Doctor Legum - LLD / The principle of complementarity forms the basis upon which the International Criminal Court (ICC) exercises its jurisdiction. This principle of international law first appears in the Preamble to the Rome Statute and then the admissibility provisions under Article 17 of the Rome Statute, which outline that the Court will declare a case inadmissible where it is being investigated or prosecuted by a state which has jurisdiction over it; unless the state is unwilling or unable to genuinely carry out the investigation or prosecution. Alternatively where the case has been investigated by a state which has jurisdiction over it and the state has decided not to prosecute the person concerned, unless the decision resulted from the unwillingness or inability of the state to genuinely prosecute. This principle implies that the ICC is a court of last resort and will therefore not intervene in a case where the state of commission is either able or willing genuinely to investigate and prosecute perpetrators of grave crimes. It is common cause that Africa has been the staging area of mass atrocities for decades. The indictment of Kenyan president Uhuru Kenyatta’s’ and his deputy William Ruto, Hissene Habre case, and the indictment and issuance of an arrest warrant against the Sudanese President Omar El-Bashir are instructive in this regard. The ICC’S actions created the perception of bias, injustice and inequity. This prompted a sharp reaction from African states, which threated a mass withdrawal from the Rome Statute in 2013. The one positive spin off from the AU reaction was the expansion of the jurisdiction of the merged court to include a criminal chamber in 2014, thus creating Africa’s first international criminal court, the African Criminal Court (ACC). This development was the result of the discontent and frustration of the African continent towards the work of the ICC, which was perceived as focusing only on African cases, whilst ignoring the litany of cases coming from other regions of the world.

The thesis deals with topic of universal jurisdiction with an emphasis on British House of Lords' decisions in case of former Chilean president Augusto Pinochet from years 1998 and 1999. Universal jurisdiction enables to prosecute crimes committed abroad by persons, who at time of such commission were neither the citizens of state in question nor the permanent residents of the state. It is expression of an idea, that it is common interest of the whole international community to prosecute the most serious crimes under international law, irrespective of any link to the prosecuting state, because such crimes relate to the whole international community and not only single state. The first chapter of the thesis deals with national criminal jurisdiction, whose comprehension is necessary for further understanding of universal jurisdiction. The universal jurisdiction is the main topic in the second chapter, in which I outline a brief history of the concept, mention application of the universal jurisdiction in case with Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem, and try to find out where the importance of universal jurisdiction lies or what the main alleged disadvantages and risks are as well. My further concerns are the scope of universal jurisdiction, that is the crimes that are subjects to its application, universal...

Em conformidade com o direito internacional penal e o direito internacional dos direitos humanos, a presente dissertação de mestrado tem como objetivo verificar se o exercício da competência repressiva universal pelos tribunais nacionais constitui um mecanismo da justiça internacional penal capaz de auxiliar na promoção e na proteção dos direitos humanos. Para responder a esta indagação, três fontes do direito internacional foram analisadas neste estudo: a doutrina, a jurisprudência e a prática dos Estados. Neste sentido, além da exposição teórica, procedeu-se à análise dos principais casos em que o instituto foi aplicado e à pesquisa da legislação de alguns países sobre o tema. Este estudo verificou como a competência repressiva universal está inserida no momento de transição do direito internacional penal desencadeado pela crescente afirmação dos direitos humanos. / According to international criminal law and to international human rights law, this thesis aims to verify if the exercise of universal jurisdiction by national courts represents a mechanism of the international criminal justice able to promote and to strengthen human rights. In order to answer this question, three sources of international law were investigated: the teachings of publicists, judicial decisions and the internal law of some countries. This study assumed there is a transition going on in international law caused by the advances of human rights and analyzed how universal jurisdiction relates to it.

