Penalties, enforcement and cooperation in the international criminal court statute (parts vii, ix, x)

European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice

Volumn 6, Issue 4, 1998, Pages 126-144

  Kreß, Claus ^a,b  

^a Cambridge ^*  (France)

^b International Department   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 23844543909     PISSN: 09289569     EISSN: 15718174     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1163/15718179820518656     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. A/CONF. 183/9, 17 July 1998.
2. For a comprehensive documentation cf. M. Cherif Bassiouni (ed.), International Criminal Court. Compilation of United Nations Documents and Draft ICC Statute before the Diplomatic Conference (Rome 1998).
3. Articles 75 a and 76 of the ICC Draft Statute (Draft Statute A/CONF. 183/2/Add. 1, 14 April 1998) contain different options of dealing with penalties for minors and legal persons (Bassiouni, op. cit., pp. 90-92).
4. cf. P. Akhavan, 'The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda: The Politics and Pragmatics of Punishment', 90 American Journal of International Law (AJIL, 1996), pp. 504 et seq., in particular pp. 507-508.
5. On the current status of the death penalty under public international law cf. M. Möhrenschlager, 'Völkerrechtliche Abschaffung der Todesstrafe - Geschichtliche Entwicklung und gegenwärtiger Stand', in Gunther Arzt et al. (ed.), Festschrift für Jürgen Baumann zum 70. Geburtstag am 22 Juni 1992 (Bielefeld 1992), p. 297 et seq.
6. As much as it has to be regretted that the final solution could not be brought closer to the ideal of the highest degree of legal certainty the following word of caution against too strong a verdict seems to be in place. On the level of national criminal legislation where it should be much easier to resort to subtle legal techniques you will often find wide ranges of punishment even though the relevant provisions are specifically designed to the respective crimes. Judging from the experience made in the course of his involvement in the recent criminal law reform in Germany the present author holds the view that the feasability of a radical cut of the existing ranges of punishment remains to be proven; for further references to the relevant discussion in Germany See C. Kreß, 'Das Sechste Gesetz zur Reform des Strafrechts', Neue Juristische Wochenschrift (NJW), 1998, pp. 634-635 (notes 17-18).
7. First doctrinal efforts are undertaken e.g., by Jan Christoph Nemitz, Aggravating and Mitigating Circumstances in International Humanitarian Law - The Erdemović case, Humanitäres Völkerrecht - Informationsschriften (HuV-I) 1997, p. 24 et seq.,
8. and more generally by K. Ambos, Impunidad, Makrokriminalität und Völkerstrafrecht. Zu Ausmaß, Ursachen und Grenzen der weltweiten Straflosigkeit von Menschenrechtsverletzungen, 79 Kritische Vierteljahresschrift für Gesetzgebung und Rechtswissenschaft (1996), pp. 365-376;
9. H. Jäger, 'Makroverbrechen als Gegenstand des Vö lkerstrafrechts. Kriminalpolitisch-kriminologische Aspekte', in Gerd Hankel/Gerhard Study, eds., Strafgerichte gegen Menschheitsverbrechen. Zum Völkerstrafrecht 50 Jahre nach den Nürnberger Prozessen (Hamburg 1995), p. 339 et seq.
10. F. Mosconi/N. Parisi, 'Co-operation between International Criminal Court and States Parties', in F. Lattanzi (ed.), The International Criminal Court. Comments on the Draft Statute (Naples 1998), p. 312;
11. in the context of the ICTY See A. Cassese, 'Reflections on International Criminal Justice', 61 Modern Law Review (1998), p. 9 et seq.
12. Urteil des Internationalen Straftribunals für das ehemalige Jugoslawien (Appeals Chamber) im Fall Tadić', Europäische Grundrechte Zeitschrift (EuGRZ) (1996), p. 642 et seq.
13. Such prohibitions exist predominantly in civil law countries in Europe and Southern America; for an instructive comparative overview See C. Rinio, 'Die Auslieferung eigener Staatsangehöriger. Historische Entwicklungen und neuere Tendenzen', 108 Zeitschrift für die gesamte Strafrechtswissenschaft (1996), p. 356 et seq.
14. This point cannot be pursued further in this article. Suffice it to recall that prohibitions to extradite nationals most often exist where a person's nationality derives from the one of its parents and not from the place of birth (See A. Eser. 'Common goals and different ways in international criminal law: reflections from a European perspective', 31 Harvard International Law Journal (1990), p. 122). Rinio, loc. cit., p. 381 et seq., lists the main reasons which have been advanced to justify non-extradition of nationals and evaluates them critically.
15. The legal nature of the speciality rule is the object of much academic debate. This debate which relates to the general discussion about the role of human rights in the context of international cooperation clearly goes beyond the scope of this article. cf. C. van den Wyngaert, 'Rethinking the law of international criminal co-operation: the restrictive function of international human rights through individual-oriented bars', in A. Eser/O. Lagodny (eds.), Principles and procedures for a new transnational criminal law (Freiburg im Breisgau 1992), p. 489 et seq.;
16. S. Trechsel, 'Grundrechtsschutz bei der internationalen Zusammenarbeit in Strafsachen', EuGRZ (1987), p. 69 et seq. (this author touches upon the issue of speciality but avoids taking a stand, ibid., p. 75 with further references in note 56).
17. The fact that the so-called failed state scenario gets special treatment in the Statute already as such is noteworthy. See for a detailed discussion from an international law perspective the papers of D. Thürer and M. Herdegen on 'Der Wegfall effektiver Staatsgewalt' 'The failed State', 34 Berichte der deutschen Gesellschaft für Völkerrecht (1995), p. 9 et seq., respectively; for a discussion in the special context of the international law on the use of armed force see also C. Kreß, 'Die Rettungsoperation der Bundeswehr in Albanien am 14. März 1997 aus völker- und verfas-sungsrechtlicher Sicht', 57 Zeitschrift für ausländisches Recht und Völkerrecht (1997), p. 334 et seq.
18. Approaching it only from a legal perspective it is not easy to understand the very strong emphasis placed upon sovereignty by the US delegation. Curt Markees has shown in his contribution on 'The difference in concept between civil law and common law countries as to judicial assistance and cooperation in criminal matters', in M. Cherif Bassiouni/V.P. Nanda (eds.), A Treatise on international criminal law Volume II Jurisdiction and Co-operation (Springfield Illinois 1973), p. 171 et seq., that common law countries are traditionally more permissive than civil law countries as to the activities of foreign prosecutors on their territories such as interviewing persons on a strictly voluntary basis. This view has later been confirmed by Ph. Heymann, loc. cit., p. 102, who stated for this very reason that the USA 'Jeans toward the prosecutorial model'.