{"title":"《罗马规约》在非洲的催化作用:积极互补和自我参照","authors":"Patricia Hobbs","doi":"10.1007/s10609-020-09398-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The International Criminal Court’s (ICC) policy and practice of self-referrals has attracted some degree of academic criticism. This has been due partly because the procedure itself was, according to some opinions, never quite envisaged in the original Rome Statute, and partly because the concept of a State self-referral appears to contradict the Rome Statute objective of the ICC as a Court of complementarity. Following Gabon’s self-referral in 2016, and in view of the recent termination of the ICC Prosecutor’s Preliminary Examinations in Gabon, this paper argues that African States’ self-referral practice continues to represent a step backwards for African local justice and accountability. The fact that in this particular situation the necessary threshold was not met is actually not relevant for the argument put forward in this paper, namely that this practice should now be put under scrutiny rather than accepting, at face value, a self-referral whenever an (African) State proposes it. The strengthening of local accountability and the transformation of the local justice landscape should be considered as the ICC long-term objectives, and more dialogue (as well as political pressure) should be contemplated in order to gently coerce States to take on investigations and prosecutions of international crimes.","PeriodicalId":43773,"journal":{"name":"Criminal Law Forum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Catalysing Effect of the Rome Statute in Africa: Positive Complementarity and Self-Referrals\",\"authors\":\"Patricia Hobbs\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10609-020-09398-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The International Criminal Court’s (ICC) policy and practice of self-referrals has attracted some degree of academic criticism. This has been due partly because the procedure itself was, according to some opinions, never quite envisaged in the original Rome Statute, and partly because the concept of a State self-referral appears to contradict the Rome Statute objective of the ICC as a Court of complementarity. Following Gabon’s self-referral in 2016, and in view of the recent termination of the ICC Prosecutor’s Preliminary Examinations in Gabon, this paper argues that African States’ self-referral practice continues to represent a step backwards for African local justice and accountability. The fact that in this particular situation the necessary threshold was not met is actually not relevant for the argument put forward in this paper, namely that this practice should now be put under scrutiny rather than accepting, at face value, a self-referral whenever an (African) State proposes it. The strengthening of local accountability and the transformation of the local justice landscape should be considered as the ICC long-term objectives, and more dialogue (as well as political pressure) should be contemplated in order to gently coerce States to take on investigations and prosecutions of international crimes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43773,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Criminal Law Forum\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Criminal Law Forum\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10609-020-09398-7\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Criminal Law Forum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10609-020-09398-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Catalysing Effect of the Rome Statute in Africa: Positive Complementarity and Self-Referrals
The International Criminal Court’s (ICC) policy and practice of self-referrals has attracted some degree of academic criticism. This has been due partly because the procedure itself was, according to some opinions, never quite envisaged in the original Rome Statute, and partly because the concept of a State self-referral appears to contradict the Rome Statute objective of the ICC as a Court of complementarity. Following Gabon’s self-referral in 2016, and in view of the recent termination of the ICC Prosecutor’s Preliminary Examinations in Gabon, this paper argues that African States’ self-referral practice continues to represent a step backwards for African local justice and accountability. The fact that in this particular situation the necessary threshold was not met is actually not relevant for the argument put forward in this paper, namely that this practice should now be put under scrutiny rather than accepting, at face value, a self-referral whenever an (African) State proposes it. The strengthening of local accountability and the transformation of the local justice landscape should be considered as the ICC long-term objectives, and more dialogue (as well as political pressure) should be contemplated in order to gently coerce States to take on investigations and prosecutions of international crimes.
期刊介绍:
Criminal Law Forum is a peer-review journal dedicated to the advancement of criminal law theory, practice, and reform throughout the world. Under the direction of an international editorial board, Criminal Law Forum serves the global community of criminal law scholars and practitioners through the publication of original contributions and the dissemination of noteworthy public documents. Criminal Law Forum is published pursuant to an agreement with the Society for the Reform of Criminal Law, based in Vancouver, British Columbia.