War Crimes in International Versus Non-International Armed Conflicts: "New Wine in Old Wineskins"?

2008 ◽  
Vol 8 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 319-329 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gauthier de Beco
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Trial Chamber ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law

AbstractThis note discusses the distinction between international and non-international armed conflicts in the prosecution of war crimes before the International Criminal Court. It analyses the international humanitarian law applicable to both kinds of conflict, and the way in which the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia succeeded in prosecuting war crimes committed in non-international armed conflicts. It also studies the two war crimes regimes provided for in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The note then examines how Pre-Trial Chamber I dealt with this issue in its Decision on the confirmation of charges against Thomas Lubanga Dyilo and the problems it faced in doing so. It concludes with a plea for the abolition of the distinction between international and non-international armed conflicts with respect to war crimes in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

The International Criminal Court and Non-International Armed Conflicts

2000 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 395-425 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heike Spieker
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Conflicts

Non-international armed conflicts are more numerous, more brutal and entail more blood-shed today than international ones. The Statute of the International Criminal Court explicitly upholds the traditional distinction between international and non-international conflicts, and armed conflicts will have to be characterized accordingly. But the tendency to adapt the international humanitarian law (IHL) regime for non-international conflicts to the rules for international ones emerges. Article 7 on Crimes Against Humanity and Article 8(2)(c) and (e) on War Crimes amount to real progress in this respect. Yet, the regulation on war crimes in particular does not provide for comprehensive criminal responsibility of individual perpetrators in non-international conflicts.

Dealing with the Principle of Proportionality in Armed Conflict in Retrospect: The Application of the Principle in International Criminal Trials

2013 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 271-315 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rogier Bartels
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Criminal Trials ◽  
Principle Of Proportionality ◽  
International Criminal Trials

The principle of proportionality is one of the core principles of international humanitarian law. The principle is not easy to apply on the battlefield, but is even harder to apply retrospectively, in the courtroom. This article discusses the challenges in applying the principle during international criminal trials. It discusses the principle itself, followed by an explanation of the general challenges of dealing with violations of international humanitarian law, and more specifically the rules related to the conduct of hostilities, during war crime trials. The way in which the principle has been used before the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia is examined, including an in-depth discussion of the recentGotovinacase. The second part consists of an evaluation of Article 8(2)(b)(iv) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, and discusses the difficulties the International Criminal Court would face in cases dealing with violations of the principle of proportionality.

scholarly journals International Legal Problems of Qualification of Armed Conflicts

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (68) ◽  
pp. 735-757
Author(s):  
Mykhaylo Buromenskiy ◽  
Vitalii Gutnyk
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Legal Doctrine ◽  
International Agencies

The article addresses the qualification problems of armed conflicts. The study was conducted through the analysis of international legal doctrine, international treaties, decisions of international organizations. Attention is paid to the jurisprudence of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Court. It is noted that International Humanitarian Law has been in place since the beginning of the armed conflict. Therefore, the application of International Humanitarian Law does not require any recognition of the existence of armed conflict (international or non-international); this conflict exists because of armed clashes. It is emphasized that the need to classify the conflict arises in view of domestic and international legal factors (to bring to international criminal justice those who have committed war crimes; state responsibility for internationally wrongful acts, etc.). Attention was paid to the non-existence of a single body, which was empowered to determine the existence of an armed conflict. Different international agencies may have different qualifications for the same armed conflict. It is concluded that it is necessary to establish a Committee of Experts under the UN Secretary-General, to avoid different qualifications from the same armed conflict.

scholarly journals ON THE QUESTION OF THE RELATIONSHIP OF WAR AND MILITARY CRIMES IN INTERNATIONAL AND NATIONAL LAW

2021 ◽  
pp. 220-228
Author(s):  
T. S. Sadova
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Military Service ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
The Relationship

The article is devoted to the study of military (crimes against the established order of military service) and war crimes. Particular attention is paid to the concept and features of these phenomena. The sources of both international and national law were also considered for the comparative characteristics of military and war crimes in order to understand their meaning and avoid the shift of these concepts. We have explored various aspects of the concept of war crimes. They are violations of the laws and customs of war. War crimes are serious violations of international law. They are violations of the Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949. There is a list of war crimes in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. This list is contained in Аrt. 8. The list of war crimes is contained in Art. 18 of the Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Humanity too. International jurisprudence shows that there is a special subject of war crimes. The author of the article studied the draft Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of Ukraine on the Application of International Criminal and Humanitarian Law”. This bill proposes to exclude certain articles on military crimes and to introduce new articles on war crimes into the Criminal Code of Ukraine. The new war crimes articles contain a list of war crimes. This list is substantially similar to the list of war crimes contained in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The concept of war and military crimes is given. The main differences between military and military crimes are revealed. Identical signs of war and military crimes have been studied. As a result, the author of the article has made a conclusion about the relationship between war and military crimes under international and national law.

scholarly journals Su kariavimo priemonėmis susiję karo nusikaltimai: tarptautinės humanitarinės teisės ir tarptautinės baudžiamosios teisės santykio problemos

Teisė ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 75 ◽  
pp. 111-125
Author(s):  
Dovydas Špokauskas
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law

Straipsnyje nagrinėjama, ar Tarptautinio baudžiamojo teismo Romos statuto nuostatos visiškai pertei­kia kariavimo priemonių pasirinkimą reglamentuojančias tarptautinės humanitarinės teisės sutartines ir paprotines nuostatas. The analysis assesses whether the provisions of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court do not fully reflect the customary and treaty norms of international humanitarian law related to the choice of means of warfare.

