Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- Foreword
- Acknowledgements
- 1 Introduction
- 2 The state of the art
- 3 Guiding interpretive principle
- 4 Challenges to the principle of legality
- 5 Operationalizing the principle of legality
- 6 Custom as an aid to interpretation
- 7 Internal indicia of codification
- 8 External indicia of codification
- 9 The Vienna Convention (1969) and aids to interpretation
- 10 Conclusions
- Bibliography
- Index
- References
7 - Internal indicia of codification
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 November 2014
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- Foreword
- Acknowledgements
- 1 Introduction
- 2 The state of the art
- 3 Guiding interpretive principle
- 4 Challenges to the principle of legality
- 5 Operationalizing the principle of legality
- 6 Custom as an aid to interpretation
- 7 Internal indicia of codification
- 8 External indicia of codification
- 9 The Vienna Convention (1969) and aids to interpretation
- 10 Conclusions
- Bibliography
- Index
- References
Summary
Introduction
In Chapter 6, an attempt was made to explain why, in order to develop a method of interpretation for crimes in the Rome Statute, the relationship between the Statute and custom must be understood. The nature of this relationship is essential to determining custom’s role as an aid to interpretation and the relationship of this aid to other interpretive aids, especially the Elements of Crimes. The codification study that follows is guided by indicia of codification identified in the previous Chapter. The goal in this and the following Chapter is to determine whether the definitions of crimes in the Rome Statute are more of a codification of custom or a progressive development of international criminal law. Codification experts disagree on the relative weight to be given to indicia of codification in the text of a treaty and those external to it (e.g., travaux préparatoires). Accordingly, all indicia will be considered. In this Chapter, consideration will be given to the provisions of the Rome Statute on the following issues and the clues they offer about the relationship between the Statute and custom: material, personal and temporal jurisdiction; legality; applicable law; the Rome Statute’s relationship to existing and developing international law; definitions of crimes; Elements of Crimes; and mental elements of crimes. In the next Chapter, indicia of codification external to the Rome Statute will be examined.
Material jurisdiction (article 5)
According to the preamble of the Rome Statute, crimes within its jurisdiction are ‘grave’ and ‘threaten the peace, security and well-being of the world’. They are the ‘most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole’ and ‘must not go unpunished’. This notion of seriousness is expressly reiterated in articles 1 and 5 of the Rome Statute and in the Elements of Crimes. Article 8(1) of the Rome Statute also emphasizes to the Court and prosecutor that their focus should be on the most egregious war crimes: ‘The Court shall have jurisdiction in respect of war crimes in particular when committed as part of a plan or policy or as part of a large-scale commission of such crimes.’ What does this general gravity threshold suggest about the nature of the crimes within the Court’s jurisdiction?
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2014
References
and , ‘The New International Criminal Court: An Uneasy Revolution’ (2000) 88 Geo LJ 381, 419Google Scholar
, ‘Gravity and the Legitimacy of the International Criminal Court’ (2008) 32 Fordham Int’l LJ1400Google Scholar
, ‘Entangled Treaty and Custom’ in (ed.), International Law at a Time of Perplexity: Essays in Honour of Shabtai Rosenne (Martinus Nijhoff 1989) 717, 735Google Scholar
Filártiga v. Peña-Irala, 630 F.2d 876 (2d Cir. 1980)
, Reservations to the Convention on Prevention and Punishment of Genocide, Advisory Opinion [1951]
Prosecutor v. Furundžija, Judgment, ICTY-95–17/1-T, 10 December 1998
, ‘International Criminal Law’ in (ed.), Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (2008–)
, ‘Fragmentation of International Law: Difficulties Arising from the Diversification and Expansion of International Law: Report of the Study Group of the International Law Commission’ (4 April 2006), UN Doc. A/CN.4/L.682, paras. 188–189
