The International Criminal Court: A Criminal World Court?

Babaian, Sarah

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-78015-3_4

Sarah Babaian²

1482 Accesses
1 Citations
3 Altmetric

Abstract

In this chapter and in accordance to the foregoing examination it will be determined how the subject-matter of the twin-pillar system lead to the response of the book, whether the ICC could be regarded as an International Criminal World Court which already at that stage has potentially worldwide jurisdiction upon every national of any State; may it be a Member or a Non-Member State to the Statute. The judicial pillar entails the analysis of significant provisions which deal with the “heart of the Statute”, the jurisdiction system of the Court, article 12 (2) (a) and 13 (b) Rome Statute. The huge controversies of these two articles are essential in response to the question and will therefore be portrayed extensively. Furthermore, attention will be paid on articles like 15 bis, 15 ter, 16, 17 and 124 to examine if these provisions may bar the Court to exercise its jurisdiction. Moreover, emphasis will be put on the enormously important article 27, which contains the irrelevance of the official capacity. Notwithstanding the analysis of the article itself, it will be also incidentally addressed and examined in relation to the jurisdiction mechanism regarding article 12 (2) (a), article 13 (b) as well as with respect to the cooperation and especially the matter of conflicting obligations, pursuant to article 98 (1). After verifying to what extent the judicial pillar underlines the question of the book affirmatively, an examination of the enforcement pillar will be evaluated. Whereas firstly the theoretical strength of the Court through the applicability of its provisions with regard to international cooperation and judicial assistance will be presented, extensive attention will be focused on the practical implementation of the Rome Statute’s provisions regarding cooperation and judicial assistance, thus States practice, to determine whether the cooperation system and therefore the whole enforcement mechanism of the Court operates effectively. In order to strengthen the cooperation regime of the ICC, possible new solutions will be examined. The conclusion will entail an extensive analysis of the statutory regime and its practical implementation in order to determine whether the ICC can be designated as an independent International Criminal World Court.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Chapter: USD 29.95; Price excludes VAT (USA)

eBook: USD 99.00; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Softcover Book: USD 129.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 129.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
The literal interpretation of “worldwide” is not to confound with the definition of universal jurisdiction in criminal law.
2.
Arsanjani (1999), p. 25.
3.
Kaul (2007), p. 584; Schabas and Pecorella (2016), p. 673, para. 1.
4.
UN General Assembly Resolution 50/ 46 (1995) UN Doc, A/RES/50/46, para.2.
5.
Idem, para.2.
6.
See United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, Rome, 15 June-17 July 1998, Official Records, Volume III, Reports and other documents, A/CONF.183/13/Vol. III.
7.
Cryer et al. (2014), p. 167.
8.
See Kaul (2007), p. 593; Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its 46th Session, Draft Statute of an International Criminal Court, 2 May-22 July 1994, UNGAOR, 49th Session, Supp.No.10, UN Doc. A/49/10 (1994); Report of the Preparatory Committee on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, Draft Statute & Draft Final Act, further option for article 7, article 11, UN Doc.A/CONF.183/2/Add.1 (14 April 1998).
9.
See Kaul (2007), p. 594.
10.
Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its forty-sixth session, Draft Statute of an International Criminal Court, 2 May-22 July 1994, UNGAOR, Forty-ninth Session, Supplement No.10, UN Doc. A/49/10 (1994), Commentary to article 22, para. 3.
11.
Report of the Preparatory Committee on the establishment of an International Criminal Court, article 7, option 2, UN Doc.A/CONF.183/2/Add.1 (14 April 1998); Sok Kim (2007), pp. 115–116.
12.
See Sok Kim (2007), pp. 115–116.
13.
Idem, p. 116.
14.
See Kaul (2007), p. 594.
15.
Schabas (2010), p. 278 et seq.
16.
See Kaul (2007), p. 597.
17.
See Rhea (2012), pp. 168–169; Scheffer (1999b), pp. 12–13 et seq.
18.
Schabas (2010), p. 279.
19.
See Schabas (2010), pp. 279–280; Kaul (2007), p. 598.
20.
See Sok Kim (2007), p. 118.
21.
UN Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court UN Doc. A/CONF.183/C.1/L.6; Kaul (2002), p. 599.
22.
See Kaul (2007), p. 599; Cryer et al. (2014), p. 167.
23.
See Sok Kim (2007), p. 113.
24.
See Kaul (2007), p. 586; Bourgon (2002), p. 569; Schabas (2010), p. 283.
25.
See Bourgon (2002), p. 564.
26.
Idem, p. 562.
27.
For the Crime of Aggression, other preconditions for the exercise of jurisdiction were set up, which will be elaborated in Chapter C, I, 3 (a).
28.
See Crawford (2003), p. 147.
29.
Shaw (2017), p. 489.
30.
Scheffer, Head of the United States Delegation, on the Bureau’s Discussion Paper of 9 July 1998 in Kaul (2007), p. 601.
31.
Statement of US Ambassador Scheffer in the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly on the International Criminal Court, 21 October 1998, Sixth Committee -10- Press Release GA/L/3077, 9th meeting, available at: http://www.un.org/press/en/1998/19981021.gal3077.html (Last accessed 18 Dec 2017).
32.
Kaul (2007), p. 607 et seq.
33.
Brown (1999), p. 870; Lotus Case (France vs. Turkey) PCIJ [1927] Series A No. 10, p. 24.
34.
See Akande (2003), p. 620; Schabas (2010), p. 286.
35.
Scheffer (1999b), p. 18.
36.
See Mangold (2007), p. 275; Akande (2003), p. 620.
37.
See Morris (2001), p. 27.
38.
See Morris (2001), p. 20 et seq.; Wedgwood (2001), p. 199.
39.
Scheffer (1999b), p. 20.
40.
See Danilenko (1999–2000), p. 448.
41.
Danilenko (1999–2000), p. 448.
42.
See Akande (2003), p. 620; Junck (2006), p. 55.
43.
Kirsch (1998); Brown (1999), p. 870.
44.
See Akande (2003), p. 620.
45.
See Sok Kim (2007), p. 125 et seq.
46.
Idem, p. 130.
47.
Ibidem, p. 125, 130.
48.
Kaul (2002), pp. 608–609.
49.
See Danilenko (2002), p. 1873.
50.
Idem, p. 1873.
51.
Scheffer (1999a), The Challenge of Jurisdiction, p. 8.
52.
See Danilenko (2002), p. 1873; Reparation for Injuries Suffered in the Service of the United Nations (Advisory Opinion), ICJ Reports (1949) 174, 185.
53.
See Danilenko (2002), p. 1873.
54.
See Kaul (2002), pp. 586–591; Sok Kim (2003), pp. 223–230; Cryer et al. (2014), p. 57; Akande (2003), pp. 626 and 639.
55.
See Akande (2003), p. 626.
56.
See Zimmermann and Scheel (2002), p. 137; Akande (2003), p. 626; Danilenko (2002), p. 1882.
57.
Scheffer (1999a), The Challenge of Jurisdiction, p. 7.
58.
See Morris (2001), p. 29 et seq.
59.
See Zimmermann and Scheel (2002), p. 137; Scharf (2001), p. 99.
60.
Lotus Case (France vs. Turkey) PCIJ [1927] Series A No. 10, p. 19; Scharf (2001), p. 73.
61.
See Scharf (2001), p. 73.
62.
Crawford (1983), pp. 85–86.
63.
For further information see Akande (2003), pp. 622–634; Scharf (2001), p. 76 et seq.
64.
Trial of the Major War Criminals Before the International Criminal Tribunal 22 (Lake Success, NY: United Nations 1949), p. 466.
65.
Interim Report of the Independent Commission of Experts Established pursuant a Security Council Resolution 780 (1992), 73 UN Doc S/25274 (1993); Scharf (2001), p. 105.
66.
See Article 1 of the SCSL Statute.
67.
Prosecutor vs. Charles Ghankay Taylor, Sentencing Judgement, SCSL-03-01-T (30 May 2012).
68.
See Akande (2003), p. 631.
69.
See Scharf (2001), pp. 99–100; Sok Kim (2007), p. 131.
70.
See Danilenko (2002), p. 1882.
71.
Idem, p. 1882; Article V of the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime Apartheid and article VI of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
72.
See Scheffer (1999a), The Challenge of Jurisdiction, pp. 1 and 8.
73.
Idem, p. 6.
74.
Akande (2003), p. 634.
75.
Scharf (2001), p. 76.
76.
See Schabas (2010), p. 286; Akande (2003), p. 626.
77.
Kaul (2002), p. 591.
78.
See Akande (2003), p. 625.
79.
See Akande (2003), p. 626.
80.
With regard to this doctrine the International Court of Justice.
81.
See Shaw (2017), pp. 818–819.
82.
See Akande (2003), p. 636.
83.
See See Cryer et al. (2014), p. 546.
84.
Idem, p. 546.
85.
Attorney General of Israel v. Eichmann, Israel Supreme Court (1968) reprinted in 36 ILR 277, pp. 308–310.
86.
Prosecutor v. Tihomir Blaskic, Judgement of the Appeals Chamber, IT-95-14-AR9 (29 October 1997), para. 41.
87.
See Pedretti (2015), p. 278 and more detailed in Chapter 6 of her book; Triffterer and Burchard (2016), p. 1048, para. 16.
88.
The problem of the applicability of article 27 to Non-State Members will be extensively discussed within the analysis of article 13 (b) as well as 27.
89.
Wedgwood (1999), p. 104.
90.
See Scheffer (1999b), p. 20; Wedgwood (1999), p. 104.
91.
More information in this chapter, Sect. I, 3, e.
92.
Wedgwood (1999), p. 104; Scheffer (1999b), p. 20.
93.
See Zimmermann (2016), p. 2317, para. 20.
94.
See Clark (2010), p. 691; Zimmermann (2016), pp. 2316, 2317, paras. 18–19.
95.
See Brown (1999), p. 887.
96.
Crime of Aggression, Resolution RC/Res.6 (11 June 2010).
97.
Scheffer (2010a), para. 10.
98.
See Akande (2003), p. 634.
99.
See Kaul (2002), p. 591; Akande (2003), p. 626.
100.
Wedgwood (1999), p. 104; Scheffer (1999b), p. 20.
101.
See Carr Center for Human Rights Policy, “The United States and the International Criminal Court”, Working Paper T-00-02, p. 13 available at: https://www.innovations.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/ICC.pdf (Last accessed 07 Dec 2017).
102.
See Bourgon (2002), p. 569.
103.
See Schabas (2017), p. 151; Wilmshurst (2001), p. 39.
104.
Schabas (2010), p. 294.
105.
See Bourgon (2002), p. 563.
106.
Kaul (2002), p. 585; Schabas (2010), p. 294.
107.
Negotiated Relationship Agreement between the International Criminal Court and the United Nations.
108.
See Condorelli and Villalpando (2002), p. 630.
109.
Dralle (2011), p. 3.
110.
See Schabas (2010), p. 294.
111.
And even in situations, where such a breach is given, as the incidents in the Syrian Arabic Republic since 2011 could demonstrate, there will still remain the political problem in getting to a mutual consent of the five permanent members to take action.
112.
See Schabas (2010), p. 294.
113.
United Member States, available at: www.un.org/en/members/ (Last accessed 07 Dec 2017).
114.
See Akande (2009), p. 342.
115.
UN Security Council Resolution 1593 (2005) UN Doc S/RES/1593; UN Security Council Resolution 1970 (2011) UN Doc S/RES/1970.
116.
See The Prosecutor v. Muammar Mohammed Abu Minyar Gaddafi, Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi and Abdullah Al- Senussi, Decision on the “Prosecutor’s Application Pursuant to Article 58”, ICC-01/11 (27 June 2011); The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmed Al Bashir, Decision on the Prosecutor’s Application for a Warrant of Arrest against Omar Hassan Ahmed Al Bashir, Pre-Trial Chamber I, ICC-02/05-01/09 (4 March 2009).
117.
Case Concerning The Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000, (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Belgium,) ICJ Reports (2002), p. 21, para. 51.
118.
See Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Libya, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/libya (Last accessed 07 Dec 2017).
119.
Simbeye (2004), p. 19.
