Search: Complementarity SAIF GADDAFI

...in the title of this piece. Indeed, it concerns the ICC complementarity principle which entails that states have priority in proceeding with cases within their jurisdiction, and a case is only admissible if a state is unwilling or unable to investigate crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. By analogy, if the international community as a whole is unable (due to the US veto) or unwilling (considering the blatant double-standard positions of Western States) to hold Israel to account for its ongoing CAH, where can the Palestinians recourse to seek...

...(SOAS, University of London), Professor Andrew Williams (University of Warwick, UK) and Dr Dominika Uckiewicz (Pilecki Institute, Warsaw). Such items to be addressed include: lessons learned from the limitations and barriers faced by the UNWCC; the legal treatment of questions of immunity in the work and trials under the UNWCC; the prosecution of international crimes under the UNWCC framework; the right to a fair trial in UNWCC practice; the UNWCC as an early example of complementarity. To register for this event, please click here. For further information, please contact amina.adanan@mu.ie....

...principle of complementarity by disregarding Kenya’s own national investigations. This legal critique of  violating the principle of non-intervention helped fuel broader political opposition, with the ICC increasingly depicted as an instrument of Western intervention disproportionately targeting African states. While a motion for mass withdrawal from the Rome Statute ultimately failed within the African Union, the populist reframing of the issue garnered significant domestic support. Formalist legal grievances, therefore, often drive and sustain populist resistance to international courts. For example, the European Court of Human Rights has been criticized for overfitting...

...states: “ICC rules prohibit it from prosecuting cases against a country that has a robust judicial system willing and able to prosecute war crimes of its personnel. Therefore, the ICC’s mandate should not supersede Israel’s robust judicial system, including its military justice system.” (emphasis added). The House letter contains similar language claiming that Israel and the US “are both able and willing to carry out investigations and prosecute offenders.” These assertions misstate the Rome Statute’s “complementarity” regime. The ICC does not cede jurisdiction simply because a country “has a robust...

...if it attributes al-Senussi’s lack of counsel to the “security situation,” therefore, PTC I has absolutely no reason to accept Libya’s assertions that it will be able to provide al-Senussi with counsel prior to trial. And that, of course, is the problem with PTC I’s new “at the time of the admissibility decision” test for complementarity, which I criticized in my previous post. Al-Senussi’s lack of counsel may not threaten his prosecution right now — but it eventually will. And that is true regardless of whether al-Senussi’s lack of counsel...

...ILC’s work as duplicative and redundant as crimes against humanity is already within the mandate of the ICC. Malaysia based its argument on the understanding that the member States of the Rome Statute have an obligation to domesticate the crimes in their jurisdictions in furtherance of the complementarity principle. Further, the replication of the definition of CAH from the Rome Statute to the Draft Articles was flagged as problematic. (pp. 43 – 44, 129, 2016 Verbatim Record) China questioned the relevance and need for a specialised convention and called out...

...of the Court”; (3) admissibility, which focuses on gravity and complementarity; and (4) interests of justice, whether the OTP should decline to proceed despite jurisdiction and admissibility. The OTP opened its investigation into the situation in Afghanistan in January 2007. Yet only now — nearly seven years later — has the OTP concluded that there is a reasonable basis to believe that crimes were committed there. And what are those crimes? Here is a snippet from the report: 23. Killings: According to the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (“UNAMA”),...

...to consist of an entirely new regime, national trials could become vengeful affairs— overzealous prosecutions lacking due process—such as Saddam Hussein’s trial before the Iraqi High Tribunal. If there actually were to be future credible national trials, the referral would have done no harm (it would not supplant good faith national investigations and prosecutions under the “complementarity” provisions of Rome Statute article 17), and in fact could provide incentive for holding national trials. As in all referrals, the referral would be of the “situation” in Syria , so would not...

...never implemented. Moreover, inclusion of actors from these Oblasts ought to extend to actors that favour unity and represent minorities, including Russian-speaking groups opposed to Russia’s role in the conflict or to regional autonomy.  Subnational governance arrangements in Ukraine ought to centre around strong decentralization at the municipal level—in complementarity to a ‘weaker’ asymmetrical arrangement at the regional level—to avoid further deepening divisions along regional lines, which would render any future unity-building more challenging and instead encourage other regions to demand similar levels of self-governance. Moreover, this approach would increase...

...to make sueing corporations possible. The same is the case of international treaties. There are no such treaties, because powerful states, such as U.S. don't want their corporations to be sued for human rights violations. In short your argument is like saying that Gaddafi should be tried according to the Libyan law, which he dictated himself, stating that whatever he does or say is the law. Jordan Response... AND there are at least 20 Supreme Court cases that have ALREADY decided that corporations and companies can have duties and rights...

...is this: Since the National Transitional Council has been recognized as the legitimate government of Libya, does or does not this status imply the designated government is legally responsible for the disorder and atrocities around the country? There are numerous reports coming from the field pointing to crimes perpetrated by the "agents of new government" against civilians – such as murders, robberies, rapes, racist hate crimes (against blacks). Who gets the bill for all of those crimes? – now when Gaddafi is off the map of legal considerations. Thank you....

...does not claim the right to intervene when purely internal violence conforms to IHL or human rights law, but may intervene when it doesn't (see Libya, Kosovo, etc.). Is this evidence of some form customary international combatant or equivalent functional immunity for the state's leaders and armed forces engaged in purely internal armed violence? Do Gaddafi's ICC charges effectively indicate the removal of a functional immunity recognized by customary international law? Again, I am not making an argument here. I am thinking out loud and welcome your thoughts. Some have...