Abstract
Established by the Rome Statute, the International Criminal Court has fulfilled, to some extent, the expectations for which it was created. However, there are still many challenges for the Court to achieve its full potential. The Court and other relevant stakeholders, such as States and civil society, should continue working to address those challenges and provide the Court with the necessary tools to meet all the expectations for which it was created. From my standpoint, as a judge at the ICC, I have identified several procedural and practical issues on which we could focus in order to make the Court more meaningful in the current geopolitical situation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
ICC ASP, Establishment of a study group on governance, 10 December 2010, Resolution ICC-ASP/9/Res.2.
- 2.
Ibid.
- 3.
Ibid.
- 4.
ICC ASP, Report of the Bureau on the Study Group on Governance, 22 November 2011, ICC-ASP/10/30; Report of the Study Group on Governance on rule 132bis of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, 1 November 2012, ICC-ASP/11/41; Report of the Bureau on Study Group on Governance, 15 October 2013, ICC-ASP/12/37; Report of the Bureau on Study Group on Governance, 28 November 2014, ICC-ASP/13/28; Report of the Bureau on the Study Group on Governance, 16 November 2015, ICC-ASP/14/30; Report of the Bureau on the Study Group on Governance, 14 November 2016, ICC-ASP/15/21.
- 5.
ICC ASP Study Group on Governance 2015.
- 6.
ICC ASP Secretariat 2016.
- 7.
ICC ASP, Status Report on the Court’s investigations into efficiency measures for 2010, 6 May 2019, ICC-ASP/8/6.
- 8.
Ibid., para 11.
- 9.
Ibid.
- 10.
ICC ASP, Report of the Court on measures to improve clarity on the responsibilities of the different organs, 3 December 2010, ICC-ASP/9/34.
- 11.
- 12.
Fernández de Gurmendi 2015.
- 13.
Ibid.
- 14.
ICC 2017.
- 15.
ICC ASP, Strengthening the International Criminal Court and the Assembly of States Parties, 24 November 2016, Resolution ICC-ASP/15/Res.5.
- 16.
ICC 2017, pp. 16–17.
- 17.
Ibid., p. 19.
- 18.
- 19.
ICC 2016.
- 20.
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, opened for signature 17 July 1998, 2187 UNTS. 90 (entered into force 1 July 2002) (Rome Statute), preamble.
- 21.
UN 1998a, p. 67, para 37.
- 22.
Ibid., p. 90, para 77.
- 23.
US 1998, n 2.
- 24.
Ibid.
- 25.
- 26.
Gallant 2003.
- 27.
See the website of the ASP: https://asp.icc-cpi.int/en_menus/asp/states%20parties/Pages/the%20states%20parties%20to%20the%20rome%20statute.aspx. Accessed 7 January 2019.
- 28.
Rome Statute, above n 20, preambular para 10 and Article 1.
- 29.
Ibid., preambular paras 4 and 6 and Article 17.
- 30.
Ibid., Article 93(10).
- 31.
The German Code of Crimes against International Law of 26 June 2002 (Bundesgesetzblatt 2002 I, 2254) may serve as an example. See Werle and Jeßberger 2014, marginal nos. 395–427.
- 32.
Pictet 1952, p. 54. See also ICTY, The Prosecutor v. Timohir Blaškić, Judgement, 3 March 2000, IT-95-14-T, para 186.
- 33.
An interesting model of extending international criminal jurisdiction is provided for by the African Union ’s Malabo Protocol of 2014. The envisaged African Criminal Court shall have jurisdiction over legal persons as well as over the crimes of unconstitutional change of government, piracy, terrorism , mercenarism, corruption, money laundering , trafficking in persons, trafficking in drugs, trafficking in hazardous wastes and illicit exploitation of natural resources. For the Malabo Protocol , see Werle and Vormbaum 2017.
- 34.
Schloenhardt 2005, p. 112.
- 35.
International Law Commission 1994.
- 36.
Smith 2016, p. 46.
- 37.
Ezeudu 2011, p. 51. The provision read as follows: ‘5. The Court shall also have jurisdiction over legal persons, with the exception of States, when the crimes committed were committed on behalf of such legal persons or by their agencies or representatives. 6. The criminal responsibility of legal persons shall not exclude the criminal responsibility of natural persons who are perpetrators or accomplices in the same crimes.’
- 38.
Haigh 2008, p. 202.
- 39.
ICC OTP 2016, pp. 13–14.
- 40.
Ibid., p. 15.
- 41.
Regulation 29(2) stipulates that factors that guide the assessment include the scale, nature, manner of commission and impact of the crimes.
- 42.
ICC OTP 2016, pp. 4–5 (emphasis added).
