference of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court in Kampala, Uganda. There they adopted two amendments to the Statute. The second amendment defined the crime of aggression and outlined the procedure by which the ICC could prosecute individuals. However, the conditions outlined in the amendment have not yet been met and the ICC can not yet exercise jurisdiction over crimes of aggression.

During the Obama administration US opposition to the ICC evolved in "what Harold Koh, then the State Department's legal adviser, called positive engagement".[17]

In October 2016, after repeated claims that the court was biased against African states, Burundi, South Africa and the Gambia announced their withdrawals from the Rome Statute.[18] However, following Gambia's presidential election later that year, which ended the long rule of Yahya Jammeh, Gambia rescinded its withdrawal notification.[19] Subsequent to a ruling of the High Court of South Africa, in early 2017, that the country's withdrawal would be unconstitutional, the South African government informed the United Nations, on 7 March 2017, that it was revoking its decision to withdraw.[20]

Experts believe that Kenya, Namibia, and Uganda may soon follow in withdrawing from the court, while South Africa is still committed to withdrawing, leading to a mass African exodus.[18][21]

Following the announcement that the ICC would open a preliminary investigation on the Philippines in connection to the Philippine Drug War, President Rodrigo Duterte announced on March 14, 2018 that the Philippines will start to submit plans for its withdrawal in the ICC.[22] It completed the proceeding to withdraw from the ICC on March 17, 2019. However, the ICC clarified that it retained jurisdiction over the Philippines during the period when it was a state party to the Rome Statute, from November 2011 to March 2019.[23]

Structure

The ICC is governed by an Assembly of States Parties, which is made up of the states which are party to the Rome Statute.[24] The Assembly elects officials of the Court, approves its budget, and adopts amendments to the Rome Statute. The Court itself, however, is composed of four organs: the Presidency, the Judicial Divisions, the Office of the Prosecutor, and the Registry.[25]

State parties

As of March 2019, 123 states[26] are parties to the Statute of the Court, including all the countries of South America, nearly all of Europe, most of Oceania and roughly half of Africa.[27] Burundi and the Philippines were member states, but later withdrew effective 27 October 2017 and 17 March 2019, respectively.[28][27] A further 31 countries[26] have signed but not ratified the Rome Statute.[27] The law of treaties obliges these states to refrain from "acts which would defeat the object and purpose" of the treaty until they declare they do not intend to become a party to the treaty.[29] Four signatory states—Israel, Sudan, the United States and Russia[30]—have informed the UN Secretary General that they no longer intend to become states parties and, as such, have no legal obligations arising from their signature of the Statute.[27][31]

Forty-one United Nations member states[26] have neither signed nor acceded to the Rome Statute. Some of them, including China and India, are critical of the Court.[32][33] Ukraine, a non-ratifying signatory, has accepted the Court's jurisdiction for a period starting in 2013.[34]

Assembly of States Parties

The Court's management oversight and legislative body, the Assembly of States Parties, consists of one representative from each state party.[35] Each state party has one vote and "every effort" has to be made to reach decisions by consensus.[35] If consensus cannot be reached, decisions are made by vote.[35] The Assembly is presided over by a president and two vice-presidents, who are elected by the members to three-year terms.

The Assembly meets in full session once a year, alternating between New York and The Hague, and may also hold special sessions where circumstances require.[35] Sessions are open to observer states and non-governmental organizations.[36]

The Assembly elects the judges and prosecutors, decides the Court's budget, adopts important texts (such as the Rules of Procedure and Evidence), and provides management oversight to the other organs of the Court.[24][35] Article 46 of the Rome Statute allows the Assembly to remove from office a judge or prosecutor who "is found to have committed serious misconduct or a serious breach of his or her duties" or "is unable to exercise the functions required by this Statute".[37]

The states parties cannot interfere with the judicial functions of the Court.[38] Disputes concerning individual cases are settled by the Judicial Divisions.[38]

In 2010, Kampala, Uganda hosted the Assembly's Rome Statute Review Conference.[39]

Organs of the Court

The Court has four organs: the Presidency, the Judicial Division, the Office of the Prosecutor, and the Registry.

Presidency

Song Sang-Hyun - Trento 2014 01
Song Sang-Hyun was President of the Court from 2009 to 2015

The Presidency is responsible for the proper administration of the Court (apart from the Office of the Prosecutor).[40] 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.[41] The current president is Chile Eboe-Osuji, who was elected 11 March 2018, succeeding Silvia Fernández de Gurmendi (first female president).[42][43]

Judicial Divisions

The Judicial Divisions consist of the 18 judges of the Court, organized into three chambers—the Pre-Trial Chamber, Trial Chamber and Appeals Chamber—which carry out the judicial functions of the Court.[44] Judges are elected to the Court by the Assembly of States Parties.[44] They serve nine-year terms and are not generally eligible for re-election.[44] All judges must be nationals of states parties to the Rome Statute, and no two judges may be nationals of the same state.[45] 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".[45]

The Prosecutor or any person being investigated or prosecuted may request the disqualification of a judge from "any case in which his or her impartiality might reasonably be doubted on any ground".[46] Any request for the disqualification of a judge from a particular case is decided by an absolute majority of the other judges.[46] A judge may be removed from office if he or she "is found to have committed serious misconduct or a serious breach of his or her duties" or is unable to exercise his or her functions.[37] The removal of a judge requires both a two-thirds majority of the other judges and a two-thirds majority of the states parties.[37]

Office of the Prosecutor

The Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) is responsible for conducting investigations and prosecutions.[47] It is headed by the Chief Prosecutor, who is assisted by one or more Deputy Prosecutors.[25] The Rome Statute provides that the Office of the Prosecutor shall act independently;[48] 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.[47]

The Prosecutor may open an investigation under three circumstances:[47]

  • when a situation is referred to him or her by a state party;
  • when a situation is referred to him or her by the United Nations Security Council, acting to address a threat to international peace and security; or
  • when the Pre-Trial Chamber authorises him or her to open an investigation on the basis of information received from other sources, such as individuals or non-governmental organisations.

Any person being investigated or prosecuted may request the disqualification of a prosecutor from any case "in which their impartiality might reasonably be doubted on any ground".[48] Requests for the disqualification of prosecutors are decided by the Appeals Chamber.[48] A prosecutor may be removed from office by an absolute majority of the states parties if he or she "is found to have committed serious misconduct or a serious breach of his or her duties" or is unable to exercise his or her functions.[37] However, 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".[49] Luis Moreno-Ocampo, chief ICC prosecutor, stressed in 2011 the importance of politics in prosecutions: "You cannot say al-Bashir is in London, arrest him. You need a political agreement.[50]" Henry Kissinger says the checks and balances are so weak that the prosecutor "has virtually unlimited discretion in practice".[51]

As of 16 June 2012, the Prosecutor has been Fatou Bensouda of Gambia, who had been elected as the new Prosecutor on 12 December 2011.[52] She has been elected for nine years.[47] Her predecessor, Luis Moreno Ocampo of Argentina, had been in office from 2003 to 2012.

A Policy Paper is a document published by the Office of the Prosecutor occasionally where the particular considerations given to the topics in focus of the Office and often criteria for case selection are stated.[53] While a policy paper does not give the Court jurisdiction over a new category of crimes, it promises what the Office of Prosecutor will consider when selecting cases in the upcoming term of service. OTP's policy papers are subject to revision.[54]
The five following Policy Papers have been published since the start of the ICC:

  • 1 September 2007: Policy Paper on the Interest of Justice[55]
  • 12 April 2010: Policy Paper on Victims' Participation[56]
  • 1 November 2013: Policy Paper on Preliminary Examinations[57]
  • 20 June 2014: Policy Paper on Sexual and Gender-Based Crimes[58]
  • 15 September 2016: Policy paper on case selection and prioritisation[59]

On the Policy Paper published in September 2016 it was announced that the International Criminal Court will focus on environmental crimes when selecting the cases.[60] According to this document, the Office will give particular consideration to prosecuting Rome Statute crimes that are committed by means of, or that result in, "inter alia, the destruction of the environment, the illegal exploitation of natural resources or the illegal dispossession of land".[61]

This has been interpreted as a major shift towards the environmental crimes[62][63] and a move with significant effects.[64][65]

Registry

The Registry is responsible for the non-judicial aspects of the administration and servicing of the Court.[66] 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".[66] The Registry is headed by the Registrar, who is elected by the judges to a five-year term.[25] The current Registrar is Herman von Hebel, who was elected on 8 March 2013.[67]

Jurisdiction and admissibility

The Rome Statute requires that several criteria exist in a particular case before an individual can be prosecuted by the Court. The Statute contains three jurisdictional requirements and three admissibility requirements. All criteria must be met for a case to proceed. The three jurisdictional requirements are (1) subject-matter jurisdiction (what acts constitute crimes), (2) territorial or personal jurisdiction (where the crimes were committed or who committed them), and (3) temporal jurisdiction (when the crimes were committed).

Subject-matter jurisdiction requirements

The Court's subject-matter jurisdiction means the crimes for which individuals can be prosecuted. Individuals can only be prosecuted for crimes that are listed in the Statute. The primary crimes are listed in article 5 of the Statute and defined in later articles: genocide (defined in article 6), crimes against humanity (defined in article 7), war crimes (defined in article 8), and crimes of aggression (defined in article 8 bis) (which is not yet within the jurisdiction of the Court; see below).[68] In addition, article 70 defines offences against the administration of justice, which is a fifth category of crime for which individuals can be prosecuted.

Genocide

Article 6 defines the crime of genocide as "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group".[69] There are five such acts which constitute crimes of genocide under article 6:[70]

  1. Killing members of a group
  2. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group
  3. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction
  4. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group
  5. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group

The definition of these crimes is identical to those contained within the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide of 1948.

Crimes against humanity

Article 7 defines crimes against humanity as acts "committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack".[71] The article lists 16 such as individual crimes:[72]

  1. Murder
  2. Extermination
  3. Enslavement
  4. Deportation or forcible transfer of population
  5. Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty
  6. Torture
  7. Rape
  8. Sexual slavery
  9. Enforced prostitution
  10. Forced pregnancy
  11. Enforced sterilization
  12. Sexual violence
  13. Persecution
  14. Enforced disappearance of persons
  15. Apartheid
  16. Other inhumane acts

War crimes

Article 8 defines war crimes depending on whether an armed conflict is either international (which generally means it is fought between states) or non-international (which generally means that it is fought between non-state actors, such as rebel groups, or between a state and such non-state actors). In total there are 74 war crimes listed in article 8.[72] The most serious crimes, however, are those that constitute either grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 1949, which only apply to international conflicts,[72] and serious violations of article 3 common to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, which apply to non-international conflicts.[73]

There are 11 crimes which constitute grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions and which are applicable only to international armed conflicts:[72]

  1. Willful killing
  2. Torture
  3. Inhumane treatment
  4. Biological experiments
  5. Willfully causing great suffering
  6. Destruction and appropriation of property
  7. Compelling service in hostile forces
  8. Denying a fair trial
  9. Unlawful deportation and transfer
  10. Unlawful confinement
  11. Taking hostages

There are seven crimes which constitute serious violations of article 3 common to the Geneva Conventions and which are applicable only to non-international armed conflicts:[72]

  1. Murder
  2. Mutilation
  3. Cruel treatment
  4. Torture
  5. Outrages upon personal dignity
  6. Taking hostages
  7. Sentencing or execution without due process

Additionally, there are 56 other crimes defined by article 8: 35 that apply to international armed conflicts and 21 that apply to non-international armed conflicts.[72] Such crimes include attacking civilians or civilian objects, attacking peacekeepers, causing excessive incidental death or damage, transferring populations into occupied territories, treacherously killing or wounding, denying quarter, pillaging, employing poison, using expanding bullets, rape and other forms of sexual violence, and conscripting or using child soldiers.[74]

Crimes of aggression

Article 8 bis defines crimes of aggression; however, the Court is not yet able to prosecute individuals for these crimes. The Statute originally provided that the Court could not exercise its jurisdiction over the crime of aggression until such time as the states parties agreed on a definition of the crime and set out the conditions under which it could be prosecuted.[3][75] Such an amendment was adopted at the first review conference of the ICC in Kampala, Uganda, in June 2010. However, this amendment specified that the ICC would not be allowed to exercise jurisdiction of the crime of aggression until two further conditions had been satisfied: (1) the amendment has entered into force for 30 states parties and (2) on or after 1 January 2017, the Assembly of States Parties has voted in favor of allowing the Court to exercise jurisdiction.

The Statute, as amended, defines the crime of aggression as "the planning, preparation, initiation or execution, by a person in a position effectively to exercise control over or to direct the political or military action of a State, of an act of aggression which, by its character, gravity and scale, constitutes a manifest violation of the Charter of the United Nations."[76] The Statute defines an "act of aggression" as "the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations."[77] The article also contains a list of seven acts of aggression, which are identical to those in United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3314 of 1974 and include the following acts when committed by one state against another state:[78]

  1. Invasion or attack by armed forces against territory
  2. Military occupation of territory
  3. Annexation of territory
  4. Bombardment against territory
  5. Use of any weapons against territory
  6. Blockade of ports or coasts
  7. Attack on the land, sea, or air forces or marine and air fleets
  8. The use of armed forces which are within the territory of another state by agreement, but in contravention of the conditions of the agreement
  9. Allowing territory to be used by another state to perpetrate an act of aggression against a third state
  10. Sending armed bands, groups, irregulars, or mercenaries to carry out acts of armed force

Offences against the administration of justice

Article 70 criminalizes certain intentional acts which interfere with investigations and proceedings before the Court, including giving false testimony, presenting false evidence, corruptly influencing a witness or official of the Court, retaliating against an official of the Court, and soliciting or accepting bribes as an official of the Court.[79]

Territorial or personal jurisdiction requirements

For an individual to be prosecuted by the Court either territorial jurisdiction or personal jurisdiction must exist. Therefore, an individual can only be prosecuted if he or she has either (1) committed a crime within the territorial jurisdiction of the Court or (2) committed a crime while a national of a state that is within the territorial jurisdiction of the Court.

Territorial jurisdiction

The territorial jurisdiction of the Court includes the territory, registered vessels, and registered aircraft of states which have either (1) become party to the Rome Statute or (2) accepted the Court's jurisdiction by filing a declaration with the Court.[80]

In situations that are referred to the Court by the United Nations Security Council, the territorial jurisdiction is defined by the Security Council, which may be more expansive than the Court's normal territorial jurisdiction.[81] For example, if the Security Council refers a situation that took place in the territory of a state that has both not become party to the Rome Statute and not lodged a declaration with the Court, the Court will still be able to prosecute crimes that occurred within that state.

