Law Commons^™

Universal Jurisdiction Not So Universal: A Time To Delegate To The International Criminal Court, Dalila V. Hoover

Cornell Law School Inter-University Graduate Student Conference Papers

The exercise of universal jurisdiction in cases involving crimes under international law remains highly debated and underlines a certain number of legal and political issues in its implementation. Because the principle of universal jurisdiction relies on national authorities to enforce international prohibitions, pivotal decisions are expected to reflect, to a greater or lesser extent, domestic decision-makers’ positions as to the interests of justice, the national interest and other criteria. In many States, the legal system lacks the means to investigate or prosecute on the basis of universal jurisdiction. Indeed, many legal systems do not define the term “crimes” that can …

The United States And The International Criminal Court Post-Bush: A Beautiful Courtship But An Unlikely Marriage, Megan A. Fairlie

Faculty Publications

The article focuses on the relationship status between the U.S. and the International Criminal Court (ICC) from being dormant due to being renewed. The renewal was evident from the U.S. representation at the 2009 ICC's Assembly of States Parties annual meeting and the 2010 ICC Review Conference. Using the Rome Statute, the ICC has been granted subject matter jurisdiction over war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide.

The Reason Behind The Rules: From Description To Normativity In International Criminal Procedure, Noah Weisbord

Faculty Publications

As the International Criminal Court (ICC) continues to mature in its practices, it provokes discussion on whether the comfortable framework of adversarial and inquisitorial systems should be used to evaluate an institution that exists in a fundamentally different context from that of national criminal justice systems. In order to avoid entangling the ICC in rules that are not tailored to fit its specific goals and institutional context, the normative purposes underlying procedural rules derived from domestic institutions should be reexamined.

This article draws out basic principles that may be of use in reexamining the reasoning behind the rules of procedure …

International Decision, International Criminal Court, Decision On The Authorization Of An Investigation Into The Situation In The Republic Of Kenya, Charles Chernor Jalloh

Faculty Publications

On March 31, 2010, in its first ever decision authorizing a prosecutorial proprio motu investigation, the Pre-Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) granted the ICC Prosecutor permission to investigate the shocking violence which followed Kenya’s December 2007 Presidential elections under Article 15 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The majority of the Chamber ruled that both the contextual and underlying requirements of crimes against humanity had been fulfilled, including that they were committed as part of a state or organizational policy as required by Article7(2)(a) of the Rome Statute. According to the majority, the latter …

Assessing The African Union Concerns About Article 16 Of The Rome State Of The International Criminal Court, Charles Chernor Jalloh, Dapo Akande, Max Du Plessis

Faculty Publications

This article assesses the African Union’s (AU) concerns about Article 16 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC). It seeks to articulate a clearer picture of the law and politics of deferrals within the context of the AU’s repeated calls to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC, or the Council) to invoke Article 16 to suspend the processes initiated by the ICC against President Omar Al Bashir of Sudan. The UNSC’s failure to accede to the AU request led African States to formally withhold cooperation from the ICC in respect to the arrest and surrender of the …

Advantaging Aggressors: Justice & Deterrence In International Law, Paul H. Robinson, Adil Ahmad Haque

All Faculty Scholarship

Current international law imposes limitations on the use of force to defend against unlawful aggression that improperly advantage unlawful aggressors and disadvantage their victims. The Article gives examples of such rules, governing a variety of situations, showing how clearly unjust they can be. No domestic criminal law system would tolerate their use.

There are good practical reasons why international law should care that its rules are perceived as unjust. Given the lack of an effective international law enforcement mechanism, compliance depends to a large degree upon the moral authority with which international law speaks. Compliance is less likely when its …