Em conformidade com o direito internacional penal e o direito internacional dos direitos humanos, a presente dissertação de mestrado tem como objetivo verificar se o exercício da competência repressiva universal pelos tribunais nacionais constitui um mecanismo da justiça internacional penal capaz de auxiliar na promoção e na proteção dos direitos humanos. Para responder a esta indagação, três fontes do direito internacional foram analisadas neste estudo: a doutrina, a jurisprudência e a prática dos Estados. Neste sentido, além da exposição teórica, procedeu-se à análise dos principais casos em que o instituto foi aplicado e à pesquisa da legislação de alguns países sobre o tema. Este estudo verificou como a competência repressiva universal está inserida no momento de transição do direito internacional penal desencadeado pela crescente afirmação dos direitos humanos. / According to international criminal law and to international human rights law, this thesis aims to verify if the exercise of universal jurisdiction by national courts represents a mechanism of the international criminal justice able to promote and to strengthen human rights. In order to answer this question, three sources of international law were investigated: the teachings of publicists, judicial decisions and the internal law of some countries. This study assumed there is a transition going on in international law caused by the advances of human rights and analyzed how universal jurisdiction relates to it.

Doctor Legum - LLD / The crimes of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity are customary international law crimes. The African continent has experienced quite a number of cases involving these crimes, and the continent's ability and willingness to prosecute offenders’ remains in doubt. As a result, in the past decade or so, non-African states have sought to institute proceedings against African leaders accused of perpetrating international customary law crimes. These attempts have taken two distinct formats, the first being the use of Universal Jurisdiction {UJ), and the second being the attempts by the International Criminal Court {ICC) to indict and prosecute African leaders. The African Union {AU) has vehemently opposed both these attempts on the grounds that they are inspired by neo-colonial thinking that is aimed at stifling peace and reconciliation efforts on the continent.Proponents of UJ argue that this principle is fundamental to international justice and the global fight to end impunity for international crimes. UJ allows a state to exercise jurisdiction over crimes committed outside its territory and for which the normal jurisdictional links of nationality and passive personality do not exist. Although the concept of UJ has been part of international law for quite some time, its relevance today has been questioned by national courts and international judicial bodies. Its recent usage by both Belgian and French courts, as well as by international tribunals, such as the ICC, has attracted sharp criticism from many African states. Given that African states constitute the biggest block of signatory states to the Rome Statute, their voice cannot be ignored. Their principal concern is that the ICC is unfairly targeting African leaders for prosecution. The negative sentiment is also evidenced by some African leaders' deliberate refusal to comply with ICC requests or to cooperate in cases where warrants of arrest have been issued against African leaders, such as in the case of the Sudanese President, Omar Al Bashir, and the present prosecution of the Kenyan President, Uhuru Kenyatta and his deputy, William Ruto. Given the aversion shown by African states to ICC prosecution of state leaders, and attempts by some non-African states to resort to UJ in order to try African leaders, the question is whether African states themselves have a solution to the problem of impunity on the continent? The answer might lie, partly, in the age old concept of UJ, where individual African states might be able to exercise jurisdiction over the international crimes of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. It might also lie in the ability and willingness of African states to strengthen the Continent’s own, regional institutions by setting up an African international criminal tribunal, or strengthening an existing one to deal with these issues. It therefore becomes important to assess what the African standpoint on UJ is, as against what the practical realities are. In other words, what continental or regional institutions exist to combat impunity for international crimes: what do states do in fact?

Universal Jurisdiction (UJ) emerged as a norm in international post-conflict justice after the Nuremberg Trials and is based on the principle that the nature of certain crimes is of greater importance than the nationality of the perpetrator, the location of the crime or any direct connection to the prosecuting state. This paper discusses the spread of UJ, which has been wide-ranging and consistent since the 1950s, and seeks answers to the question – why do some states adopt universal jurisdiction legislation while others do not? Through the novel use of Social Network Analysis (SNA) and application of diffusion theory (specifically emulation), the study tests the hypothesis that liberalist network ties influence a state’s willingness to adopt UJ legislation. This bivariate relationship is tested with a medium-n population of OECD states and the empirical results of the SNA reveal strong support for the hypothesis, findings that are determined to be statistically significant by the Pearson’s Chi-Square test. This study embodies an innovative methodological and theoretical approach to an important international post-conflict justice issue, and draws attention to the obstacles that often stand between victims and survivors of genocide and their day in court.  N.B The design of the Social Network Analysis maps and details in some tables mean that this paper is most optimally viewed in colour.

