Search: palestine icc

and Casey, whose knowledge of the ICC could fit comfortably on the head of a pin. And indeed, Scott’s comment seems misguided in a number of important respects. To begin with, many of the world’s “great powers” have agreed that the ICC can indeed be a forum for “enforcement of the laws of war” against them: the UK, France, Germany, Japan. To be sure, those countries would be less than thrilled if the ICC prosecuted one of their nationals — but there is no evidence whatsoever that they would abandon...

...under Article 12(2), unless Ukraine accepts ICC jurisdiction on an ad hoc basis under Article 12(3). Ukraine has already made such an Article 12(3) declaration on 17 April 2014, accepting ICC jurisdiction over crimes committed within its territory. However, this declaration is temporally limited to the period between 21 November 2013 and 22 February 2014. Nevertheless, Ukraine may choose to make a further Article 12(3) declaration which does cover the events of 17 July 2014, accepting ICC jurisdiction over the downing of MH17. Again, this would depend on Ukraine’s political...

to the interests of the Libyan authorities,” Keita wrote in a court filing. “It might also be appropriate for the ICC Prosecutor to consider recusing himself from the case.” [snip] Ocampo earlier had suggested to judges that, as Gaddafi had not formally requested a lawyer during a meeting in March with an ICC defence official, Keita be removed from the case. Judges said no to that one, too, but they have still to make up their minds what to do about a case that is fast spiralling into a major...

...in full. Vieira said (my translation): “This is an issue that has to be examined in light of the established process. I personally have no knowledge of it and have not seen it. Brazil is a party to the ICC and we respect and follow it. Not every country is part of the ICC so it does not have total/global reach – it is limited. We need to understand its terms better, we do not have a fixed position on this. Putin’s presence in any member country can lead to...

[Melanie O’Brien is Senior Lecturer in International Law at the UWA Law School, University of Western Australia; and an affiliated researcher of the Asia-Pacific Centre for the Responsibility to Protect, University of Queensland.] Followers of Opinio Juris well know Kevin Jon Heller’s criticism of Crossing Lines and its portrayal of the ICC. I recently watched the action-comedy The Hitman’s Bodyguard, a film that includes an ICC-related storyline, and it certainly opens itself up to some well-deserved criticism about its portrayal of the ICC. The storyline of The Hitman’s Bodyguard is...

...should go without saying. Given several states’ disregard of ICC arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Putin, however, it bears stating that for international justice to be effective, including for LGBTQI+ victims, states must honor all ICC warrants. The ICC, however, is just one of the tools the international community should use to hold the Taliban accountable and support LGBTQI+ Afghans. Potential uses of universal jurisdiction should be also explored. In addition to robustly supporting the UN Special Rapporteur on Afghanistan’s mandate, states should create an independent international investigative mechanism to...

...the ICC and surrender persons subject to ICC arrest warrants. The NUG has lodged a declaration with the ICC accepting the jurisdiction of the ICC. However, whether the NUG ever takes over as government, or is recognised as the legitimate government of Myanmar remains to be seen. The greatest deterrence is certainty of apprehension and the related certainty of punishment. The slow pace of investigations and cases and unlikely surrender of perpetrators from non-state parties mean there is little to no certainty of apprehension and subsequent punishment, and thus perpetrators...

to try Saadi impartially, then they have primary jurisdiction. For the ICC to embark on a prosecutorial campaign against Saadi merely because Niger has expressed a willingness to transfer his would be tantamount to child's play. The ICC is desperately vying for increased legitimacy and cooperation; to prosecute a Saadi, who is likely only limitedly culpable for war crimes, would be hinder the progress of the ICC. Not to mention, this prosecution raises serious questions about sovereignty and jurisdiction, as Libya has repeatedly stated that they desire and intend to...

...international criminal law. The primary target of his analysis is the International Criminal Court (ICC). Hafetz observers that the ongoing tensions between the ICC’s selection of situations to investigate and cases to prosecute have been intimately related to perceptions of the institution’s credibility: Continued asymmetries in the selection of situations and cases – even if largely the product of a tribunal’s design and the practical obstacles it faces – will hinder the ICC and other international tribunals from satisfying broader conceptions of fairness rooted in the equal application of criminal...

Kevin has no doubt put his finger on the key issues facing the ICC and Sudan. Plainly, the ICC is raising the stakes in its investigation of Sudan, a risky proposition given certain fragile peace accords emerging. More interesting to me is that the ICC last week revealed that it tried to capture wanted Sudan minister Ahmed Harun via an extraordinary rendition. The plan, apparently, was to divert Harun’s plane away from its destination: Mecca, Saudi Arabia – and toward some ICC member state where he would be arrested and...

The second is to assume that an international border is part of the territory of neither of the states it divides. The first possibility means that the OTP is correct: the ICC has jurisdiction over the deportation of the Rohingya, because at least one “essential element” of deportation — crossing an international border — took place on the territory of a state party, Bangladesh. The second possibility means that the OTP is wrong: the ICC does not have jurisdiction over the deportation of the Rohingya, because no “essential element” of...

...right to investigate and prosecute those responsible according to the legal principle of territorial jurisdiction – based on where the crime was committed. The Ukrainian leadership determined, however, that it would be very difficult to carry out the investigations and prosecutions due to the ongoing conflict in the Donbass region, where the MH17 incident took place. As a result, Ukraine triggered the ICC’s jurisdiction over crimes allegedly committed on its territory from 20 February 2014 onwards via two declarations under the ICC Statute, requesting the ICC Prosecutor to investigate the...