This thesis analyzes the technical definition of the crime of persecution for the purpose of prosecutions at the International Criminal Court. The provisions on the crime of persecution are found in Article 7(1)(h) and Article 7(2)(g) of the Rome Statute and Article 7(1)(h) of the Elements of Crimes. Lack of clarity is a difficulty with these provisions. The writer analyzes the provisions by pooling together primary and secondary sources and drawing on the customary international law that has emerged from the ad-hoc International Criminal Tribunals established between 1945 and 2003.

No description available.

No description available.

LL.M. (International Law) / The coming into force of the Rome Statute of the ICC (International Criminal Court) created a shift in state attitude in respect of the implementation and enforcement of International Law. In particular, several issues arise concerning the role to be played by states in the context of complementarity between the ICC and national courts. The ICC has jurisdiction over crimes of the most concern to the international community and its power is limited by, amongst others, the complementarity principle as well as the jurisdiction and functioning of national courts. States parties agreed to establish a permanent court which would put an end to impunity and prevent acts of core international crimes, as well as ensure effective prosecution of international crimes. Under the Rome Statute, states parties are obliged to develop measures at the national level in order to enhance international cooperation with the ICC. The complementarity principle encompasses, amongst others, the duty of every State to exercise criminal jurisdiction over international crimes, to enhance the capacity of national jurisdiction and to implement an appropriate national legal system which provides the same level of guarantee in investigating and prosecuting international crimes as the ICC. Both the ICC and national courts have jurisdiction over core crimes and this concurrent jurisdiction causes conflict between both institutions. The complementarity principle is based on the basis that states should maintain primary responsibility to protect their populations from genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. However,these conflicts do not arise with Ad Hoc tribunals, whose Statutes emphasise the supremacy of the international criminal tribunals over national courts. The complementarity principle is based on the basis that states should maintain primary responsibility to protect their populations from genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. The complementarity principle provides that prosecutions of crimes stipulated under the Rome Statute are primarily the task of states and the ICC is the court of last resort.6 This primary competence of national courts and the boundary between the two jurisdictions is given expression in article 17 of the Rome Statute. Prosecutions of core crimes before the ICC are only admissible if, and under condition that, an effective prosecution at the national level is threatened by legal, political and factual obstacles.

<p>On 17 July 1998, a total of 120 States, including Malawi, voted for the adoption of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The ermanent ICC became operational on 1 July 2002. The ICC has jurisdiction over the crime of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. These crimes are the most serious crimes of international concern. The&nbsp / ICC operates under the principle of complementarity, which entails that the ICC will only assume jurisdiction over these core crimes in the event that a State Party is unwilling and unable genuinely to carry out the investigation and prosecution. States Parties have, therefore, the primary responsibility to investigate and prosecute these crimes. The States&nbsp / Parties must therefore establish jurisdiction to conduct investigations and prosecution of these core crimes. It is from that background, coupled with the historical evolution and development of international criminal law, with regard to individual criminal responsibility, that this paper argues for the implementation of the Rome Statute in Malawi, through&nbsp / domestic legislation.The paper thus argues that only through domestic legislation can the purports of the Rome Statute be achieved and fulfilled by Malawi.</p>

<p>On 17 July 1998, a total of 120 States, including Malawi, voted for the adoption of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The ermanent ICC became operational on 1 July 2002. The ICC has jurisdiction over the crime of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. These crimes are the most serious crimes of international concern. The&nbsp / ICC operates under the principle of complementarity, which entails that the ICC will only assume jurisdiction over these core crimes in the event that a State Party is unwilling and unable genuinely to carry out the investigation and prosecution. States Parties have, therefore, the primary responsibility to investigate and prosecute these crimes. The States&nbsp / Parties must therefore establish jurisdiction to conduct investigations and prosecution of these core crimes. It is from that background, coupled with the historical evolution and development of international criminal law, with regard to individual criminal responsibility, that this paper argues for the implementation of the Rome Statute in Malawi, through&nbsp / domestic legislation.The paper thus argues that only through domestic legislation can the purports of the Rome Statute be achieved and fulfilled by Malawi.</p>

Magister Legum - LLM / On 17 July 1998, a total of 120 States, including Malawi, voted for the adoption of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The ermanent ICC became operational on 1 July 2002. The ICC has jurisdiction over the crime of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. These crimes are the most serious crimes of international concern. The ICC operates under the principle of complementarity, which entails that the ICC will only assume jurisdiction over these core crimes in the event that a State Party is unwilling and unable genuinely to carry out the investigation and prosecution. States Parties have, therefore, the primary responsibility to investigate and prosecute these crimes. The States Parties must therefore establish jurisdiction to conduct investigations and prosecution of these core crimes. It is from that background, coupled with the historical evolution and development of international criminal law, with regard to individual criminal responsibility, that this paper argues for the implementation of the Rome Statute in Malawi, through domestic legislation.The paper thus argues that only through domestic legislation can the purports of the Rome Statute be achieved and fulfilled by Malawi. / South Africa