120.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmed Al Bashir, Decision on the Prosecution’s Application for a Warrant of Arrest against Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, ICC-02/05-01/09, Pre-Trial Chamber I, 4 March 2009, para. 41.
121.
Idem, para. 43–45.
122.
Decision on the “Prosecutor’s Application Pursuant to Article 58 as to Muammar Mohammed Abu Minyar Gaddafi, Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi and Abdullah Al-Senussi”, ICC-01/11-12, Pre-Trial Chamber I, 27 June 2011, para. 9.
123.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision Pursuant to Article 87 (7) of the Rome Statute on the Failure by the Republic of Malawi to Comply with the Cooperation Requests Issued by the Court with Respect to the Arrest and Surrender of Omar Hasan Ahmed Al Bashir, ICC-02/05/01/09, 12 December 2011, para. 36.
124.
See The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision Pursuant to Article 87 (7) of the Rome Statute on the refusal of the Republic of Chad to Comply with the Cooperation Requests Issued by the Court with Respect to the Arrest and Surrender of Omar Hasan Ahmed Al Bashir, ICC-02/05/01/09, 13 December 2011, para. 13.
125.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision on the Cooperation of the Democratic Republic of The Congo Regarding Omar Al Bashir’s Arrest and Surrender to the Court, ICC-02/05-01/09-195, 9 April 2014, para. 29.
126.
See The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision under article 87 (7) of the Rome Statute on the non-compliance by South Africa with the request by the Court for the arrest and surrender of Omar Hasan Ahmed Al Bashir, ICC-02/05/01/09, 06 July 2017, para. 88.
127.
Idem, paras. 76 and 93.
128.
See Crawford (2012), pp. 384–385.
129.
See Schabas (2017), p. 62.
130.
See Schabas (2017), p. 62.
131.
See Gaeta (2009), p. 322.
132.
Case Concerning The Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000, (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Belgium,) ICJ Judgement (2002).
133.
Article 6 II ICTR Statute, article 7 II ICTY Statute.
134.
Prosecutor vs. Milosevic, Decision on Preliminary Motions, IT-02-54-PT, 8 November 2001, para. 28.; Schabas (2010), p. 448.
135.
See Prosecutor v. Charles Ghankay Taylor, Decision on Immunity from Jurisdiction, SCSL-2003-01-I, Appeals Chamber, 31 May 2004.
136.
Idem, para. 51.
137.
Gaeta (2009) p. 325 et seq.; Gaeta (2002), p. 991.
138.
See Cryer et al. (2014), p. 560; Akande (2009) p. 340 et seq.
139.
See Cryer et al. (2014), pp. 559–561.
140.
ICC-Statement by the ICC Prosecutor on the Decision by the Pre-Trial-Chamber I to issue three warrants of arrest for Muammar Gaddafi, Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi and Abdulla Al-Senussi, Press Releases, 28.06.2011, p. 1.
141.
See Daqun (2012), p. 62.
142.
Triffterer and Burchard (2016), p. 1049, para. 17; Preamble of the Rome-Statute, para.5.
143.
1996 ILC Draft Code against the Peace and Security of Mankind, Commentary (1) to article 7.
144.
See Daqun (2012), p. 56 et seq.; Akande (2011), p. 3.
145.
Idem, p. 3.
146.
See Daqun (2012), p. 67.
147.
Gaeta (2009), p. 322; Daqun (2012), p. 67.
148.
Daqun (2012), pp. 67–68.
149.
Damgaard (2008), pp. 264–265; Daqun (2012), p. 68.
150.
Schabas (2011).
151.
Gaeta (2009), p. 319.
152.
See Gaeta (2009), p. 324.
153.
Akande (2009), p. 342.
154.
UN Security Council Resolution 1593 (2005) UN Doc S/RES/1593, para. 2; UN Security Council Resolution 1970 (2011) UN Doc S/RES/1970, para. 5.
155.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision on the Cooperation of the Democratic Republic of The Congo Regarding Omar Al Bashir’s Arrest and Surrender to the Court, ICC-02/05-01/09-195, 9 April 2014, para. 26.
156.
See also Pedretti (2015), p. 288.
157.
See also Jacobs (2015), p. 290.
158.
See Gaeta (2009), p. 319.
159.
See Schabas (2010), pp. 451–452.
160.
See Triffterer and Burchard (2016), p. 1038, para. 1; Akande (2004), p. 419.
161.
The Pre-Trial Chamber determined that the legal framework of the Statute applies “in its entirety” to Sudan. See The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision under article 87 (7) of the Rome Statute on the non-compliance by South Africa with the request by the Court for the arrest and surrender of Omar Hasan Ahmed Al Bashir, ICC-02/05/01/09, 06 July 2017, para. 85.
162.
Sarooshi (2004), p. 100.
163.
It is dependent on each resolution, which UN-Member State is obliged to cooperate with the Court, but theoretically the ICC can exercise its jurisdiction upon every UN-Member State.
164.
See Barriga and Grover (2011), p. 517.
165.
Resolution ICC-ASP/16/Res. 5, Activation of the jurisdiction of the Court over the Crime of Aggression, Adopted at the 13th plenary meeting, 14 December 2017, by consensus, available at: https://asp.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/asp_docs/Resolutions/ASP16/ICC-ASP-16-Res5-ENG.pdf (Last accessed 19 Dec 2017).
166.
See Reisinger Coracini (2010), pp. 747–748.
167.
Trial of the major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg, 14 October 1945 -1 October 1996; Trahan (2011), p. 50.
168.
See Trahan (2011), p. 49 et seq.
169.
Kaul (2011), p. 4.
170.
See Crime of Aggression, article 8 bis Rome Statute.
171.
Former article 5 (2) Rome Statute, which was deleted in accordance with RC/Res.6, Annex I, 11 June 2010.
172.
See Trahan (2011), p. 55; Barriga and Grover (2011), pp. 518, 521.
173.
Due to the fact that this analysis does not play an essential role with regard to the question of the book.
174.
See RC/Res.6, Annex III, 11 June 2010.
175.
See RC/Res.6, Annex III, paragraph 6 and 7, 11 June 2010.
176.
See Trahan (2011), p. 59; Kaul (2011), p. 5.
177.
See Reisinger Coracini (2010), p. 763; Schabas (2011), p. 202.
178.
See Yengejeh (2004), p. 127 et seq.; Barriga and Grover (2011), p. 527.
179.
More detailed information with regard to the SC practise, see Gaja (2004), p. 124; Escarameia (2004), p. 140.
180.
See Escarameia (2004), p. 136; Kemp (2010), p. 223.
181.
General Assembly, Uniting for Peace 377 (V), 302nd plenary meeting, 3 November 1950. Para. A.
182.
Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, ICJ Reports 1962, p. 163.
183.
See Escarameia (2004), p. 137.
184.
See Barriga and Grover (2011), p. 528.
185.
See Barriga and Grover (2011), p. 530.
186.
See Article 5 (2) was deleted in accordance with RC/Res.6, annex I, of 11 June 2010.
187.
See Article 123 (3) Rome Statute.
188.
See Barriga and Grover (2011), p. 524; Scheffer (2010b), p. 3; Reisinger Coracini (2010), p. 766.
189.
See Scheffer (2010b), p. 3; Reisinger Coracini (2010), p. 766.
190.
See Barriga and Grover (2011), p. 524.
191.
Idem, p. 524.
192.
See Articles 15 bis (2) (3), 15 ter (2), (3); Barriga and Grover (2011), pp. 526, 530.
193.
See Barriga and Grover (2011), p. 519.
194.
Idem, p. 526.
195.
See Reisinger Coracini (2010), p. 778.
196.
See Trahan (2011), p. 80 et seq; Akande (2010), pp. 5–6.
197.
See Akande (2010), pp. 5–6; Reisinger Coracini (2010), pp. 776–779.
198.
Akande (2010), p. 6.
199.
State Parties to Amendments on the Crime of Aggression to the Rome Statute, available at: https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XVIII-10-b&chapter=18&lang=en (Last accessed 19 Dec 2017).
200.
Coalition of the International Criminal Court (2017), Press Release, available at: http://www.coalitionfortheicc.org/sites/default/files/cicc_documents/CICCPR_ASP2017_CrimeofAggression_15Dec2017_final.pdf (Last accessed 17 Dec 2017).
201.
See Akande (2010), p. 6.
202.
See also Reisinger Coracini (2010), p. 772 et seq.
203.
See Reisinger Coracini (2010), p. 786; Akande (2010), p. 4.
204.
See Reisinger Coracini (2010), p. 761.
205.
See Trahan (2011), p. 93.
206.
See Annex III, para. 6 of the Resolution RC/Res.6 (11 June 2010) and article 8 bis (1) Rome Statute.
207.
See Paragraph 5 of the Preamble of the Rome Statute.
208.
See also Schabas (2012), p. 204.
209.
See Reisinger Coracini (2010), p. 786.
210.
See Trahan (2011), p. 93.
211.
See Zimmermann (2016), p. 2317, para. 20.
212.
December 2017.
213.
See Reisinger Coracini (2010), pp. 787–788.
214.
See this chapter, Sect. I, 1, Main objections and possible violations of article 34 VCLT, p. 28 et seq.
215.
See Kaul (2002), pp. 608, 609.
216.
See this chapter, Sect. I, 1a, p. 27; Akande (2003), p. 626; Danilenko (2002), p. 1882.
217.
With regard to the crime against peace.
218.
See Shaw (2017), p. 589.
219.
See Articles 4–7 of the Draft Articles for Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts.
220.
See Cryer et al. (2014), p. 57.
221.
See Reisinger Coracini (2010), p. 788.
222.
See Article 121 (5) Rome Statute.
223.
See Reisinger Coracini (2010), p. 789.
224.
Kaul (2011), p. 12.
225.
See Wilmshurst (2001), p. 40.
226.
1994 ILC Draft Statute, article 23 (3), p. 85; Wilmshurst (2001), p. 40.
227.
See Rwelamira (1999), p. 150; Bergsmo et al. (2016), p. 771.
228.
See Akande et al. (2010), p. 8.
229.
See Rwelamira (1999), p. 150.
230.
Bergsmo (2000), p. 93; Sarooshi (2004), pp. 105–106.
231.
See Wilmshurst (2001), p. 40.
232.
Bergsmo et al. (2016), p. 774, para. 9.
233.
Proposal by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland: trigger Mechanism, U.N. Doc. A/AC.249/1998/WG.3/DP.1 (25 March 1998); Bergsmo et al. (2016), p. 773, para. 6; Abass (2005), p. 271.
234.
See Security Council Resolution 1422 (2002) UN Doc S/RES/1422 (2002).
235.
See Akande et al. (2010), p. 8; Global Policy Forum: “The ICC in the Security Council”, available at: http://www.globalpolicy.org/international-justice/the-international-criminal-court/icc-in-the-security-council-6-4.html (Last accessed 07 Dec 2017).
236.
See UN Security Council Resolution 1487 (2003) UN Doc S/RES/1487 (2003).
237.
See Akande et al. (2010), p. 8.
238.
See UN SCOR, 58th Session, 4772nd meeting, UN Doc S/PV.4772, 12 June 2003, p. 20; Akande et al. (2010), p. 8; Cryer et al. (2014) , p. 174.
239.
UN SCOR, 57th Session, 4568th meeting, UN Doc S/PV.4568, 10 July 2002, p. 9; Jain (2005), pp. 241–242.
240.
See Kofi Annan (2003), p. 1.
241.
See American Non-Governmental Organization Coalition for the ICC (AMICC), Background on Peacekeeping and the ICC, p. 2 available at: http://www.iccnow.org/documents/FS-AMICC-Peacekeeping.pdf (researched on: 10 July 2015) Extensive analysis of legality of SC resolutions 1422, 1487: Jain (2005), p. 244 et seq.; Stahn (2003), p. 85 et seq.
242.
Kofi Annan (2004); Global Policy Forum: “The ICC in the Security Council”, available at: http://www.globalpolicy.org/international-justice/the-international-criminal-court/icc-in-the-security-council-6-4.html (Last accessed 19 Dec 2017).
243.
See Corell (2004), p. 1.
244.
See Article 25 UN-Charter; see also Jain (2005), p. 253.
245.
See Corell (2004), p. 2.
246.
See Sarooshi (2004), pp. 100, 116.
247.