Personal jurisdiction

The personal jurisdiction of the Court extends to all natural persons who commit crimes, regardless of where they are located or where the crimes were committed, as long as those individuals are nationals of either (1) states that are party to the Rome Statute or (2) states that have accepted the Court's jurisdiction by filing a declaration with the Court.[80] As with territorial jurisdiction, the personal jurisdiction can be expanded by the Security Council if it refers a situation to the Court.[81]

Temporal jurisdiction requirements

Temporal jurisdiction is the time period over which the Court can exercise its powers. No statute of limitations applies to any of the crimes defined in the Statute.[82] However, the Court's jurisdiction is not completely retroactive. Individuals can only be prosecuted for crimes that took place on or after 1 July 2002, which is the date that the Rome Statute entered into force.[83] If a state became party to the Statute, and therefore a member of the Court, after 1 July 2002, then the Court cannot exercise jurisdiction prior to the membership date for certain cases.[84] For example, if the Statute entered into force for a state on 1 January 2003, the Court could only exercise temporal jurisdiction over crimes that took place in that state or were committed by a national of that state on or after 1 January 2003.

Admissibility requirements

To initiate an investigation, the Prosecutor must (1) have a "reasonable basis to believe that a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been or is being committed", (2) the investigation would be consistent with the principle of complementarity, and (3) the investigation serves the interests of justice.[85]

Complementarity

The principle of complementarity means that the Court will only prosecute an individual if states are unwilling or unable to prosecute. Therefore, if legitimate national investigations or proceedings into crimes have taken place or are ongoing, the Court will not initiate proceedings. This principle applies regardless of the outcome of national proceedings.[86] Even if an investigation is closed without any criminal charges being filed or if an accused person is acquitted by a national court, the Court will not prosecute an individual for the crime in question so long as it is satisfied that the national proceedings were legitimate. However, the actual application of the complementarity principle has recently come under theoretical scrutiny.[87][86]

Gravity

The Court will only initiate proceedings if a crime is of "sufficient gravity to justify further action by the Court".[88]

Interests of justice

The Prosecutor will initiate an investigation unless there are "substantial reasons to believe that an investigation would not serve the interests of justice" when "[t]aking into account the gravity of the crime and the interests of victims".[89] Furthermore, even if an investigation has been initiated and there are substantial facts to warrant a prosecution and no other admissibility issues, the Prosecutor must determine whether a prosecution would serve the interests of justice "taking into account all the circumstances, including the gravity of the crime, the interests of victims and the age or infirmity of the alleged perpetrator, and his or her role in the alleged crime".[90]

Procedure

Trial

Trials are conducted under a hybrid common law and civil law judicial system, but it has been argued the procedural orientation and character of the court is still evolving.[91] A majority of the three judges present, as triers of fact, may reach a decision, which must include a full and reasoned statement.[92] Trials are supposed to be public, but proceedings are often closed, and such exceptions to a public trial have not been enumerated in detail.[93] In camera proceedings are allowed for protection of witnesses or defendants as well as for confidential or sensitive evidence.[94] Hearsay and other indirect evidence is not generally prohibited, but it has been argued the court is guided by hearsay exceptions which are prominent in common law systems.[95] There is no subpoena or other means to compel witnesses to come before the court, although the court has some power to compel testimony of those who chose to come before it, such as fines.[96]

Rights of the accused

The Rome Statute provides that all persons are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt,[97] and establishes certain rights of the accused and persons during investigations.[98] 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.

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.[99][100] The OPCD also helps to safeguard the rights of the accused during the initial stages of an investigation.[101] However, Thomas Lubanga's defence team say they were given a smaller budget than the Prosecutor and that evidence and witness statements were slow to arrive.[102]

Victim participation

One of the great innovations of the Statute of the International Criminal Court and its Rules of Procedure and Evidence is the series of rights granted to victims.[103][104] For the first time in the history of international criminal justice, victims have the possibility under the Statute to present their views and observations before the Court.

Participation before the Court may occur at various stages of proceedings and may take different forms, although it will be up to the judges to give directions as to the timing and manner of participation.

Participation in the Court's proceedings will in most cases take place through a legal representative and will be conducted "in a manner which is not prejudicial or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial".

The victim-based provisions within the Rome Statute provide victims with the opportunity to have their voices heard and to obtain, where appropriate, some form of reparation for their suffering. It is the aim of this attempted balance between retributive and restorative justice that, it is hoped, will enable the ICC to not only bring criminals to justice but also help the victims themselves obtain some form of justice. Justice for victims before the ICC comprises both procedural and substantive justice, by allowing them to participate and present their views and interests, so that they can help to shape truth, justice and reparations outcomes of the Court.[105]

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."[106] Article 68 sets out procedures for the "Protection of the victims and witnesses and their participation in the proceedings."[107] The Court has also established an Office of Public Counsel for Victims, to provide support and assistance to victims and their legal representatives.[108]

The ICC does not have its own witness protection program, but rather must rely on national programs to keep witnesses safe.[109]

Reparations

Victims before the International Criminal Court can also claim reparations under Article 75 of the Rome Statute. Reparations can only be claimed when a defendant is convicted and at the discretion of the Court's judges.[110] So far the Court has ordered reparations against Thomas Lubanga.[111] Reparations can include compensation, restitution and rehabilitation, but other forms of reparations may be appropriate for individual, collective or community victims. Article 79 of the Rome Statute establishes a Trust Fund to provide assistance before a reparation order to victims in a situation or to support reparations to victims and their families if the convicted person has no money.[112]

Co-operation by states not party to Rome Statute

One of the principles of international law is that a treaty does not create either obligations or rights for third states without their consent, and this is also enshrined in the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.[113] The co-operation of the non-party states with the ICC is envisioned by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court to be of voluntary nature.[114] However, even states that have not acceded to the Rome Statute might still be subjects to an obligation to co-operate with ICC in certain cases.[115] When a case is referred to the ICC by the UN Security Council all UN member states are obliged to co-operate, since its decisions are binding for all of them.[116] Also, there is an obligation to respect and ensure respect for international humanitarian law, which stems from the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol I,[117] which reflects the absolute nature of international humanitarian law.[118] Although the wording of the Conventions might not be precise as to what steps have to be taken, it has been argued that it at least requires non-party states to make an effort not to block actions of ICC in response to serious violations of those Conventions.[115]

In relation to co-operation in investigation and evidence gathering, it is implied from the Rome Statute[119] that the consent of a non-party state is a prerequisite for ICC Prosecutor to conduct an investigation within its territory, and it seems that it is even more necessary for him to observe any reasonable conditions raised by that state, since such restrictions exist for states party to the Statute.[115] Taking into account the experience of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (which worked with the principle of the primacy, instead of complementarity) in relation to co-operation, some scholars have expressed their pessimism as to the possibility of ICC to obtain co-operation of non-party states.[115] As for the actions that ICC can take towards non-party states that do not co-operate, the Rome Statute stipulates that the Court may inform the Assembly of States Parties or Security Council, when the matter was referred by it, when non-party state refuses to co-operate after it has entered into an ad hoc arrangement or an agreement with the Court.[120]

Amnesties and national reconciliation processes

It is unclear to what extent the ICC is compatible with reconciliation processes that grant amnesty to human rights abusers as part of agreements to end conflict.[121] Article 16 of the Rome Statute allows the Security Council to prevent the Court from investigating or prosecuting a case,[122] 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".[123] Former ICC president Philippe Kirsch has said that "some limited amnesties may be compatible" with a country's obligations genuinely to investigate or prosecute under the Statute.[121]

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 by some as an obstacle to ending the insurgency in Uganda.[124][125] Czech politician Marek Benda argues that "the ICC as a deterrent will in our view only mean the worst dictators will try to retain power at all costs".[126] However, the United Nations[127] and the International Committee of the Red Cross[128] maintain that granting amnesty to those accused of war crimes and other serious crimes is a violation of international law.

Facilities

Headquarters

International Criminal Court
Icc permanent premises
General information
StatusComplete
TypeOffice
LocationThe Hague, Netherlands
Coordinates52°6′20″N 4°19′7.16″E / 52.10556°N 4.3186556°ECoordinates: 52°6′20″N 4°19′7.16″E / 52.10556°N 4.3186556°E
Construction startedAutumn 2012
OpenedDecember 2015
Technical details
Floor area52,000 m2 (560,000 sq ft)
Design and construction
Architectschmidt hammer lassen
DeveloperCombination Visser & Smit Bouw and Boele & van Eesteren ('Courtys')
Website
http://www.icc-permanentpremises.org

The official seat of the Court is in The Hague, Netherlands, but its proceedings may take place anywhere.[129][130]

The Court moved into its first permanent premises in The Hague, located at Oude Waalsdorperweg 10, on 14 December 2015.[131] Part of The Hague's International Zone,[132] which also contains the Peace Palace, Europol, Eurojust, ICTY, OPCW and The Hague World Forum, the court facilities are situated on the site of the Alexanderkazerne, a former military barracks, adjacent to the dune landscape on the northern edge of the city. The ICC's detention centre is a short distance away.

Development

The land and financing for the new construction were provided by the Netherlands.[133] In addition, the host state organised and financed the architectural design competition which started at the end of 2008.

Three architects were chosen by an international jury from a total of 171 applicants to enter into further negotiations. The Danish firm schmidt hammer lassen were ultimately selected to design the new premises since its design met all the ICC criteria, such as design quality, sustainability, functionality and costs.[134]

Demolition of the barracks started in November 2011 and was completed in August 2012.[135] In October 2012 the tendering procedure for the General Contractor was completed and the combination Visser & Smit Bouw and Boele & van Eesteren ("Courtys") was selected.[136]

Architecture

The building has a compact footprint and consists of six connected building volumes with a garden motif. The tallest volume with a green facade, placed in the middle of the design, is the Court Tower that accommodates 3 courtrooms. The rest of the building's volumes accommodate the offices of the different organs of the ICC.[137]

Icc permanent premises lobby
Lobby
ICC permanent premises courtroom
Typical courtroom

Provisional headquarters, 2002–2015

Netherlands, The Hague, International Criminal Court
The former (provisional) headquarters of the ICC in The Hague, in use until December 2015

Until late 2015, the ICC was housed in interim premises in The Hague provided by the Netherlands.[138] Formerly belonging to KPN, the provisional headquarters were located at Maanweg 174 in the east-central portion of the city.

Detention centre

The ICC's detention centre accommodates both those convicted by the court and serving sentences as well as those suspects detained pending the outcome of their trial. It comprises twelve cells on the premises of the Scheveningen branch of the Haaglanden Penal Institution, The Hague, close to the ICC's new headquarters in the Alexanderkazerne.[139][140] 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.[139]

Other offices

The ICC maintains a liaison office in New York[141] and field offices in places where it conducts its activities.[142] As of 18 October 2007, the Court had field offices in Kampala, Kinshasa, Bunia, Abéché and Bangui.[142]

Finance

International Criminal Court contributions, 2008
Contributions to the ICC's budget, 2008

The ICC is financed by contributions from the states parties. The amount payable by each state party is determined using the same method as the United Nations:[143] each state's contribution is based on the country's capacity to pay, which reflects factors such as a national income and population. The maximum amount a single country can pay in any year is limited to 22% of the Court's budget; Japan paid this amount in 2008.

The Court spent €80.5 million in 2007.[144] The Assembly of States Parties approved a budget of €90.4 million for 2008,[143] €101.2 million for 2009,[145] and €141.6 million for 2017.[146] As of April 2017, the ICC's staff consisted of 800 persons from approximately 100 states.[146]

Trial history to date

Omar al-Bashir, 12th AU Summit, 090131-N-0506A-347
The ICC issued an arrest warrant for Omar al-Bashir of Sudan over alleged war crimes in Darfur.[147]

To date, the Prosecutor has opened investigations in 11 situations: Burundi; two in the Central African Republic; Côte d'Ivoire; Darfur, Sudan; the Democratic Republic of the Congo; Georgia; Kenya; Libya; Mali; and Uganda.[148] Additionally, the Office of the Prosecutor is conducting preliminary examinations in eleven situations in Afghanistan; Colombia; Gabon; Guinea; Iraq / the United Kingdom; Nigeria; Palestine; the Philippines, registered vessels of Comoros, Greece, and Cambodia; Ukraine and Venezuela.[149][150]

The Court's Pre-Trial Chambers have publicly indicted 44 people. The ICC has issued arrest warrants for 36 individuals and summonses to eight others. Six persons are in detention. Proceedings against 22 are ongoing: 15 are at large as fugitives, one is under arrest but not in the Court's custody, two are in the pre-trial phase, and four are at trial. Proceedings against 22 have been completed: two are serving sentences, four have finished their sentences, two have been acquitted, six have had the charges against them dismissed, two have had the charges against them withdrawn, one has had his case declared inadmissible, and four have died before trial.

The Lubanga and Katanga-Chui trials in the situation of the DR Congo are concluded. Mr Lubanga and Mr Katanga were convicted and sentenced to 14 and 12 years imprisonment, respectively, whereas Mr Chui was acquitted.

The Bemba trial in the Central African Republic situation is concluded. Mr Bemba was convicted on two counts of crimes against humanity and three counts of war crimes. This marked the first time the ICC convicted someone of sexual violence as they added rape to his conviction.[151]

Trials in the Ntaganda case (DR Congo), the Bemba et al. OAJ case and the Laurent Gbagbo-Blé Goudé trial in the Côte d'Ivoire situation are ongoing. The Banda trial in the situation of Darfur, Sudan, was scheduled to begin in 2014 but the start date was vacated. Charges against Dominic Ongwen in the Uganda situation and Ahmed al-Faqi in the Mali situation have been confirmed; both are awaiting their trials.