, ‘The Doctrinal Foundations of International Criminalization’ in (ed.), International Criminal Law, vol. I, 3rd edn (Martinus Nijhoff 2008) 107Google Scholar
Prosecutor v. Tadić, Decision on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction, ICTY-94–1-AR72, 2 October 1995
Prosecutor v. Kordić and Čerkez, Judgment, ICTY-95–14/2-A, 17 December 2004, paras. 40–46; and case law rejecting this position: Prosecutor v. Vasiljević, Judgment, ICTY-98–32-T, 29 November 2002, para. 26; Prosecutor v. Galić, Judgment, Separate and Partially Dissenting of Judge Nieto-Navia, ICTY-98–29-T, 5 December 2003, paras. 109–112
Case concerning the Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company, Limited (Belgium v. Spain) (Second Phase) [1970]
, ‘Obligations and Rights Erga Omnes in International Law’ (Krakow Session 2005) 71-II Annuaire de l’Institut de Droit International289, article 1Google Scholar
, ‘The Protection of Human Rights and the Principle of Non-Intervention in Internal Affairs of States’ (Santiago de Compostela Session 1989) 3-II Annuaire de l’Institut de Droit International341, article 1Google Scholar
and , ‘The Birth of the International Criminal Court: The 1998 Rome Conference’ (1998) 36 Canadian Ybk Int’l L3, 18Google Scholar
, ‘Jurisdiction Ratione Personae’ in and Others (eds.), The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Commentary, vol. I (Oxford University Press 2002) 527, 534–35Google Scholar
The Case of the SS Lotus (France v. Turkey) (1927)
, ‘The Jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court over Nationals of Non-Parties: Legal Basis and Limits’ (2003) 1 J Int’l Crim Justice618, 621–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Jurisdiction to Adjudicate and Jurisdiction to Prescribe in International Criminal Courts’ (2003) 48 Vill L Rev763, 821Google Scholar
, ‘Article 22’ in (ed.), Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 2nd edn (CH Beck/Hart/Nomos 2008) 720Google Scholar
Vienna Convention (1969)
Vienna Convention (1969); Free Zones Case (France v. Switzerland) (1929) PCIJ Series A, No. 22, 17–18
, ‘The Security Council as a Law Maker: The Adoption of (Quasi)-Judicial Decisions’ in and (eds.), Developments in International Law in Treaty Making (Springer 2005) 183, 198–99Google Scholar
Prosecutor v. Delalić and Others, Judgment, ICTY-96–21-T, 16 November 1998
, ‘Article 5’ in (ed.), Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 2nd edn (CH Beck/Hart/Nomos 2008) 129, 136–37Google Scholar
, ‘The Process of Negotiations’ in (ed.), The International Criminal Court: The Making of the Rome Statute (Kluwer Law International 1999) 217Google Scholar
, and (eds.), The Princeton Process on the Crime of Aggression: Materials of the Special Working Group on the Crime of Aggression, 2003–2009 (Princeton University: Liechtenstein Institute on Self-Determination, 2009)
and , The Travaux Préparatoires of the Crime of Aggression (Cambridge University Press 2012)Google Scholar
and , ‘A Historic Breakthrough on the Crime of Aggression’ (2011) 105 AJIL517, fn. 38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Jurisdiction Ratione Temporis’ in and Others (eds.), The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Commentary, vol. I (Oxford University Press 2002) 545Google Scholar
and , ‘The ICC and the Security Council: An Uncomfortable Relationship’ in , and (eds.), The Legal Regime of the International Criminal Court: Essays in Honour of Professor Igor Blishchenko (Martinus Nijhoff 2009) 455, 463–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Article 124’ in (ed.), Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 2nd edn (CH Beck/Hart/Nomos 2008) 1767, 1769Google Scholar
, ‘Multilateral Treaties as Evidence of Customary International Law’ (1965–1966) 41 British Ybk Int’l L274, 280Google Scholar
, ‘Report of the Secretary-General Pursuant to Paragraph 2 of Security Council Resolution 808’ (1993), UN Doc. S/25704, para. 34
Prosecutor v. Delalić and Others, Judgment, ICTY-96–21-T, 16 November 1998, para. 417; Prosecutor v. Jelisić, Judgment, ICTY-95–10-T, 14 December 1999, para. 61
Vienna Convention (1969)
and , ‘Crimes within the Jurisdiction of the Court’ in (ed.), The International Criminal Court: The Making of the Rome Statute (Kluwer Law International 1999) 79, 122Google Scholar