See Kampala Declaration (RC/Decl.1), in: Selected Basic Documents Related to the International Criminal Court (The Hague 2011), p. 430.
248.
In the following see Verduzco (2015), pp. 53–57; Verduzco further determined that the Central African Republic requested the SC for a deferral in 2008, but due to the fact that no official documents prove that request, it will be not mentioned. See Verduzco, pp. 54–55.
249.
Letter from the Permanent Observer of the African Union, Communiqué of the 142nd meeting of the Peace and Security Council, 21 July 2008, Annex to the UN Doc Security Council S/2008/481. 23 July 2008, para. 9.
250.
See Verduzco (2015), p. 54.
251.
See Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Situation in Kenya, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/kenya (Last accessed 23 Dec 2017).
252.
Idem.
253.
See Assembly of the Union, Sixteenth Ordinary Session, 30–31 January 2010, Decision on the Implementation of the Decisions on the International Criminal Court (ICC), Assembly/AU/Dec.334 (XVI), para. 6.
254.
See Benzing (2003), p. 592.
255.
Idem, p. 595.
256.
Preamble, paragraph 4–5; similar Benzing (2003), pp. 596–597.
257.
See Akande (2003), p. 648.
258.
The Prosecutor v. Francis Kirimi Muthaura,Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta and Mohammed Hussein Ali, Judgment on the appeal of the Republic of Kenya against the decision of Pre-Trial Chamber II of 30 May 2011 entitled “Decision on the Application by the Government of Kenya Challenging the Admissibility of the Case Pursuant to Article 19(2)(b) of the Statute”, ICC-01/09-02/11 OA, 30 August 2011, para. 38–39.
259.
Cassese (2009), p. 28.
260.
See Article 18 para. (3), (5) and article 19 para. (10), (11).
261.
Former Prosecutor Ocampo, Response to the Document in Support of the Appeal, para 82, in: The Prosecutor v. Germain Katanga and Matthieu Ngudjolo Chui, Judgement of the Appeals Chamber, Situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, ICC-01/04-01/07 OA 8, 25 September 2009, para. 67.
262.
December 2017.
263.
See Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Case Information Sheet, Situation in the Republic of Kenya, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/PIDS/publications/RutoKosgeySangEng.pdf (Last accessed 18 Dec 2017); Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Case Information Sheet, Situation in Côte d’Ivoire, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/cdi/simone-gbagbo/Documents/SimoneGbagboEng.pdf (accessed 23 Dec 2017); Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Case Information Sheet, Situation in Libya, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/libya (Last accessed 31 Dec 2017).
264.
Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Case Information Sheet, Situation in Côte d’Ivoire, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/cdi/simone-gbagbo/Documents/SimoneGbagboEng.pdf (Last accessed 07 Dec 2017).
265.
The Prosecutor v. Francis Kirimi Muthaura, Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta and Mohamed Hussein Ali, Appeals Chamber, ICC-01/09-02/11 OA, 30 August 2011, p. 30, para. 80.
266.
Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Case Information Sheet, Situation in Libya, The Prosecutor v. Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi, p. 2, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/libya/gaddafi/Documents/GaddafiEng.pdf (Last accessed 18 Dec 2017); The Prosecutor v. Saif Al- Islam Gaddafi and Abdullah Al-Senussi, Decision on the admissibility of the case against Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi, Pre-Trial Chamber I, ICC-01/11-01/11, 31 Mai 2013, p. 90, para. 219.
267.
Summary of the Decision on the admissibility of the case against Mr. Abdullah Al-Senussi, p. 7, 8; Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Case Information Sheet, Situation in Libya, The Prosecutor v. Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi, p. 2, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/libya/gaddafi/Documents/GaddafiEng.pdf (Last accessed 18 Dec 2017).
268.
Paragraph 4 and 5 of the Preamble of the Rome Statute; Similar Triffterer and Burchard (2016), p. 1049, para. 17.
269.
See Triffterer and Burchard (2016), p. 1038, para. 1; Akande (2004), p. 419.
270.
See Gaeta (2002), pp. 990–991; Triffterer and Burchard (2016), p. 1040, para. 4; Schabas (2010), p. 449; Pedretti (2015), p. 246; Akande (2004), pp. 419–420.
271.
See Cryer et al. (2014), pp. 556–5557.
272.
See similar Pedretti (2015), p. 247.
273.
See Article 25 (3).
274.
In the following Triffterer and Burchard (2016), pp. 1048–1049, para. 16–17.
275.
Whereas Triffterer and Burchard emphasize that there is no unanimous decision regarding the abolishment of immunity ratione materiae for international crimes in front of national courts dues to the ICJ’s Arrest Warrant decision, authors such as Akande and Pedretti determine that there is no functional immunity with regard to the prosecution of international crimes in front of either a national or international court. See Akande (2004), pp. 414–415; Pedretti (2015), p. 248.
276.
Further and more detailed reference to the exception of functional immunity, see article 98 (1).
277.
Within the analysis of article 13 (b).
278.
But with regard to a SC referral and the applicability of article 27 (2). See Chapter C, I, 2.
279.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision Pursuant to Article 87(7) of the Rome Statute on the Failure by the Republic of Malawi to Comply with the Cooperation Requests Issued by the Court with Respect to the Arrest and Surrender of Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, ICC-02/05-01/09, 12 December 2011, p. 35, 36.
280.
See Jacobs (2015), pp. 291–292.
281.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision on the Prosecution’s Application for a Warrant of Arrest against Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, ICC-02/05-01/09-3, 4 March 2009, para. 42–44.
282.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision under article 87 (7) of the Rome Statute on the non-compliance by South Africa with the request of the Court for the arrest and surrender of Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 6 July 2017, para. 91.
283.
See also Steinberger-Fraunhofer (2008), p. 215.
284.
See also Triffterer and Burchard (2016), p. 1053, para. 24; Akande (2004), p. 433.
285.
See also Triffterer and Burchard (2016), p. 1053, para. 24.
286.
See Pedretti (2015), p. 272; Triffterer and Burchard (2016), p. 1040, para. 5.
287.
See Jacobs (2015), p. 296.
288.
See detailed analysis with regard to article 12 (2) (a).
289.
See detailed analysis with regard to article 98, p. 77 et seq., especially 84.
290.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision on the Cooperation of the Democratic Republic of The Congo Regarding Omar Al Bashir’s Arrest and Surrender to the Court, ICC-02/056-01/09-195, 9 April 2014, para. 29.
291.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision under article 87 (7) of the Rome Statute on the non-compliance by South Africa with the request of the Court for the arrest and surrender of Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 6 July 2017, para. 88.
292.
See Triffterer and Burchard (2016), p. 1041, para. 6; Akande (2004), p. 433.
293.
See Report of the Expert Workshop, “Cooperation and the International Criminal Court”, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom, 18–19 September 2004, para. 6.
294.
Regarding article 13 (b) it is first and foremost the SC resolution which makes the Rome Statutes provisions applicable to the Non-Member State but it is the initial trigger mechanism of the Statute itself, which at all constitutes to the bases for such a referral.
295.
Regarding article 12 (3) it should be stated that the Non-State Party waived its immunity at the moment of accepting the jurisdiction of the Court. See Triffterer and Burchard (2016), p. 1041, para. 6.
296.
See Zimmermann (2016), p. 2312, paras. 1 and 2.
297.
See Zimmermann (2016), p. 2312, para. 9. The declaration of France became effective with the Rome Statutes entry into force on 1 July 2002; thus the declaration would have last until the 1 July 2009.
298.
See Zimmermann (2016), p. 2315, para. 10.
299.
See Zimmermann (2016), p. 2313, para. 4 et seq.
300.
See Zimmermann (2016), p. 2314, para. 8.
301.
See Bourgon (2002), p. 565.
302.
Crawford (1994), p. 147.
303.
See Bourgon (2002), p. 565.
304.
There is a dispute whether article 124 has to be regarded as a reservation, which is prohibited, or as an interpretive declaration. More to this dispute: Tabak (2009), pp. 1075–1076.
305.
See Arsanjani (1999), p. 53.
306.
See Zimmermann (2016), pp. 2315, 2316, 2317 para. 9 and paras. 19–20.
307.
See Coalition for the International Criminal Court (2010), Report on the first Review Conference On the Rome Statute, 31.May- 11.June 2010, Kampala Uganda, p.4, available at: http://www.iccnow.org/documents/RC_Report_finalweb.pdf (Last accessed 11 Dec 2017).
308.
See Tabak (2009), p. 1098.
309.
Cassese (1998), p. 3.
310.
See Broomhall (2003), p. 155.
311.
Kirsch (2007), p. 546.
312.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2037, para. 54.
313.
See Information made available from Bashir Watch, Bashir Travel Map” available under: http://bashirwatch.org/#section-case-against-bashir (Last accessed 19 Dec 2017).
314.
Song (2015), p. VIII.
315.
See Schabas (2010), p. 975.
316.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2008, para. 5.
317.
See Sluiter (2009), p. 188.
318.
See Sluiter (2009), p. 188.
319.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2005, para. 2.
320.
See Rinoldi and Parisi (1999), pp. 346–347.
321.
See Schabas (2010), p. 974.
322.
Idem, p. 981.
323.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2008, para. 5; Broomhall (2003), pp. 157–158.
324.
Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2008, para. 5; Mochochoko (1999), p. 314.
325.
See Broomhall (2003), p. 156.
326.
Verduzco (2015), p. 44.
327.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2007, para. 4.
328.
See Mochochoko (1999), p. 306.
329.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), pp. 2043–2044, para. 2.
330.
See Broomhall (2003), p. 155; Mochochoko (1999), p. 308.
331.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2020, para. 2.
332.
In the following see Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2025 ff., para. 219 et seq.
333.
See Verduzco (2015), p. 44.
334.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2036, para. 53.
335.
Prosecutor v. Tihomir Blaskic, Appeals Chamber, Judgement on the request of the Republic of Croatia for review of the decision of Trial Chamber II of 18 July (29 October 1997), para. 35; Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2036, para. 53.
336.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2036, para. 53.
337.
See Rinoldi and Parisi (1999), p. 376; Article 78 PrepCom Draft.
338.
See Broomhall (2003), p. 156.
339.
See Schabas (2010), pp. 1123–1124; Broomhall (2003), p. 156.
340.
Cassese (1999), p. 166.
341.
See Zimmermann (1989), p. 223; Sarooshi (2004), p. 102.
342.
See Rinoldi and Parisi (1999), p. 377.
343.
See Resolution ICC-ASP/10/Res.5, Strengthening the International Criminal Court and the Assembly of States Parties (2011), Annex.
344.
See Resolution ICC-ASP/10/Res.5, Strengthening the International Criminal Court and the Assembly of States Parties (2011), para. 14 (a), (b) of the Annex.
345.
See Resolution ICC-ASP/10/Res.5, Strengthening the International Criminal Court and the Assembly of States Parties (2011), para. 15, 19 of the Annex.
346.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2035, para. 49 and pp. 2041–2042, para. 69–71; similar also Sluiter and Talontsi (2016), p. 103.
347.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2035, para. 49 and pp. 2041–2042, para. 69–71.
348.
See Prosecutor v. Tihomir Blaskic, Appeals Chamber, Judgement on the request of the Republic of Croatia for review of the decision of Trial Chamber II of 18 July, para. 36 (29 October 1997).
349.
Prosecutor v. Tihomir Blaskic, Appeals Chamber, Judgement on the request of the Republic of Croatia for review of the decision of Trial Chamber II of 18 July, para. 36 (ii) (29 October 1997).
350.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2042, para. 71.
351.
In the following see Sarooshi (2004), p. 103; Cassese (1999), p. 166.
352.
See Sarooshi (2004), p. 104; Plachta (2001), p. 136.
353.
Plachta (2001), p. 129 et seq.
354.
See Sarooshi (2004), p. 104.
355.
Idem, p. 103.
356.
See Cassese (1999), p. 166.
357.
See Schabas (2010), p. 984.
358.
See Article 17 (3) also refers to article 87 (5) but the non-cooperation of Non-Member States will be discussed elsewhere.
359.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2033, para. 46.
360.
See United Nations and International Criminal Court, Memorandum of understanding between the United Nations and the International Criminal Court concerning cooperation between the United Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUC) and the International Criminal Court, 8 November 2005, No. 1292.
361.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2033, para. 46.