Investigations and preliminary examinations

ICC investigations
ICC investigations
Green: Official investigations (Burundi, Central African Republic (2), Côte d'Ivoire, Darfur (Sudan), Democratic Republic of Congo, Georgia, Kenya, Libya, Mali, Uganda)
Orange: Authorization to open investigation requested (none at present)
Light red: Ongoing preliminary examinations (Afghanistan, Colombia, Comoros, Guinea, Iraq, Nigeria, Palestine, Philippines, Ukraine and Venezuela)
Dark red: Closed preliminary examinations (Honduras and South Korea)

Currently, the Office of the Prosecutor has opened investigations in 11 situations: Burundi; two in the Central African Republic; Côte d'Ivoire; Darfur, Sudan; the Democratic Republic of the Congo; Georgia; Kenya; Libya; Mali; and Uganda.[152] Additionally, the Office of the Prosecutor is conducting preliminary examinations in eleven situations in Afghanistan; Colombia; Gabon; Guinea; Iraq / the United Kingdom; Nigeria; Palestine; the Philippines, registered vessels of Comoros, Greece, and Cambodia; Ukraine and Venezuela.[153][154]


Key:
  Investigation
  Authorization to open investigation requested
  Preliminary examination ongoing
  Preliminary examination closed

Situation Referred by Referred on Preliminary examination announced Investigation began Current status[A] Ref(s).
Democratic Republic of the Congo Democratic Republic of the Congo 19 April 2004 16 July 2003 23 June 2004 Investigation [156][157][158]
Côte d'Ivoire 1 October 2003 3 October 2011 Investigation [159][160]
Uganda Uganda 16 December 2003 16 December 2003 29 July 2004 Investigation [161][162]
Colombia June 2004 Preliminary examination (phase 3) [155]
Central African Republic I Central African Republic 7 January 2005 7 January 2005 22 May 2007 Investigation [163][164]
Darfur, Sudan United Nations Security Council 31 March 2005 1 April 2005 6 June 2005 Investigation [165][166]
Iraq / United Kingdom 9 February 2006 Preliminary examination (phase 3)[B] [155]
Venezuela I 9 February 2006 Preliminary examination closed on 9 February 2006 [168]
Afghanistan 2007 Authorization to open investigation requested [169]
Kenya 5 February 2008 31 March 2010 Investigation [170][171]
Georgia 20 August 2008 27 January 2016 Investigation [172][173]
Palestine I 22 January 2009 Preliminary examination closed on 3 April 2012 [174]
Guinea 14 October 2009 Preliminary examination (phase 3) [155]
Honduras 18 November 2009 Preliminary examination closed on 28 October 2015 [175]
Nigeria 18 November 2010 Preliminary examination (phase 3) [155]
South Korea 6 December 2010 Preliminary examination closed on 23 June 2014 [176]
Libya United Nations Security Council 26 February 2011 28 February 2011 3 March 2011 Investigation [177][178][179]
Mali Mali 18 July 2012 18 July 2012 16 January 2013 Investigation [180][181]
Registered vessels[C] Comoros 14 May 2013 14 May 2013 Preliminary examination closed on 29 November 2017[D] [183]
Central African Republic II Central African Republic 30 May 2014 7 February 2014 24 September 2014 Investigation [184]
Ukraine 25 April 2014 Preliminary examination (phase 2) [155]
Palestine II Palestine 22 May 2018 16 January 2015 Preliminary examination (phase 3) [155]
Burundi 25 April 2016 25 October 2017 Investigation [185]
Gabon Gabon 21 September 2016 29 September 2016 Preliminary examination closed on 21 September 2018 [186]
Philippines 8 February 2018 Preliminary examination (phase 2) [155]
Venezuela II Argentina et al.[E] 27 September 2018 8 February 2018 Preliminary examination (phase 2) [155]
Myanmar / Bangladesh 18 September 2018 Preliminary examination (phase 2) [155]
Notes
  1. ^ The Office of the Prosecutor process preliminary examinations through different phases. Every communication is first given an initial assessment to determine if it is sufficiently serious and if it falls within the Court's jurisdiction (phase 1). If it does, the Office begins a preliminary examination by first considering whether the alleged crimes fall within the subject-matter jurisdiction of the Court (phase 2). If the Office is satisfied that all the jurisdictional requirements are met, it then focuses on issues of admissibility of potential cases by considering complementarity and the gravity of the alleged crimes (phase 3). If there are no admissibility concerns, the Office then considers the interests of justice and decides whether or not begin a formal investigation (phase 4).[155]
  2. ^ The preliminary examination of the situation in Iraq / the United Kingdom was initially closed on 9 February 2006, but was reopened on 13 May 2014.[167]
  3. ^ The preliminary examination relates to registered vessels of the Comoros, Greece and Cambodia.
  4. ^ The Prosecutor previously closed the preliminary examination of the situation on registered vessels of the Comoros, Greece and Cambodia on 6 November 2014, but reconsidered her decision following a request by the Pre-Trial Chamber of the Court.[182][183]
  5. ^ The referral of the situation in Venezuela (II) was jointly made by Argentina, Canada, Colombia, Chile, Paraguay, and Peru.
  1. ^ The Office of the Prosecutor process preliminary examinations through different phases. Every communication is first given an initial assessment to determine if it is sufficiently serious and if it falls within the Court's jurisdiction (phase 1). If it does, the Office begins a preliminary examination by first considering whether the alleged crimes fall within the subject-matter jurisdiction of the Court (phase 2). If the Office is satisfied that all the jurisdictional requirements are met, it then focuses on issues of admissibility of potential cases by considering complementarity and the gravity of the alleged crimes (phase 3). If there are no admissibility concerns, the Office then considers the interests of justice and decides whether or not begin a formal investigation (phase 4).[155]
  2. ^ The preliminary examination of the situation in Iraq / the United Kingdom was initially closed on 9 February 2006, but was reopened on 13 May 2014.[167]
  3. ^ The preliminary examination relates to registered vessels of the Comoros, Greece and Cambodia.
  4. ^ The Prosecutor previously closed the preliminary examination of the situation on registered vessels of the Comoros, Greece and Cambodia on 6 November 2014, but reconsidered her decision following a request by the Pre-Trial Chamber of the Court.[182][183]
  5. ^ The referral of the situation in Venezuela (II) was jointly made by Argentina, Canada, Colombia, Chile, Paraguay, and Peru.
Summary of investigations[note 1] and prosecutions by the International Criminal Court (not including reparations proceedings)
Situation Publicly indicted Ongoing procedures Procedures finished, due to ... PTC TCs
Not before court Pre-Trial Trial Appeal Death Inadmissibility Acquittal etc. Conviction
[note 2] [note 3] [note 4] [note 5] [note 6] [note 7] [note 8] [note 9] [note 10]
Democratic Republic of the Congo 6 1
Mudacumura
0 1
Ntaganda
0 0 0 2
Chui, Mbarushimana
2
Katanga, Lubanga
I VI
Ntaganda
Uganda 5 2
Kony, Otti
0 1
Ongwen
0 2
Lukwiya, Odhiambo
0 0 0 II IX
Ongwen
Central African Republic I 5 0 0 0 5
Bemba (main case); Kilolo, Babala, Mangenda, Arido + Bemba (OAJ)
0 0 0 0 II III
Bemba
VII
Bemba et al.
Darfur, Sudan 7 4
Haroun, Kushayb, al-Bashir, Hussein
1
Banda
0 0 1
Jerbo
0 1
Abu Garda
0 II IV
Banda
Kenya 9 3
Barasa, Gicheru, Bett
0 0 0 0 0 6
Kosgey, Ali, Muthaura, Kenyatta, Ruto, Sang
0 II
Libya 5 3
S. Gaddafi, Khaled, Werfalli
0 0 0 1
M. Gaddafi
1
Senussi
0 0 I
Côte d'Ivoire 3 1
S. Gbagbo
0 2
L. Gbagbo, Blé Goudé
0 0 0 0 0 I I
L. Gbagbo-Blé Goudé
Mali 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
al-Mahdi
I VIII
al-Mahdi
Central African Republic II 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 II
Georgia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I
Burundi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 III
Total 41 14 1 4 5 4 1 9 3

Notes

  1. ^ A situation is listed here if an investigation was begun by the Prosecutor.
  2. ^ Indicted but has not yet appeared before the Court.
  3. ^ Indicted and has had at least first appearance; trial has not yet begun.
  4. ^ Trial has begun but has not yet been completed.
  5. ^ Trial has been completed and verdict delivered but appeal is pending.
  6. ^ Indicted but died before the trial and/or appeal (where applicable) was concluded.
  7. ^ Indicted but case was held inadmissible.
  8. ^ Indicted but either charges not confirmed or withdrawn or proceedings terminated or acquitted. If charges were not confirmed or withdrawn or if proceedings were terminated, the Prosecutor may again prosecute with fresh evidence.
  9. ^ Pre-Trial Chamber currently in charge
  10. ^ Trial Chambers currently in charge; once proceedings have moved to the Appeals Chamber, the Trial Chamber designation will be removed here.
Overview on cases currently active before the ICC (excludes cases against fugitives and reparations proceedings)
Between initial appearance and beginning of confirmation of charges hearing Between beginning of confirmation of charges hearing and beginning of trial Between beginning of trial and judgment Between trial judgment and appeals judgment
Bemba
Bemba-Kilolo-Babala-Mangenda-Arido
al-Mahdi
Ntaganda
L Gbagbo-Blé Goude
Ongwen
Banda
Detailed summary of investigations[note 1] and prosecutions by the International Criminal Court
Situation Individuals
indicted

[note 2]
Indicted[note 3] [note 4] Transfer to ICC
Initial appearance

[note 5]
Confirmation of charges hearing
Result
Trial
Result
Appeal hearings
Result
Current status Ref.
Date G CAH WC OAJ
Democratic Republic of the Congo
Investigation article
Thomas Lubanga Dyilo 10 February 2006 3 17 March 2006
20 March 2006
9-28 November 2006
confirmed 29 January 2007
26 January 200926 August 2011
convicted 14 March 2012
sentenced 10 July 2012
19–20 May 2014
verdict and sentence confirmed
1 December 2014
Convicted and sentenced to 14 years imprisonment; decision final; reparations regime established; release from custody in the DRC not later than 16 March 2020 [187] [188]
Bosco Ntaganda 22 August 2006
13 July 2012
3 7 22 March 2013
26 March 2013
10-14 February 2014
confirmed
9 June 2014
began
2 September 2015
In ICC custody; charges confirmed; trial before Trial Chamber VI ongoing [189]
Germain Katanga 2 July 2007 3 6 17 October 2007
22 October 2007
27 June–18 July 2008
confirmed 26 September 2008
24 November 200923 May 2012
convicted 7 March 2014
sentenced 23 May 2014
Appeals by Prosecution and Defence discontinued Convicted and sentenced to 12 years imprisonment; decision final; reparations regime established; ICC-related sentence served (after 8 years, 4 months); remains in custody of DRC authorities due to other charges [190] [191] [192]
Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui 6 July 2007 3 6 6 February 2008
11 February 2008
24 November 200923 May 2012
acquitted 18 December 2012
21 October 2014
acquittal confirmed 27 February 2015
Acquitted by Trial Chamber II, decision final [193]
Callixte Mbarushimana 28 September 2010 5 6 25 January 2011
28 January 2011
16-21 September 2011
dismissed 16 December 2011
Proceedings finished with charges dismissed, released [note 6] [194] [195]
Sylvestre Mudacumura 13 July 2012 9 Fugitive [196]
Uganda
Investigation article
Joseph Kony 8 July 2005 12 21 Fugitive [197]
Okot Odhiambo 3 7 Proceedings finished; died on 27 October 2013
Raska Lukwiya 1 3 Proceedings finished; died on 12 August 2006
Vincent Otti 11 21 Fugitive, reportedly died in 2007
[198]
Dominic Ongwen 3 4 21 January 2015
26 January 2015
21–27 January 2016
confirmed
23 March 2016
began
6 December 2016
In ICC custody; charges confirmed; trial before Trial Chamber IX ongoing [199]
Central African Republic Jean-Pierre Bemba 23 May 2008
10 June 2008
3 5 3 July 2008
4 July 2008
12-15 January 2009
confirmed 15 June 2009
22 November 201013 November 2014
convicted
21 March 2016
sentenced
21 June 2016
Convicted and sentenced to 18 years imprisonment; reparations regime to be established; under appeal; in ICC custody; if conviction and sentence stand, release between 2020 and 2026 [200] [201]
20 November 2013 2 23 November 2013
27 November 2013
in writing
confirmed
11 November 2014
29 September 20152 June 2016
convicted
19 October 2016
sentenced
22 March 2017
Convicted and sentenced to one additional year of imprisonment and a fine of 300,000 USD; under appeal; in ICC custody [202] [203]
Kilolo 2 25 November 2013
27 November 2013
Convicted and sentenced to two and a half years of imprisonment and a fine of 30,000 USD; sentence suspended for three years; currently not in ICC custody; under appeal
Babala 2 Convicted and sentenced to six months of imprisonment; sentence served; currently not in ICC custody; under appeal
Mangenda 2 4 December 2013
5 December 2013
Convicted and sentenced to two years of imprisonment; sentence suspended for three years; currently not in ICC custody; under appeal
Arido 2 18 March 2014
20 March 2014
Convicted and sentenced to eleven months of imprisonment; sentence served; currently not in ICC custody; under appeal
Darfur, Sudan
Investigation article
Ahmed Haroun 27 April 2007 20 22 Fugitive [204]
Ali Kushayb 22 28
Omar al-Bashir 4 March 2009
12 July 2010
3 5 2 Fugitive [205]
Bahr Idriss Abu Garda 7 May 2009
(summons)
3 18 May 2009 19-29 October 2009
dismissed 8 February 2010
Proceedings finished with charges dismissed [note 6] [206]
Abdallah Banda 27 August 2009
(summons)
11 September 2014
(warrant of arrest)
3 17 June 2010 8 December 2010
confirmed 7 March 2011
At large under warrant of arrest, previously appeared voluntarily, charges confirmed, trial before Trial Chamber IV to begin [207]
Saleh Jerbo 27 August 2009
(summons)
3 Proceedings finished; died on 19 April 2013
Abdel Raheem Muhammad Hussein 1 March 2012 7 6 Fugitive [208]
Kenya
Investigation article
William Ruto 8 March 2011
(summons)
4 7 April 2011 1-8 September 2011
confirmed 23 January 2012
10 September 2013 –
5 April 2016

