Search: Complementarity SAIF GADDAFI

...opening an investigation: if taken seriously, it will simply overwhelm the OTP’s resources. There may not be even one admissible case in the Comoros situation (because there is only one case), but how likely is it that larger situations, which are the norm, will not contain even one case sufficiently grave to prosecute? Just think about the situations currently at Phase 2 or Phase 3 of the preliminary-examination process: Burundi, Gabon, Iraq, Palestine, Ukraine, Colombia, Guinea, and Nigeria. There may well be complementarity issues in some of those situations that...

...Until 2025, it is up to the discretion of Member States, with the political-cultural barriers such discretion entails, to determine whether to extend whistleblower protection beyond the confines prescribed by the Directive. A note on complementarity In its Proposal, the Commission explained that the Directive’s whistleblowing rules “will run parallel to existing protection in the field of other EU legislation: (i) on equal treatment, which provide for protection against victimisation as a reaction to a complaint or to proceedings aimed at enforcing compliance with this principle and (ii) on protection...

...Joaquín Guzman Loera (aka “El Chapo”) and Genaro García Luna? Perhaps, not. In a case like Cienfuegos, it is more likely that México and the COPLA would be on a collision course. As such, it is very likely that the creation of the COPLA would reproduce a whole host of issues (and scholarship) that arise in relation to the nature of international courts founded on the principle of complementary (as opposed to those which have jurisdictional primacy, such as the ICTY and ICTR).  The Complementarity Conundrum Art 2 COPLA provides...

...of rules which seek to realize the same aim of protecting the person’s interest in not being tried twice for the same matter while also respecting a fundamental aspect of the legal system in which they operate: the complementary nature of the ICC’s jurisdiction.” (p. 159) The topic I was assigned for this book symposium is limited to “due process and complementarity.” However, these two concepts are central to Gaiane’s discussion of the main topic and addressing them in the abstract would require another opportunity. For the purposes of this...

...of the ICC. Accordingly, assuming that the ICC determines activities in the territory of the Palestinian Authority to be within its jurisdiction, a Palestinian request may entail an ICC investigation into Israeli settlement activities (whether or not Israel accepts the ICC’s jurisdiction). The ICC could also investigate other violations committed on Palestinian territory (by Israelis or Palestinian), such as indiscriminate attacks or unlawful arrests. But the ICC could be precluded from investigating most allegations against Israelis under the principle of complementarity, as Israel would likely investigate these allegations herself. Settlement...

...would have needed to issue a new Art. 18 notification. Israel would then have had 30 days to inform the OTP that it was pursuing its own investigations of Netanyahu and Gallant. If it did, the OTP would have been required to suspend its investigation until it was able to convince the PTC that Israel’s efforts were not sufficient to satisfy complementarity. That process would have delayed issuance of the warrants by months. The PTC, however, unanimously rejected Israel’s challenge. It began by rejecting the claim that the 2021 Art....

...has shown in the essay linked to above, complementarity is a two-step process, not a one-step process as many scholars assume. The first step asks whether the state is “active” with regard to a case that the OTP wants to pursue — whether, in other words, the state is currently pursuing an investigation or prosecution of the same suspect for the same conduct. If it isn’t active, the case is admissible regardless of whether the state is willing and able to investigate or prosecute. If it is active — and...

[Nabil M. Orina is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Centre of Excellence for International Courts (iCourts), Faculty of Law, University of Copenhagen. He holds a PhD from City University of Hong Kong.] President Trump’s sanctions against the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (the Court), Fatou Bensouda and the Head of Jurisdiction, Complementarity and Cooperation Division, Phakiso Mochochoko have rightly attracted condemnation from states as well as academic commentary. The sanctions, which have now been revoked underlie a bigger issue in the relationship between the United States of America...

...20(3) seems to be little more than a drafting artifact. The bottom line is that there does not seem to be any room in the Rome Statute’s complementarity regime for NSA prosecutions. And that, I would suggest, is precisely as it should be. I realize that there is growing support in the scholarly community for permitting NSAs to play a more formal role in the creation of international law. (See here, for example.) I’m skeptical of that idea, for reasons beyond the scope of this post, but I would hope...

...account the new elements which have emerged in the last eight years, will reconsider the issue under a different light. For sure one major difficulty can be anticipated with regard to the complementarity principle: the circumstance that several military proceedings, and even some criminal investigations, have been taken place in the UK over the last years (see for instance the Baha Mousa Inqury) may be used as an argument to conclude that the UK has a functioning domestic legal and judicial system and therefore no intervention of the ICC is...

...against humanity, including murder — I cite his case in a recent article as a primary example of why the ICC’s “same conduct” test for complementarity is counterproductive. The traditional defense of Moreno-Ocampo’s decision was that the conscription and enlistment charges were relatively easy to prove, making it likely that the trial would result in a quick and unproblematic conviction. As regular readers know, reality proved to be far messier (see, for example, here and here). I wonder whether Moreno-Ocampo is regretting his decision not to pursue more serious charges…...