Jurisdiction to Adjudicate and Jurisdiction to Prescribe in International Criminal Courts
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Volume 48 Issue 3 Article 2 2003 Jurisdiction to Adjudicate and Jurisdiction to Prescribe in International Criminal Courts Kenneth S. Gallant Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/vlr Part of the International Law Commons, and the Jurisdiction Commons Recommended Citation Kenneth S. Gallant, Jurisdiction to Adjudicate and Jurisdiction to Prescribe in International Criminal Courts, 48 Vill. L. Rev. 763 (2003). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/vlr/vol48/iss3/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Villanova Law Review by an authorized editor of Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law Digital Repository. Gallant: Jurisdiction to Adjudicate and Jurisdiction to Prescribe in Inter 2003] Articles JURISDICTION TO ADJUDICATE AND JURISDICTION TO PRESCRIBE IN INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURTS KENNETH S. GALIANT* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ........................................... 764 II. THE IDENTITY OF THE LAWMAKER IN INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW AND INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURTS ...... 769 A. Piracy: International Crime Without an International Cou rt ................................................ 772 B. The Nuremberg and Tokyo Tribunals: Differing Views of Prescription ....................................... 775 C. The Ad Hoc International Criminal Tribunals and the New Special Court for Sierra Leone ................... 782 D. The International Criminal Court (ICC) .............. 785 E. The Security Council and the International Crime of "Terrorism " ...... .................................... 793 III. PERSONAL JURISDICTION IN THE AD Hoc TRIBUNALS ......... 794 IV. GENERAL STATEMENT AND LIMITS OF JURISDICTION TO ADJUDICATE IN THE ICC STATUTE .............................. 798 A. Jurisdiction to Adjudicate and Its Limits ............... 798 B. Immunities from Jurisdiction-Limited but Not Fully A bolished ............................................ 802 1. Official Immunities Generally Abolished ........... 802 2. Rights of Third States to Prevent Transfers ........ 803 3. Security Council Deferral of Prosecution .......... 807 4. Ne bis in idem ..................................... 807 V. PERSONAL JURISDICTION WHERE A SITUATION IS REFERRED BY A STATE OR AN INVESTIGATION IS INITIATED BY THE PROSECUTOR PROPRIO MOTU .............................. 809 A. The General Rule .................................... 809 B. Two Theoretical Problems ............................ 812 * Professor of Law and Director of Clinical Programs, University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law. The author is a member of the Conncil of the newly-created International Criminal Bar, which is designed to represent the interests of defense and victims' lawywers in the International Criminal Court, and the interests of their clients. He would like to thank Leila N. Sadat, Roger Clark, Ellen S. Podgor and Mark A. Drumbl for perceptive comments on earlier drafts of this paper. (763) Published by Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law Digital Repository, 2003 1 Villanova Law Review, Vol. 48, Iss. 3 [2003], Art. 2 VILLANOVA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 48: p. 763 1. Jurisdiction over the Participant from a Non-Party State Who Acts in a Non-Party State with Effect in a Party State ........................................ 812 2. Retroactively Effective Declarations of Non-Party States Accepting Jurisdiction of the Court and a Nulla Crimen Problem ............................. 817 VI. JURISDICTION TO ADIJUDICATE AND JURISDICTION TO PRESCRIBE IN SITUATIONS REFERRED TO THE COURT BY THE SECURITY COUNCIL, WITH SPECIAL ATTENTION TO SITUATIONS INVOLVING STATES NOT PARTIES TO THE ICC STATUTE ...... 820 A. Person (either accused or victim) or Crime Connected to Party State to the ICC Statute ...................... 821 B. Persons with No Relevant Connection to a Party State to the ICC Statute-Is Jurisdiction Universal After a Security Council Referral? ............................ 823 1. Theory that Security Council Referral Can Legitimately Create Jurisdiction over an Individual with a Relevant Connection to a United Nations M em ber State .................................... 825 2. True Universal Jurisdiction and the Power of the International Community to Legislate for All Individuals and States Including Non-Members of the United Nations and Persistent Objectors to Customary International Law ...................... 830 3. Universal Personal Jurisdiction, Jurisdiction to Prescribe and the Nulla Crimen Problem ........... 838 C. A Challenge to Broad Personal Jurisdiction in Situations Referred by the Security Council-The 'Jurisdiction ratione temporis" Provision ................. 