(terminated)
Proceedings terminated with no prejudice to re-prosecution, appeal possible [209] [210]
Joshua Sang 4
Henry Kosgey 4 1-8 September 2011
dismissed 23 January 2012
Proceedings finished with charges dismissed [note 6]
Francis Muthaura 8 March 2011
(summons)
5 8 April 2011 21 September5 October 2011
confirmed 23 January 2012
Proceedings finished with confirmed charges withdrawn before trial [211]
Uhuru Kenyatta 5
Mohammed Hussein Ali 5 21 September5 October 2011
dismissed 23 January 2012
Proceedings finished with charges dismissed [note 6]
Walter Barasa 2 August 2013 3 Fugitive [212]
Paul Gicheru 10 March 2015 6 Arrested on 30 July 2015, in custody of Kenyan authorities [213]
Philip Kipkoech Bett 4
Libya Muammar Gaddafi 27 June 2011 2 Proceedings finished; died on 20 October 2011 [214]
Saif al-Islam Gaddafi 2 Arrested on 19 November 2011, in custody of Libyan authorities
Abdullah Senussi 2 Proceedings finished with case held inadmissible
Al-Tuhamy Mohamed Khaled 18 April 2013 4 3 Fugitive [215]
Mahmoud al-Werfalli 15 August 2017 7 Fugitive [216]
Ivory Coast Laurent Gbagbo 23 November 2011 4 30 November 2011
5 December 2011
19–28 February 2013
confirmed
12 June 2014
began
28 January 2016
In ICC custody; charges confirmed; trial before Trial Chamber I ongoing [217] [218]
Charles Blé Goudé 21 December 2011 4 22–23 March 2014
27 March 2014
29 September –
2 October 2014

confirmed
11 December 2014
Simone Gbagbo 29 February 2012 4 Arrested on 11 April 2011, in custody of Ivorian authorities. Found guilty and currently being tried in separate proceedings under Ivorian jurisdiction. [219] [220] [221]
Mali
Investigation article
Ahmad al-Faqi al-Mahdi 18 September 2015 1 26 September 2015
30 September 2015
1 March 2016
confirmed
24 March 2016
22–24 August 2016
convicted and sentenced
27 September 2016
Convicted and sentenced to nine years imprisonment upon guilty plea; in ICC custody; if conviction and sentence stand, release between 2021 and 2024 [222] [223]
Central African Republic II Investigation initiated [224]
Georgia Investigation initiated [225]
Burundi Investigation initiated [226]
Afghanistan
Investigation article
Investigation initiated [227]

Notes

  1. ^ A situation is listed here if the Prosecutor of the Court has opened an investigation.
  2. ^ Obviously, only persons who are publicly indicted are listed. The Court can issue an indictment under seal.
  3. ^ If not otherwise noted, the indicted is wanted by warrant of arrest.
  4. ^ The International Criminal Court does currently not have jurisdiction regarding the crime of aggression. An amendment to the Rome Statute to expand the ICC's jurisdiction towards that crime is currently in the process of ratification. Under no circumstances will the Court be able to actually exercise jurisdiction before 1 January 2017.
  5. ^ If there was a warrant of arrest, the dates of transfer to the International Criminal Court (in italics) and of the initial appearance are given. In case of a summons to appear, only the date of the initial appearance is given.
  6. ^ a b c d According to Article 61 (8) of the Rome Statute, "where the Pre-Trial Chamber declines to confirm a charge, the Prosecutor shall not be precluded from subsequently requesting its confirmation if the request is supported by additional evidence."

Relationships

United Nations

Darfur report - Page 2 Image 1
The UN Security Council referred the situation in Darfur to the ICC in 2005

Unlike the International Court of Justice, the ICC is legally independent from the United Nations. However, the Rome Statute grants certain powers to the United Nations Security Council, which limits its functional independence. Article 13 allows the Security Council to refer to the Court situations that would not otherwise fall under the Court's jurisdiction (as it did in relation to the situations in Darfur and Libya, which the Court could not otherwise have prosecuted as neither Sudan nor Libya are state parties). Article 16 allows the Security Council to require the Court to defer from investigating a case for a period of 12 months.[122] Such a deferral may be renewed indefinitely by the Security Council. This sort of an arrangement gives the ICC some of the advantages inhering in the organs of the United Nations such as using the enforcement powers of the Security Council, but it also creates a risk of being tainted with the political controversies of the Security Council.[228]

The Court cooperates with the UN in many different areas, including the exchange of information and logistical support.[229] The Court reports to the UN each year on its activities,[229][230] and some meetings of 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".[231][232]

Nongovernmental organizations

During the 1970s and 1980s, international human rights and humanitarian Nongovernmental Organizations (or NGOs) began to proliferate at exponential rates. Concurrently, the quest to find a way to punish international crimes shifted from being the exclusive responsibility of legal experts to being shared with international human rights activism.

NGOs helped birth the ICC through advocacy and championing for the prosecution of perpetrators of crimes against humanity. NGOs closely monitor the organization's declarations and actions, ensuring that the work that is being executed on behalf of the ICC is fulfilling its objectives and responsibilities to civil society.[233] According to Benjamin Schiff, "From the Statute Conference onward, the relationship between the ICC and the NGOs has probably been closer, more consistent, and more vital to the Court than have analogous relations between NGOs and any other international organization."

There are a number of NGOs working on a variety of issues related to the ICC. The NGO Coalition for the International Criminal Court has served as a sort of umbrella for NGOs to coordinate with each other on similar objectives related to the ICC. The CICC has 2,500 member organizations in 150 different countries.[234] The original steering committee included representatives from the World Federalist Movement, the International Commission of Jurists, Amnesty International, the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, Human Rights Watch, Parliamentarians for Global Action, and No Peace Without Justice.[233] Today, many of the NGOs with which the ICC cooperates are members of the CICC. These organizations come from a range of backgrounds, spanning from major international NGOs such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, to smaller, more local organizations focused on peace and justice missions.[233] Many work closely with states, such as the International Criminal Law Network, founded and predominantly funded by the Hague municipality and the Dutch Ministries of Defense and Foreign Affairs. The CICC also claims organizations that are themselves federations, such as the International Federation of Human Rights Leagues (FIDH).

CICC members ascribe to three principles that permit them to work under the umbrella of the CICC, so long as their objectives match them:

  • Promoting worldwide ratification and implementation of the Rome Statute of the ICC
  • Maintaining the integrity of the Rome Statute of the ICC, and
  • Ensuring the ICC will be as fair, effective and independent as possible[234]

The NGOs that work under the CICC do not normally pursue agendas exclusive to the work of the Court, rather they may work for broader causes, such as general human rights issues, victims' rights, gender rights, rule of law, conflict mediation, and peace.[233] The CICC coordinates their efforts to improve the efficiency of NGOs' contributions to the Court and to pool their influence on major common issues. From the ICC side, it has been useful to have the CICC channel NGO contacts with the Court so that its officials do not have to interact individually with thousands of separate organizations.

NGOs have been crucial to the evolution of the ICC, as they assisted in the creation of the normative climate that urged states to seriously consider the Court's formation. Their legal experts helped shape the Statute, while their lobbying efforts built support for it. They advocate Statute ratification globally and work at expert and political levels within member states for passage of necessary domestic legislation. NGOs are greatly represented at meetings for the Assembly of States Parties, and they use the ASP meetings to press for decisions promoting their priorities.[233] Many of these NGOs have reasonable access to important officials at the ICC because of their involvement during the Statute process. They are engaged in monitoring, commenting upon, and assisting in the ICC's activities.

The ICC often depends on NGOs to interact with local populations. The Registry Public Information Office personnel and Victims Participation and Reparations Section officials hold seminars for local leaders, professionals and the media to spread the word about the Court.[233] These are the kinds of events that are often hosted or organized by local NGOs. Because there can be challenges with determining which of these NGOs are legitimate, CICC regional representatives often have the ability to help screen and identify trustworthy organizations.

However, NGOs are also "sources of criticism, exhortation and pressure upon" the ICC.[233] The ICC heavily depends on NGOs for its operations. Although NGOs and states cannot directly impact the judicial nucleus of the organization, they can impart information on crimes, can help locate victims and witnesses, and can promote and organize victim participation. NGOs outwardly comment on the Court's operations, "push for expansion of its activities especially in the new justice areas of outreach in conflict areas, in victims' participation and reparations, and in upholding due-process standards and defense 'equality of arms' and so implicitly set an agenda for the future evolution of the ICC."[233] The relatively uninterrupted progression of NGO involvement with the ICC may mean that NGOs have become repositories of more institutional historical knowledge about the ICC than its national representatives, and have greater expertise than some of the organization's employees themselves. While NGOs look to mold the ICC to satisfy the interests and priorities that they have worked for since the early 1990s, they unavoidably press against the limits imposed upon the ICC by the states that are members of the organization. NGOs can pursue their own mandates, irrespective of whether they are compatible with those of other NGOs, while the ICC must respond to the complexities of its own mandate as well as those of the states and NGOs.

Another issue has been that NGOs possess "exaggerated senses of their ownership over the organization and, having been vital to and successful in promoting the Court, were not managing to redefine their roles to permit the Court its necessary independence."[233] Additionally, because there does exist such a gap between the large human rights organizations and the smaller peace-oriented organizations, it is difficult for ICC officials to manage and gratify all of their NGOs. "ICC officials recognize that the NGOs pursue their own agendas, and that they will seek to pressure the ICC in the direction of their own priorities rather than necessarily understanding or being fully sympathetic to the myriad constraints and pressures under which the Court operates."[233] Both the ICC and the NGO community avoid criticizing each other publicly or vehemently, although NGOs have released advisory and cautionary messages regarding the ICC. They avoid taking stances that could potentially give the Court's adversaries, particularly the US, more motive to berate the organization.

Criticisms

African accusations of Western imperialism

The ICC has been accused of bias and as being a tool of Western imperialism, only punishing leaders from small, weak states while ignoring crimes committed by richer and more powerful states.[235][236][237][238] This sentiment has been expressed particularly by African leaders due to an alleged disproportionate focus of the Court on Africa, while it claims to have a global mandate; until January 2016, all nine situations which the ICC had been investigating were in African countries.[239][240][241]

The prosecution of Kenyan Deputy President William Ruto and President Uhuru Kenyatta (both charged before coming into office) led to the Kenyan parliament passing a motion calling for Kenya's withdrawal from the ICC, and the country called on the other 33 African states party to the ICC to withdraw their support, an issue which was discussed at a special African Union (AU) summit in October 2013.

Though the ICC has denied the charge of disproportionately targeting African leaders, and claims to stand up for victims wherever they may be, Kenya was not alone in criticising the ICC. Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir visited Kenya, South Africa, China, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Ethiopia, Qatar and several other countries despite an outstanding ICC warrant for his arrest but was not arrested; he said that the charges against him are "exaggerated" and that the ICC was a part of a "Western plot" against him. Ivory Coast's government opted not to transfer former first lady Simone Gbagbo to the court but to instead try her at home. Rwanda's ambassador to the African Union, Joseph Nsengimana, argued that "It is not only the case of Kenya. We have seen international justice become more and more a political matter." Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni accused the ICC of "mishandling complex African issues." Ethiopian Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalegn, at the time AU chairman, told the UN General Assembly at the General debate of the sixty-eighth session of the United Nations General Assembly: "The manner in which the ICC has been operating has left a very bad impression in Africa. It is totally unacceptable."

African Union (AU) withdrawal proposal

South African President Jacob Zuma said the perceptions of the ICC as "unreasonable" led to the calling of the special AU summit on 13 October 2015. Botswana is a notable supporter of the ICC in Africa.[242] At the summit, the AU did not endorse the proposal for a mass withdrawal from the ICC due to lack of support for the idea.[243] However, the summit did conclude that serving heads of state should not be put on trial and that the Kenyan cases should be deferred. Ethiopian Foreign Minister Tedros Adhanom said: "We have rejected the double standard that the ICC is applying in dispensing international justice."[244] Despite these calls, the ICC went ahead with requiring William Ruto to attend his trial.[245] The UNSC was then asked to consider deferring the trials of Kenyatta and Ruto for a year,[246] but this was rejected.[247] In November, the ICC's Assembly of State Parties responded to Kenya's calls for an exemption for sitting heads of state[248] by agreeing to consider amendments to the Rome Statute to address the concerns.[249]

On 7 October 2016, Burundi announced that it would leave the ICC, after the court began investigating political violence in that nation. In the subsequent two weeks, South Africa and Gambia also announced their intention to leave the court, with Kenya and Namibia reportedly also considering departure. All three nations cited the fact that all 39 people indicted by the court over its history have been African and that the court has made no effort to investigate war crimes tied to the 2003 invasion of Iraq.[250][251] However, following Gambia's presidential election later that year, which ended the long rule of Yahya Jammeh, Gambia rescinded its withdrawal notification.[252] The High Court of South Africa ruled on 2 February 2017 that the South African government's notice to withdraw was unconstitutional and invalid.[253] On 7 March 2017 the South African government formally revoked its intention to withdraw;[254] however, the ruling ANC revealed on 5 July 2017 that its intention to withdraw stands.[255]

Checks and balances

The United States Department of State argues 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".[49] The current law in the United States on the ICC is the American Service-Members' Protection Act (ASPA), 116 Stat. 820, The ASPA authorizes the President of the United States to use "all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any U.S. or allied personnel being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court." This authorization has led the act to be nicknamed the "Hague Invasion Act",[256][257] because the freeing of U.S. citizens by force might be possible only through military action.

