International Law Reflections 2017/2/EN - All’s wrong that starts wrong – withdrawals from the International Criminal Court (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Uncertain Future of the International Criminal Court
2017
This Newsletter's editorial note is being written as I wait in the Air Canada international lounge for an evening flight to Vienna, for the 2017 ACUNS Vienna UN conference organized by our tremendous Vienna Liaison Office volunteer team. This will be the eighth major conference for ACUNS in Vienna, beginning with the 2010 Annual Meeting and then a 'Vienna UN' conference each January. Led by Michael Platzer and now by Max Edelbacher, the Vienna group has steadily built its profile with UNOV, national Missions, and the Austrian government, and has become a major NGO-if not the major NGO-in the UNOV orbit. * Following the election of Adama Barrow in December 2016, Gambia has cancelled the withdrawal from the ICC. See postscript following this article.
Withdrawal from the International Criminal Court: Does Africa have an alternative?
2017
After a century in the making, the International Criminal Court (ICC) came into existence in 2002 with an overwhelming number of states ratifying the Rome Statute. With 34 signatories, Africa is the largest contributor in the Assembly of State Parties, yet Africa has become its severest critic. As threats of withdrawal become a reality with the imminent withdrawal of Burundi, this article considers the question of whether Africa has an alternative solution. With an African Union (AU) Constitutive Act purporting a commitment to combating impunity and promoting democracy, rule of law and good governance, one would expect the AU to be ready to pick up the reins. To end impunity and hold perpetrators accountable, finding an alternative for the lacuna left in the absence of the ICC has never been more pressing. The recent adoption of a strategy by African countries for a mass withdrawal has pushed the matter to the fore. This article discusses the feasibility of amnesty, domestic and loc...
THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT-AND THE EXIT OF AFRICAN NATIONS-A LEGAL APPRAISAL
To stay or not to stay? That’s the question before African Governments regarding continuing to be signatories to the Rome Treaty that established the International Criminal Court. This paper takes a look at the provisions of the Treaty, the workings of the International Criminal and the allegation of neo colonialism and bias against African leaders in the operations of the prosecutor. The question this paper seeks to answer is whether by the exit African leaders are protecting their self interest or the interest of their people.
THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT: A "BIG FISH JUSTICE?"
The Thinker , 2017
The world’s first permanent international criminal court (the ICC) that came into being on 1 July 2002 was dealt a silent but solid slap on 1 February 2017 when the African Union (AU) approved a plan for a mass withdrawal. The decision (albeit non-legally binding) was held behind closed doors as the AU summit in Ethiopia's capital Addis Ababa was nearing an end. Out of the 34 African countries that are signatories to the ICC Treaty, the majority were in favour of withdrawing. Since its inception, the ICC has been the target of fervent support, as well as harsh criticism, increasingly so. While South Africa’s recent withdrawal late last year was a hard blow and an unprecedented challenge to the Court’s very legitimacy, the summit decision underlined the need for scrutinizing the mechanics, if not the existence, of this court. This year marks the ICC’s 15th anniversary, whose inherent mission is to bring to justice those most responsible within an event or more events — usually a situation that stems from a country at war — of the worst international crimes: war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. At the review conference held in Kampala in June 2010, member states that ratified the Rome Statute, the 1998 treaty establishing the ICC, decided by consensus to its amendment, allowing it to exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression. Namely the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State. Yet it is not clear when the aggression amendments will become operational and the Court may only exercise jurisdiction over aggression committed one year after 30 States Parties have accepted the amendments. The aggression amendments also carry a confusing opt-out clause. “Why would a State ratify the amendment only to opt out of jurisdiction?”, argues Public International Law Oxford University lecturer Dapo Akande[i], a co-director of the Oxford Institute for Ethics. In November 2016, Russia, a permanent United Nations Security Council (UNSC) member, made a decision to withdraw its signature from the ICC's founding document, which it had signed, but never ratified. Now within the UNSC Permanent Five structure, only France and England are part of the ICC, while China, the United States and now Russia are not signatories.
African states withdrawal from the International Criminal Court: what's wrong
The withdrawal of South Africa and other African states (Burundi and Gabon) is perceived as a signal of the negative relations between African states and ICC. There are fears that other African states members of the African Unity organisation will follow. Therefore, the aim of the article is to show that the discords between the African states and the International Criminal Court are due to some legal reasons based on international law.
From Russia and beyond: the ICC global standing, while countries’ resignation is getting serious.
This article aims to critically examine the International Criminal Court, established in 2002 to complement domestic jurisdiction in prosecuting the gravest crimes (was crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, and – most recently – crimes of aggression), in a multidimensional manner, assessing its place in relation to public international law, international criminal law and international human rights law. Simultaneously, it will problematize compatibility of the Rome Statute, the Court’s founding treaty, with national jurisdictions of both Member and Nonmember states to the ICC, and raise questions about the dynamics between the institution and the UN Security Council, which plays a crucial supranational role in the process of initiating and authorizing prosecutions of crimes committed on the territories, or by the nationals of Non-member countries. In the light of the recent crisis the ICC suffered in the form of African demarche (with South Africa, Gambia and Burundi declared their pull-out in November 2016), followed closely by Russia’s signature withdrawal, and Kenyan, Ugandan and Filipino authorities expressing their significantly undermined trust in the judicial institution, the need to reflect on the relevance and feasibility of the initial hopes put in the Rome Statute comes particularly acute, as the international community is puzzled by the controversial question of how to improve the Court while managing to attract as many states (with often mutually exclusive viewpoints on the principles of international law) to sign the Statute.
Nagari Law Review, 2020
The International Criminal Court is an international criminal justice institution established in the context of struggle against impunity. Eighteen years of operation of the ICC since 2002, ICC experienced a case where the state it one by one withdraw from membership, such as South Africa, Burundi, Gambia and the Philippines, which is due to the inclusion of ICC investigations related to these state as well as several reasons related to the existence of discriminatory ICC judicial operations patterns. What is the implementation of ICC legal norms by state parties, and how the impact on the existence of ICC is what will be discussed in this study. The research method used is Socio-Legal Research, which examines the relationship between juridical and political aspects. The results of this study conclude some evidence related to the implementation of ICC legal norms by withdrawing party states, such as the background to ratifying the Rome Statute 1998, the implementation of the law, an...
This article seeks to acclaim the remarkable work done by the International Criminal Court (ICC) to date, recognizing and lauding its invaluable contribution brought to international criminal justice but also considers the various challenges faced by the ICC to date as well as its embedded flaws. This article is an academic piece of work based on the personal opinions of the author and opinions of academic commentaries. The overarching origin of all challenges can be argued to arise preponderantly from the drafting of the Rome Statute as the ICC has been established and is governed by the Rome Statute. This article provides a methodical analysis of such treaty with suggestions for reform.