Part 2 Jurisdiction, Admissibility, and Applicable Law: Compétence, Recevabilité, Et Droit Applicable, Art.6 Genocide/Crime de génocide

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schabas William A
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Trial Chamber ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
Definition Of

This chapter comments on Article 6 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 6 defines the crime of genocide, one of four categories of offence within the subject-matter jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. The first important ruling on genocide by one of the ad hoc tribunals — the September 2, 1998 judgment of a Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda in Prosecutor v. Akayesu — was issued several weeks after the adoption of the Rome Statute. Since then there have been several important judicial pronouncements by the Appeals Chambers of the ad hoc tribunals addressing a range of issues relevant to the interpretation of article 6 as well as two judgments of the International Court of Justice. The Court has indicated that the definition of genocide in article 2 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (and therefore article 6 of the Rome Statute) reflects customary law.

Part 6 The Trial: Le Procès, Art.74 Requirements for the decision/Conditions requises pour la décision

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schabas William A
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Trial Chamber ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Military Tribunal ◽  
Military Tribunal

This chapter comments on Article 74 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 74 deals with several aspects of the trial itself. It requires members of the Trial Chamber to be present at all stages of the trial, but also allows for alternates to be designated. It indicates that the decision be adopted by a majority, and that the deliberations remain secret. The decision must contain a full and reasoned statement. This is far more specificity than any other international criminal tribunal has required. The Charter of the International Military Tribunal said that the judges must ‘give the reasons on which it is based’. Nowhere did it specify whether the deliberations should be in secret, or whether the decision should be by majority or unanimity, or whether there should be dissenting opinions, yet the judges did essentially what is provided for in article 74 of the Rome Statute.

Chemical Weapons and the International Criminal Court

2014 ◽  
Vol 108 (3) ◽  
pp. 436-448 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Zimmermann ◽  
Meltem Şener
Keyword(s):  
Subject Matter ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Chemical Weapons

When the contracting parties to the Rome Statute establishing the International Criminal Court met in Kampala in 2010 to discuss possible amendments to the statute, the main focus was, and has thereafter remained, on the crime of aggression. In addition to amending the statute to include the crime of aggression, however, the contracting parties amended Article 8 of the statute to include a broader range of war crimes in noninternational armed conflicts over which the ICC can have jurisdiction—inter alia, by including the use of chemical weapons. Although the latter amendment received much less attention from both the Kampala drafters and outside observers than the former, it is the use of chemical weapons that has come most quickly into play in world events. In particular, the use of chemical weapons by Syrian government forces in 2013 (and perhaps subsequently) has acutely raised questions concerning the extent of the ICC’s treaty-based jurisdiction, both under the unamended text of the Rome Statute or in situations where the amendment to Article 8 applies. These events have also provoked consideration concerning the Security Council’s legal powers to extend the ICC’s jurisdiction to certain crimes involving chemical weapons that would otherwise be beyond its subject matter jurisdiction. These questions are considered in this Note.

scholarly journals Dolus Eventualis and the Rome Statute Without It?

2009 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 433-467 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohamed Elewa Badar
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
General Definition ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Dolus Eventualis

Article 30 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court provides a general definition for the mental element required to trigger the criminal responsibility of individuals for serious violations of international humanitarian law. At first sight, it appears that the explicit words of Article 30 are sufficient to put an end to a long-lasting debate regarding the mens rea enigma that has confronted the jurisprudence of the two ad hoc Tribunals for the last decade, but this is not true. Recent decisions rendered by the International Criminal Court evidence the discrepancy among the ICC Pre-Trial Chambers in interpreting the exact meaning of Article 30 of the ICC Statute. The paper challenges that dolus eventualis is one of the genuine and independent pillars of criminal responsibility that forms, on its own, the basis of intentional crimes, and suggests its inclusion in the legal standard of Article 30 of the ICC Statute.

Prosecutor v. Callixte Mbarushimana: Judgment on the Appeal of the Prosecutor Against the Decision of Pre-Trial Chamber I of 16 December 2011 Entitled “Decision on the Confirmation of Charges” (Int'l Crim. Ct.)

2013 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 417-439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Frolich
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Democratic Republic ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Trial Chamber ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Republic Of The Congo

On May 30, 2012, the Appeals Chamber (Chamber) of the International Criminal Court (ICC) voted unanimously to dismiss the appeal of the Prosecution against the decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber not to confirm the charges against the alleged Congolese warlord Callixte Mbarushimana. The Prosecution had alleged Mbarushimana was criminally responsible under Article 25(3)(d) of the Rome Statute (Statute) for crimes against humanity and war crimes committed by members of the Forces Démocratiques de Libération du Rwanda (FDLR) in the Kivu provinces of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The Prosecution had appealed the Pre-Trial Chamber’s decision on three separate issues, all of which were rejected.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document