On September 10, 2018, John R. Bolton, in his first major address as U.S. National Security Advisor, reiterated that the ICC lacks checks and balances, exercises "jurisdiction over crimes that have disputed and ambiguous definitions," and has failed to "deter and punish atrocity crimes." The ICC, said Bolton, is "superfluous" given that "domestic judicial systems already hold American citizens to the highest legal and ethical standards." He added that the U.S. would do everything "to protect our citizens" should the ICC attempt to prosecute U.S. servicemen over alleged detainee abuse in Afghanistan. In that event, ICC judges and prosecutors would be barred from entering the U.S., their funds in the U.S. would be sanctioned and the U.S. "will prosecute them in the US criminal system. We will do the same for any company or state that assists an ICC investigation of Americans", Bolton said. He also criticized Palestinian efforts to bring Israel before the ICC over allegations of human rights abuses in the occupied West Bank and Gaza.[258]

ICC responded that it will continue to investigate war crimes undeterred.[259]

OPCD

Concerning the independent Office of Public Counsel for the Defence (OPCD), Thomas Lubanga's defence team say they were given a smaller budget than the Prosecutor and that evidence and witness statements were slow to arrive.[102]

Limitations

Limitations exist for the ICC. Human Rights Watch (HRW) reported that the ICC's prosecutor team takes no account of the roles played by the government in the conflict of Uganda, Rwanda or Congo. This led to a flawed investigation, because the ICC did not reach the conclusion of its verdict after considering the governments' position and actions in the conflict.[260]

Unintentional consequences

Research suggests that prosecutions of leaders in the ICC makes dictators less likely to peacefully step down.[261] It is also argued that justice is a means to peace: "As a result, the ICC has been used as a means of intervention in ongoing conflicts with the expectation that the indictments, arrests, and trials of elite perpetrators have deterrence and preventive effects for atrocity crimes. Despite these legitimate intentions and great expectations, there is little evidence of the efficacy of justice as a means to peace".[262]

State cooperation

That the ICC cannot mount successful cases without state cooperation is problematic for several reasons. It means that the ICC acts inconsistently in its selection of cases, is prevented from taking on hard cases and loses legitimacy.[263] It also gives the ICC less deterrent value, as potential perpetrators of war crimes know that they can avoid ICC judgment by taking over government and refusing to cooperate.[263]

Questioning the true application of the principle of complementarity

The fundamental principle of complementarity of the ICC Rome Statute is often taken for granted in the legal analysis of international criminal law and its jurisprudence. Initially the thorny issue of the actual application of the complementarity principle arose in 2008, when William Schabas published his monumental paper.[264] However, despite Schabas' theoretical impact, no substantive research was made by other scholars on this issue for quite some time. In June 2017, Victor Tsilonis advanced the same criticism which is reinforced by events, practices of the Office of the Prosecutor and ICC cases in the Essays in Honour of Nestor Courakis. His paper essentially argues that the Αl‐Senussi case arguably is the first instance of the complementarity principle's actual implementation eleven whole years after the ratification of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.[265]

On the other hand, the Chief Prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, has invoked recently the principle of complementarity in the situation between Russia and Georgia in Ossetia region.[266] Moreover, following the threats of certain African states (initially Burundi, Gambia and South Africa) to withdraw their ratifications, Bensouda again referred to the principle of complementarity as a core principle of ICC’s jurisdiction and has more extensively focused on the principle’s application on the latest Office of The Prosecutor’s Report on Preliminary Examination Activities 2016.[267]