362.
See UN Security Council Resolution 2098 (2013) UN Doc S/Res/2089 and UN Security Council Resolution 2100 (2013) UN Doc S/Res/2100.
363.
UN Security Council Resolution 2098 (2013), paragraph 12 (d).
364.
See UN Security Council Resolution 2100 (2013), paragraph 16 (g) and 27.
365.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2033, para. 46.
366.
See Regulations of the Court, adopted by the judges of the Court on 24 May 2004, ICC-BD/01-01-04.
367.
See Heilmann (2006), p. 181.
368.
Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2030, para. 39.
369.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), pp. 2028–2030, para. 31, 36, 39 et seq; Palmisano (1999), pp. 417–418.
370.
See Heilmann (2006), p. 182; Gallant (2003), pp. 30–31.
371.
See Gallant (2003), p. 31.
372.
See Heilmann (2006), pp. 182–183; Gallant (2003), pp. 30–33.
373.
See this chapter, Sect. I, 2, p. 54 et seq.
374.
The Prosecutor v. Abdel Raheem Muhammad Hussein, Decision on the Prosecutor’s Request for a finding of non-compliance against the Republic of the Sudan, Pre Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/12, 26 June 2015, para. 16; The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision on the Prosecutor’s Request for a finding of non-compliance against the Republic of the Sudan, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/12, 9 March 2015, para. 18.
375.
The Prosecutor v. Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi, Decision on the non-compliance by Libya with requests of cooperation by the Court and referring the matter to the United Nations Security Council, Pre-Trial Chamber I, ICC-01/11-01/11, 10 December 2014.
376.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision under article 87 (7) of the Rome Statute on the non-compliance by Jordan with the request of the Court to arrest and surrender Omar Al-Bashir, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 11 December 2017, para. 54; The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision under article 87 (7) of the Rome Statute on the non-compliance by South Africa with the request of the Court to arrest and surrender Omar Al-Bashir, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 06 July 2017, para. 88.
377.
Similar Verduzco (2015), p. 44.
378.
See Palmisano (1999), p. 418.
379.
The Prosecutor v. Ahmad Muhammad Harun and Ali Muhammad Ali Abd-Al-Rahman, Decision informing the United Nations Security Council about the lack of cooperation by the Republic of the Sudan, Pre-Trial Chamber I, ICC-02/05-01/07, 25 May 2010, p. 7.
380.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision under article 87 (7) of the Rome Statute on the non-compliance by South Africa with the request of the Court to arrest and surrender Omar Al-Bashir, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 06 July 2017, paras. 94.
381.
Similar O’Donohue (2015), p. 133.
382.
See Broomhall (2003), pp. 160–161.
383.
See similar Verduzco (2015), p. 47.
384.
In the following see Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2075, para. 2.
385.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2069, paras. 2–3.
386.
Model Treaty of Extradition, adopted by General Assembly resolution 45/116 (14 December 1990).
387.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2048, para. 5.
388.
See Rinoldi and Parisi (1999), p. 348.
389.
Idem, p. 350.
390.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2058, para. 59; Rinoldi and Parisi (1999), p. 350.
391.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2058, para. 60–62.
392.
See Article 90 (3) Rome Statute.
393.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), pp. 2063–2064, paras. 16–17.
394.
Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2065, para. 23.
395.
Cassese (1999), p. 166.
396.
In the following see Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2090 ff., paras. 37–53.
397.
See Prosecutor v. Tihomir Blaskic, Judgement of the Appeals Chamber, IT-95-14-AR9 (29 October 1997); Cassese (1999), p. 164 et seq.; Sluiter (2009), p. 189.
398.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2104, para. 6.
399.
In the follwing see Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2120, para. 4 et seq.
400.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2103, para.2. and p. 2106, para 2.
401.
See Rinoldi and Parisi (1999), p. 371.
402.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2107, para. 4 and 7.
403.
See Articles 18 (6) and 19 (8).
404.
See Palmisano (1999), p. 409.
405.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision under article 87 (7) of the Rome Statute on the non-compliance by Jordan with the request of the Court to arrest and surrender Omar Al-Bashir, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 11 December 2017, para. 47.
406.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision under article 87 (7) of the Rome Statute on the non-compliance by Jordan with the request of the Court to arrest and surrender Omar Al-Bashir, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 11 December 2017, para. 48.
407.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2115, para.2.
408.
With regard to article 12 (2) (a) as well as 13 (b).
409.
Rinoldi and Parisi (1999), p. 389.
410.
See Saland (1999), p. 202.
411.
See 12 (2) (b) is obviously not included as the requested State cannot be the “third State” at the same time.
412.
See Benzing (2004), p. 202.
413.
See Kreß (2012), pp. 236–237.
414.
See Kreß (2012), pp. 237–238.
415.
See Cryer et al. (2014), p. 558 and more precisely pp. 546–555; Gaeta (2002), pp. 981–982; Pedretti (2015), p. 278; Akande (2003), p. 642.
416.
See Cryer et al. (2014), p. 558 and more precisely pp. 546–555; Gaeta (2002), pp. 981–982; Pedretti (2015), p. 278.
417.
See Akande (2003), p. 639.
418.
An extensive portray about the different statements of Tribunals and case law with regard to the abolishment of functional immunity with regard to the commitment of core crimes: Gaeta (2002), pp. 981–982 and Cryer et al. (2014), pp. 546–555.
419.
See Cryer et al. (2014), pp. 548–549.
420.
See Akande (2003), p. 642.
421.
See Pedretti (2015), p. 278; Cryer et al. (2014), p. 559.
422.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2123, para. 11; Kreß (2012), p. 233; Pedretti (2015), p. 277; Schabas (2010), p. 1041.
423.
See Akande (2004), p. 423; Wirth (2001), p. 429; Gaeta (2002), p. 994.
424.
See Gaeta (2002), p. 994.
425.
See Akande (2004), p. 425.
426.
See Pedretti (2015), p. 277; Kreß (2012), pp. 238–239.
427.
See Kreß (2012), p. 238.
428.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision under article 87 (7) of the Rome Statute on the non-compliance by South Africa with the request of the Court to arrest and surrender Omar Al-Bashir, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 06 July 2017, para. 76.
429.
The Prosecutor v Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision Pursuant to Article 87(7) of the Rome Statute on the Failure by the Republic of Malawi to Comply with the Cooperation Requests Issued by the Court with Respect to the Arrest and Surrender of Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Case No. ICC-02/05-01/09, Decision by the Pre-Trial Chamber I (12 December 2011), para. 18; Pedretti (2015), p. 283.
430.
See Pedretti (2015), p. 280; Kreß (2012), p. 239; Schabas (2010), pp. 1040–1041.
431.
See Pedretti (2015), p. 282; Akande (2004), p. 426.
432.
See Akande (2003), p. 642.
433.
United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Iran (US v. Iran), Merits, (1980) ICJ Report 3, para. 91.
434.
See Pedretti (2015), p. 285.
435.
The Prosecutor v. Muammar Mohammed Abu Minyar Gaddafi, Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi and Abdullah Al-Senussi, Decision on the “Prosecutor’s Application Pursuant to Article 58 as to Muammar Mohammed Abu Minyar Gaddafi, Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi and Abdullah Al-Senussi”, Pre-Trial Chamber I, ICC-01/11-12, 27 June 2011.
436.
See Cryer et al. (2014), p. 560; The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision under article 87 (7) of the Rome Statute on the non-compliance by South Africa with the request of the Court to arrest and surrender Omar Al-Bashir, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 06 July 2017, para. 88.
437.
See Gaeta (2009), pp. 330–331; Tladi (2015), p. 499.
438.
The discussion, if article 103 UN-Charter also covers under “agreement” customary international law has not to be decided, because pursuant to the majority view, treaties prevail over customary law obligations, so that obligations arising out of the UN-Charter a fortiori shall be regarded as taking priority over customary international law. See Akande (2009), p. 348.
439.
See Gaeta (2009), p. 330.
440.
UN Security Council Resolution 827 (1993) UN Doc S/Res/827, para.4 (ICTY); UN Security Council Resolution 955 (1994), UN Doc S/Res/955, para.2 (ICTR).
441.
UN Security Council Resolution 1593 (2005) UN Doc S/RES/1593, para. 2.; UN Security Council Resolution 1970 (2011) UN Doc S/RES/1970, para. 5.
442.
See Cryer et al. (2014), p. 561; Akande (2009), p. 345 et seq.
443.
See Akande (2009), p. 345.
444.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision Pursuant to Article 87(7) of the Rome Statute on the Failure by the Republic of Malawi to Comply with the Cooperation Requests Issued by the Court with Respect to the Arrest and Surrender of Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, ICC-02/05-01/09, Pre-Trial Chamber I (12 December 2011), para. 43.
445.
More precisely to the analysis of this question: Kreß (2012), p. 240 et seq.; Daqun (2012), pp. 55–74.
446.
See Gaeta (2009), pp. 324–325.
447.
See Pedretti (2015), p. 298; Gaeta (2009), p. 329; Akande (2011).
448.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision on the Cooperation of the Democratic Republic of the Congo Regarding Omar Al Bashir’s Arrest and Surrender to the Court, ICC-02/05-01/09, Pre-Trial Chamber II (9 April 2014), para. 22–29.
449.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision on the Cooperation of the Democratic Republic of the Congo Regarding Omar Al Bashir’s Arrest and Surrender to the Court, Case No. ICC-02/05-01/09, Decision by the Pre-Trial Chamber II (9 April 2014), para. 29.
450.
See Pedretti (2015), p. 292.
451.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision on the Cooperation of the Democratic Republic of the Congo Regarding Omar Al Bashir’s Arrest and Surrender to the Court, Case No. ICC-02/05-01/09, Decision by the Pre-Trial Chamber II (9 April 2014), para. 30, 31.
452.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision under article 87 (7) of the Rome Statute on the non-compliance by South Africa with the request of the Court to arrest and surrender Omar Al-Bashir, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 06 July 2017, paras. 86 and 96.
453.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision under article 87 (7) of the Rome Statute on the non-compliance by South Africa with the request of the Court to arrest and surrender Omar Al-Bashir, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 06 July 2017, paras. 88–94; The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision under article 87 (7) of the Rome Statute on the non-compliance by Jordan with the request of the Court to arrest and surrender Omar Al-Bashir, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 11 December 2017, paras. 44 and 54.
454.
See Akande (2004), p. 433.
455.
Coalition for the International Criminal Court, Fact Sheet “US Bilateral Immunity Agreements or So-Called “Article 98” Agreements”, p. 3, available at: https://www.iccnow.org/documents/FS-BIAs_Q&A_current.pdf (Last accessed 26 Nov 2017).
456.
See Scheffer (2005), p. 333.
457.
Sok Kim (2007), p. 272; Akande (2003), p. 642.
458.
See Sok Kim (2007), p. 273.
459.
See Akande (2003), p. 643.
460.
See Coalition for the International Criminal Court, Fact Sheet “US Bilateral Immunity Agreements or So-Called “Article 98” Agreements, p. 2, available at: https://www.iccnow.org/documents/FS-BIAs_Q&A_current.pdf (Last accessed 26 Nov 2017).
461.
See Akande (2003), p. 645.
462.
Schabas (2017), p. 65.
463.
See Cryer et al. (2014), pp. 175–176.
464.
See 2450th Council Session, General Affairs and External Relations, Doc. 12134/02, 30 September 2002 available at: https://www.iccnow.org/documents/2002_Council_Conclusions_on_ICC.pdf (Last accessed 27 Nov 2017).
465.
See Coalition for the International Criminal Court, Fact Sheet “US Bilateral Immunity Agreements or So-Calles “Article 98” Agreements”, available at: https://www.iccnow.org/documents/FS-BIAs_Q&A_current.pdf (Last accessed 26 Nov 2017); Benzing (2004), pp. 218–220; Wirth (2001), pp. 455–458.
466.
See Wirth (2001), pp. 456–458; Benzing (2004), p. 218.
467.
See Akande (2003), pp. 643–646.
468.
Benzing (2004), p. 218.
469.
See Akande (2003), p. 644; Benzing (2004), p. 211.
470.
Schabas (2017), p. 65.
471.