840 VII. CONCLUSION ............................................. 841 I. INTRODUCTION D IRECT jurisdiction over individuals,' along with responsibilities to them, 2 will be the outstanding characteristics of the new Interna- l. See Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 53rd Sess., U.N. Doc. A/CONF. 183/9, adopted by the U.N. Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court on 17 July 1998, as cor- rected by the proces-verbaux of 10 Nov. 1998 and 12 July 1999, art. 1 [hereinafter ICC Statute] (discussing jurisdiction over persons); see also id. art. 25(1) (explaining that Court's jurisdiction is limited to natural persons); see also Paul C. Szasz, The Security Council Starts Legislating, 96 AM. J. INT'L L. 901, 902 (2002) (characterizing legislative acts of Security Council as decision that all States shall "take certain actions against financing of terrorist activities, as well as miscellany of other actions designed to prevent any support for terrorists and terrorist activities"). 2. There are at least five types of responsibilities of the ICC to individuals in the ICC Statute, some of which are novel in the system of international law and international organizations. First, the Court is required to protect an expanded set of procedural rights of those being tried. See, e.g., ICC Statute, supra note 1, arts. https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/vlr/vol48/iss3/2 2 Gallant: Jurisdiction to Adjudicate and Jurisdiction to Prescribe in Inter 2003] JURISDICTION IN INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURTS 765 tional Criminal Court (ICC or Court), as they already are of the Interna- tional Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and for Rwanda (ICTR). The ICC will be able to issue warrants for individuals' arrest, obtain their presence at its seat, try them and order them pun- ished.3 In the standard terminology of international law, the ICC, like the 55, 67 (listing rights afforded to persons during investigations including, among other things, right to counsel, right against compelled self-incrimination and right against cruel punishment). Second, the ICC Statute protects substantive and equal protection rights of accused persons before the Court. See id. art. 21(3). Under this provision, the Court must enforce internationally recognized human rights in applying the crimi- nal law. See id. The Court is also prohibited from making adverse distinctions among persons on such bases as race, gender, religion, political opinion or na- tional, ethnic or social origin. See id. Third, the protection of the accused is extended to allow monetary remedies against the ICC. In some cases, individuals wrongly imprisoned or convicted may be awarded monetary damages for these wrongs. See id. art. 85 (providing that damages are appropriate when conviction has been reversed due to newly discov- ered evidence). Fourth, not only the accused, but victims and witnesses are protected in the procedures of the Court as well. See, e.g., id. art. 68 (providing specific procedures for victim and witness protection such as limited guarantees of confidentiality). The statute also establishes a separate office, a Victims and Witnesses Unit, to pro- tect their interests. See id. art. 43(6) (explaining duties of ICC Registry). Fifth, the ICC Statute establishes a system of monetary restitution for victims of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. See id. arts. 75, 79 (extending power to Court to determine scope and extent of damage, loss or injury). Some restitu- tion is provided directly from the assets of convicted persons. See id. art. 75 (noting that Court may take account of representations on behalf of convicted person before making order). Other restitution is planned from a Trust Fund. See id. art. 79 (stating that Fund shall be established to benefit victims of crimes within juris- diction of Court); see, e.g., CHRISTOPH J.M. SAFFERLING, TOWARDS AN INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 330-31 (Oxford Univ. Press 2001) (presenting arguments jus- tifying responsibility of ICC to observe human rights of individuals); see also Ken- neth S. Gallant, Individual Human Rights in a New International Organization: The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, in 3 INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW (ENFORCEMENT) 693 (M.C. Bassiouni ed., Transnat'l Publishers 2d ed. 1999) (dis- cussing individual human rights in ICC Statute). 3. See generally ICC Statute, supra note 1, arts. 5, 6, 7, 10 (discussing investiga- tion and prosecution, describing trials and discussing enforcement); see also Shuichi Furuya, Legal Effect of Rules of the International Criminal Tribunals and Court Upon Individuals: Emerging InternationalLaw of Direct Effect, 47 NETH. INT'L L.