Magister Legum - LLM / The Rome Statute established the International Criminal Court (the ICC) in July 2002 and South Africa was one of the first signatories. South Africa incorporated this statute into its domestic law by enacting the Implementation of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Act 27 of 2002 (the Implementation Act). The preamble and article 1 of the Rome Statute, provides that the jurisdiction of the ICC is ‘complementary’ to national courts and that, therefore, States Parties retain the primary responsibility for the repression of international crimes.

This thesis will explore the relationship between war crimes trials and communication for development by utilising the Gibril Massaquoi trial as a case study. Mr Massaquoi, a Sierra Leonean national accused of committing war crimes and crimes against humanity allegedly committed during the Second Liberian Civil War, was residing in Finland, and therefore tried by Finnish authorities under universal jurisdiction. The growing importance of universal jurisdiction - the practice that allows States to prosecute individuals accused of international crimes independently from nationality and the location where the crimes were committed – raises important questions of process ownership, localisation, and social change.  Universal jurisdiction cases are often prosecuted in temporally and geographically distant countries from where the alleged crimes were committed. Whilst they are extensively debated in legal studies, this thesis will analyse the matter through a communication development lens.  With a focus on those few selected journalists that had the opportunity to witness the trial for its Liberian stretch, I will use their experiences to draw lessons learned and future avenues to explore for cases of this nature from a communication for development approach.

L’application de la compétence internationale pénale dans l'affaire Pinochet à laissé un précédent important dans le domaine de la lutte contre l'impunité, comme le démontre la procédure mise en œuvre par l'Audiencia Nacional d'Espagne, ainsi que par la Cour d'Assises de Paris avec application du principe de la personnalité passive. En effet, avec le mandat d’arrêt international aux fins d'extradition émis par les autorités judiciaires espagnols, qui a permis l'arrestation de Pinochet à Londres, la négation de son immunité par la chambre des Lords et le jugement par défaut en France de son administration militaire, le droit international connait un avant et in après. Le droit international pénal est ainsi mis en exergue en tant que fondement juridique de la compétence extra-territoriale des Etats. Il permet d'utiliser tant le principe de la compétence universelle que celui. Il permet d'utiliser tant le principe de la compétence universelle que celui de la personnalité passive, toutes deux appliquées, dans cette affaire précise, dans le but d'exercer une justice internationale. / The application of the criminal international jurisdiction in the Pinochet case left an important precedent in the area of the fight against impunity, as shown by the procedure brought into play by the Spanish Audiencia Nacional and also by the Cour d'Assises of Paris, with the enforcement of the passive personality principle. Actually, with the international arrest warrant for extradition issued by the Spanish judicial authorities, which made possible the arrest of Pinochet in London; the denial of his immunity by the House of Lords and the judgment in absentia in France of his military organization, the international law has a before and an after. The international criminal law is under lined as the juridical foundation of the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the legal authorities of a state. It allows the application as well of the universal jurisdiction principle as of the passible personality principle, both used, in this precise case, with the objective to exercise an international justice.

This thesis deals with the topic of universal jurisdiction and the aut dedere aut judicare principle. It also marginally deals with issues of immunity of the perpetrators of international crimes, in relation of them enjoying leading functions of the state. In the introductory chapter of this thesis is discussed concept of jurisdiction as a basis for understanding following content of the next chapter about universal jurisdiction itself. In the chapter about the historical development the emergence of universal jurisdiction is described, through circumstances accompanying the establishment of the Nuremberg Tribunal to internationally significant legal proceedings with Albert Eichmann. In my work I try to bring yet ambiguously defined concept of universal jurisdiction, to elucidate its content and scope of its application areas. In the second part of this thesis I focus on the principle aut dedere aut judicare i.e. obligations of states to prosecute perpetrators of international crimes, present at their territory, or else extradite them to the State, which calls for providing their prosecution. On the case before the International Court of Justice in The Hague in the matter of extradition of former Chadian president by Senegal to Belgium I demonstrate the practical implications of the aut dedere aut...