Law Commons^™

International Decision, International Criminal Court, Judgment On The Appeal Of The Republic Of Kenya Against Pre-Trial Chamber Decision Denying Inadmissibility Of The Kenya Situation, Charles Chernor Jalloh

Charles C. Jalloh

A fundamental pillar of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) is Article 17, which enshrines the complementarity principle – the idea that ICC jurisdiction will only be triggered when states fail to act to prosecute genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes within their national courts or in circumstances where they prove unwilling and or unable to do so. The problem is that, as shown in this case report in the American Journal of International Law on the first ICC Appeals Chamber ruling regarding a state party’s objection to the court’s assertion of jurisdiction over its nationals, …

Extraterritorial Criminal Jurisdiction And The Rule Of Law, Danielle Ireland-Piper

Danielle Ireland-Piper

Nations states are demonstrating an increased willingness to assert jurisdiction over conduct occurring extraterritorially. This paper considers why that may be the case, and seeks to examine the extent to which assertions of extraterritorial criminal jurisdiction are consistent with the rule of law. Case studies of assertions of extraterritorial jurisdiction are presented and analysed using five principles as benchmarks. To that end, the rule of law is taken to refer to the following five principles: 1) The law must be both readily known and available, and certain and clear; 2) The law should be applied to all people equally, and …

Prosecutions Of Extraterritorial Criminal Conduct And The Abuse Of Rights Doctrine, Danielle Ireland-Piper

Danielle Ireland-Piper

Under international law, states can in certain circumstances institute domestic prosecutions over conduct occurring extraterritorially. Such exercises of extraterritorial jurisdiction sit at the crossroads of domestic and international law and can be highly controversial. This paper considers whether the abuse of rights doctrine is useful in regulating assertions of extraterritorial criminal jurisdiction. Part I introduces the principles of extraterritorial jurisdiction under international law. Part II provides examples of some of the problems that can arise in domestic prosecutions of extraterritorial criminal conduct, compromising the ability of an individual to enjoy a fair trial. Part III considers the effectiveness of the …

Hamdan V. United States: A Death Knell For Military Commissions?, Jennifer Daskal

Jennifer Daskal

In October 2012, a panel of the D.C. Circuit dealt a blow to the United States’ post- September 11, 2001 decade-long experiment with military commissions as a forum for trying Guantanamo Bay detainees. Specifically, the court concluded that prior to the 2006 statutory reforms, military commission jurisdiction was limited to violations of internationally-recognized war crimes; that providing material support to terrorism was not an internationally-recognized war crime; and that the military commission conviction of Salim Hamdan for material support charges based on pre-2006 conduct was therefore invalid. Three months later, a panel of the D.C. Circuit reached the same conclusion …

Chatterjee V. Ontario: Property, Crime And Civil Proceedings, Michelle Gallant

Michelle Gallant

This paper examines the decision in Chatterjee v. Ontario (Attorney General), which upheld the constitutionality of provincial legislation permitting the pursuit of civil actions in response to criminal activity. The legislation in question, Ontario's Civil Remedies Act, enabled the pursuit of money remedies for criminal activities through civil legal proceedings. The Supreme Court of Canada in Chatterjee examined whether or not provincial legislation permitting civil actions for breaches of the federal Criminal Code was ultra vires provincial jurisdiction. This paper provides an overview and an analysis of the Chatterjee decision.

Ontario (Attorney General) V. $29, 020 In Canadian Currency: A Comment On Proceeds Of Crime And Provincial Civil Forfeiture Laws, Michelle Gallant

Michelle Gallant

Many provinces are embracing a modern approach to crime control, an approach which uses civil proceedings, primarily a device known as forfeiture, to tackle criminal activity. The strategy targets the financial underpinnings of crime, the proceeds or the assets linked to illegal activity. It effectively gives the public actor the ability to use civil actions to recover financial resources tainted by criminality.

New to provincial law, this convergence of civil proceedings and crime, of civil forfeiture and the financial element of crime, invites obvious questions about the consistency of this approach with constitutional norms. On the jurisdictional front, there is …

Alberta And Ontario: Civilizing The Money-Centered Model Of Crime Control, Michelle Gallant

Michelle Gallant

An examination of contemporary crime management strategies reveals an emerging trend. With increasing frequency, reliance is placed on a money-centered model of control, a model that copes with crime by attacking its financial underpinnings, the money and the assets linked to the offences. A second trend occurs within the first, the diminution of criminal models in favor of civil legal models. In 2001, the provinces of Alberta and Ontario partook of this trend. Manitoba, in its own unique fashion, joined the movement in 2003.

The paper outlines the contours civil models, identifies the main themes of constitutional conflicts and locates …