Prosecuting Crimes of International Concern: Islamic State at the ICC?

IF 0.3 Q4 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Utrecht Journal of International and European Law Pub Date : 2017-04-12 DOI:10.5334/UJIEL.364
Cóman Kenny
{"title":"Prosecuting Crimes of International Concern: Islamic State at the ICC?","authors":"Cóman Kenny","doi":"10.5334/UJIEL.364","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The rise of Islamic State (IS) has fundamentally altered the conception of terrorism, a development which international criminal law is arguably unprepared for. Given the scale and gravity of the group’s crimes, questions abound as to how those responsible will be held accountable. In the absence of significant domestic prosecutions and short of the establishment of a dedicated accountability mechanism, the International Criminal Court (ICC) stands as the forum of last resort in which IS members could stand trial. Such a proposition is not without significant challenges, however. This article addresses some key issues facing any potential prosecutions from the perspective of: (i) jurisdiction; (ii) applicable crimes; and (iii) modes of liability. First, as Syria, Iraq, and Libya are not States Parties to the Rome Statute, the available avenues for asserting jurisdiction will be assessed, namely: a Security Council referral; jurisdiction over so called ‘foreign fighters’ who are State Party nationals; and jurisdiction over attacks on the territory of a State Party and whether they could be considered part of a broader series of criminal acts in IS held territory. Second, as there is no crime of terrorism in the Rome Statute, the question of prosecuting acts encapsulated in a systematic campaign of terror through existing provisions will be assessed. Third, the regime of accountability at the ICC will be analysed in light of IS’s purported structure and the crimes with which it stands accused. Focus will be directed to those responsible for the propagation of genocidal propaganda and individuals who provide aid or assistance to IS which contributes to its crimes. These questions are far from theoretical. The UN has designated IS a threat to international peace and security. There follows an expectation that international criminal law should play a role in tackling one of the major criminal concerns of our time and ensure that impunity for those responsible for IS’s atrocities is avoided.","PeriodicalId":30606,"journal":{"name":"Utrecht Journal of International and European Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2017-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Utrecht Journal of International and European Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/UJIEL.364","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

Abstract

The rise of Islamic State (IS) has fundamentally altered the conception of terrorism, a development which international criminal law is arguably unprepared for. Given the scale and gravity of the group’s crimes, questions abound as to how those responsible will be held accountable. In the absence of significant domestic prosecutions and short of the establishment of a dedicated accountability mechanism, the International Criminal Court (ICC) stands as the forum of last resort in which IS members could stand trial. Such a proposition is not without significant challenges, however. This article addresses some key issues facing any potential prosecutions from the perspective of: (i) jurisdiction; (ii) applicable crimes; and (iii) modes of liability. First, as Syria, Iraq, and Libya are not States Parties to the Rome Statute, the available avenues for asserting jurisdiction will be assessed, namely: a Security Council referral; jurisdiction over so called ‘foreign fighters’ who are State Party nationals; and jurisdiction over attacks on the territory of a State Party and whether they could be considered part of a broader series of criminal acts in IS held territory. Second, as there is no crime of terrorism in the Rome Statute, the question of prosecuting acts encapsulated in a systematic campaign of terror through existing provisions will be assessed. Third, the regime of accountability at the ICC will be analysed in light of IS’s purported structure and the crimes with which it stands accused. Focus will be directed to those responsible for the propagation of genocidal propaganda and individuals who provide aid or assistance to IS which contributes to its crimes. These questions are far from theoretical. The UN has designated IS a threat to international peace and security. There follows an expectation that international criminal law should play a role in tackling one of the major criminal concerns of our time and ensure that impunity for those responsible for IS’s atrocities is avoided.
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
在国际刑事法院起诉国际关注的罪行:伊斯兰国?
伊斯兰国的崛起从根本上改变了恐怖主义的概念,国际刑法可以说对这一发展毫无准备。鉴于该组织罪行的规模和严重性,如何追究责任人的责任充满了疑问。在没有重大的国内起诉,也没有建立专门的问责机制的情况下,国际刑事法院(ICC)是IS成员可以接受审判的最后论坛。然而,这样的提议并非没有重大挑战。本文从以下角度论述了任何潜在起诉所面临的一些关键问题:(一)管辖权;(ii)适用的罪行;三赔偿责任模式。首先,由于叙利亚、伊拉克和利比亚不是《罗马规约》缔约国,将评估行使管辖权的可用途径,即:安全理事会移交;对属于缔约国国民的所谓“外国战斗人员”的管辖权;以及对袭击缔约国领土的管辖权,以及这些袭击是否可以被视为伊斯兰国控制领土上更广泛的一系列犯罪行为的一部分。第二,由于《罗马规约》中没有恐怖主义罪,将评估通过现有条款起诉系统性恐怖运动中的行为的问题。第三,国际刑事法院的问责制度将根据IS所谓的结构及其被指控的罪行进行分析。重点将放在传播种族灭绝宣传的责任人和向IS提供援助或协助的个人身上,这些人助长了IS的罪行。这些问题远非理论性的。联合国认定伊斯兰国对国际和平与安全构成威胁。人们期望,国际刑法应在解决我们这个时代的一个主要刑事问题方面发挥作用,并确保避免对伊斯兰国暴行负责的人有罪不罚。
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
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊最新文献
The Legal Nature of the Climate Change Regime: Fluctuation between Lex Lata and Lex Ferenda The Concept of a Virtual Registered Office in EU Law: Challenges and Opportunities Discharge of Debts of Insolvent Entrepreneurs Under the Restructuring and Insolvency Directive Editorial of Volume 38, Issue I of the Utrecht Journal of International and European Law Will Victims’ Rights Be Lost in Translation? Bridging the Information Gap in Universal Jurisdiction Cases
×
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