The International Criminal Court and the principle of complementarity Abstract The principle of complementarity is often referred to as the cornerstone of the International Criminal Court's functioning ("Court" or "ICC"), so the purpose of my thesis is to analyze complementarity in more detail. The Preamble of the Rome Statute ("Statute") provides that the Court "shall be complementary to national criminal jurisdictions". Complementarity means that the ICC will act only when domestic authorities fail to take the certain steps in the investigation or prosecution of crimes enumerated under article 5 of the Statute. My thesis consists of seven chapters. First three chapters are introductory and show a historical and practical background of the establishment of the ICC. Chapter four explains that there exist various forms of the relationship between an international criminal jurisdiction and national jurisdictions, not just complementary. This chapter is subdivided into several parts which firstly describe a particular forms of these relationships and then give an example of such a relations existing in reality. The following chapter inquires into the roots of complementary idea. It highlights that the principle of complementarity included in the Statute was not the outcome of the International Law Commission's...

The analysis of the principle of the complementarity formula set out in the Rome Statute is at the heart of this dissertation. The research aims to critically reflect on the complementarity regime under the Rome Statute in relation to international crimes committed in the DRC since the incorporation of the Rome Statute into the Congolese legal system. This research argues that the implementation of the principle of complementarity poses difficulties of application, implementation, and interpretation and thus remains a less effective means of putting an end to international crimes. The findings of this research indicate an urgent need for the principle of complementarity being rethought by clarifying its content and scope. Victims of international crimes cannot to date rely on its implementation to obtain justice. This research adopts an essentially conceptual approach; moreover, the methodological approach adopted is that of qualitative research. This research calls for the principle of complementarity being rethought by clarifying its content and scope.

Selon la lecture classique du principe de complémentarité, le Statut de Rome confère à la CPI une fonction purement supplétive : elle n’a vocation à intervenir que si l’ordre juridique national, ayant la compétence prioritaire sur le crime international, est défaillant. La présente thèse part de l’insuffisance de cette lecture et propose d’élargir la définition de la complémentarité pour la fonder sur l’idée d’interaction et de partenariat des ordres juridiques international et national, et, ce faisant, plaide pour une reconstruction de la justice pénale internationale s’appuyant sur une nouvelle répartition du contentieux des crimes internationaux à la fois légitime et efficace. À cette fin, dans l’ordre international, l’auteur préconise, d’un côté, d’instaurer une primauté sélective de la CPI pour les hauts dirigeants étatiques ayant conçu et dirigé le dessein criminel, et d’un autre côté, pour le contentieux ne concernant pas ces auteurs, d’impulser une nouvelle dynamique de complémentarité qui permettrait d’associer l’État à la procédure menée par la CPI, grâce à une dissociation des phases du procès (dissociation enquête/poursuite ou jugement sur la culpabilité/prononcé de la peine). Dans l’ordre étatique, il conviendrait de renforcer la mise en œuvre de deux perspectives conjointes : d’une part, devrait être confortée la restauration de la paix sociale grâce à des commissions de vérité inspirées de la théorie de justice restaurative ; d’autre part, devraient être diversifiés les mécanismes de lutte contre l’impunité consistant à recourir à la justice accélérée (plaidoyers de culpabilité, pratiques ancestrales) ainsi qu’à la technique des juridictions hybrides. / According to the traditional understanding of the principle of complementarity, the Rome Statute gives the ICC a purely auxiliary function: it should intervene only if the national judicial system, which enjoys jurisdictional priority to prosecute international crimes, has failed. The thesis draws away from this unsatisfactory reading. It suggests expanding the definition of complementarity to base it on the concept of interaction and partnership between the international and the national legal orders. In doing so the thesis calls for a new distribution of international criminal cases that would be both legitimate and effective. It would be the foundation to rebuild international criminal justice. To this end, at the international level, the author recommends to establish the selective primacy of the ICC to prosecute senior state leaders who conceived and directed the criminal plan, whereas new dynamics of complementarity are suggested to judge the other perpetrators. It would involve the State in the proceedings conducted by the ICC, by dividing the stages of the trial (dissociation of the investigation/prosecution or judgment/sentencing). At the national level, the author recommends to strengthen two joint approaches. On the one hand, the restoration of social peace should be strengthened through truth commissions inspired by the restorative justice theory. On the other hand, the diversity of the mechanisms to fight impunity such as expeditious procedures (guilty pleas, traditional practices) and the use of hybrid courts should be fostered.