See Akande (2003), p. 644; Wirth (2001), p. 455; 2450th Council Session, General Affairs and External Relations, Doc. 12134/02, 30 September 2002 available at: https://www.iccnow.org/documents/2002_Council_Conclusions_on_ICC.pdf. (Last accessed 26 Nov 2017).
472.
See Sok Kim (2007), p. 272; Akande (2003), p. 645.
473.
Sok Kim (2007), p. 272.
474.
Scheffer (2005), p. 335.
475.
See Cryer et al. (2014), p. 176; Akande (2003), p. 644; Benzing (2004), p. 220.
476.
See Schabas (2010), p. 1045.
477.
December 2017.
478.
In the following see: Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Facts and Figures of the International Criminal Court, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/about (Last accessed 17 Dec 2017).
479.
See Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Situations under investigation, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/pages/situations.aspx (Last accessed 17 Dec 2017).
480.
See Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Preliminary Examination, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/pages/preliminary-examinations.aspx (Last accessed 17 Dec 2017).
481.
See Maunganidze and du Plessis (2015), pp. 66–67; Tull and Weber (2016), p. 8.
482.
Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Statement of the Prosecutor, 20 November 2017, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/Pages/item.aspx?name=171120-otp-stat-afgh (Last accessed 20 Dec 2017).
483.
See in the following: Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Situations under investigation, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/pages/situations.aspx (Last accessed 11 Dec 2017); Preliminary examination, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/gabon (Last accessed 12 Dec 2017).
484.
See Tull and Weber (2016), p. 8
485.
See du Plessis et al. (2013), p. 3.
486.
The alleged crimes committed in Ukraine and Crimea have not been confirmed yet.
487.
See Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Preliminary Examination, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/iraq (Last accessed 17 Dec 2017).
488.
In the following see Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Lubanga Case available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/drc/lubanga (Last accessed 17 Dec 2017).
489.
See Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Bemba Case available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/car/bemba (Last accessed 17 Dec 2017).
490.
See Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Al Mahdi Case, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/mali/al-mahdi (Last accessed 20 Dec 2017).
491.
Ambach (2015), p. 1283; Phooko (2011), pp. 193–194.
492.
Assembly of States Parties, Study Group on Governance: Lessons learnt: First report of the Court to the Assembly of States Parties, 23 October 2012, ICC-ASP/11/31/Add.1, para. 1.
493.
See Assembly of States Parties, Study Group on Governance: Lessons learnt: First report of the Court to the Assembly of States Parties, 23 October 2012, ICC-ASP/11/31/Add.1, para. 3, 13–14.
494.
See Assembly of States Parties, Resolution ICC-ASP/12/Res.7, Amendments to the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, para. 1–3; It has to be emphasized that in the same resolution amendments 134bis, 134ter as well as 134qater were adopted whereby these amendments were not followed to the roadmap but brought before the ASP by States Parties. See more: O’Donohue (2015), p. 120 et seq.
495.
Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Fact sheet, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/mali/al-mahdi/Documents/Al-MahdiEng.pdf (Last accessed 20 Dec 2017).
496.
See Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Al Bashir case available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/darfur/albashir (Last accessed 17 Dec 2017).
497.
UN Security Council Resolution 1593 (2005), UN Doc S/RES/1593, para.1, 2.
498.
Ocampo (2006), Third Report of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court to the UN Security Council pursuant to UNSCR 1593 (2005), 14 June 2006, p. 2.
499.
Fatou Bensouda (2016), Statement to the United Nations Security Council on the Situation in Darfur, Sudan pursuant to UNSCR 1593 (2005), 9 June 2016, para. 4,5.
500.
Idem.
501.
Ocampo (2009), p. 18.
502.
See Broomhall (2003), p. 153.
503.
See Rastan (2009), p. 166.
504.
Eleventh Report of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court to the UN Security Council pursuant to UNSCR 1593 (2005) 17 June 2010, p. 9.
505.
See Case information sheet of the ICTY: Milosevic (IT-02-54), Karadzic (IT-95-5/18), Mladic (IT-09-92).
506.
See Address Prosecutor Serge Brammertz, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia to the United Nations Security Council (6 December 2010).
507.
See Rastan (2009), p. 167; Broomhall (2003), p. 153.
508.
Report of the Expert Workshop, “Cooperation and the International Criminal Court”, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom, 18–19 September 2004, para. 8.
509.
See Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Bemba case, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/car/bemba#6 (Last accessed 17 Dec 2017).
510.
See Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Case information sheet, ICC-PIDS-CIS-CAR-02-010-15/Eng available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/car/Bemba-et-al/Documents/Bemba-et-alEng.pdf (Last accessed 17 Dec 2017).
511.
See Rastan (2009), pp. 173–174.
512.
See Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Case information sheet, ICC-PIDS-CIS-DRC-02-011-15/Eng available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/drc/ntaganda/Documents/NtagandaEng.pdf (Last accessed 17 Dec 2017).
513.
See Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Case information sheet, ICC-PIDS-CIS-DRC-04-003-15/Eng available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/drc/mbarushimana/Documents/MbarushimanaEng.pdf (Last accessed 17 Dec 2017).
514.
See Phooko (2011), pp. 198–190.
515.
See Oola (2015), p. 149.
516.
The ICC issued five arrest warrants, but due to the deaths of Raska Lukwiya and Okot Odhiambo the proceedings were terminated. See Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Case information sheet, ICC-PIDS-CIS-UGA-001-005-15/Eng available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/uganda/kony/Documents/KonyEtAlEng.pdf (Last accessed 17 Dec 2017).
517.
In the following see Oola (2015), p. 155 et seq.
518.
See Rastan (2009), p. 175.
519.
See Oola (2015), pp. 157–158; Maunganidze and du Plessis (2015), p. 78.
520.
See Maunganidze and du Plessis (2015), p. 77.
521.
See Oola (2015), p. 161 et seq.; Rastan (2009), p. 176.
522.
See Oola (2015), p. 163.
523.
See Rastan (2009), p. 176; Oola (2015), p. 169.
524.
See Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Kenia, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/kenya (Last accessed 11 Dec 2017).
525.
See Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Kenyatta case, available at https://www.icc-cpi.int/kenya/kenyatta (Last accessed 11 Dec 2017).
526.
See Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Gicheru and Bett case, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/kenya/gicheru-bett (Last accessed 11 Dec 2017).
527.
See Article 16 of the book.
528.
See Grono and de Courcy Wheeler (2015), p. 1235.
529.
See Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Ruto and Sang Case, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/kenya/rutosang (Last accessed 10 Dec 2017).
530.
Statement of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Fatou Bensouda, regarding Trial Chamber’s decision to vacate charges against Messrs William Samoei Ruto and Joshua Arap Sang without prejudice to their prosecution in the future, 6 April 2016 available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int//Pages/item.aspx?name=otp-stat-160406 (Last accessed 10 Dec 2017).
531.
Idem.
532.
See Grono and de Courcy Wheeler (2015), p. 1235.
533.
Statement of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Fatou Bensouda, on the status of the Government of Kenya’s cooperation with the Prosecution's investigations in the Kenyatta case, 4 December 2015 available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/Pages/item.aspx?name=otp-stat-04-12-2014 (Last accessed 10 Dec 2017).
534.
The Prosecutor v. Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta, Decision on Prosecution’s application for a finding of non-compliance under Article 87 (7) of the Statute, Pre-Trial Chamber V (B), ICC-01/09-02/11, 3 December 2014, para. 89.
535.
Idem, para. 88–90.
536.
See for detailed analysis of the Pre-Trial Chamber’s decision Kreß and Prost (2016), pp. 2038–2041, para. 58–68.
537.
The Prosecutor v. Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta, Decision on Prosecution’s application for a finding of non- compliance under Article 87 (7) of the Statute, Pre-Trial Chamber V (B), ICC-01/09-02/11, 3 December 2014, para. 39, 40.
538.
Idem, para. 84.
539.
Ibidem, para. 85–87.
540.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2041, para. 66.
541.
The Prosecutor v. Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta, Judgement on the Prosecutor’s appeal against Trial-Chamber V (B)’s Decision on Prosecution’s application for a finding of non- compliance under Article 87 (7) of the Statute, Appeals Chamber, ICC-01/09-02/11 OA 5, 19 August 2015, para. 98.
542.
See Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Case Information Sheet, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/mali/al-mahdi/Documents/Al-MahdiEng.pdf (Last accessed 17 Dec 2017).
543.
Fatou Bensouda (2016), Statement of the Prosecutor, available at https://www.icc-cpi.int/Pages/item.aspx?name=161201-otp-stat-mali (Last accessed 17 Dec 2017).
544.
See Grono and de Courcy Wheeler (2015), p. 1235.
545.
See Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Situation in Georgia available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/georgia (Last accessed 10 Dec 2017).
546.
Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Press Release, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/Pages/item.aspx?name=pr1327 (Last accessed 20 Dec 2017).
547.
Côte d’Ivoire ratified the Statute in 2013.
548.
See in the following: Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Situation in the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire, ICC-PIDS-CIS-CI-04-02-15/Eng, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/cdi (Last accessed 10 Dec 2017).
549.
See Tull and Weber (2016), p. 8.
550.
The Prosecutor v. Simone Gbagbo, Decision on Côte d’Ivoire’s challenge to the admissibility of the case against Simone Gbagbo, Pre-Trial Chamber I, ICC-02/11-01/12, 11 December 2014, para. 78; The Prosecutor v. Simone Gbagbo, Judgment on the appeal of Côte d’Ivoire against the decision of Pre-Trial Chamber I of 11 December 2014 entitled “Decision on Côte d’Ivoire’s challenge to the admissibility of the case against Simone Gbagbo”, Appeals Chamber, ICC-02/11-01/12 OA, 27 May 2015.
551.
See Human Rights Watch (2016), “Côte d’Ivoire: Simone Gbagbo Trial Begins”, available at: https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/05/30/cote-divoire-simone-gbagbo-trial-begins (Last accessed 11 Dec 2017).
552.
Human Rights Watch (2017), “Côte d’Ivoire: Simone Gbagbo Acquitted after Flawed War Crimes Trial”, available at: https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/03/29/cote-divoire-simone-gbagbo-acquitted-after-flawed-war-crimes-trial (Last accessed 17 Dec 2017).
553.
Human Rights Watch (2017), “Côte d’Ivoire: Simone Gbagbo Acquitted after Flawed War Crimes Trial”, available at: https://www.hrw.org/news/2017/03/29/cote-divoire-simone-gbagbo-acquitted-after-flawed-war-crimes-trial (Last accessed 17 Dec 2017).
554.
See Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Burundi, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/burundi (Last accessed 17 Dec 2017).
555.
Pre-Trail Chamber III, Public redacted version of “Decision pursuant to article 15 of the Rome Statute on the authorization of an investigation into the situation in the Republic Burundi”, ICC-01/17-X-9-US-Exp, 25 October 2016, para. 193.
556.
Idem, para. 192.
557.
See UN-Security Council Resolution 1970 (2011) UN Doc S/Res/1970.
558.
See Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Situation in Libya, available at https://www.icc-cpi.int/libya (Last accessed 11 Dec 2017).
559.
The Prosecutor v. Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi and Abdullah Al Senussi, Decision on the admissibility of the case against Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi, Pre-Trial Chamber I, ICC-01/11-01/11, 31 May 2013, para. 219.
560.
See The Prosecutor v. Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi and Abdullah Al Senussi, Decision on the admissibility of the case against Abdullah Al Senussi, Pre-Trial Chamber I, ICC-01/11-01/11, 11 October 2013, para. 311.
561.
See The Prosecutor v. Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi, Decision on the non-compliance by Libya with requests for cooperation by the Court and referring the matter to the United Nations Security Council, Pre-Trial Chamber I, ICC-01/11-01/11, 10 December 2014, paras. 13, 26.
562.
See The Prosecutor v. Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi, Decision on the non-compliance by Libya with requests for cooperation by the Court and referring the matter to the United Nations Security Council, Pre-Trial Chamber I, ICC-01/11-01/11, 10 December 2014, paras. 4, 33.
563.
Idem, para. 31.
564.
Ibidem, para. 33.
565.
UN Security Council Resolution 2213 (2015) UN Doc S/Res/2213.
566.
Idem, para. 7.
567.
UN Security Council Resolution 2238 (2015), UN Doc S/Res/2238, para. 12 of the Preamble.
568.
