International Criminal Law Review最新文献

The rising tide of autocratization does not bode well for the International Criminal Court (icc), which has almost exclusively intervened in contexts of autocratic rule. As the Court is dependent not only on state cooperation but also on non-governmental organizations (ngo s) for effectiveness and legitimacy, this article explores the role—if any—of dissident ngo s in the pursuit of justice for international crimes committed under autocratic regimes. It shows that, while ngo s have been fundamental to the working of the icc, autocratic states are particularly challenging for the icc and ngo s to operate in. Despite this, ngo s may have found new ways of holding autocratic states to account for international crimes—with or without the icc.

This article examines the scope and limitations of jurisdictional immunities afforded to high-ranking state officials accused of international and transnational crimes in foreign courts, including international courts. It discusses how international law balances the immunities granted to facilitate international relations and uphold state sovereignty against the need to address serious crimes that threaten the international community as a whole. The analysis delves into key legal debates and landmark cases shaping the understanding of these immunities. A focal point of the analysis is the work of the International Law Commission (ilc) on the topic of Immunity of State Officials from Foreign Criminal Jurisdiction, particularly Draft Article 7. It is argued that ilc’s Draft Article 7, while explicitly clarifying the application of immunity in international crime cases, also provides valuable insights into the scope of immunity for transnational crimes. Transnational crimes, like corruption, are fundamentally private acts carried out for personal gain, regardless of whether they are committed by someone in an official capacity or utilizing the resources and instrumentalities of the state. Therefore, these acts cannot be considered official and do not trigger the application of immunity ratione materiae. By highlighting the implications of Draft Article 7, the article contributes to the broader understanding of how international law can reconcile the need for state officials to perform their duties without fear of foreign prosecution with the necessity of holding them accountable for serious crimes. It suggests a more restrictive approach to immunity, particularly concerning transnational crimes, thereby enhancing the potential for legal accountability for offending state officials.

By embarking on a project that primarily accentuates the macro aspect of international law, the spotlight falls on grand corruption. Various considerations concerning international law per se are accommodated in the context of the uncac and the untoc. One of the objectives is to ascertain what amounts to a case of evolutionary inertia as regards international norm identification. Another purpose of the exercise is to distill some macro–micro learning lessons, which may result in a change of methodology and strategy in the future. The conclusions for the research elaborate on findings and insights that are both applicable to country-specific scenarios and to the more general endeavor of inspiring policymakers and legal scholars to engage in critical discourse.

Corruption is a serious threat to the stability and security of societies, undermining institutions and democratic values, ethical principles, and justice, as well as sustainable development and the rule of law. It manifests itself in many ways and in a multitude of contexts, affecting almost all human rights, including economic and social rights (i.e., the right to work, the right to food, the right to housing, the right to health, the right to education, the right to public services, the right to development), as well as civil and political rights (i.e., the right to equality and non-discrimination, the right to political participation, the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial). In this perspective, starting from an examination of the direct and negative impact of corruption on the enjoyment of human rights (Section 1), the analysis that follows focuses on the obligations of States to respect, promote, and above all, protect human rights (i.e., take all necessary measures to ensure their full enjoyment) (Section 2), traces the ECtHR’s most incisive pronouncements on violations of individual guarantees in the context of corruption (Section 3), and highlights the crucial role of the Court’s case law in defining more effective, preventive, and punitive measures against corruption (Section 4).

The article deals with the laws of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, and the status of victims of occupations in Lithuania. In addition, the article discloses Lithuanian state policy, society’s cultural approach to atrocity crimes, and support for victims. The article draws attention to how the concept of genocide has been constantly expanded in Lithuania. The international role of Lithuania in the fight against genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes is emphasized.

This article will explain how Argentina developed a strong commitment to international criminal justice to address the crimes of the last dictatorship (1976–1983) that transcended the local dimension and shaped the field globally. In particular, the article will focus on three specific dimensions: the disputes surrounding the concept of ‘dirty war’ in relation to the crimes committed in the 1970s and how its legal conceptualisation has evolved over time; how domestic courts have applied international and domestic criminal law to judge these crimes and how this has changed over time; and, finally, what was the role of human rights organisations in fostering the accountability process.

This article identifies how, and to what extent, harmful speech, such as, gender-based incitement and threats against women, are addressed in international criminal law and practice. It delves into the jurisprudence on direct and public incitement to genocide, genocide and persecution, a crime against humanity, to identify trends. Finding that the law overlooks the issue and that the practice only marginally refers to it, the article resorts to international human rights law as an interpretative aid and to fill the gaps. In this regard, inspired by feminist theories, it proposes interpretative methods that can be applied by judges to surface, fairly label and ultimately sanction harmful speech targeted at women. As such, this article contributes to the doctrinal discourse on what gendered crimes are, and what gender-sensitive judging in international courts should look like.

This article provides a summary and reflection on the results relating to the United States of America (United States or US) in the EU cost Action ca18228 (the Action) and the Scoping Survey on states’ experiences with international criminal justice. It looks at how the United States has engaged or not engaged with international criminal justice in its law, policy, institutions, civil society, and culture. The data demonstrates that the United States’ relationship with international criminal justice has been complex and, at times, controversial. More specifically, it shows the importance of framing international criminal justice as within the United States’ national interest to ensure US support for the project.

We present an original interpretation of the justice cascade theory developed by Kathryn Sikkink and her coauthors as it pertains to the icc’s engagements with African states since 2004. In doing so, we challenge a prominent and acclaimed critique of this theory: Oumar Ba’s States of Justice. Ba presents four qualitative case studies informed by fieldwork, focused on the admissibility challenges, selective cooperation, and obstructionism involving Uganda, Libya, Kenya, and Côte d’Ivoire. We closely examine the key publications in which the justice cascade theory is introduced, refined, and critiqued, identifying misinterpretations of this theory in Ba’s work and elucidating its empirical implications. Furthermore, we perform a citation analysis of States of Justice, demonstrating that the book, by virtually omitting primary sources of any type, misimplements its own empirical strategy. We introduce fresh legal analyses of compliance with the Rome Statute of the icc in the four relevant cases, revealing the dearth of evidence of noncompliance in all but the Kenyan case. Finally, we discuss legal analysis as a means of testing theories of international law and courts, and we illustrate the relevance of the justice cascade theory to current debates on the establishment of new international tribunals.