Search: Complementarity SAIF GADDAFI

...power struggles or gaps that have generated state practice that tends to limit immunity, but also that suggests that there may be a complementarity requirement for universal jurisdiction. In a forthcoming article I argue that the intersection between domestic and international law in these areas generates narrow decisions that mediate the competing normative frameworks of accountability on the one hand and sovereign equality on the other. Professor Bradley’s book is a great help for newcomers to the field, but it also provides a balanced overview of the areas it surveys,...

...or protest. The type of message may change over time with the evolution of the respective institution.  International criminal justice cannot simply be, but is driven by expectations of action (e.g., ‘justice must be done’). Speech act theory (e.g., John Searle) is an important analytical frame to understand practices and institutional discourses. Messaging reaches far beyond the trial as such. Communication is not only an auxiliary activity, but related to the exercise of core functions of justice institutions (Mohammad Zakerhossein). Actions, such as jurisdictional or admissibility determinations (e.g. complementarity), preliminary...

...important role in generating consensus among their clients about what relief is appropriate. Response to Naomi Roht-Arriaza Professor Roht-Arriaza offers a carefully considered and thoughtfully crafted commentary that furthers the conversation on the complementarity of collective memory and judicial proceedings. First, she reminds us that not all post-conflict settings are the same and in some localities, communities may be so disrupted that collective memories are not formed. That observation aligns with my own experience working with societies in transition after mass atrocity and I would like to underscore my agreement...

...crime fit within the complementarity regime? (There is an “understanding” appended to the adopted resolution that the aggression amendments “shall not be interpreted as creating the right or obligation to exercise domestic jurisdiction with respect to an act of aggression committed by another State.”) What effect will the amendments have on the prospects for municipal legislation and potential aggression prosecutions down the line? And there are, of course, many other details over which we could quibble. The flood of new scholarship on this issue will soon be upon us. But...

...and civil proceedings seems unjustified, since (as the Chamber acknowledges at para. 207) “[t]here is no doubt that individuals may in certain circumstances also be personally liable for wrongful acts which engage the State’s responsibility.” Unless a Grand Chamber revisits the Jones opinion, it appears likely that, conceptually incoherent as it might be, the law of foreign official immunity will develop for the time being along two tracks: the non-recognition of immunity ratione materiae for international crimes that is a logical corollary of the Rome Statute’s complementarity regime and that...

...the OTP to investigate in the West Bank, the direct or indirect transfer of the civilian population into occupied territory, thereby ensuring that Israel could not take advantage of the Rome Statute’s principle of complementarity. It’s a creative suggestion — and one that I’ve been hearing with increasing regularity from people sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. (I’ve just returned from a wonderful conference in Tel Aviv, a trip that included giving three different presentations in one day — a new record for me.) But would such a geographically-limited self-referral be...

...we are not facing a possible gap in the Rome Statute? It can be further asked which category the 3 April decision falls in, i.e. on which basis did the Prosecutor actually decide not to open the investigation? Article 53(1) ICC Statute outlines three elements for the Prosecutor to consider in order to decide whether to open the investigation: a) the information available, which must provide a reasonable basis to believe that a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been committed; b) the complementarity principle, i.e. that the...

...in 2017, the OTP acknowledged that there was a reasonable basis to believe that war crimes had been committed by UK troops in Iraq. In 2019, another ECCHR submission argued that, according to the principle of complementarity, the OTP should move to open investigations, as the UK had proved unwilling to adequately investigate and prosecute command chain responsibility for its forces’ systematic abuse of detainees in Iraq. With its decision on 9 December 2020, the OTP closes the preliminary examination once again, with the option of further re-opening it if...

...The Crime of Aggression and the Resort to Force against Entities in Statu Nascendi , Alexander Wills Judicial Independence at Risk: Critical Issues Raised by Selected Human Rights Organizations regarding the Crime of Aggression, Leonie von Braun and Annelen Micus Par in Parem Imperium Non Habet: The Crime of Aggression and the Complementarity Principle, Beth van Schaack Aggression and Legality: Custom in Kampala, Marko Milanovic What is the Crime of Aggression? Comparing the Jus ad Bellum and the ICC Statute, Mary Ellen O’Connell and Mirakmal Niyazmatov Amending the Amendment Provisions...

...stressed the importance of ending impunity “as part of a comprehensive approach to seeking sustainable peace, justice, truth and national reconciliation.” This resolution affirmed the primary responsibility of States to investigate and prosecute crimes occurred in their jurisdictions, reflecting the recently adopted principle of complementarity, underlying the ICC regime. Indeed, this approach represented a shift in expectations: from a period where the implementation of international humanitarian, criminal and human rights law was led by international institutions to a time where national systems of justice are increasingly expected to provide more...

...community-based rituals. The book argues that the Court must live up to its own principle of complementarity and show greater deference to African legal and non-legal institutions that – while imperfect (but certainly no more so than the ICC) – are making important strides in addressing serious crimes across the continent. It also shows that the Court’s limited African expertise – believing that a lack of contextual knowledge enhances its neutrality – has left it open to manipulation by African states and other powerful actors. The central concept of ‘distance’...

...increased human presence lead to the question of the protection of the human element, in particular of the application of human rights at sea. Many scholars have already discussed the application of the relevant human rights treaties at sea, pointing out that the law of the sea, specifically UNCLOS, pursues some community interests, among which the protection of human rights (see a.o. here). Some authors have stressed the complementarity of these two fields of international law (see here). The duty to render assistance can then be considered as the corollary...