See also

References

  1. ^ "The International Criminal Court: An Introduction". Archived from the original on 3 March 2013. Retrieved 25 November 2012. The official languages of the ICC are Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish and the working languages are currently English and French
  2. ^ International Criminal Court is sometimes abbreviated as ICCt to distinguish it from several other organisations abbreviated as ICC. However, the more common abbreviation ICC is used in this article.
  3. ^ a b United Nations Department of Public Information, December 2002. The International Criminal Court Archived 5 December 2006 at the Wayback Machine Archived 5 December 2006 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 5 December 2006.
  4. ^ a b Dempsey, Gary T. (16 July 1998). "Reasonable Doubt: The Case Against the Proposed International Criminal Court" Archived 28 December 2006 at the Wayback Machine. Cato Institute. Retrieved 31 December 2006.
  5. ^ "Benjamin B Ferencz, Biography". 9 January 2008. Archived from the original on 9 January 2008. Retrieved 1 March 2011.
  6. ^ International Criminal Court (20 June 2006). ""Election of Mr Arthur N.R. Robinson to the Board of Directors of the Victims Trust Fund"". Archived from the original on 27 September 2007. Retrieved 11 April 2017.CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown (link). Retrieved 3 May 2007.
  7. ^ "History of the ICC" Archived 7 March 2007 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 4 June 2012.
  8. ^ Coalition for the International Criminal Court. "History of the ICC" Archived 7 March 2007 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 31 December 2006.
  9. ^ "Draft Statute for an International Criminal Court, 1994" Archived 19 October 2013 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 4 June 2012.
  10. ^ Scharf, Michael P. (August 1998). "Results of the Rome Conference for an International Criminal Court" Archived 15 May 2012 at the Wayback Machine. American Society of International Law. Retrieved 4 December 2006.
  11. ^ [1] Archived 30 June 2018 at the Wayback Machine: "Israel has reluctantly cast a negative vote. It fails to comprehend why it has been considered necessary to insert into the list of the most heinous and grievous war crimes the action of transferring population into occupied territory. The exigencies of lack of time and intense political and public pressure have obliged the Conference to by-pass very basic sovereign prerogatives to which we are entitled in drafting international conventions, in favour of finishing the work and achieving a Statute on a come-what-may basis. We continue to hope that the Court will indeed serve the lofty objectives for the attainment of which it is being established."
  12. ^ Amnesty International (11 April 2002). "The International Criminal Court – A Historic Development in the Fight for Justice" Archived 24 December 2014 at the Wayback Machine Archived 24 December 2014 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 20 March 2008.
  13. ^ Coalition for the International Criminal Court. "Judges and the Presidency". Archived from the original on 9 December 2012. Retrieved 9 December 2012.
  14. ^ International Criminal Court (14 October 2005). "Warrant of Arrest Unsealed Against Five LRA Commanders" Archived 6 October 2014 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 30 September 2014.
  15. ^ International Criminal Court (9 November 2006). ""Prosecutor Presents Evidence That Could Lead to First ICC Trial"". Archived from the original on 9 July 2007. Retrieved 5 December 2006.CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown (link). Retrieved 5 December 2006.
  16. ^ "ICC finds Congo warlord Thomas Lubanga guilty". BBC News. 14 March 2012. Archived from the original on 15 October 2014. Retrieved 29 September 2014.
  17. ^ M.Landler, Bolton Expands on His Boss’s Views, Except on North Korea Archived 11 September 2018 at the Wayback Machine, New York Times, 10 Sept. 2018.
  18. ^ a b Sieff, Kevin (26 October 2016). "Gambia is the latest African country deciding to pull out of International Criminal Court". Washington Post. Archived from the original on 27 October 2016. Retrieved 26 October 2016.
  19. ^ Moore, Jina (27 October 2017). "Burundi Quits International Criminal Court". New York Times. Archived from the original on 9 November 2017. Retrieved 20 March 2018.
  20. ^ Onishi, Norimitsu (8 March 2017). "South Africa Reverses Withdrawal From International Criminal Court Archived 28 October 2017 at the Wayback Machine". New York Times. nytimes.com. Retrieved 27 October 2017.
  21. ^ "South African court blocks government's International Criminal Court withdrawal bid". The Independent. 22 February 2017. Archived from the original on 8 March 2017. Retrieved 7 March 2017.
  22. ^ "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 8 June 2018. Retrieved 10 May 2018.CS1 maint: Archived copy as title (link)
  23. ^ https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2019/03/17/1901757/philippines-becomes-second-country-quit-icc
  24. ^ a b International Criminal Court. "Assembly of States Parties". Archived from the original on 18 January 2008. Retrieved 3 January 2008.CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown (link). Retrieved 2 January 2008.
  25. ^ a b c International Criminal Court. Structure of the Court Archived 25 May 2012 at Archive.today Archived 25 May 2012 at Archive.today, ICC website. Retrieved 16 June 2012
  26. ^ a b c The sum of (a) states parties, (b) signatories and (c) non-signatory United Nations member states is 195. This number is two more than the number of United Nations member states (193) due to the State of Palestine and Cook Islands being states parties but not United Nations member states.
  27. ^ a b c d United Nations Treaty Database entry regarding the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Retrieved 10 March 2010.
  28. ^ "Reference: C.N.805.2016.TREATIES-XVIII.10 (Depositary Notification)" (PDF). United Nations. 2016-10-28. Retrieved 2016-10-28.
  29. ^ The 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Article 18. Accessed 23 November 2006.
  30. ^ Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Status of Treaties.. Retrieved 02 December 2016.
  31. ^ John R Bolton, 6 May 2002. International Criminal Court: Letter to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan. US Department of State. Accessed 2006-11-23.
  32. ^ China's Attitude Towards the ICC”, Lu Jianping and Wang Zhixiang, Journal of International Criminal Justice, 2005-07-06.
  33. ^ India and the ICC, Usha Ramanathan, Journal of International Criminal Law, 2005.
  34. ^ Ukraine accepts ICC jurisdiction over alleged crimes committed since 20 February 2014. ICC press release. 8 September 2015. Retrieved 11 September 2015.
  35. ^ a b c d e Article 112 of the Rome Statute Archived 19 October 2013 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 18 October 2013.
  36. ^ Amnesty International, 11 November 2007. Assembly of States Parties of the International Criminal Court Archived 11 August 2014 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 2 January 2008.
  37. ^ a b c d Article 46 of the Rome Statute Archived 19 October 2013 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 18 October 2013.
  38. ^ a b Coalition for the International Criminal Court. Assembly of States Parties Archived 12 December 2007 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 2 January 2008.
  39. ^ "Uganda to host Rome Statute Review Conference " The Hague Justice Portal". Archived from the original on 18 January 2012. Retrieved 5 May 2016.
  40. ^ The Presidency Archived 21 July 2014 at the Wayback Machine.
  41. ^ Article 38 of the Rome Statute Archived 19 October 2013 at the Wayback Machine. Accessed 18 October 2013.
  42. ^ "New ICC Presidency elected for 2018–2021". Archived from the original on 13 March 2018. Retrieved 16 March 2018.
  43. ^ Peter Cluskey (6 April 2015). "International Criminal Court elects first woman president". Irishtimes.com. Archived from the original on 14 August 2016. Retrieved 12 April 2015.
  44. ^ a b c International Criminal Court. "Chambers". Archived from the original on 18 July 2007. Retrieved 21 June 2007.CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown (link). Retrieved 21 July 2007.
  45. ^ a b Article 36 of the Rome Statute Archived 19 October 2013 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 18 October 2013.
  46. ^ a b Article 41 of the Rome Statute Archived 19 October 2013 at the Wayback Machine. Accessed 18 October 2013.
  47. ^ a b c d International Criminal Court. "Office of the Prosecutor". Archived from the original on 19 January 2008. Retrieved 21 June 2007.CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown (link). Retrieved 21 July 2007.
  48. ^ a b c Article 42 of the Rome Statute Archived 19 October 2013 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 18 October 2013.
  49. ^ a b US Department of State, 30 July 2003. "Frequently Asked Questions About the U.S. Government's Policy Regarding the International Criminal Court (ICC)". Archived from the original on 9 January 2008. Retrieved 1 January 2007.CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown (link). Retrieved 31 December 2006.
  50. ^ LeBor, Adam (September 2011). Brûlé, Tyler, ed. "Don't Judge". Monocle. Midori House, London: Winkontent Ltd. 05 (46): 48–49. ISSN 1753-2434. cases are not the same, says Moreno-Ocampo. Arresting a head of state is more than a police matter. "You cannot say al-Bashir is in London, arrest him. You need a political agreement and a broad set of actors."
  51. ^ Henry A. Kissinger. "The Pitfalls of Universal Jurisdiction". Foreign Affairs, July/August 2001, p. 95. Retrieved 31 December 2006.
  52. ^ The Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute opens its tenth session. ICC. 14 December 2011. Retrieved 14 December 2011.
  53. ^ "Office of the Prosecutor". Icc-cpi.int. Archived from the original on 11 October 2016. Retrieved 11 October 2016.
  54. ^ S, Barrie (29 September 2016). "Is the ICC Reconsidering its Policy on the "Interests of Justice"?". Justice in Conflict. Archived from the original on 11 October 2016. Retrieved 11 October 2016.
  55. ^ "Policy Paper on the Interest of Justice". Icc-cpi.int. Archived from the original on 11 October 2016. Retrieved 11 October 2016.
  56. ^ "Policy Paper on Victims' Participation". Icc-cpi.int. Archived from the original on 11 October 2016. Retrieved 11 October 2016.
  57. ^ "Policy Paper on Preliminary Examinations". Icc-cpi.int. Archived from the original on 11 October 2016. Retrieved 11 October 2016.
  58. ^ "Policy Paper on Sexual and Gender-Based Crimes". Icc-cpi.int. Archived from the original on 11 October 2016. Retrieved 11 October 2016.
  59. ^ "Policy paper on case selection and prioritisation". Icc-cpi.int. Archived from the original on 11 October 2016. Retrieved 11 October 2016.
  60. ^ Vidal, John; Bowcott, Owen (15 September 2016). "ICC widens remit to include environmental destruction cases". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 20 September 2016. Retrieved 20 September 2016.
  61. ^ "Policy Paper on Case Selection and Prioritisation" (PDF). Icc-cpi.int. Archived (PDF) from the original on 23 September 2016. Retrieved 20 September 2016.
  62. ^ "International court to prosecute environmental crimes in major shift". Reuters.com. 15 September 2016. Archived from the original on 12 October 2016. Retrieved 12 October 2016.
  63. ^ Vidal, John; Bowcott, Owen (15 September 2016). "ICC widens remit to include environmental destruction cases". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 12 October 2016. Retrieved 12 October 2016.
  64. ^ "Is environmental destruction a crime against humanity? The ICC may be about to find out". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on 12 October 2016. Retrieved 12 October 2016.
  65. ^ "CEOs can now be tried in The Hague like war criminals". The Independent. 19 September 2016. Archived from the original on 12 October 2016. Retrieved 12 October 2016.
  66. ^ a b International Criminal Court. The Registry. Retrieved 21 July 2007.
  67. ^ "The registrar". International Criminal Court. Archived from the original on 1 November 2013. Retrieved 17 August 2013.
  68. ^ Rome Statute, Article 5.
  69. ^ Rome Statute, Article 6.
  70. ^ Rome Statute, Articles 6(a)–6(e).
  71. ^ Rome Statute, Article 7.
  72. ^ a b c d e f "Elements of Crimes" (PDF). ICC. 2011. Archived (PDF) from the original on 23 September 2014. Retrieved 28 September 2014.
  73. ^ Rome Statute, Article 8(2)(c).
  74. ^ Rome Statute, Article 8.
  75. ^ Article 5 of the Rome Statute Archived 19 October 2013 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 20 March 2008.
  76. ^ Rome Statute, Article 8 bis(1).
  77. ^ Rome Statute, Article 8 bis(2).
  78. ^ Rome Statute, Articles 8 bis(2)(a)–8 bis(2)(g).
  79. ^ Rome Statute, Article 70.
  80. ^ a b Rome Statute, Article 12.
  81. ^ a b Rome Statute, Article 13(b).
  82. ^ Rome Statute, Article 29.
  83. ^ Rome Statute, Article 11(1).
  84. ^ Rome Statute, Article 11(2).
  85. ^ Rome Statute, Article 53(1).
  86. ^ a b Rome Statute, Articles 17(a)–17(c).
  87. ^ Tsilonis, Victor. "The awakening hypothesis of the complementarity principle" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 12 August 2017. Retrieved 11 August 2017.
  88. ^ Rome Statute, Articles 17(d).
  89. ^ Rome Statute, Article 53(1)(c).
  90. ^ Rome Statute, Article 53(2)(c).
  91. ^ Schabas, William A. (2011). An Introduction to the International Criminal Court. Cambridge University Press. p. 302. ISBN 978-0-521-15195-5. Archived from the original on 29 April 2016. Retrieved 23 October 2015.
  92. ^ Schabas 2011, p. 322.
  93. ^ Schabas 2011, pp. 303–304.
  94. ^ Schabas 2011, p. 304.
  95. ^ Schabas 2011, p. 312.
  96. ^ Schabas 2011, p. 316.
  97. ^ Article 66 of the [Rome Statute]. Retrieved 18 October 2013.
  98. ^ 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 Archived 7 July 2014 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 20 March 2008.
  99. ^ Katy Glassborow (21 August 2006). ""Defending the Defenders"". Archived from the original on 9 May 2007. Retrieved 3 May 2007.CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown (link). Global Policy Forum. Retrieved 3 May 2007.
  100. ^ International Criminal Court. ""Rights of the Defence"". Archived from the original on 22 April 2007. Retrieved 3 May 2007.CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown (link). Retrieved 3 May 2007.
  101. ^ International Criminal Court, 2005. Report of the International Criminal Court for 2004 Archived 27 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 3 May 2007.
  102. ^ a b Stephanie Hanson (17 November 2006). Africa and the International Criminal Court Archived 26 February 2008 at the Wayback Machine Archived 26 February 2008 at the Wayback Machine. Council on Foreign Relations. Retrieved 23 November 2006.
  103. ^ International Criminal Court. "Victims and witnesses". Archived from the original on 2 July 2007. Retrieved 29 June 2006.CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown (link). Accessed 22 June 2007.
  104. ^ Ilaria Bottigliero (April 2003). "The International Criminal Court – Hope for the Victims" Archived 28 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine. 32 SGI Quarterly. pp. 13–15. Accessed 24 July 2007.
  105. ^ Moffett, Luke. "Realising Justice for Victims before the International Criminal Court" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 27 September 2015.
  106. ^ Article 43(6) of the Rome Statute Archived 19 October 2013 at the Wayback Machine. Accessed 18 October 2013.
  107. ^ Article 68 of the Rome Statute Archived 19 October 2013 at the Wayback Machine. Accessed 18 October 2013.
  108. ^ International Criminal Court, 17 October 2006. Report on the activities of the Court at the Internet Archive PDF (151 KB). Accessed 18 June 2007.
  109. ^ "US Department of State Cable, 10NAIROBI11, Kenya: Inadequate Witness Protection Poses Painful Dilemma". Wikileaks.ch. Retrieved 5 March 2011.
  110. ^ Moffett, Luke (27 June 2014). Justice for Victims Before the International Criminal Court. Routledge. ISBN 9781317910824. Archived from the original on 29 April 2016. Retrieved 26 September 2015.
  111. ^ "Decision establishing the principles and procedures to be applied to reparations" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 7 December 2013.
  112. ^ International Criminal Court. "Trust Fund for Victims". Archived from the original on 19 January 2008. Retrieved 29 June 2006.CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown (link). Accessed 22 June 2007.
  113. ^ "Article 34" (PDF). Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. United Nations. 1969. Archived (PDF) from the original on 17 October 2013. Retrieved 30 October 2011.
  114. ^ Article 87 (5)(a) of the Rome Statute. Retrieved 30 October 2008.
  115. ^ a b c d Zhu, Wenqi (2006). "On Co-Operation by States Not Party to the International Criminal Court" (PDF). International Review of the Red Cross. International Committee of the Red Cross (861): 87–110. Archived (PDF) from the original on 22 November 2008. Retrieved 30 October 2008.
  116. ^ Article 25 of the UN Charter Archived 20 February 2009 at the Wayback Machine Archived 20 February 2009 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 30 October 2008.
  117. ^ Article 89 of Additional Protocol I Archived 10 December 2008 at the Wayback Machine from 1977. Accessed on 30 October 2008.
  118. ^ Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. the United States of America), Merits, Judgment, ICJ Reports 1986, p. 114, para. 220.
  119. ^ Article 99 of the Rome Statute. Retrieved 30 October 2008.
  120. ^ Article 87(5) of the Rome Statute. Accessed on 30 October 2008.
  121. ^ a b Anthony Dworkin (December 2003). "Introduction" Archived 16 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine in The International Criminal Court: An End to Impunity? Crimes of War Project. Accessed 18 September 2007.
  122. ^ a b Article 16 of the Rome Statute Archived 19 October 2013 at the Wayback Machine. Accessed 20 March 2008.
  123. ^ Article 53 of the Rome Statute Archived 19 October 2013 at the Wayback Machine. Accessed 20 March 2008.
  124. ^ Tim Cocks (30 May 2007). ""Uganda Urges Traditional Justice for Rebel Crimes"". Archived from the original on 21 February 2008. Retrieved 31 May 2007.CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown (link). Reuters. Accessed 31 May 2007.
  125. ^ Alasdair Palmer (14 January 2007). "When Victims Want Peace, Not Justice" Archived 19 February 2008 at the Wayback Machine. The Sunday Telegraph. Accessed 15 January 2007.
  126. ^ Alena Skodova (12 April 2002). "Czech Parliament Against Ratifying International Criminal Court" Archived 20 February 2008 at the Wayback Machine. Radio Prague. Accessed 11 January 2007.
  127. ^ See, for example, Kofi Annan (4 October 2000). Report of the Secretary-General on the Establishment of a Special Court for Sierra Leone Archived 25 May 2006 at the Wayback Machine, para. 22. Accessed 31 December 2006.
  128. ^ Jean-Marie Henckaerts & Louise Doswald-Beck, 2005. Customary International Humanitarian Law, Volume I: Rules, pp. 613–614. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-80899-6.
  129. ^ Article 3 of the Rome Statute Archived 19 October 2013 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 18 October 2013.
  130. ^ The legal relationship between the ICC and the Netherlands is governed by a headquarters agreement, which entered into force on 1 March 2008. (See International Criminal Court, 2008: Headquarter Agreement between the International Criminal Court and the Host State at the Internet Archive PDF (2.23 MB). Retrieved 1 June 2008.)
  131. ^ "ICC Permanent Premises". Archived from the original on 23 February 2016. Retrieved 22 February 2016.
  132. ^ "The Hague – International Zone". Archived from the original on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 5 May 2016.
  133. ^ "ICC – Permanent Premises". International Criminal Court. Retrieved 19 February 2012.
  134. ^ "ICC has signed contract with Danish architect schmidt hammer lassen for the development of permanent premises". Icc-cpi.int. Retrieved 16 March 2019.
  135. ^ "ICC – Timeline". Archived from the original on 16 March 2016. Retrieved 5 May 2016.
  136. ^ "ICC Permanent Premises". Archived from the original on 23 January 2015. Retrieved 5 May 2016.
  137. ^ "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 6 March 2016. Retrieved 22 March 2016.CS1 maint: Archived copy as title (link)
  138. ^ Zaken, Ministerie van Buitenlandse (28 September 2016). "PR UN, New York - Permanent Representations - The Netherlands at International Organisations". Permanentrepresentations.nl. Retrieved 16 March 2019.
  139. ^ a b Emma Thomasson, 28 February 2006. ICC says cells ready for Uganda war crimes suspects Archived 28 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine Archived 28 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine. Reuters. Retrieved 18 June 2007.
  140. ^ International Criminal Court, 18 October 2005. "Report on the future permanent premises of the International Criminal Court: Project Presentation" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 16 June 2011. Retrieved 30 December 2009. (537 KB), p. 23. Retrieved 18 June 2007.
  141. ^ International Criminal Court, January 2007. "Socorro Flores Liera Head of the Liaison Office to the UN". Archived from the original on 10 October 2007. Retrieved 11 June 2008.CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown (link). Retrieved 10 June 2008.