Magister Legum - LLM

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:24:13Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Heloisa Helena de Almeida Portugal.pdf: 1331064 bytes, checksum: a15c9fcaca12ca55a3253171173e79b7 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-02-12 / Objective with this doctoral thesis demonstrate the viability of law-keeping Brazilian act of grace declared obstacle to compliance with the ruling to the detriment of Brazil for the Inter-American Court of Human Rights within the framework of the Case of Gomes Lund et al (Araguaia guerrilla movement) vs. . Brazil, 24.11.2010 sentence. It stands out, moreover, that a month before the court to rule in this sentence by a provision of Law 6,683 / 1979, the Supreme Court in ADPF 153 / DF judged incorporated this law by the Constitution of 1988. It appears that the Brazilian democratic formation compared in particular with the countries of South America, they showed different times, while in Brazil the transition took place through a negotiated political process and in the context of democratic transition, as a rule, in Latin America the amnesty occurs by imposition. Considering the inter-American system of human rights, the obligations and the international responsibility of State headquarters of violation of fundamental principles, it is concluded that the Supreme Court and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights consists of horizontal and complementary bodies. Having autonomy and government discretion to the decision of the supreme national court / Objetiva-se com a presente tese doutoral demonstrar a viabilidade de manutenção da Lei de Anistia brasileira declarada como óbice ao cumprimento da decisão proferida a desfavor do Brasil pela Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos no marco do Caso Gomes Lund e outros (Guerrilha do Araguaia) vs. Brasil, com sentença de 24.11.2010. Destaca-se, ademais, que um mês antes da Corte pronunciar-se nesta sentença pela nulidade da Lei 6.683/1979, o STF na ADPF 153/DF julgou recepcionado dita lei pela Constituição Federal de 1988. Verifica-se que a formação democrática brasileira se comparada em especial, com os países da América do Sul, apresentaram momentos distintos, enquanto no Brasil a transição deu-se através de um processo político negociado e no âmbito da transição democrática, via de regra, na América Latina a anistia ocorre por imposição. Considerando o sistema interamericano de direitos humanos, as obrigações decorrentes e a responsabilidade internacional de Estado em sede de violação de preceitos fundamentais, conclui-se que o Supremo Tribunal Federal e a Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos consistem em órgãos horizontais e complementares. Havendo autonomia e discricionariedade governamental para a decisão da suprema corte nacional

La quête d’une réponse à l’impunité des crimes internationaux a connu un pas de géant avec l’adoption par un grand nombre d’États du Statut de Rome créant la Cour pénale internationale. Néanmoins, toujours jaloux de leur souveraineté, ces États ont fait de cette dernière une juridiction complémentaire. Cette Cour n’agit que lorsque des crimes relevant de sa compétence, commis par de hautes autorités, ne font pas l’objet d’enquêtes ou poursuites sérieuses sur le plan national. Mais aussi, dans une approche proactive de sa complémentarité, elle est appelée à catalyser l’organisation des enquêtes ou poursuites au niveau national en assistant ou en encourageant les instances nationales. Cette complémentarité de la CPI par rapport aux systèmes judiciaires nationaux constitue le seul moyen par lequel cette cour lutte contre l’impunité des crimes internationaux. Cependant, au lieu de constituer un remède à l’impunité, la mise en œuvre de ce principe et la manière dont il est libellé dans le Statut de Rome, en serait plutôt, dans la plupart des cas, la source. Pour étayer ces propos, cette étude met en exergue la politisation et l’instrumentalisation qui entachent la mise en œuvre de ce principe ainsi que l’exploitation insuffisante de la complémentarité positive. Après avoir interrogé l’évolution de la justice pénale internationale pour dégager son caractère complémentaire, ce mémoire décortique le sens et la portée du principe de complémentarité. Il vérifie ensuite notre hypothèse par l’analyse de la mise en œuvre de ce principe dans les situations en Côte d’Ivoire et en Libye. Au final, il suggère la révision de la base juridique de ce principe et l’optimisation de la complémentarité positive comme véritable rempart contre l’impunité des crimes internationaux les plus graves. / Many States have ratified the Rome Statute establishing the International Criminal Court (ICC). In response to the issue of international crimes which usually go unpunished, this represents a giant step forward. However, by exercising much of their sovereignty, these States have made the ICC a supplementary jurisdiction which only acts when crimes within its jurisdiction committed by high authorities, are not subject to serious investigations or prosecutions at the national levels. As a proactive approach to its complementarity, it is required to catalyze the organization of investigations or prosecutions at the national levels by assisting or encouraging local authorities. This complementarity of the ICC to the national judiciary systems constitutes the only way this court has available to fight against international crimes impunity. However, the implementation of this principle and the way it is worded in the Rome Statute, constitute, in most cases, the source of impunity rather than its remedy. In order to do so, this study first highlights the politicization and instrumentalisation that plagued the implementation of this principle and the insufficient exploration of positive complementarity. It secondly gives an overview of the evolution of international criminal justice stressing its complementary nature. The meaning and scope of the principle of complementarity will be then scrutinized which will allow for testing our hypothesis; taking Ivory Coast’s and Libya’s contexts as cases in point. In light of the results, suggestions in terms of revisions of the legal basis of this principle and the optimization of positive complementarity as a true weapon against impunity of such unheard of crimes are discussed.