- 43.
Ibid., pp. 13–14.
- 44.
UNGA 2001, Article 3.
- 45.
References
Ezeudu M-J (2011) Revisiting corporate violations of human rights in Nigeria’s Niger Delta region: Canvassing the potential role of the International Criminal Court. African Human Rights Law Journal 11:23–56
Fernández de Gurmendi S (2015) Remarks to the Assembly of States Parties in relation to Cluster I: Increasing the efficiency of the criminal process. https://asp.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/asp_docs/ASP14/ASP14-PD-EFEC-President-ENG.pdf. Accessed 7 January 2019
Gallant K (2003) The International Criminal Court in the system of states and international organizations. Leiden Journal of International Law 16:553–591
Haigh K (2008) Extending the International Criminal Court’s jurisdiction to corporations: Overcoming complementarity concerns. Australian Journal of Human Rights 14:199–219
ICC (2015a) Enhancing the Court’s efficiency and effectiveness – a top priority for ICC officials. https://www.icc-cpi.int/Pages/item.aspx?name=pr1177. Accessed 7 January 2019
ICC (2015b) Report of the Court on the development of performance indicators for the International Criminal Court. https://www.icc-cpi.int/itemsDocuments/Court_report-development_of_performance_indicators-ENG.pdf. Accessed 7 January 2019
ICC (2016) Second Court’s report on the development of performance indicators for the International Criminal Court. https://www.icc-cpi.int/Pages/item.aspx?name=second-courts-report-of-performance-indicators. Accessed 7 January 2019
ICC (2017) Chamber’s Practice Manual. ICC Assembly of States Parties Secretariat Summary of the panel discussion on Performance Indicators for the International Criminal Court, held at the eighth meeting of the fifteenth session of the ASP in The Hague on 22 November 2016. https://asp.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/asp_docs/ASP15/ICC-ASP15-SGG-PD-Summary-ENG.pdf. Accessed 7 January 2019
ICC Assembly of States Parties Study Group on Governance (2015) Cluster I: Increasing the efficiency of the criminal process, Panel discussion on the Efficiency and Effectiveness of Court Proceedings, held at the tenth meeting of the fourteenth session of the ASP in The Hague on 24 November 2015. https://asp.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/asp_docs/ASP14/ASP14-PD-EFEC-Summary-ENG.pdf. Accessed 7 January 2019
ICC OTP (2016) International Criminal Court, Policy Paper on Case Selection and Prioritisation. https://www.icc-cpi.int/itemsDocuments/20160915_OTP-Policy_Case-Selection_Eng.pdf. Accessed 7 January 2019
International Law Commission (1994) Draft Statute for an International Criminal Court. http://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/commentaries/7_4_1994.pdf. Accessed 7 January 2019
International Law Commission (1996) Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind with commentaries. http://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/commentaries/7_4_1996.pdf. Accessed 7 January 2019
Pictet J (1952) Commentary on the Ist Geneva Convention of 12 August 1949. International Committee of the Red Cross, Geneva
Schabas W (2016) The International Criminal Court: A commentary on the Rome Statute, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Schloenhardt A (2005) Transnational organised crime and the International Criminal Court: Developments and debates. University of Queensland Law Journal 24:93–122
Smith T (2016) Creating a framework for the prosecution of environmental crimes in international criminal law. In: Schabas W (ed) The Ashgate research companion to international criminal law. Routledge, London and New York, pp 45–62
UN (1998a) Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court. Official Records Volume II. UN Doc A/CONF.183/13 (Vol. II)
UN (1998b) Report of the Working Group on Procedural Matters. UN Doc A/CONF.183/C.1/WGPM/L.2/Add.7
UNGA (2001) Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, Supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, GA Res. 25, annex II. UN Doc A/55/49 (Vol. I) (2001)
US (1998) Proposal submitted by the United States of America on Article 73: Reparations to Victims. UN Doc A/CONF.183/C.1/WGPM/L. 69. https://www.legal-tools.org/en/doc/e7b969/. Accessed 7 January 2019
Werle G, Jeßberger F (2014) Principles of international criminal law, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Werle G, Vormbaum M (2017) The African Criminal Court: A Commentary on the Malabo Protocol. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 T.M.C. Asser press and the authors
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Chung, Ch. (2019). The International Criminal Court 20 Years After Rome – Achievements and Deficits. In: Werle, G., Zimmermann, A. (eds) The International Criminal Court in Turbulent Times. International Criminal Justice Series, vol 23. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-303-0_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-303-0_2
Published:
Publisher Name: T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague
Print ISBN: 978-94-6265-302-3
Online ISBN: 978-94-6265-303-0
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)