  142. ^ a b International Criminal Court, 18 October 2007. "The Registrar Inaugurates the ICC Field Office in Bangui". Archived from the original on 29 October 2007. Retrieved 11 June 2008.CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown (link). Accessed 10 June 2008.
  143. ^ a b "Resolution ICC-ASP/6/Res.4" (PDF). Part III – Resolutions and recommendations adopted by the Assembly of States Parties. International Criminal Court. 14 December 2007. Archived from the original (PDF, 323 KB) on 9 April 2008. Retrieved 30 October 2011. Programme budget for 2008, the Working Capital Fund for 2008, scale of assessments for the apportionment of expenses of the International Criminal Court and financing appropriations for the year 2008
  144. ^ "Report on programme performance of the International Criminal Court for the year 2007" (PDF). Assembly of States Parties, Seventh Session. International Criminal Court. 26 May 2008. Archived from the original (PDF, 309 KB) on 25 June 2008. Retrieved 30 October 2011.
  145. ^ Programme budget for 2009, the Contingency Fund, the Working Capital Fund for 2009, scale of assessments for the apportionment of expenses of the International Criminal Court and financing appropriations for the year 2009:
    Assembly of States Parties (21 November 2008). "Resolution ICC-ASP/7/Res.1" (PDF). Part III – Resolutions adopted by the Assembly of States Parties. International Criminal Court. Archived from the original (PDF) on 30 October 2011. Retrieved 30 October 2011.
  146. ^ a b "The Court Today" (PDF). International Criminal Court. 25 April 2017. Archived (PDF) from the original on 24 June 2017. Retrieved 11 August 2017.
  147. ^ "The world's enduring dictators Archived 9 June 2013 at the Wayback Machine". CBS News. 16 May 2011.
  148. ^ "Situations under investigation". ICC. Retrieved 2016-10-01.
  149. ^ "Preliminary examinations". ICC. Retrieved 2016-10-01.
  150. ^ "Statement of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Fatou Bensouda, concerning referral from the Gabonese Republic". ICC. 2016-09-29. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  151. ^ Kevin Sieff (21 March 2016). "In historic ruling, international court cites rape in war crimes conviction of ex-Congo official". Washington Post.
  152. ^ "Situations under investigation". ICC. Retrieved 2016-10-01.
  153. ^ "Preliminary examinations". ICC. Retrieved 2016-10-01.
  154. ^ "Statement of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Fatou Bensouda, concerning referral from the Gabonese Republic". ICC. 2016-09-29. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  155. ^ a b c d e f g h i j "Report on Preliminary Examination Activities (2018)" (PDF). ICC. 2018-12-05. Retrieved 2018-12-13.
  156. ^ "Communications Received by the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICC" (PDF). ICC. 2003-07-16. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  157. ^ "ICC - Prosecutor receives referral of the situation in the Democratic Republic of Congo". ICC. 2004-04-19. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  158. ^ "ICC - The Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court opens its first investigation". ICC. 2004-06-23. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  159. ^ "The Statement of the International Criminal Court, Luis Moreno-Ocampo in relation to Cote D'Ivoire". ICC. 2011-06-22. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  160. ^ "ICC-02/11: Situation in the Republic of Côte d'Ivoire Decision Pursuant to Article 15 of the Rome Statute on the Authorisation of an Investigation into the Situation in the Republic of Côte d'Ivoire" (PDF). ICC. 2011-10-03. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  161. ^ "ICC - ICC Holds Seminar with Ugandan Judicial Authorities". ICC. 2005-10-26. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  162. ^ "ICC - Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court opens an investigation into Nothern [sic] Uganda". ICC. 2004-07-29. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  163. ^ "ICC - Prosecutor receives referral concerning Central African Republic". ICC. 2007-01-07. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  164. ^ "Prosecutor opens investigation in the Central African Republic". ICC. 2007-05-22. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  165. ^ "ICC - Security Council refers situation in Darfur to ICC Prosecutor". ICC. 2005-04-01. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  166. ^ "The Prosecutor of the ICC opens investigation in Darfur". ICC. 2007-06-06. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  167. ^ "Preliminary examination: Iraq/UK". ICC. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  168. ^ "Preliminary examination: Venezuela". ICC. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  169. ^ "Preliminary examination: Afghanistan". ICC. Retrieved 2016-11-21.
  170. ^ "OTP statement in relation to events in Kenya" (PDF). ICC. 2008-02-05. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  171. ^ "ICC judges grant the Prosecutor's request to launch an investigation on crimes against humanity with regard to the situation in Kenya". ICC. 2010-03-31. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  172. ^ "ICC Prosecutor confirms situation in Georgia under analysis". ICC. 2008-08-20. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  173. ^ "ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I authorises the Prosecutor to open an investigation into the situation in Georgia". ICC. 2016-01-27. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  174. ^ "Update on Situation in Palestine" (PDF). ICC. 2012-04-03. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  175. ^ "Statement of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Fatou Bensouda, on the conclusion of the preliminary examination into the situation in Honduras". ICC. 2015-10-28. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  176. ^ "Statement of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Fatou Bensouda, on the conclusion of the preliminary examination of the situation in the Republic of Korea". ICC. 2014-06-23. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  177. ^ "In Swift, Decisive Action, Security Council Imposes Tough Measures on Libyan Regime, Adopting Resolution 1970 in Wake of Crackdown on Protesters". United Nations. 2011-02-26. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  178. ^ "Statement by the Office of the Prosecutor on situation in Libya". ICC. 2011-02-28. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  179. ^ "Statement of the Prosecutor on the opening of the investigation into the situation in Libya" (PDF). ICC. 2011-03-03. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  180. ^ "ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda on the Malian State referral of the situation in Mali since January 2012". ICC. 2012-07-18. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  181. ^ "ICC Prosecutor opens investigation into war crimes in Mali: 'The legal requirements have been met. We will investigate'". ICC. 2013-01-16. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  182. ^ "Statement of ICC Prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, on the Situation on registered vessels of the Union of the Comoros et al". ICC. 2017-11-30. Retrieved 2017-12-01.
  183. ^ a b "Preliminary examination: Registered Vessels of Comoros, Greece and Cambodia". ICC. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  184. ^ "Statement of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Fatou Bensouda, on opening a second investigation in the Central African Republic". ICC. 2014-09-24. Retrieved 2016-09-30.
  185. ^ "Situation: Republic of Burundi". ICC. Retrieved 2017-11-15.
  186. ^ "Situation in the Gabonese Republic: Article 5 Report" (PDF). ICC. 2018-09-21. Retrieved 2018-09-22.
  187. ^ ICC case information sheet on the Lubanga case. Retrieved 1 October 2017.
  188. ^ ICC Judges decline to reduce Mr Thomas Lubanga Dyilo’s sentence. ICC press release. 22 September 2015. Retrieved 27 September 2015.
  189. ^ ICC case information sheet on the Ntaganda case. Retrieved 1 October 2017.
  190. ^ ICC case information sheet on the Katanga case. Retrieved 1 October 2017.
  191. ^ DR Congo to prosecute militia leader Katanga, convicted by ICC. Yahoo News. 18 January 2016. Retrieved 28 January 2016.
  192. ^ ICC Presidency approves the prosecution of Mr Germain Katanga by national authorities of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. ICC press release. 7 April 2016. Retrieved 10 April 2016.
  193. ^ ICC case information sheet on the Chui case. Retrieved 1 October 2017.
  194. ^ ICC case information sheet on the Mbarushimana case. Retrieved 1 October 2017.
  195. ^ Mbarushimana case: ICC Appeals Chamber rejects the Prosecution’s appeal. ICC. Retrieved 30 May 2012.
  196. ^ ICC case information sheet on the Mudacumura case.. Retrieved 1 October 2017.
  197. ^ ICC case information sheet on the Kony-Otti case. Retrieved 1 October 2017.
  198. ^ Vincent Otti is confirmed dead. New Vision. 22 November 2007. Retrieved 28 February 2012.
  199. ^ ICC case information sheet on the Ongwen case. Retrieved 23 March 2017.
  200. ^ ICC case information sheet on the Bemba case. Retrieved 23 March 2017.
  201. ^ Article 110 (3) of the Rome Statute of the International Court states that "[w]hen the person has served two thirds of the sentence, or 25 years in the case of life imprisonment, the Court shall review the sentence to determine whether it should be reduced. Such a review shall not be conducted before that time." Article 78 (3) of the Rome Statute specifies that "[i]n imposing a sentence of imprisonment, the Court shall deduct the time, if any, previously spent in detention in accordance with an order of the Court. The Court may deduct any time otherwise spent in detention in connection with conduct underlying the crime." The Court's Trial Chamber III determined in its sentencing decision that the time since 24 May 2008 is to be deducted from the sentence. Thus, Jean-Pierre Bemba is to be released on or before 24 May 2026. Starting from 24 May 2008, two-thirds of 18 years (twelve years) will elapse on 24 May 2020.
  202. ^ ICC case information sheet on the Bemba et al. case. Retrieved 23 March 2017.
  203. ^ Bemba et al. case: Trial Chamber VII issues sentences for five convicted persons. ICC press release. 22 March 2017. Retrieved 23 March 2017.
  204. ^ ICC case information sheet on the Haroun-Kushayb case. Retrieved 4 August 2011.
  205. ^ ICC case information sheet on the al-Bashir case. Retrieved 4 August 2011.
  206. ^ ICC case information sheet on the Abu Garda case. Retrieved 4 August 2011.
  207. ^ ICC case information sheet on the Banda case. Last updated 11 September 2014. Retrieved 25 September 2014.
  208. ^ ICC case information sheet on the Hussein case. Retrieved 1 March 2012.
  209. ^ ICC case information sheet on the Ruto-Sang case. Retrieved 30 April 2012.
  210. ^ Ruto and Sang case: ICC Trial Chamber V(A) terminates the case without prejudice to re-prosecution in future. ICC press release. 5 April 2016. Retrieved 10 April 2016.
  211. ^ ICC case information sheet on the Kenyatta case. Last updated 15 December 2014. Retrieved 3 January 2015.
  212. ^ The Prosecutor v. Walter Osapiri Barasa. ICC information page. Retrieved 5 May 2016.
  213. ^ The Prosecutor v. Paul Gicheru and Philip Kipkoech Bett. ICC information page. Retrieved 5 May 2016.
  214. ^ ICC case information sheet on the Gaddafi case. Retrieved 28 June 2015.
  215. ^ ICC case information sheet on the Al-Tuhamy case. Retrieved 3 May 2017.
  216. ^ The Office of the Prosecutor (2019-05-09). "Fifteenth report of the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court to the United Nations Security Council pursuant to UNSCR 1970 (2011)" (PDF). International Criminal Court. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2019-04-09. Retrieved 2019-04-09.
  217. ^ ICC case information sheet on the L. Gbagbo-Blé Goude case. Retrieved 16 January 2016.
  218. ^ Statement of ICC-Prosecutor at the Commencement of Trial in the case against Messrs. Laurent Gbagbo and Charles Blé Goudé. Office of the Prosecutor press release. 28 January 2016. Retrieved 28 January 2016.
  219. ^ ICC case information sheet on the Simone Gbagbo case. Retrieved 8 December 2012.
  220. ^ Ivory Coast jails ex-first lady for 20 years over poll violence, Reuters (March 10, 2015).
  221. ^ Simone Gbagbo goes on trial accused of crimes against humanity, Agence France-Presse (May 31, 2016).
  222. ^ ICC case information sheet on the al-Faqi case. Retrieved 9 October 2016.
  223. ^ Article 110 (3) of the Rome Statute of the International Court states that "[w]hen the person has served two thirds of the sentence, or 25 years in the case of life imprisonment, the Court shall review the sentence to determine whether it should be reduced. Such a review shall not be conducted before that time." Article 78 (3) of the Rome Statute specifies that "[i]n imposing a sentence of imprisonment, the Court shall deduct the time, if any, previously spent in detention in accordance with an order of the Court. The Court may deduct any time otherwise spent in detention in connection with conduct underlying the crime." The Court's Trial Chamber VIII determined in its sentencing decision that the time since 18 September 2015 is to be deducted from the sentence. Thus, Ahmad Al-Mahdi is to be released on or before 18 September 2024. Starting from 18 September 2015, two-thirds of nine years (six years) will elapse on 18 September 2021.
  224. ^ Situation in the Central African Republic II. ICC information page. Retrieved 2 May 2016.
  225. ^ Situation in Georgia. ICC information page. Retrieved 2 May 2016.
  226. ^ Situation in the Republic of Burundi. ICC information page. Retrieved 15 November 2017.
  227. ^ International Criminal Court's investigation into Alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes committed in Afghanistan since 1 May 2003. Internaitional Criminal Court. Retrieved 15 March 2019.
  228. ^ "Abadir M. Ibrahim, The International Criminal Court in Light of Controlling Factors of the Effectiveness of International Human Rights Mechanisms, 7 Eyes on the International Criminal Court (2011)" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 25 April 2012. Retrieved 4 November 2011.
  229. ^ a b International Criminal Court, 1 February 2007. "UN Secretary-General visits ICC". Archived from the original on 11 February 2007. Retrieved 10 February 2007.CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown (link). Accessed 1 February 2007.
  230. ^ International Criminal Court, August 2006. Report of the International Criminal Court for 2005–2006 at the Internet Archive PDF (68.5 KB). Accessed 14 May 2007.
  231. ^ Negotiated Relationship Agreement between the International Criminal Court and the United Nations at the Internet Archive PDF (130 KB). Retrieved 23 November 2006.
  232. ^ Coalition for the International Criminal Court, 12 November 2004. "Q&A: The Relationship Agreement between the ICC and the UN" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 29 June 2006. Retrieved 23 November 2006. (64.8 KB). Accessed 23 November 2006.
  233. ^ a b c d e f g h i j Schiff, Benjamin (2008). Building the International Criminal Court. Cambridge University Press.
  234. ^ a b "About the Coalition". Coalition for the International Criminal Court. Archived from the original on 20 May 2011. Retrieved 28 April 2011.
  235. ^ "ICC and Africa – International Criminal Court and African Sovereignty". Archived from the original on 3 March 2016. Retrieved 5 May 2016.
  236. ^ https://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/30/ozatp-africa-icc-idAFJOE70T01R20110130 Archived 24 September 2015 at the Wayback Machine African Union accuses ICC prosecutor of bias
  237. ^ "The European Union's Africa Policies". Archived from the original on 29 April 2016. Retrieved 5 May 2016.
  238. ^ "Is this the end for the International Criminal Court?". Archived from the original on 27 April 2018. Retrieved 21 June 2018.
  239. ^ Africa and the International Criminal Court: A drag net that catches only small fish?, Nehanda Radio, By William Muchayi, 24 September 2013, http://nehandaradio.com/2013/09/24/africa-and-the-international-criminal-court-a-drag-net-that-catches-only-small-fish/ Archived 28 September 2013 at the Wayback Machine
  240. ^ Europe – From Lubanga to Kony, is the ICC only after Africans? Archived 26 March 2013 at the Wayback Machine. France 24 (15 March 2012). Retrieved on 28 April 2014.
  241. ^ Darleen Seda. "Dissatisfaction with the court". D+C, Development and Cooperation. Archived from the original on 20 December 2016. Retrieved 16 December 2016.
  242. ^ Peter Cluskey (4 October 2013). "Kenya pushing for African split from International Criminal Court". Irishtimes.com. Archived from the original on 28 September 2015. Retrieved 12 April 2015.
  243. ^ Fortin, Jacey (12 October 2013). "African Union Countries Rally Around Kenyan President, But Won't Withdraw From The ICC". International Business Times. Archived from the original on 18 October 2013. Retrieved 12 October 2013.
  244. ^ Africans urge ICC not to try heads of state – Africa Archived 12 October 2013 at the Wayback Machine. Al Jazeera English. Retrieved on 28 April 2014.
  245. ^ ICC rules Kenya VP must attend his trial – Africa Archived 27 October 2013 at the Wayback Machine. Al Jazeera English. Retrieved on 28 April 2014.
  246. ^ Africans push UN to call off 'racist' court – Features Archived 16 November 2013 at the Wayback Machine. Al Jazeera English. Retrieved on 28 April 2014.
  247. ^ "UN rejects trial deferral for Kenyan leaders". Al Jazeera. 16 November 2013. Archived from the original on 22 November 2013. Retrieved 25 January 2014.
  248. ^ "Kenya vows to have ICC statute amended". Archived from the original on 20 April 2016. Retrieved 5 May 2016.
  249. ^ Kaberia, Judie (20 November 2013). "Win for Africa as Kenya agenda enters ICC Assembly". Archived from the original on 23 November 2013. Retrieved 23 November 2013.
  250. ^ Jane Onyanga-Omara (26 October 2016). "Gambia latest African nation to withdraw from International Criminal Court". usatoday.com. Archived from the original on 9 November 2016. Retrieved 26 October 2016.
  251. ^ Ofeibea Quist-Arcton (26 October 2016). "South Africa Withdraws From International Court; Others Follow". npr.org. Archived from the original on 27 October 2016. Retrieved 26 October 2016.
  252. ^ "Gambia rejoins ICC". Dispatches. Human Rights Watch. Archived from the original on 19 July 2017. Retrieved 14 July 2017.
  253. ^ "ICC withdrawal 'unconstitutional and invalid', high court rules". News24. Media24. Archived from the original on 15 July 2017. Retrieved 6 July 2017.
  254. ^ "SA formally revokes ICC withdrawal". Eyewitness News. Primedia. Archived from the original on 12 August 2017. Retrieved 6 July 2017.
  255. ^ "ANC is sticking to its guns on ICC withdrawal". Business Day. TMG. Archived from the original on 4 July 2017. Retrieved 6 July 2017.
  256. ^ Human Rights Watch, "U.S.: 'Hague Invasion Act' Becomes Law Archived 18 January 2015 at the Wayback Machine". 3 August 2002. Accessed 8 January 2007.
  257. ^ John Sutherland, "Who are America's real enemies?". The Guardian, 8 July 2002. Accessed 8 January 2007.
  258. ^ McKelvey, Tara (10 September 2018). "International Criminal Court: US threatens sanctions". Bbc.co.uk. BBC. Archived from the original on 10 September 2018. Retrieved 10 September 2018.
  259. ^ "ICC will continue 'undeterred' after US threats | Law | The Guardian". Archived from the original on 11 September 2018.
  260. ^ Scharf, Michael (4 April 2016). "War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol.Issue 2". Publicinternationallawandpolicygroup.org. Archived from the original on 29 January 2017. Retrieved 16 September 2016.
  261. ^ Nalepa, Monika; Powell, Emilia Justyna (12 February 2015). "The Role of Domestic Opposition and International Justice Regimes in Peaceful Transitions of Power". Journal of Conflict Resolution: 0022002714567946. doi:10.1177/0022002714567946. ISSN 0022-0027.
  262. ^ Alana Tiemessen, The International Criminal Court and the lawfare of judicial intervention, International Relations Vol. 30, No. 4, December 2016.
  263. ^ a b Hillebrecht, Courtney; Straus, Scott (28 March 2016). "Last week, the International Criminal Court convicted a war criminal. And that revealed one of the ICC's weaknesses". The Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Archived from the original on 28 March 2016. Retrieved 28 March 2016.
  264. ^ Schabas, William A. (2008). "'Complementarity in practice': Some uncomplimentary thoughts". Criminal Law Forum. 19: 5–33. doi:10.1007/s10609-007-9054-5.
  265. ^ "Victor Tsilonis, "The Awakening Hypothesis of the Complementarity Principle", in C.D. Spinellis, Nikolaos Theodorakis, Emmanouil Billis, George Papadimitrakopoulos (eds.), Europe in Crisis: Crime, Criminal Justice and the Way Forward, Essays in Honour of Nestor Courakis, Volume II: Essays in English, French, German, and Italian, (Athens: Ant. N. Sakkoulas Publications), (2017), pp. 1257–1303". Archived from the original on 12 August 2017. Retrieved 25 July 2017.
  266. ^ Situation in Georgia, Public Document with Confidential, EX PARTE, Annexes A, B, C, D.2, E.3, E.7, E.9, F, H and Public Annexes 1, D.1, E.1, E.2, E.4, E.5, E.6, E.8, G, I, J, ICC‐01/15‐4 13‐10‐2015 1/160 EO PT, pp. 132‐133, 150‐151, <https://www.icc‐cpi.int/CourtRecords/CR2015_19375.PDF>, 10 April 2017.
  267. ^ Statement of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Ms Fatou Bensouda, regarding the situation in the Kasaï provinces, Democratic Republic of theCongo, 31 March 2017, <https://www.icc‐cpi.int/Pages/item.aspx?name=170331‐otp‐stat>, 10 April 2017.