Magister Legum - LLM / Sitting head of state immunity for crimes under international law has been a very controversial issue in recent times. On the one hand, the debate bears that personal immunity has been renounced for crimes under international law. On the other hand, the advocates of personal immunity claim that the principle of immunity is still persisting under customary International law. Although the International Criminal Court (ICC) is a treaty based court, it is able to extend its jurisdiction to non-state parties to the Rome Statute through a referral by the United Nations Security Council. Lacking its own enforcement body the ICC relies on the cooperation of other states for arrest and surrender of those it indicts. The extension of the court's jurisdiction to non-state parties, such as the case of Sudanese President Omar Al Bashir, has led to the reluctance of state parties to the Rome Statue to effect arrest and surrender citing a 'dilemma between two conflicting obligations'. This paper analyses the legal status of personal immunity before different fora such as International tribunals, foreign domestic courts and under customary international law. It also critically examines the legal basis for the alleged conflicting obligations of state parties. The paper at the end concludes that there is no conflicting obligation for states parties to fully co-operate with the ICC and the lack of co-operation in the arrest and surrender of a sitting head of state is inconsistent with international law particularly with United Nation Charter and the Rome Statute. / German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD)

Thesis (LLM)--University of Stellenbosch, 2002. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The permanent International Criminal Court (ICC) will come into operation after the 60th ratification of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court of 1998. The ICC will have jurisdiction over the most serious international crimes, namely war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity. The focus of this thesis is the difficulties surrounding the admissibility of a case before the ICC. There are basically two legs to this analysis: jurisdiction and complementarity .. Jurisdiction of the ICC is analysed in historical and theoretical context. This comprises an overview of the international tribunals since the First World War, and more specifically their impact on the development of jurisdiction in international criminal law. Secondly, the thesis is examining the jurisdiction of the ICC in terms of the specific provisions of the Rome Statute. This analysis comprises a detailed analysis of all the provisions of the Rome Statute that have an impact on the exercise of the ICC's jurisdiction. The relationship between the ICC and national courts is a difficult relationship based on a compromise at the Rome Conference in 1998. The principle underlying this relationship is known as "complementarity". This : means that the ICC will only exercise its jurisdiction if a national court is "unwilling" or "unable" to exercise its jurisdiction. A detailed analysis of the different provisions of the Rome Statute, as well as some references to other international tribunals, serve to analyse the impact of complementarity on the eventual ambit of the ICC's jurisdiction. In conclusion, some suggestions regarding the admissibility of cases and the difficult relationship between the ICC and national courts are made. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die permanente Internasionale Strafhof (ISH) sal met sy werksaamhede begin na die 60ste ratifikasie van die Statuut van Rome van 1998. Die ISH sal jurisdiksie uitoefen oor die ernstigste internasionale misdade, tewete oorlogsmisdade, volksmoord en misdade teen die mensdom. Hierdie tesis fokus op die probleme rondom die toelaatbaarheid van 'n saak voor die ISH. Hierdie ontleding het basies twee bene: jurisdiksie en komplementariteit. Die jurisdiksie van die ISH word in historiese en teoretiese konteks ontleed. Dit behels 'n oorsig van die internasionale tribunale sedert die Eerste Wêreldoorlog, en meer spesifiek die impak wat hierdie tribunale op die ontwikkeling van jurisdiksie in die internasionale strafreg gehad het. In die tweede plek word jurisdiksie ontleed aan die hand van die spesifieke bepalings van die Statuut van Rome. Hierdie ontleding behels 'n gedetaileerde ontleding van al die bepalings van die Statuut van Rome wat 'n impak het op die uitoefening van die ISH se jurisdiksie. Die verhouding tussen die ISH en nasionale howe is 'n komplekse verhouding, gebaseer op 'n kompromie wat by die Rome Konferensie van 1998 aangegaan is. Die beginselonderliggend aan hierdie verhouding staan bekend as "komplementariteit". Dit beteken dat die ISH slegs sy jurisdiksie sal uitoefen indien 'n nasionale hof "onwillig" of "nie in staat is" om jurisdiksie uit te oefen nie. 'n Gedetaileerde ontleding van die verskillende bepalings van die Statuut van Rome, sowel as verwysings na ander internasionale tribunale, dien om die impak van komplementariteit op die omvang van die ISH se jurisdiksie, te ontleed. Ten slotte word sekere voorstelle aangaande die toelaatbaarheid van sake en die verhouding tussen die ISH en nasionale howe gemaak.

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court is a major landmark in the development of international accountability. Its preamble affirms “that the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole must not go unpunished and that their effective prosecution must be ensured by taking measures at the national level and by enhancing international cooperation”. Thus the signatory states were “determined to put an end to impunity for the perpetrators of these crimes and thus to contribute to the prevention of such crimes”. The ICC contributes to the fight against impunity and the establishment of the rule of law by punishing violations of international legal norms. Accountability is important for the past and the future of societies. The ICC needs the support and cooperation of the states to effectively perform its mandate. So without ratification and implementation of the Rome Statute the ICC will not have jurisdiction over non-member states, unless referred by the UN Security Council. The Rome Statute does not only create the ICC but it also creates the national jurisdiction of its States Parties as these states have the primary responsibility to investigate and prosecute Rome Statute crimes. With only five Arab states to date being State Parties to the Rome Statute, it is obvious that the region is underrepresented at the ICC. Despite their positive role played in the creation of the ICC, not ratifying the Rome Statute raises several questions, especially that the majority of states that voted against the Statute were from the Arab region. Ratifying and implementing the Rome Statute will strengthen the Arab states criminal justice system, enabling them to prosecute international crimes domestically and will deter any individual from committing them in the future, regardless his official position. It will also allow the Arab states to have the primary jurisdiction over international crimes and reinforces the entire judicial system. This research will examine the issue of ratification and implementation of the Rome Statute by the Arab states by analysing the reasons, challenges and obstacles of the Arab states for not becoming part of the international criminal justice system.