Return to search

Terrorism and International Criminal Court : the issue of subject matter jurisdiction

Terrorism is not a new threat to the international order but it is a threat that has grown more urgent in the last few years. Terrorism has become a tragic circumstance of everyday live and has caused a remarkable loss of lives. It was only after the terrorist attacks against the United States on September 11 2001, that the international community realised it needed to co-operate and take actions against terrorism on an international level. One response has been the adoption of international rules for the suppression and eradication of terrorism and terrorist activities and making accountable the perpetrators of such acts. In fact, the contingent character of ad hoc tribunals encourages states to carry out their idea of establishing a permanent penal jurisdiction. The establishment of the International Criminal Court is considered a crowning achievement for preventing and prosecuting abominable crimes. The jurisdiction of the court shall be limited to the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole; this includes crime of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and eventually crime of aggression. However disagreement over a definition of what constitutes terrorist activity made it impossible to include within the jurisdiction of the Court such serious crime named terrorism. There have been multiple approaches to the issue, but despite all efforts to pursue individuals who committed human rights violations, the ICC’s subject matter jurisdiction is limited since the international community could not reach to a consensual definition on what should be understood as terrorism. Consequently the Court does not have jurisdiction over international terrorism. There is therefore no standing, permanent international body with criminal jurisdiction over individuals accused of terrorist acts, although such acts may in extreme case fall within the rubric of crime against humanity. The various instruments and international directives dedicated to the eradication and suppression of terrorism have not resolved the impasse of its definition; nor is there any ‘unified’ international law approach to combating terrorism. / Dissertation (LLM)--University of Pretoria, 2011. / Public Law / unrestricted

Identiferoai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:up/oai:repository.up.ac.za:2263/26659
Date25 July 2013
CreatorsMabtue Kamga, Mireille
ContributorsBotha, C.J. (Christo J.), upetd@up.ac.za
PublisherUniversity of Pretoria
Source SetsSouth African National ETD Portal
Detected LanguageEnglish
TypeDissertation
Rights© 2011 University of Pretoria. All rights reserved. The copyright in this work vests in the University of Pretoria. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, without the prior written permission of the University of Pretoria

Page generated in 0.0024 seconds