Positive Complementarity in Action: International Criminal Justice and the Ongoing Armed Conflict in Ukraine

Iuliia Anosova, Karolina Aksamitowska, Vasilka Sancin
{"title":"Positive Complementarity in Action: International Criminal Justice and the Ongoing Armed Conflict in Ukraine","authors":"Iuliia Anosova, Karolina Aksamitowska, Vasilka Sancin","doi":"10.1163/15718123-bja10211","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Complementarity has been traditionally understood in a twofold manner. On the one hand, the principle of complementarity explicates the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. On the other hand, it has been conceptualised as the broader principle that governs the functioning of the international criminal justice system built after the entry into force of the Rome Statute. Understood in this sense, complementarity outlines the interplay between different (domestic and international) accountability actors, including national authorities and civil society. This article explores the ways in which the principle of complementarity has been operationalised in Ukraine since 2014, in an attempt to highlight the challenges faced by domestic and international justice actors in the situation of atrocities being committed in an ongoing armed conflict. It puts forward an argument that <jats:italic>ad hoc</jats:italic> responses introduced in cooperation and coordination with local and international partners—including the civil society—have been prioritised over permanent legislative solutions. These <jats:italic>ad hoc</jats:italic> responses have the potential to influence the expansion of the complementarity architecture, shape the coordinated accountability approaches and advance positive complementarity for core international crimes in ongoing armed conflicts.","PeriodicalId":55966,"journal":{"name":"International Criminal Law Review","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Criminal Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718123-bja10211","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Complementarity has been traditionally understood in a twofold manner. On the one hand, the principle of complementarity explicates the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. On the other hand, it has been conceptualised as the broader principle that governs the functioning of the international criminal justice system built after the entry into force of the Rome Statute. Understood in this sense, complementarity outlines the interplay between different (domestic and international) accountability actors, including national authorities and civil society. This article explores the ways in which the principle of complementarity has been operationalised in Ukraine since 2014, in an attempt to highlight the challenges faced by domestic and international justice actors in the situation of atrocities being committed in an ongoing armed conflict. It puts forward an argument that ad hoc responses introduced in cooperation and coordination with local and international partners—including the civil society—have been prioritised over permanent legislative solutions. These ad hoc responses have the potential to influence the expansion of the complementarity architecture, shape the coordinated accountability approaches and advance positive complementarity for core international crimes in ongoing armed conflicts.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
积极互补的行动:国际刑事司法与乌克兰持续的武装冲突
传统上对互补性有双重理解。一方面,补充性原则阐述了国际刑事法院的管辖权。另一方面,补充性原则被视为《罗马规约》生效后国际刑事司法系统运作的更广泛原则。从这个意义上理解,互补性概述了包括国家当局和民间社会在内的不同(国内和国际)问责行为体之间的相互作用。本文探讨了互补性原则自 2014 年以来在乌克兰的运作方式,试图强调国内和国际司法行为体在持续武装冲突中犯下暴行时所面临的挑战。报告提出了一个论点,即与地方和国际合作伙伴(包括民间社会)合作与协调采取的临时应对措施比永久性立法解决方案更受重视。这些临时应对措施有可能影响互补性架构的扩大,形成协调的问责办法,并推动对正在发生的武装冲突中的核心国际罪行的积极互补。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: Thus there is also a need for criminological, sociological and historical research on the issues of ICL. The Review publishes in-depth analytical research that deals with these issues. The analysis may cover: • the substantive and procedural law on the international level; • important cases from national jurisdictions which have a bearing on general issues; • criminological and sociological; and, • historical research.
期刊最新文献
Positive Complementarity in Action: International Criminal Justice and the Ongoing Armed Conflict in Ukraine International Criminal Law, Complementarity and Amnesty Within the Context of Transitional Justice: Lessons from Uganda Atrocity Crime Responses in Bosnia and Herzegovina: Navigating Tensions in Multifaceted Approaches Trajectories of Contestation: Motivational Dynamics in Repressive Regimes Corruption: From International Law and Ethics to Realpolitik and Amoralism
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1