Politics, the Rule of Law, and the Role of the Crime of Aggression: A Response to Koh and Buchwald (original) (raw)
Related papers
Negotiating at the Interface of Power & Law: The Crime of Aggression
2010
Delegates recently convened in Kampala, Uganda to lay the groundwork for the International Criminal Court's eventual prosecution of the crime of aggres-* B.A., Stanford University; J.D., Yale Law School. I served on the U.S. delegation to the International Criminal Court Review Conference in 2010 in Kampala, Uganda as the Academic Advisor. Needless to say, the views expressed herein (and any errors) are entirely my own and do not reflect the position of the government of the United States. All material contained in this Article is available in the public record or is derived from my notes of the Review Conference. I am indebted to
2014
2.3. Method and Material………………………………………………………4 2.4 Limitations……………………………………………………………………….4 2.5 Outline/Structure of Analysis……………………………………………5 3. Briefly about the lead-up to the historical agreement in Kampala 2010…………………………………………………………………………………………6 4. Understanding the Crime of Aggression. Historical review of breach of the peace…………………………………………………….…….…….8 5. Material aspects-what constitutes the crime and what are the exceptions. …………………………………………………………………………..
The Anatomy of an International Crime: Aggression at the International Criminal Court
International Criminal Law Review, 2013
In 2010 in Kampala, Uganda, the States Parties to the International Criminal Court (ICC) adopted a set of amendments to the Rome Statute that define the elements and trigger mechanisms of the crime of aggression. However, significant questions remain as to what was actually agreed upon in Kampala, including with respect to the parameters of the crime itself. These questions, which include the applicability of exceptions for humanitarian intervention and anticipatory self-defence, affect not only the potential criminal responsibility of individuals charged with the crime of aggression, but also the interests of States in whether their acts are considered to amount to aggression or not. This article explores the anatomy of the crime of aggression and highlights issues that remain to be resolved.
2010
The first review conference to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, held in June 2010 in Kampala successfully concluded decades of negotiations over a statutory definition of the crime of aggression and its prosecution by a permanent international criminal court. The main unresolved issues to be addressed by the review conference concerned the determination of an act of aggression as a (procedural) prerequisite for the exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression and the appropriate activation procedure for a provision on aggression. Most importantly, the compromise of Kampala could safeguard an independent and effective criminal prosecution of the crime of aggression by not subjugating the Court’s exercise of jurisdiction to decisions of outside organs. However, in case of a referral of a situation by a State Party or the initiation of a proprio motu investigation, the Court’s reach over perpetrators is significantly narrowed with a view to crimes of aggre...
The Crime of Aggression in the African Court of Justice and Human and Peoples' Rights
C. Jalloh, M. K. Clarke and V. Nmehielle (eds.), The African Court of Justice and Human and Peoples’ Rights in Context: Development and Challenges (Cambridge University Press), 2019
In accordance with Article 28A(1)(14) of the Malabo Protocol, the International Criminal Law Section of the African Court of Justice and Human and Peoples’ Rights shall have power to try persons for the crime of aggression. Article 28M of the Protocol sets out a definition of the crime for the purpose of the Court. The definition is largely in line with current international law on the subject but also reflects important regional features. This article analyses the substantive provisions of Article 28M, in a comparative fashion, and suggests that it could become, in the future, even more efficient that the Rome Statute’s provisions on the crime of aggression.
Demystifying the Crime of Aggression: A Case for the International Criminal Court
Christ University Law Journal, 2013
The crime of aggression forms one of the most controversial parts of international law in contrast with the need to protect national sovereignty of a given state without undue interference. Even with the adoption of the Rome Statute in 1998, the crime of aggression seems to have been sidelined in favour of other matters of international justice concerns that did not directly touch the political status of the different states parties. Jurisdictional issues concerning aggression were left unresolved. The term "aggression" was nevertheless given recognition in the year 2010 at a Review Conference of the Rome Statute held in Kampala, Uganda, from 31 May to 11 June 2010. However, the concept still remains on paper due to the postponement in establishing the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court till 2017. Currently, only four states have signed and ratified the amendments to the Rome Statute 1998 and they are to be enforced over the next couple of years. This article gives an overview of the crime of aggression. It examines some of the contentious issues that may arise in relation to the crime of aggression.
Goettingen J. Int'l L., 2010
The first review conference to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, held in June 2010 in Kampala successfully concluded decades of negotiations over a statutory definition of the crime of aggression and its prosecution by a permanent international criminal court. The main unresolved issues to be addressed by the review conference concerned the determination of an act of aggression as a (procedural) prerequisite for the exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression and the appropriate activation procedure for a provision on aggression. Most importantly, the compromise of Kampala could safeguard an independent and effective criminal prosecution of the crime of aggression by not subjugating the Court’s exercise of jurisdiction to decisions of outside organs. However, in case of a referral of a situation by a State Party or the initiation of a proprio motu investigation, the Court’s reach over perpetrators is significantly narrowed with a view to crimes of aggression involving a non-state party or a state-party that does not accept the Court’s exercise of jurisdiction. These concessions, built on state consent to the exercise of criminal prosecution over individuals and elements of reciprocity, concepts that are alien to the Rome Statute, form part of a political compromise that enabled the activation of the Court’s jurisdiction over the crime of aggression.
The continued prevalence of deadly conflicts resulting in atrocities and crimes against humanity bring to sharp contrast the competing demands of justice and the interests of conflict resolution and peace building. While contemporary transitional justice deals with questions of impunity in post conflict situations, this book examines the suitability of international justice for conflict resolution. This critique is situated in the historical development and rise to prominence of international humanitarian law and human rights conventions. It critiques the consequences of pursuing justice in on going conflicts and scrutinizes the competing interests of the punitive and retributive approach to contemporary international justice leading to prosecution, against a conflict resolution approach that favours political considerations for peace and security that may require engagement with perpetrators of war crimes in order to secure peace. The balance between peace and justice is the more difficult to strike in the context of an on going conflict such as Northern Uganda's where the pursuit of justice by the ICC risks exacerbating the conflict and diminishing the prospects for peace.