, The Principle of Legality in International Comparative Criminal Law (Cambridge University Press 2008) 339–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Article 21 of the Statute of the International Criminal Court and the Treatment of Sources of Law in the Jurisprudence of the ICC’ in and (eds.), The Emerging Practice of the International Criminal Court (Brill 2008) 285, 295Google Scholar
and , ‘Interpretation and Comparative Analysis’ in and (eds.), Interpreting Statutes: A Comparative Study (Ashgate 1991) 461, 475–76Google Scholar
, The International Criminal Court: A Commentary on the Rome Statute (Oxford University Press 2010) 269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Article 10’ in (ed.), Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 2nd edn (CH Beck/Hart/Nomos 2008) 531, 533Google Scholar
Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities in and Against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) [1986]
, An Introduction to the International Criminal Court, 2nd edn (Cambridge University Press 2004) 28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vienna Convention (1969)
, Prosecuting International Crimes: Selectivity and the International Criminal Law Regime (Cambridge University Press 2005) 174–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘War Crimes Committed in Non-International Armed Conflict and the Emerging System of International Criminal Justice’ (2000) 30 Israel Ybk Human Rights103Google Scholar
Prosecutor v. Tadić, Judgment, ICTY-94–1-A, 15 July 1999, para. 223. See also Prosecutor v. Kupreškić and Others, Judgment, ICTY-95–16-T, 14 January 2000, para. 580
Vienna Convention (1969)
Case concerning the Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company, Limited (Belgium v. Spain) (Second Phase) [1970]
, and (revised by CK Hall), ‘Article 7’ in (ed.), Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 2nd edn (CH Beck/Hart/Nomos 2008) 159, 170Google Scholar
Vienna Convention (1969)
Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda) [2005]
, ‘Retreat from Nuremberg – the Leadership Requirement in the Crime of Aggression’ (2007) 18 EJIL477, 479–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Report of the CICC Team on the Crime of Aggression (2005) 30–31
, ‘Time for Decision: Some Thoughts on the Immediate Future of the Crime of Aggression: A Reply to Andreas Paulus’ (2009) 20 EJIL1139, 1139–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Advisory Opinion [1951] ICJ Rep. 15, 23
, ‘The Statute of the International Criminal Court and Third States’ (1999–2000) 21 Mich J Int’l L445, 482Google Scholar
, ‘Report of the Secretary-General Pursuant to Paragraph 5 of Security Council Resolution 955’ (1994), UN Doc. S/1995/134, para. 45
, ‘The Elements of Crimes Against Humanity’ in (ed.), The International Criminal Court: Elements of Crimes and Rules of Procedure and Evidence (Transnational 2001) 58Google Scholar
, ‘ICC Statute and Third States’ in and Others (eds.), The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Commentary, vol. II (Oxford University Press 2002) 1871Google Scholar
Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion [1996]
, ‘Article 8’ in (ed.), Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 2nd edn (CH Beck/Hart/Nomos 2008) 275Google Scholar
Convention (II) with Respect to the Laws and Customs of War on Land and its Annex: Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land 32 Stat. 1803, 1 Bevans 247, 187 TS 429
Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, 75 UNTS 135; Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, 75 UNTS 287 (all adopted 12 August 1949, all entered into force 2 October 1950)
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (first Additional Protocol), 1125 UNTS 3; Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts (second Additional Protocol) 1125
, ‘Article 8’ in (ed.), Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 2nd edn (CH Beck/Hart/Nomos 2008) 275, 301Google Scholar
Additional Protocol (1977)
Additional Protocols (1977)
Additional Protocol (1977), and 142 had ratified the second Additional Protocol (1977)
Additional Protocol (1977)
Geneva Conventions (1949)
Additional Protocol (1977), six on other provisions of it or the Geneva Conventions (1949)
, ‘Article 8’ in (ed.), Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 2nd edn (CH Beck/Hart/Nomos 2008) 275, 477Google Scholar
