This book concerns the relationship between the principles of complementarity and universal jurisdiction. Territorial States are normally affected most strongly by core international crimes committed during a conflict or an attack directed against its civilian population. Most victims reside in such States. Most damaged or plundered property is there. Public order and security are violated most severely in the territorial States. It is also on their territory that most of the evidence of the alleged crimes can be found. There are, in other words, obvious policy and practical reasons why States should accord priority to territoriality as a basis of jurisdiction. But is there also an obligation for States to defer exercise of universal jurisdiction of core international crimes to investigation and prosecution of the same crimes by the territorial State? What - if any - is the impact of the principle of complementarity in this respect? These are among the questions discussed in this anthology.

This book offers a unique critical analysis of the legal nature, effects and limits of UN Security Council referrals to the International Criminal Court (ICC). Alexandre Skander Galand provides, for the first time, a full picture of two competing understandings of the nature of the Security Council referrals to the ICC, and their respective normative interplay with legal barriers to the exercise of universal prescriptive and adjudicative jurisdiction. The book shows that the application of the Rome Statute through a Security Council referral is inherently limited by the UN Charter as well as the Rome Statute, and can conflict with other branches of international law, including international human rights law, the law on immunities and the law of treaties. Hence, it spells out a conception of the nature and effects of Security Council referrals that responds to these limits and, in turn, informs the reader on the nature of the ICC itself.

Critically explores the International Criminal Court's evolution and the domestic effects of its interventions in three African countries.

This systematic, contextual and practice-oriented account of complementarity explores the background and historical expectations associated with complementarity, its interpretation in prosecutorial policy and judicial practice, its context (ad hoc tribunals, universal jurisdiction, R2P) and its impact in specific situations (Colombia, Congo, Uganda, Central African Republic, Sudan and Kenya). Written by leading experts from inside and outside the Court and scholars from multiple disciplines, the essays combine theoretical inquiry with policy recommendations and the first-hand experience of practitioners. It is geared towards academics, lawyers and policy-makers who deal with the impact and application of international criminal justice and its interplay with peace and security, transitional justice and international relations.

The creation of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 1998 represented an important step in the international effort to repress genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. As there has been enormous scholarly discussion of the ICC, it is difficult and time-consuming to obtain the best writing on the subject. This volume collects the foremost analyses of each part of the ICC to form a convenient reference tool for all those wishing to understand perhaps the most important legal development of the past two decades.

This 2005 book discusses the legitimacy of the international criminal law regime. It explains the development of the system of international criminal law enforcement in historical context, from antiquity through the Nuremberg and Tokyo Trials, to modern-day prosecutions of atrocities in the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda and Sierra Leone. The modern regime of prosecution of international crimes is evaluated with regard to international relations theory. The book then subjects that regime to critique on the basis of legitimacy and the rule of law, in particular selective enforcement, not only in relation to who is prosecuted, but also the definitions of crimes and principles of liability used when people are prosecuted. It concludes that although selective enforcement is not as powerful as a critique of international criminal law as it was previously, the creation of the International Criminal Court may also have narrowed the substantive rules of international criminal law.

This fully updated second edition of Jurisdiction in International Law examines the international law of jurisdiction, focusing on the areas of law where jurisdiction is most contentious: criminal, antitrust, securities, discovery, and international humanitarian and human rights law. Since F.A. Mann's work in the 1980s, no analytical overview has been attempted of this crucial topic in international law: prescribing the admissible geographical reach of a State's laws. This new edition includes new material on personal jurisdiction in the U.S., extraterritorial applications of human rights treaties, discussions on cyberspace, the Morrison case. Jurisdiction in International Law has been updated covering developments in sanction and tax laws, and includes further exploration on transnational tort litigation and universal civil jurisdiction. The need for such an overview has grown more pressing in recent years as the traditional framework of the law of jurisdiction, grounded in the principles of sovereignty and territoriality, has been undermined by piecemeal developments. Antitrust jurisdiction is heading in new directions, influenced by law and economics approaches; new EC rules are reshaping jurisdiction in securities law; the U.S. is arguably overreaching in the field of corporate governance law; and the universality principle has gained ground in European criminal law and U.S. tort law. Such developments have given rise to conflicts over competency that struggle to be resolved within traditional jurisdiction theory. This study proposes an innovative approach that departs from the classical solutions and advocates a general principle of international subsidiary jurisdiction. Under the new proposed rule, States would be entitled, and at times even obliged, to exercise subsidiary jurisdiction over internationally relevant situations in the interest of the international community if the State having primary jurisdiction fails to assume its responsibility.

This book offers the first comprehensive and in-depth analysis of the provisions of the ‘Malabo Protocol’—the amendment protocol to the Statute of the African Court of Justice and Human and Peoples’ Rights—adopted by the African Union at its 2014 Summit in Malabo, Equatorial Guinea. The Annex to the protocol, once it has received the required number of ratifications, will create a new Section in the African Court of Justice and Human and Peoples’ Rights with jurisdiction over international and transnational crimes, hence an ‘African Criminal Court’. In this book, leading experts in the field of international criminal law analyze the main provisions of the Annex to the Malabo Protocol. The book provides an essential and topical source of information for scholars, practitioners and students in the field of international criminal law, and for all readers with an interest in political science and African studies. Gerhard Werle is Professor of German and Internationa l Crimina l Law, Criminal Procedure and Modern Legal History at Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin and Director of the South African-German Centre for Transnational Criminal Justice. In addition, he is an Extraordinary Professor at the University of the Western Cape and Honorary Professor at North-West University of Political Science and Law (Xi’an, China). Moritz Vormbaum received his doctoral degree in criminal law from the University of Münster (Germany) and his postdoctoral degree from Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin. He is a Senior Researcher at Humboldt-Universität, as well as a coordinator and lecturer at the South African-German Centre for Transnational Criminal Justice.

Presents a study of the historical antecedents of the principle of complementarity. This work draws upon the first efforts at international prosecution, after the First World War, and then traces the evolution of the concept through the drafting of the 1937 treaty on terrorism, and the post-Second World War tribunals.