Office of the Prosecutor, Eleventh Report of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court to the United Nations Security Council pursuant to UNSCR 1970 (2011), para. 3, 4.
569.
Fatou Bensouda (2017), ICC Prosecutor calls for arrest and surrender, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/Pages/item.aspx?name=170614-otp-stat (Last accessed 17 Dec. 2017).
570.
Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Khaled Case, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/libya/khaled (Last accessed 18 Dec 2017).
571.
Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Al-Werfalli Case, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/libya/al-werfalli (Last accessed 18 Dec 2017).
572.
Office of the Prosecutor, Eleventh Report of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court to the United Nations Security Council pursuant to UNSCR 1970 (2011), paras. 12 and 25.
573.
Idem, para. 26.
574.
Office of the Prosecutor, Fourteenth Report of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court to the United Nations Security Council pursuant to UNSCR 1970 (2011), paras. 36–37.
575.
Idem, paras. 43 and 45.
576.
In the following see: Homepage of the International Criminal Court, Situation in Darfur, Sudan, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/darfur (Last accessed 11 Dec 2017); Grono and de Courcy Wheeler (2015), p. 1233.
577.
Third Report of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court to the UN Security Council pursuant to UNSCR 1593 (2005), 14 June 2006, p. 2.
578.
In the following see Sixth Report of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court to the UN Security Council pursuant to UNSCR 1593 (2005), 5 December 2007, paras. 6, 22.
579.
Idem, paras. 13 and 14.
580.
Seventh Report of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court to the UN Security Council pursuant to UNSCR 1593 (2005), 5 June 2008, para. 5.
581.
Statement by the President of the Security Council, S/PRST/2008/21 (16 June 2008).
582.
See Grono and de Courcy Wheeler (2015), p. 1234.
583.
The Prosecutor v. Ahamad Muhammad Harun & Ali Mihammad Abd-Al-Rahman, “Prosecution request for a finding on the non-cooperation of the Government of the Sudan in the case of The Prosecutor v. Ahamd Harun and Ali Kushayb, pursuant to Article 87 of the Rome State”, Pre-Trial Chamber I, ICC-02/05-01/07, 19 April 2010.
584.
Idem, paras. 52–56.
585.
Ibidem, para. 60.
586.
The Prosecutor v. Ahamad Muhammad Harun & Ali Mihammad Abd-Al-Rahman, Decision informing the United Nations Security Council about the lack of cooperation by the Republic of Sudan, Pre-Trial Chamber I, ICC-02/05-01/07, 25 May 2010.
587.
See Verduzco (2015), p. 46; Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2037, para. 54. Other authors, such as Sluiter and Talontsi and the Expert Workshop Group subsume also these communications under judicial findings with respect to article 87 (7). See Sluiter and Talontsi (2016), pp. 82–84; Report of the Expert Workshop, “Cooperation and the International Criminal Court”, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom, 18–19 September 2004, para. 27.
588.
See Verduzco (2015), p. 47; The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision informing The United Nations Security Council and the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute about Omar Al-Bashir’s recent visit to Djibouti, Pre-Trial Chamber I, ICC-02/05-01/09, 12 May 2011; The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision informing The United Nations Security Council and the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute about Omar Al-Bashir’s recent visit to the Republic of Chad, Pre-Trial Chamber I, ICC-02/05-01/09, 27 August 2010; The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision informing The United Nations Security Council and the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute about Omar Al-Bashir’s presence in the territory of the Republic of Kenya, Pre-Trial Chamber I, ICC-02/05-01/09, 27 August 2010.
589.
See The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision pursuant to article 87 (7) of the Rome Statute on the refusal of the Republic of Chad to comply with the cooperation requests issued by the Court with respect to the arrest and surrender of Omar Al-Bashir, Pre-Trial Chamber I, ICC-02/05-01/09, 13 December 2011; The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision pursuant to article 87 (7) of the Rome Statute on the refusal of the Republic of Malawi to comply with the cooperation requests issued by the Court with respect to the arrest and surrender of Omar Al-Bashir, Pre-Trial Chamber I, ICC-02/05-01/09, 13 December 2011.
590.
See “Article 27” of the book, p. 85 et seq.
591.
See The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision pursuant to article 87 (7) of the Rome Statute on the refusal of the Republic of Chad to comply with the cooperation requests issued by the Court with respect to the arrest and surrender of Omar Al-Bashir, Pre-Trial Chamber I, ICC-02/05-01/09, 13 December 2011, para. 12–14.
592.
In the following see: Assembly of States Parties, Report of the Bureau on non-cooperation, ICC-ASP/11/29, 1 November 2012, para. 4 et seq.
593.
See Decision on the meeting of African State Parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, Doc. Assembly/AU/13 (xiii), 9 July 2009.
594.
Idem, para. 9,10.
595.
See Report of the Expert Workshop, “Cooperation and the International Criminal Court”, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom, 18–19 September 2004, para. 38.
596.
See The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision on the non-compliance of the Republic of Chad with the cooperation requests issued by the court regarding the arrest and surrender of Omar Al-Bashir, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 26 Match 2013, para. 7, 8.
597.
Assembly of States Parties, Report of the Bureau on non-cooperation, ICC-ASP/12/34, 7 November 2013, para. 13.
598.
See The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision on the non-compliance of the Republic of Chad with the cooperation requests issued by the court regarding the arrest and surrender of Omar Al-Bashir, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 26 March 2013, para. 19.
599.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), pp. 2037–2038, para. 55, 56.
600.
See The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision on the Cooperation of the Federal Republic of Nigeria regarding Omar Al-Bashir’s arrest and surrender to the Court, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 05 September 2013, para. 12.
601.
See Kreß and Prost (2016), p. 2038, para. 56.
602.
See The Prosecutor v. Abdel Raheem Muhammad Hussein, Decision on the Cooperation of the Central African Republic regarding Abdel Raheem Muhammad Hussein’s arrest and surrender to the Court, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/12, 13 November 2013, para. 11.
603.
Idem, para. 13.
604.
See Assembly of States Parties, Report of the Bureau on non-cooperation, ICC-ASP/12/34, 7 November 2013, para. 12.
605.
In the following see: The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision on the Cooperation of the Democratic Republic of the Congo regarding Omar Al-Bashir’s arrest and surrender to the Court, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 09 April 2014, para. 5 et seq.
606.
Idem, para.12.
607.
See “Article 27” of this book, p. 88 et seq.
608.
In the following see The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision on the Cooperation of the Democratic Republic of the Congo regarding Omar Al-Bashir’s arrest and surrender to the Court, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 09 April 2014, para. 14.
609.
See Assembly of States Parties, Report of the Bureau on non-cooperation, ICC-ASP/13/40, 5 December 2014, para. 22.
610.
UN Security Council Resolution 2147 (2014) UN Doc S/RES/2147, para. 22 of the Preamble.
611.
See The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision regarding Omar Al Bashir’s Potential Visit to the Republic of Chad, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 25 March 2014, para. 8.
612.
See Assembly of States Parties, Report of the Bureau on non-cooperation, ICC-ASP/13/40, 5 December 2014, para. 24.
613.
See The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision on the Prosecutor’s request for a finding of non-compliance against the Republic of Sudan, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 9 March 2015.
614.
Idem, paras. 9–13.
615.
Ibidem, para. 17.
616.
See The Prosecutor v. Abdel Raheem Muhammad Hussein, Decision on the Prosecutor’s request for a finding of non-compliance against the Republic of Sudan, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/12, 26 June 2015.
617.
Idem, para. 11.
618.
See Assembly of States Parties, Report of the Bureau on non-cooperation, ICC-ASP/14/38, 18 November 2015, para. 19.
619.
Statement of ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda to the United Nations Security Council on the Situation in Darfur, Sudan pursuant to UNSCR 1593 (2005), 9 June 2016, para. 11.
620.
Idem, para. 12.
621.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision of the non-compliance by the Republic of Djibouti with the request to arrest and surrender Omar Al-Bashir to the Court and referring the matter to the United Nations Security Council and the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 11 July 2016, para 10; The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision of the non-compliance by the Republic of Uganda with the request to arrest and surrender Omar Al-Bashir to the Court and referring the matter to the United Nations Security Council and the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 11 July 2016, para 14.
622.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision of the non-compliance by the Republic of Djibouti with the request to arrest and surrender Omar Al-Bashir to the Court and referring the matter to the United Nations Security Council and the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 11 July 2016, paras. 17, 18; The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision of the non-compliance by the Republic of Uganda with the request to arrest and surrender Omar Al-Bashir to the Court and referring the matter to the United Nations Security Council and the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 11 July 2016, para. 16–17.
623.
See Assembly of States Parties, Report of the Bureau on non-cooperation, ICC-ASP/14/38, 18 November 2015, para. 12, 13; Tull and Weber (2016), p. 7.
624.
The Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development v. The Southern African Litigation Centre, The Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa, Judgement, 15 March 2016, para.103, 113.
625.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision under 87 (7) of the Rome Statute on the non-compliance South Africa with the request to arrest and surrender Omar Al-Bashir, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 06 July 2017, para. 88.
626.
Idem, paras. 86–91.
627.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision under article 87 (7) of the Rome Statute on the non-compliance by South Africa with the request of the Court to arrest and surrender Omar Al-Bashir, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 06 July 2017, para. 96.
628.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision under article 87 (7) of the Rome Statute on the non-compliance by South Africa with the request of the Court to arrest and surrender Omar Al-Bashir, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 06 July 2017, paras. 124 ff.
629.
Idem, paras. 128–129, 139.
630.
Ibidem, paras.137 and 139.
631.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision under article 87 (7) of the Rome Statute on the non-compliance by South Africa with the request of the Court to arrest and surrender Omar Al-Bashir, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 06 July 2017, para. 138.
632.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Decision under article 87 (7) of the Rome Statute on the non-compliance by Jordan with the request of the Court to arrest and surrender Omar Al-Bashir, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 11 December 2017, paras. 54, 55.
633.
See Assembly of States Parties, Reports of the Bureau on non-cooperation, ICC-ASP/13/40, 5 December 2014, para. 14-17 and ICC-ASP/14/38, 18 November 2015, para. 21, 22; The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, Report of the Registry on information regarding Omar Al Bashir’s travels to State Parties and Non-States Parties, Pre-Trial Chamber II, ICC-02/05-01/09, 11 April 2017, paras. 3–28.
634.
Kaul (2007), p. 580.
635.
Idem, p. 176.
636.
See Sluiter and Talontsi (2016), p. 104.
637.
See Security Council report on Sudan (Darfur), Monthly Forecast, available at: http://www.securitycouncilreport.org/monthly-forecast/2014-11/sudan_darfur_12.php (Last accessed 11 Dec 2017).
638.
Meron (1999), p. 347.
639.
See Grono and de Courcy Wheeler (2015), p. 1234.
640.
See Sluiter and Talontsi (2016), pp. 107–108.
641.
Rastan (2009), pp. 169–171, 178–179.
642.
See Grono and de Courcy Wheeler (2015), p. 1243.
643.
See Sluiter and Talontsi (2016), p. 100.
644.
In the following see Report of the Expert Workshop, “Cooperation and the International Criminal Court”, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom, 18–19 September 2004, para. 32; Sluiter and Talontsi (2016), pp. 99–100.
645.
Sluiter and Talontsi (2016), p. 100; Report of the Expert Workshop, “Cooperation and the International Criminal Court”, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom, 18–19 September 2004, para. 32.
646.
See O’Donohue (2015), p. 133; Ambach (2015), p. 1294.
647.
See Ambach (2015), p. 1293; Sluiter and Talontsi (2016), p. 108.
648.
In the following Sluiter and Talontsi (2016), pp. 108–109.
649.
See also Report of the Expert Workshop, “Cooperation and the International Criminal Court”, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom, 18–19 September 2004, para. 40.
650.
In the following see Maryam Jamshidi (2013).
651.
See Report of the Expert Workshop, “Cooperation and the International Criminal Court”, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom, 18–19 September 2004, para. 86; Verduzco (2015), p. 61.
652.
Idem, pp. 49 and 61.
653.
In the following see Rastan (2008), p. 438 ff.; Rastan (2009), p. 166 ff.
654.
In the following see Kristof (2008).
655.
Branigan (2011).