, ‘The Statute of the International Criminal Court: Some Preliminary Reflections’ (1999) 10 EJIL144, 152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geneva Conventions (1949)
Additional Protocols (1977)
, ‘Article 8’ in (ed.), Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 2nd edn (CH Beck/Hart/Nomos 2008) 275Google Scholar
Additional Protocol (1977)
Additional Protocol (1977)
Prosecutor v. Norman, Decision on Preliminary Motion Based on Lack of Jurisdiction (Child Recruitment), Dissenting Opinion of Judge Robertson, SCSL-2004–14-AR72(E), 31 May 2004
, ‘Crimes under the Jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court’ in , and (eds.), Reflections on the International Criminal Court: Essays in Honour of Adriaan Bos (TMC Asser Press 1999) 47, 48–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘The ICRC Study on Customary International Humanitarian Law – An Assessment’ in and (eds.), Custom as a Source of International Humanitarian Law (International Committee of the Red Cross 2006) 43, 49–50Google Scholar
and , ‘Reflections on the Elements of Crimes’ in (ed.), The International Criminal Court: The Making of the Rome Statute (Kluwer Law International 1999) 219, 220Google Scholar
, ‘Some Preliminary Reflections on the Mens Rea Requirements of the Crimes in the ICC Statute and the Elements of Crimes’ in and Others (eds.), Man’s Inhumanity to Man: Essays on International Law in Honour of Antonio Cassese (Kluwer Law International 2003) 11Google Scholar
, ‘Can the “Elements of Crimes” Narrow or Broaden Responsibility for Criminal Behaviour defined in the Rome Statute?’ in and (eds.), The Emerging Practice of the International Criminal Court (Martinus Nijhoff 2009) 381, 386Google Scholar
, ‘The Decision to Include Elements of Crimes in the Rome Statute’ in and Others (eds.), The International Criminal Court: Elements of Crimes and Rules of Procedure and Evidence (Transnational 2001) 3, 8Google Scholar
, ‘Applicable Law’ in and Others (eds.), The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Commentary, vol. II (Oxford University Press 2002) 1051Google Scholar
, ‘Article 9’ in (ed.), Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 2nd edn (CH Beck/Hart/Nomos 2008) 505, 528Google Scholar
‘The Hierarchy of the Sources of International Law’ (1974–1975) 47 British Ybk Int’l L273Google Scholar
, ‘The Relationship between the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice’ in , and (eds.), Reflections on the International Criminal Court: Essays in Honour of Adriaan Bos (TMC Asser Press 1999) 163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Introduction’ in (ed.), The International Criminal Court: Elements of Crimes and Rules of Procedure and Evidence (Transnational 2001) lvGoogle Scholar
Geneva Conventions (1949)
Torture Convention (1984)
Prosecutor v. Lubanga Dyilo, Decision on Confirmation of Charges, ICC-01/04–01/06–803, 29 January 2007
and , ‘Article 30’ in (ed.), Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 2nd edn (CH Beck/Hart/Nomos 2008) 849Google Scholar
, ‘The New International Criminal Law – its General Principles Establishing Individual Criminal Responsibility’ (2003) 32 Thesaurus Acroasium633, 699Google Scholar
, ‘Command Responsibility, Article 28 Rome Statute, an Extension of Individual Criminal Responsibility for Crimes within the Jurisdiction of the Court – Compatible with Article 22, Nullum Crimen Sine Lege?’ in (ed.), Gedächtnisschrift für Theo Vogler (CF Müller 2004) 213Google Scholar
and , ‘General Principles of Criminal Law and Elements of Crimes’ in (ed.), The International Criminal Court: Elements of Crimes and Rules of Procedure and Evidence (Transnational 2001) 19Google Scholar
, ‘Elements of Crimes’ in and Others (eds.), The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Commentary, vol. 1 (Oxford University Press 2002) 443, 461Google Scholar
and , ‘Unless Otherwise Provided: Article 30 of the ICC Statute and the Mental Element of Crimes under International Criminal Law’ (2005) 3 J Int’l Crim Justice35, 45–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Mistake of Legal Element, the Common Law, and Article 32 of the Rome Statute: A Critical Analysis’ (2008) 6 J Int’l Crim Justice419, 435–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar