Search: Complementarity SAIF GADDAFI

The story coming out of Uganda bears emphasis for its impact on the ICC doctrine of complementarity. Under Article 17 of the Rome Statute, “the Court shall determine that a case is inadmissible where … [t]he case is being investigated or prosecuted by a State which has jurisdiction over it, unless the State is unwilling or unable genuinely to carry out the investigation or prosecution.” The ICC website indicates that “the International Criminal Court will complement national courts so that they retain jurisdiction to try genocide, crimes against humanity and...

...broached the topic of how ICL interventions are so ‘distanced’ that they are inept, or too awkward, to ‘get close’ to the very people they putatively are to uplift, and simply fall short of becoming part of the ‘fabric of everyday life’ even in the places they aim to repair. They are cold, they leave audiences emotionally unmoved, they are not – to draw from Coke – companionate. Complementarity is not comity. I wanted also to tell you that am very drawn to your angles on global justice aesthetics. On...

...was in office when the Rome Statute was negotiated and he decided to sign the Statute prior to the signing deadline on 31 December 2000. In the statement accompanying the signing of the Statute, President Clinton identified the importance of holding accountable those individuals accused of committing crimes falling under the Rome Statute and the United States ‘tradition of moral leadership’ when it comes to those efforts. He also highlighted that the ICC is a Court of complementary jurisdiction, although his explanation of how complementarity works was somewhat lacking. Despite...

...referral by the United Nations Security Council) and with the vexed questions of complementarity, compliance and cooperation by states. The book reveals: how so-called ‘weak states’ have managed to instrumentalise the Court’s self-referral trigger mechanism to pursue their political and security interests; the selective and inconsistent use by the Security Council of its power to refer cases to the Court; the inconsistent and strategic interpretation and application by the Court and by states of the complementarity principle; and how some states have used the Court as a platform for domestic...

...taken place regarding whether joining the ICC could offer legal protection against international crimes.  Armenia initially signed the Rome Statute in 1998. However, in 2004, the Constitutional Court ruled that the Rome Statute conflicted with the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia, specifically in two significant aspects: first, the question of the ICC’s complementarity in relation to the national criminal jurisdiction of the Republic of Armenia, and second, the matter of utilizing domestic processes for granting pardons and amnesty to convicted individuals in relation to the Article 105 of the...

...doubtful. What they would do, most likely, is prosecute their national themselves — serious prosecutions, not the kind that the U.S. reserves for its own war criminals. And then, of course, the principle of complementarity would require the ICC to defer to them — which is exactly the point of complementarity. One cannot solve the perennial problem of “who will guard the guardians” by handing over authority to prosecutors and courts. But that is what the universal jurisdiction agenda boils down to. Mr. Garzon’s comeuppance should be a warning to...

...adhere to treaties, rather than delegation of equivalent jurisdictional titles by the state.” Any other understanding could make way for notable accountability gaps by implying that a state that is unable to exercise jurisdiction over certain parts of its territory would no longer be able to investigate or prosecute perpetrators, or reach out to international jurisdiction. Similarly, this would also render the Rome Statute’s provision on complementarity obsolete. In its response to the amici observations, the OTP argues that any limitation to Palestine’s enforcement jurisdiction arising from Oslo “does not...

...on states, not just on the ICC. An examination of complementarity, for example, that looks at how the ICC ‘looks down’ on how states deal with atrocity crimes, should also properly assess how states are dealing with these international crimes. Clark does this to some extent in his exploration of domestic prosecutions, amnesties, peace negotiations and community-based responses to atrocity crimes. However, his point of departure, here, seems to be that states – in contrast to the ICC – offer justice that is not ‘distant’. They do, after all, have...

...universal jurisdiction and positive complementarity, states are encouraged to domestically investigate and prosecute crimes that have international character, or that would otherwise attract the jurisdiction of international courts. In this respect, states are increasingly passing legislation to permit the prosecution of international crimes in domestic settings, including by setting up specialized tribunals or court divisions with the existing judicial structure of a state. A recent notable example is the Special Criminal Court in the Central African Republic, set up to prosecute crimes in the aftermath of its recent civil war....

...two prosecutorial staffers by name who might be subject to visa restrictions and other punitive measures—the Prosecutor’s Chef de Cabinet and the head of the Jurisdiction, Complementarity, and Cooperation Division (JCCD) (even though neither would likely be involved in any actual investigation were one to materialize)—and threatened to also sanction the family members of ICC personnel. Experienced U.S. diplomats, including several who served under Republican and Democratic Administrations as U.S. Ambassadors-at-Large for War Crimes Issues, along with former Nuremberg Prosecutor Ben Ferencz, immediately decried this startling and counter-productive move, pronouncing...

...this largely as the cross-referencing of cases between the two regional courts. However, one might ask for a greater examination of the use of similar doctrines and practices across not only these courts but also others, as she begins to discuss when addressing subsidiarity, deference, and the ICC principle of complementarity. Here, an examination of the work of the African Court of Human and People’s Rights might have provided an additional comparative perspective, particularly given that court’s broader application of states’ obligations beyond the African Convention. The necessity of the...

...and civil society (including Parliamentarians for Global Action) have been launched to remedy the ICC’s jurisdictional limitation, whilst the creation of the Special Tribunal has increasingly found itself in a political spotlight. One would think (and hope) that such development would prompt States to properly acknowledge how the limitations relating to jurisdictional issues – procedurally or substantively- may eventually backfire, and only lead to resorting to more cumbersome solutions.  Complementarity Laying down rules for an effective State-to-State cooperation, the Convention benefits all States, irrespective of their status to the Rome...