656.
See Assembly of States Parties, Report of the Bureau on non-cooperation, ICC-ASP/14/38, 18 November 2015, para. 21.
657.
See Turlan (2016), p. 71.
658.
See Expert Workshop, “Cooperation and the International Criminal Court”, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom, 18–19 September 2004, para. 79, 80.
659.
See Ambach (2015), p. 1293.
660.
Similar see Rastan (2008), pp. 455–456; Rastan (2009), p. 182.

References

Abass, Ademola (2005). The Competence of the Security Council to terminate the Jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. In: Texas International Law Journal 40: 263-298.
Google Scholar
Akande, Dapo, du Plessis, Max and Jalloh, Charles Chernor (2010). An African expert study on the African Union concerns about article 16 of Rome Statute of the ICC. In: Institute for Security Studies, 1-36.
Google Scholar
Akande, Dapo (2003). The Jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court over Nationals of Non-Parties: Legal Basis and Limits. In: Journal of International Criminal Justice 1: 618-650.
Google Scholar
Akande, Dapo (2004). International Law Immunities and the International Criminal Court. In: The American Journal of International Law 98, No. 3: 407-433.
Google Scholar
Akande, Dapo (2009). The Legal Nature of Security Council Referrals to the ICC and its Impact on Al Bashir’s Immunities. In: Journal of Criminal Justice 7: 333-352.
Google Scholar
Akande, Dapo (2010). What exactly was Agreed in Kampala on the Crime of Aggression?. In: EJIL: Talk!, 21 June 2010, available at: http://www.ejiltalk.org/what-exactly-was-agreed-in-kampala-on-the-crime-of-aggression/. Last accessed 07 Dec 2017.
Akande, Dapo (2011). ICC Issues Detailed Decision on Bashir’s Immunity (…At long Last …) But gets the Law Wrong. In: EJIL: Talk!, 15 December 2011, available at: http://www.ejiltalk.org/icc-issues-detailed-decision-on-bashir%E2%80%99s-immunity-at-long-last-but-gets-the-law-wrong/. Last accessed 07 Dec 2017.
Ambach, Philipp (2015). A Look towards the Future- The ICC and “Lessons Learnt”. In: C. Stahn (ed.), The Law and Practice of the International Criminal Court, 1277-1295. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Annan, Kofi (2003). Statement to Security Council, Press Release, 12.06.2003, SG/SM/8749, available at: http://www.iccnow.org/documents/AnnanSG1422_12June03.pdf. Last accessed 08 Dec 2017.
Annan, Kofi (2004). Secretary-General’s press encounter upon arrival at UNHQ, 17 June 2004, available at: http://www.iccnow.org/documents/SGRemarks1487_17Jun04.pdf. Last accessed 10 Dec 2017.
Arsanjani, Mahnoush H. (1999). The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. In: The American Journal of International Law 93, No. 1: 22-43.
Google Scholar
Barriga, Stefan and Grover, Leena (2011). A Historic Breakthrough on the Crime of Aggression. In: The American Journal of International Law 105, No. 3: 517-533.
Google Scholar
Bensouda, Fatou (2016). Statement of ICC Prosecutor to the United Nations Security Council on the Situation in Darfur, Sudan pursuant to UNSCR 1593 (2005), 9 June 2016, Homepage of the International Criminal Court, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/Pages/item.aspx? name=160609-otp-stat-UNSC . Last accessed 11 Dec 2017
Benzing, Markus (2003). The Complementarity Regime of the International Criminal Court: International Criminal Justice between State Sovereignty and the Fight against Impunity. In: A. von Bogdandy and R. Wolfrum (eds.), Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law, Volume 7: 591-632.
Google Scholar
Benzing, Markus (2004). U.S. Bilateral Non-Surrender Agreements and Article 98 of the Statute of the International Criminal Court: An Exercise in the Law of Treaties. In: Max Planck United Nations Year Book 8: 181-236.
Google Scholar
Bergsmo, Morten (2000). Occasional Remarks on Certain State Concerns about the Jurisdictional Reach of the International Criminal Court, and Their Possible Implications for the Relationship between the Court and the Security Council. In: Nordic Journal of International Law 69: 87-113.
Google Scholar
Bergsmo, William, Pejic, Guilia and Zhu, Dan (2016). Article 16- Deferral of investigation or prosecution. In: O. Triffterer and K. Ambos: The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, A Commentary, Third Edition, 770-780. München: Beck.
Google Scholar
Bourgon, Stephane (2002). Jurisdiction Ratione Loci. In: A. Cassese, P. Gaeta and J. Jones (eds.), The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court – A Commentary, Volume I, 559-569. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Branigan, Tania (2011). China welcomes Sudanese president Omar al-Bashir., In: The Guardian, 16 June 2011, available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jun/16/china-welcomes-sudanese-president-omar-al-bashir. Last accessed 10 Dec 2017.
Broomhall, Bruce (2003). International Justice and the International Criminal Court: Between Sovereignty and the Rule of Law. Oxford.
Google Scholar
Brown, Bartram S. (1999). U.S. Objections to the Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Brief Response. In: New York University Journal of International Law and Politics 31: 855- 892.
Google Scholar
Cassese, Antonio (1998). Reflections on International Criminal Justice. In: Modern Law Review 61, No. 1: 1-10.
Google Scholar
Cassese, Antonio (1999). The International Criminal Court: Some Preliminary Reflections. In: European Journal of International Law 10: 144-171.
Google Scholar
Cassese, Antonio (2009). The International Criminal Court five years on: Andante or Moderato. In: C. Stahn and G. Sluiter (eds.), The Emerging Practice of the International Criminal Court, 21-30. Leiden, Boston: Nijhoff.
Google Scholar
Clark, Roger S. (2010). Amendments to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Considered at the first Review Conference on the Court, Kampala, 31 May-11 June 2012. In: Goettingen Journal of International Law 2: 689-711.
Google Scholar
Condorelli, Luigi and Villalpando, Santiago (2002). Referral and Deferral by the Security Council. In: A. Cassese, P. Gaeta and J. Jones (eds.), The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court – A Commentary, Volume I, 627-656. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Corell, Hans (2004). A question of Credibility. Available at: http://iccnow.org/documents/CorellHansArticleonUS-ICC23May04.pdf. Last accessed 10 Dec 2017.
Crawford, James (1983). International Law and Foreign Sovereigns: Distinguishing Immune Transactions. In: British Yearbook of International Law 54: 75-118.
Google Scholar
Crawford, James (1994). The ILC’s Draft Statute for an International Criminal Tribunal. In: The American Journal of International Law 88: 140-152.
Google Scholar
Crawford, James (2003). The drafting of the Rome Statute. In: P. Sands (ed.), From Nuremberg to The Hague, The Future of International Criminal Justice, 109-156. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar
Crawford, James (2012). Brownlie’s principles of public international law. Eighth edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Cryer, Robert, Friman, Hakan, Robinson, Darryl and Wilmshurst, Elizabeth (2014). An Introduction to International Criminal Law and Procedure, Third Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar
Damgaard, Ciara (2008). Individual Criminal Responsibility for Core International Crimes, Selected Pertinent Issues. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.
Google Scholar
Danilenko, Gennady M. (1999-2000). The Statute of the International Criminal Court and Third States. In: Michigan Journal of International Law 21: 445-494.
Google Scholar
Danilenko, Gennady M. (2002). ICC Statute and Third States. In: A. Cassese/P. Gaeta/J. Jones (eds.), The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court- A Commentary, Volume II, 1871-1897. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Daqun, LIU (2012). Has Non-Immunity for Heads of State Become a Rule of Customary International Law?. In: M. Bergsmo and L. Yan (eds.), State Sovereignty and International Criminal Law, 55-74. Beijing: Torkel Opsahl Academic EPublisher.
Google Scholar
Dralle, Tilman (2011). The Legal Nature of Security Council Referrals to the ICC and Muammar Gaddafi’s Immunity from Arrest, available at: http://www.readbag.com/tilman-dralle-de-pdf-gaddafi-immunity-international-criminal-court-security-council-referral-july2011. Last accessed 07 Dec 2017.
Escarameia, Paula (2004). The ICC and the Security Council on Aggression: Overlapping Competencies?. In: M. Politi and G. Nesi (eds.), The International Criminal Court and the crime of aggression, 133-143. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Google Scholar
Gaeta, Paola (2002). Official Capacity and Immunities. In: A. Cassese, P. Gaeta and J. Jones (eds.), The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court – A Commentary, Volume II, 975-1001. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Gaeta, Paola (2009). Does President Al Bashir Enjoy Immunity from Arrest?. In: Journal of Criminal Justice 7: 315-332.
Google Scholar
Gaja, Georgio (2004). The respective role of the ICC and the Security Council in Determining the Existence of an Aggression. In: M. Politi and G. Nesi (eds.), The International Criminal Court and the crime of aggression, 121-124. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Google Scholar
Gallant, Kenneth (2003). The International Criminal Court in the System of States and International Organizations. In: F. Lattanzi and W. Schabas (eds.), Essays on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, Volume II, 3-39. Ripa di Fagnano Alto 2003.
Google Scholar
Grono, Nick and de Courcy Wheeler, Anna (2015). The Deterrent Effect of the ICC on the Commission of International Crimes by Government Leaders. In: C. Stahn (ed.), The Law and Practice of the International Criminal Court, 1225-1244. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Heilmann, Daniel (2006). Die Effektivität des Internationalen Strafgerichtshofs; Die Rolle der Vereinten Nationen und des Weltsicherheitsrates, Nomos Universitätsschriften, Band 500. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
Google Scholar
Jacobs, Dov (2015). The Frog that Wanted to Be an Ox. In: C. Stahn (ed.), The Law and Practice of the International Criminal Court, 281-302. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Jain, Neha (2005). A Separate Law for Peacekeepers: The Clash between the Security Council and the International Criminal Court. In: The European Journal of International Law 16, No. 2: 239-254.
Google Scholar
Jamshidi, Maryam (2013). The enforcement gap: How the International Court failed in Darfur. In: Al Jazeera, 25 March 2013, available at: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/03/201332562714599159.html. Last accessed 11 Dec 2017.
Junck, Christoph (2006). Die Gerichtsbarkeit des Internationalen Strafgerichtshof, Schriften zum Staats- und Völkerrecht, Band 117. Frankfurt am Main: Lang.
Google Scholar
Kaul, Hans-Peter (2002). Preconditions to the Exercise of Jurisdiction. In: A. Cassese, P. Gaeta and J. Jones (eds.), The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court – A Commentary, Volume I, 583-615. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Kaul, Hans-Peter (2007). The International Criminal Court: Current Challenges and Perspectives. In: Washington University Global Studies Law Review 6, No. 3: 575-582.
Google Scholar
Kaul, Hans-Peter (2011). The Crime of Aggression after Kampala – Some Personal Thoughts in the Way Forward. At the international law symposium “Beyond Kampala: The ICC, the Crime of Aggression, and the Future of the Court” on the occasion of the formal launch of The Global Institute for the Prevention of Aggression, and in conjunction with Oxford Transitional Justice Research, St. Anne’s College, 1-13. Oxford.
Google Scholar
Kemp, Gerhard (2010). Individual Criminal Liability for the International Crime of Aggression. Antwerpen, Oxford, Portland: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Kirsch, Phillippe (1998). The Rome Conference on the International Criminal Court: A Comment. In: The American Society of International Law Newsletter 1.
Google Scholar
Kirsch, Phillippe (2007). The Role of the International Criminal Court in Enforcing International Criminal Law. In: American University International Law Review 22, No. 4: 539-547.
Google Scholar
Kreß, Claus (2012). The International Criminal Court and Immunities under International Law for States Not Party to the Court’s Statute. In: M. Bergsmo and L. Yan (eds.), State Sovereignty and International Criminal Law, 223-265. Beijing: Torkel Opsahl Academic EPublisher.
Google Scholar
Kreß, Claus and Prost, Kimberly (2016). Article 87- Requests for cooperation: general provisions. In: O. Triffterer and K. Ambos (eds.), The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, A Commentary. Third Edition, 2019-2042. München: Beck.
Google Scholar
Kristof, Nicholas (2008). China’s Genocide Olympics. In: New York Times, 24 January 2008, available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/24/opinion/24kristof.html?_r=1. Last accessed 11 Dec 2017.