Further reading

External links

European Union and the International Criminal Court

Due to its status, the European Union (EU) is not party to the International Criminal Court (ICC), but all the EU's member states are signatories and the EU has been one of the ICC's strongest supporters. The EU has given political, financial and technical support to the court, which is also based in its territory (The Hague, the Netherlands).

International Criminal Court investigation in Darfur

The International Criminal Court investigation in Darfur or the situation in Darfur is an ongoing investigation by the International Criminal Court (ICC) into criminal acts committed during the War in Darfur. Although Sudan is not a state party to the Rome Statute, the treaty which created the ICC, the situation in Darfur was referred to the ICC's Prosecutor by the United Nations Security Council in 2005. As of 2012 seven suspects have been indicted by the court: Ahmed Haroun and Ali Kushayb, Omar al-Bashir, Bahar Abu Garda, Abdallah Banda and Saleh Jerbo, and Abdel Rahim Mohammed Hussein.

International Criminal Court investigation in Libya

The International Criminal Court investigation in Libya or the Situation in Libya is an investigation started in March 2011 by the International Criminal Court (ICC) into war crimes and crimes against humanity claimed to have occurred in Libya since 15 February 2011. The initial context of the investigation was the 2011 Libyan Civil War and the time frame of the investigation continued to include the 2019 Western Libya offensive.

International Criminal Court investigation in Mali

The International Criminal Court investigation in Mali or the Situation in the Republic of Mali is an ongoing investigation by the International Criminal Court (ICC) into war crimes and other crimes within the ICC's jurisdiction that are alleged to have occurred during the Northern Mali conflict since January 2012. The investigation was requested by the government of Mali in July 2012. As the first person who pleaded guilty to a charge of the ICC, al-Mahdi made a statement expressing remorse and advising others not to commit similar acts.On 27 September 2016, al-Mahdi was sentenced to nine years in prison for the destruction of cultural world heritage in the Malian city of Timbuktu. At least nine mausoleums and one mosque were destroyed.

International Criminal Court investigation in Uganda

The International Criminal Court investigation in Uganda or the situation in Uganda is an ongoing investigation by the International Criminal Court (ICC) into the Lord's Resistance Army insurgency which has been taking place in northern Uganda and neighbouring regions since 1987. The Lord's Resistance Army is a Christian-based group led by Joseph Kony that is accused of numerous human rights violations including massacres, the abduction of civilians, the use of child soldiers, sexual enslavement, torture, and pillaging. After the government of Uganda referred the matter to the ICC in December 2003, warrants of arrest were issued in 2005 for Joseph Kony, Raska Lukwiya, Okot Odhiambo, Dominic Ongwen, and Vincent Otti, who became the first people to be indicted by the Court. The proceedings against Lukwiya ended in July 2007 following his death on 12 August 2006.

International Criminal Court investigation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

The International Criminal Court investigation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo or the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo is an ongoing investigation by the International Criminal Court (ICC) into crimes committed in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) during the Second Congo War and its aftermath, including the Ituri and Kivu conflicts. The war started in 1998 and despite a peace agreement between combatants in 2003, conflict continued in the eastern parts of the country for several years. In April 2004 the government of the DRC formally referred the situation in the Congo to the International Criminal Court, and in June 2004, prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo, formally opened an investigation. To date, arrest warrants have been issued for:

Thomas Lubanga Dyilo

Germain Katanga

Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui

Bosco Ntaganda

Callixte Mbarushimana

Sylvestre Mudacumura.Lubanga was imprisoned. Katanga was convicted, Chui was acquitted, and the pre-trial chamber declined to confirm the charges against Mbarushimana, currently a fugitive. Ntaganda turned himself in to the US Embassy in Kigali on 18 March 2013, requesting to be extradited to the ICC.

International Criminal Court investigations

So far, the International Criminal Court opened investigations in 11 situations: Burundi; two in the Central African Republic; Côte d'Ivoire; Darfur, Sudan; the Democratic Republic of the Congo; Georgia; Kenya; Libya; Mali; and Uganda. Additionally, the Office of the Prosecutor is conducting preliminary examinations in eleven situations in Afghanistan; Colombia; Gabon; Guinea; Iraq / the United Kingdom; Nigeria; Palestine; the Philippines, registered vessels of Comoros, Greece, and Cambodia; Ukraine and Venezuela.The Court's Pre-Trial Chambers publicly indicted 44 people. The ICC has issued arrest warrants for 36 individuals and summonses to eight others. Six persons are in detention. Proceedings against 22 are ongoing: 15 are at large as fugitives, one is under arrest but not in the Court's custody, two are in the pre-trial phase, and four are at trial. Proceedings against 22 have been completed: two are serving sentences, four have finished their sentences, two have been acquitted, six have had the charges against them dismissed, two have had the charges against them withdrawn, one has had his case declared inadmissible, and four have died before trial.

As of September 2010, the Office of the Prosecutor had received 8,874 communications about alleged crimes. After initial review, 4,002 of these communications were dismissed as "manifestly outside the jurisdiction of the Court".

International criminal law

International criminal law is a body of public international law designed to prohibit certain categories of conduct commonly viewed as serious atrocities and to make perpetrators of such conduct criminally accountable for their perpetration. The core crimes under international law are genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and the crime of aggression. This article also discusses crimes against international law, which may not be part of the body of international criminal law.

"Classical" international law governs the relationships, rights, and responsibilities of states. Criminal law generally deals with prohibitions addressed to individuals, and penal sanctions for violation of those prohibition imposed by individual states. International criminal law comprises elements of both in that although its sources are those of international law, its consequences are penal sanctions imposed on individuals.

Judges of the International Criminal Court

The eighteen judges of the International Criminal Court (ICC) are elected for nine-year terms by the member-countries of the court. Candidates must be nationals of those countries and they must "possess the qualifications required in their respective States for appointment to the highest judicial offices".A judge may be disqualified from "any case in which his or her impartiality might reasonably be doubted on any ground", and a judge may be removed from office if he or she "is found to have committed serious misconduct or a serious breach of his or her duties" or is unable to exercise his or her functions.The judges are organized into three divisions: the Pre-Trial Division, Trial Division, and Appeals Division.

People detained by the International Criminal Court

People detained by the International Criminal Court (ICC) are held in the ICC's detention centre, which is located within a Dutch prison in Scheveningen, The Hague. The ICC was established in 2002 as a permanent tribunal to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. As of June 2018, it has issued public arrest warrants for 42 individuals, six of whom are currently in custody of the court.

The ICC detention centre is for holding people who have been charged with crimes, not for imprisoning convicted criminals. As such, all detainees are considered innocent until their guilt has been proven. Upon conviction by the ICC, criminals are transferred outside the Netherlands to serve their sentences.

Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court

The Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court is the officer of the International Criminal Court whose duties include the investigation and prosecution of the crimes under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court, namely genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes as well as the crime of aggression once that crime comes under the Court's jurisdiction which will not be the case before 2017.The current Prosecutor is Fatou Bensouda, who was elected by the 10th session of the Assembly of States Parties and took office on 15 June 2012. Her predecessor was Luis Moreno Ocampo who served since 16 June 2003.

Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (often referred to as the International Criminal Court Statute or the Rome Statute) is the treaty that established the International Criminal Court (ICC). It was adopted at a diplomatic conference in Rome on 17 July 1998 and it entered into force on 1 July 2002. As of March 2019, 124 states are party to the statute. Among other things, the statute establishes the court's functions, jurisdiction and structure.

The Rome Statute established four core international crimes: genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. Those crimes "shall not be subject to any statute of limitations". Under the Rome Statute, the ICC can only investigate and prosecute the four core international crimes in situations where states are "unable" or "unwilling" to do so themselves; the jurisdiction of the court is complementary to jurisdictions of domestic courts. The court has jurisdiction over crimes only if they are committed in the territory of a state party or if they are committed by a national of a state party; an exception to this rule is that the ICC may also have jurisdiction over crimes if its jurisdiction is authorized by the United Nations Security Council.

States parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court

The states parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court are those sovereign states that have ratified, or have otherwise become party to, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The Rome Statute is the treaty that established the International Criminal Court, an international court that has jurisdiction over certain international crimes, including genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes that are committed by nationals of states parties or within the territory of states parties. States parties are legally obligated to co-operate with the Court when it requires, such as in arresting and transferring indicted persons or providing access to evidence and witnesses. States parties are entitled to participate and vote in proceedings of the Assembly of States Parties, which is the Court's governing body. Such proceedings include the election of such officials as judges and the Prosecutor, the approval of the Court's budget, and the adoption of amendments to the Rome Statute.

Thomas Lubanga Dyilo

Thomas Lubanga Dyilo (born 29 December 1960) is a convicted war criminal from the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and the first person ever convicted by the International Criminal Court (ICC). He founded and led the Union of Congolese Patriots (UPC) and was a key player in the Ituri conflict (1999–2007). Rebels under his command have been accused of massive human rights violations, including ethnic massacres, murder, torture, rape, mutilation, and forcibly conscripting child soldiers.On 17 March 2006, Lubanga became the first person arrested under a warrant issued by the ICC. His trial, for the war crime of "conscripting and enlisting children under the age of fifteen years and using them to participate actively in hostilities", began on 26 January 2009, and he was found guilty on 14 March 2012, and faced a sentence of up to 30 years. On 10 July 2012, Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court (ICC) sentenced Lubanga to a total period of 14 years of imprisonment, also ordering that the time from Lubanga's surrender to the ICC in 2006 until the sentencing day should be deducted from the 14-year term, which means he will spend 6 fewer years in prison.

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1422

United Nations Security Council resolution 1422, adopted unanimously on 12 July 2002, after noting the recent entry into force of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, the Council granted immunity from prosecution by the International Criminal Court (ICC) to United Nations peacekeeping personnel from countries that were not party to the ICC.The resolution was passed at the insistence of the United States, which threatened to veto the renewal of all United Nations peacekeeping missions (including the renewal of the United Nations Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina passed the same day) unless its citizens were shielded from prosecution by the ICC. Resolution 1422 came into effect on 1 July 2002 for a period of one year. It was renewed for twelve months by Resolution 1487, passed on 12 June 2003. However, the Security Council refused to renew the exemption again in 2004 after pictures emerged of U.S. troops abusing Iraqi prisoners in Abu Ghraib, and the U.S. withdrew its demand.

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1487

United Nations Security Council resolution 1487, adopted on 12 June 2003, after noting the recent entry into force of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, the Council granted a one-year extension for immunity from prosecution by the International Criminal Court (ICC) to United Nations peacekeeping personnel from countries that were not party to the ICC, beginning on 1 July 2003.The resolution was passed at the insistence of the United States and came into effect on 1 July 2003 for a period of one year. France, Germany and Syria abstained from voting, arguing there was no justification to renew the measures. The Security Council refused to renew the exemption again in 2004 after pictures emerged of U.S. troops abusing Iraqi prisoners in Abu Ghraib, and the U.S. withdrew its demand.

United States and the International Criminal Court

The United States is not a State Party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Rome Statute), which founded the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 2002 as a permanent international criminal court to "bring to justice the perpetrators of the worst crimes known to humankind – war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide", when national courts are unable or unwilling to do so.As of January 2019, 123 states are members of the Court. Other states that have not become parties to the Rome Statute include India, Indonesia, and China. On May 6th, 2002, the United States, in a position shared with Israel and Sudan, having previously signed the Rome Statute formally withdrew its signature and indicated that it did not intend to ratify the agreement.United States policy concerning the ICC has varied widely. The Clinton Administration signed the Rome Statute in 2000, but did not submit it for Senate ratification. The George W. Bush Administration, the U.S. administration at the time of the ICC's founding, stated that it would not join the ICC. The Obama Administration subsequently re-established a working relationship with the Court as an observer.

War crime

A war crime is an act that constitutes a serious violation of the laws of war that gives rise to individual criminal responsibility. Examples of war crimes include intentionally killing civilians or prisoners, torturing, destroying civilian property, taking hostages, performing a perfidy, raping, using child soldiers, pillaging, declaring that no quarter will be given, and seriously violating the principles of distinction and proportionality, such as strategic bombing of civilian populations.The concept of war crimes emerged at the turn of the twentieth century when the body of customary international law applicable to warfare between sovereign states was codified. Such codification occurred at the national level, such as with the publication of the Lieber Code in the United States, and at the international level with the adoption of the treaties during the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907. Moreover, trials in national courts during this period further helped clarify the law. Following the end of World War II, major developments in the law occurred. Numerous trials of Axis war criminals established the Nuremberg principles, such as notion that war crimes constituted crimes defined by international law. Additionally, the Geneva Conventions in 1949 defined new war crimes and established that states could exercise universal jurisdiction over such crimes. In the late 20th century and early 21st century, following the creation of several international courts, additional categories of war crimes applicable to armed conflicts other than those between states, such as civil wars, were defined.

William Ruto

William Kipchirchir Samoei Arap Ruto (born 21 December 1966) is a Kenyan politician who has been Deputy President of Kenya since 2013. He served as the Acting President of Kenya between 5 and 8 October 2014 while President Uhuru Kenyatta was away at the Hague.He previously served in various ministerial positions including the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Higher Education Science and Technology. He was Secretary General of KANU, the former ruling political party, and MP for Eldoret North Constituency between December 1997 and January 2013. He won the seat in the 1997 Kenyan election after defeating Reuben Chesire. He was appointed to the position of Assistant Minister in the Office of the President by President Daniel arap Moi in 1998. He was promoted to be Minister for Home Affairs in August 2002. He also previously served as the Chairman of the Parliamentary Select Committee on Constitutional Reform in the 9th Parliament.

On 4 March 2013, he was elected as Deputy President alongside President Uhuru Kenyatta. They won on a Jubilee Coalition ticket.

Ruto was among the list of people who were tried at the International Criminal Court (ICC) for their involvement in Kenya's 2007-8 electoral violence. However, the case was faced with challenges especially concerning withdrawal of key prosecution witnesses. In April 2016, the prosecution of Ruto was abandoned by the International Criminal Court.

International Criminal Court (ICC)
Legal texts
Crimes
Organisation
Investigations
Other
Sources
International courts
(in order of foundation)
History
Related concepts
Types
International institutions
Regional bodies
Multi-lateral bodies
Major NGOs
Intergovernmental
organizations

This page is based on a Wikipedia article written by authors (here).
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.