Mangold, Christoph (2007). Die völkerstrafrechtliche Verfolgung von Individuen durch Internationale Strafgerichtshöfe, Schriften zum Staats- und Völkerrecht, Band 126. Frankfurt am Main: Lang.
Google Scholar
Maunganidze, Ottila Anna and du Plessis, Anton (2015). The ICC and the AU. In: C. Stahn (ed.), The Law and Practice of the International Criminal Court, 65-83. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Meron, Theodor (1999). Comments in the International Law Archive Panel on the ICTY. In: ILSA Journal of International & Comparative Law 5: 347-349.
Google Scholar
Mochochoko, Phakiso (1999). International Cooperation and Judicial Assistance. In: R. Lee (ed.), The International Criminal Court: The Making of the Rome Statute – Issues, Negotiations, Results, 305-317. The Hague: Springer Netherlands.
Google Scholar
Morris, Mandeline (2001). High Crimes and Misconceptions: The ICC and Non-State-Parties. In: Law & Contemporary Problems 64: 13-66.
Google Scholar
O’Donohue, Jonathan (2015). The ICC and the ASP. In: C. Stahn (ed.), The Law and Practice of the International Criminal Court, 105-138. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Ocampo, Luis Moreno (2006). Third Report of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court to the UN Security Council pursuant to UNSCR 1593 (2005), 14 June 2006, available at: http://www.iccnow.org/documents/OTP_3rdReportUNSC_14Jun06_en.pdf. Last accessed 12 Dec 2017.
Ocampo, Luis Moreno (2009). The International Criminal Court in motion. In: C. Stahn and G. Sluiter (eds.), The Emerging Practice of the International Criminal Court, 13-20. Leiden, Boston: Nijhoff.
Google Scholar
Oola, Stephan (2015). In the shadow of Kwoyelo’s trial: The ICC and complementarity in Uganda. In: C. De Vos, S. Kendall and C. Stahn (eds.), Contested Justice: The Politics and Practice of International Criminal Court Interventions, 147-170. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar
Palmisano, Guiseppe (1999). The ICC and Third States. In: F. Lattanzi and W.A. Schabas (eds.), Essays on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, Volume I, 391-425. Ripa di Fagnano Alto: Editrice il Sirente.
Google Scholar
Pedretti, Ramona (2015). Immunity of Heads of State and State Officials for International Crimes. Leiden, Boston: Brill Nijhoff.
Google Scholar
Phooko, Moses Retselisitsoe (2011). How Effective the International Criminal Court Has Been: Evaluating The Work And Progress Of The International Criminal Court. In: Notre Dame Journal of International & Comparative Law 1 (1): 82-209.
Google Scholar
Plachta, Michael (2001). The Lockerbie case: The Role of the Security Council in Enforcing the Principle Aut Dedere Aut Judicare. In: The European Journal of International Law 12: 125-140.
Google Scholar
du Plessis, Max, Maluwa, Tiyanjana and O’Reilly, Annie (2013). Africa and the International Criminal Court. Paper based on presentations and discussions at a meeting held at the Chatham House on 30 May 2013, available at: https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/files/chathamhouse/public/Research/International%20Law/0713pp_iccafrica.pdf. Last accessed 17 Dec 2017.
Rastan, Rod (2008). Testing Co-operation: The International Criminal Court and National Authorities. In: Leiden Journal of International Law 21: 431-456.
Google Scholar
Rastan, Rod (2009). The responsibility to enforce-Connecting justice with unity. In: C. Stahn and G. Sluiter (eds.), The Emerging Practice of the International Criminal Court, 163-182. Leiden, Boston: Nijhoff.
Google Scholar
Reisinger Coracini, Astrid (2010). The International Criminal Court’s Exercise of Jurisdiction Over the Crime of Aggression – at Last … in Reach … Over Some. In: Goettingen Journal of International Law 2, No. 2: 745-789.
Google Scholar
Rhea, Harry M. (2012). The United States and International Criminal Tribunals, An Introduction. Cambridge: Intersentia.
Google Scholar
Rinoldi, Dino and Parisi, Nicoletta (1999). International Co-Operation and Judicial Assistance between the International Criminal Court and States Parties. In: F. Lattanzi and W.A. Schabas (eds.), Essays on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, Volume I, 339-390. Ripa di Fagnano Alto: Editrice il Sirente.
Google Scholar
Rwelamira, Medard R. (1999). Composition and Administration of the Court. In: R.S. Lee (ed.), The Permanent International Criminal Court: The Making of the Rome Statute – Issues, Negotiations, Results, 153-174. The Hague: Springer Netherlands.
Google Scholar
Saland, Per (1999). International Criminal Law Principles. In: R. S. Lee (ed.), The International Criminal Court: The Making of the Rome Statute – Issues, Negotiations, Results, 189-216. The Hague: Springer Netherlands.
Google Scholar
Sarooshi, Dan (2004). The Peace and Justice Paradox: The International Criminal Court and the UN Security Council. In: D. McGoldrick, P. Rowe and E. Donnelly (eds.), The Permanent International Criminal Court: legal and policy issues, 95-120. Oxford: Hart.
Google Scholar
Schabas, William (2011). Obama, Medvedev and Hu Jintao may be Prosecuted by International Criminal Court, Pre-Trial Chamber Concludes. In: PhD studies in Human Rights, Weblog for students, 15 December 2011 available at: http://humanrightsdoctorate.blogspot.de/2011/12/obamamedvedev-and-hu-jintao-may-be.html. Last accessed 07 Dec 2017.
Schabas, William (2017). An introduction to the International Criminal Court, Fifth edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar
Schabas, William A. (2010). The International Criminal Court- A Commentary to the Rome Statute. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Schabas, William A. (2012). Unimaginable Atrocities - Justice, Politics and Rights at the War Crimes Tribunals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Schabas, William and Pecorella, Guilia (2016). Article 12- Preconditions to the exercise of jurisdiction. In: O. Triffterer and K. Ambos: The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, A Commentary, Third Edition, 672-689. München: Beck.
Google Scholar
Scharf, Michael P. (2001). The ICC’s Jurisdiction over the Nationals of Non-Party States: A Critique of the U.S. Position. In: Law & Contemporary Problems 64: 67-109.
Google Scholar
Scheffer, David (2010a). State Parties Approve New Crimes for International Criminal Court. In: The American Society of International Law; Insights, Volume 14, Issue 16 available at: https://www.asil.org/insights/volume/14/issue/16/states-parties-approve-new-crimes-international-criminal-court. Last accessed 07 Dec 2017.
Scheffer, David J. (1999a). International Criminal Court: The Challenge of Jurisdiction. Address at the Annual Meeting of the American Society of International Law, Washington, available at: http://www.iccnow.org/documents/DavidSchefferAddressOnICC.pdf. Last accessed 10 Dec 2017.
Scheffer, David J. (1999b). The United States and the International Criminal Court. In: The American Society of International Law 93, No.1: 12-22.
Google Scholar
Scheffer, David J. (2005). Article 98 (2) of the Rome Statute: America’s Original Intent. In: Journal of International Criminal Justice 3: 333-353.
Google Scholar
Scheffer, David J. (2010b). State Parties Approve New Crimes for International Criminal Court. In: The American Society of International Law 14: 1-8.
Google Scholar
Shaw, Malcolm N. (2017). International Law, Eighth Edition. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar
Simbeye, Yitihia (2004). Immunity and International Criminal Law. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Google Scholar
Sluiter, Göran (2009). Cooperation of States with International Criminal Tribunals. In: A. Cassese (ed.), The Oxford Companion To International Criminal Justice, 187-200. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Sluiter, Göran and Talontsi, Stanislas (2016). Credible and Authoritative Enforcement of State Cooperation with the International Criminal Court. In: O. Bekou and D.J. Birkett (eds.), Cooperation and the International Criminal Court, Perspectives from Theory and Practice, 80-113. Leiden, Boston: Nijhoff.
Google Scholar
Sok Kim, Young (2003). The International Criminal Court - A Commentary to the Rome Statute. Leeds: Wisdom House Publications.
Google Scholar
Sok Kim, Young (2007). The Law of the International Criminal Court. New York: William S. Hein & Co.
Google Scholar
Song, Sang-Hyun (2015). Former President of the International Criminal Court, Foreword. In: C. Stahn (ed.), The Law and Practice of the International Criminal Court. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Stahn, Carsten (2003). The Ambiguities of Security Council Resolution 1422 (2002). In: The European Journal of International Law 14, No.1: 85-104.
Google Scholar
Steinberger-Fraunhofer, Theresa (2008). Internationaler Strafgerichtshof und Drittstaaten – Eine Untersuchung unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Position der USA. Berlin.
Google Scholar
Tabak, Shana (2009). Article 124, War Crimes, and the development of the Rome Statute. In: Georgetown Journal of International Law 40: 1069-1099.
Google Scholar
Tladi, Dire (2015). The International Criminal Court and the Duty to Arrest and Surrender - The Case of Omar Al-Bashir in South Africa. In: Zeitschrift für Internationale Strafrechtsdogmatik Online, available at: http://www.zis-online.com/dat/artikel/2015_10_953.pdf. Last accessed 20 Dec 2017.
Trahan, Jennifer (2011). The Rome Statute’s Amendment on the Crime of Aggression: Negotiations at the Kampala Review Conference. In: International Criminal Law Review 11: 49-104.
Google Scholar
Triffterer, Otto and Burchard, Christoph (2016). Article 27- Irrelevance of official capacity. In: O. Triffterer and K. Ambos: The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court- A Commentary, Third Edition, 1037-1055. München: Beck.
Google Scholar
Tull, Denis M. and Weber, Annette (2016). Afrika und der Internationale Strafgerichtshof: Vom Konflikt zur politischen Selbstbehauptung. SWP-Studie, Deutsches Institut für Internationale Politik und Sicherheit 2: 1-32. Berlin, available at: https://www.swpberlin.org/fileadmin/contents/products/studien/2016S02_tll_web.pdf. Last accessed 14 Dec 2017.
Turlan, Pascal (2016). The International Criminal Court Cooperation Regime- A Practical Perspective from the Office of the Prosecutor. In: O. Bekou and D. Birkett (eds.), Cooperation and the International Criminal Court, Volume 4: 58-79. Leiden, Boston: Nijhoff.
Google Scholar
Verduzco, Deborah Ruiz (2015). The Relationship between the ICC and the United Nations Security Council. In: C. Stahn (ed.), The Law and Practice of the International Criminal Court, 30-64. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Wedgwood, Ruth (1999). The International Criminal Court: Am American View. In: The European Journal for International Law 10: 93-107.
Google Scholar
Wedgwood, Ruth (2001). The Irresolution of Rome. In: Law and Contemporary Problems 64: 193-213.
Google Scholar
Wilmshurst, Elizabeth (2001). The International Criminal Court: The Role of the Security Council. In: M. Politi and G. Nesi (eds.), The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court- A challenge to impunity, 39-42. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Google Scholar
Wirth, Steffen (2001). Immunities, Related Problems, and Article98 of the Rome Statute. In: Criminal Law Forum 12, No. 4: 429-458.
Google Scholar
Yengejeh, Saeid Mirzaee (2004). Reflections on the Role of the SC in Determining an Act of Aggression. In: M. Politi and G. Nesi (eds.), The International Criminal Court and the crime of aggression, 125-132. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Google Scholar
Zimmermann, Andreas (1989). The Creation of a Permanent International Criminal Court. In: Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law 2: 169-237.
Google Scholar
Zimmermann, Andreas (2016). Article 124- Transitional Provision. In: O. Triffterer and K. Ambos: The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court- A Commentary, Third Edition, 2312-2317. München: Beck.
Google Scholar
Zimmermann, Andreas and Scheel, Holger (2002). Zwischen Konfrontation und Kooperation- Die Vereinigten Staaten und der International Strafgerichtshof. In: Vereinte Nationen 50, No. 4: 137-144.
Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Faculty of Law, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
Sarah Babaian

Authors

Sarah Babaian
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Babaian, S. (2018). The International Criminal Court: A Criminal World Court?. In: The International Criminal Court – An International Criminal World Court?. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78015-3_4

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78015-3_4
Published: 01 June 2018
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-78014-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-78015-3
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics