Second thoughts on the crime of aggression

European Journal of International Law

Volumn 20, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 1117-1128

  Paulus, Andreas ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GÖTTINGEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77952576876     PISSN: 09385428     EISSN: 14643596     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ejil/chp080     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Art.5(2)(1) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court of 17 July 1998, 2187 UNTS 3, reads: 'The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression once a provision is adopted. .. defining the crime and setting out the conditions under which the Court shall exercise jurisdiction with respect to this crime.'
2. Report of the Special Working Group on the Crime of Aggression, International Criminal Court, Assembly of States Parties, 7th session (second resumption), New York, 9-13 Feb. 2009, 20 Feb. 2009, Doc ICC-ASP/7/SWGCA/2.
3. Informal inter-sessional meeting on the Crime of Aggression, ICC Assembly of States Parties, 8th sess., Doc ICC-ASP/8/INF.2 (10 July 2009).
4. See also Kress, 'The Crime of Aggression before the First Review of the ICC Statute', 20 Leiden J Int'l L (2007) 851, at 864.
5. Barriga, 'Against the Odds: The Results of the Special Working Group on the Crime of Aggression', forthcoming in R. Bellelli (ed.), International Criminal Justice (2009).
6. Scharf and Hadji, 'Symposium: The International Criminal Court and the Crime of Aggression', 41 Case Western Reserve J Int'l L (2009) 267.
7. Anderson, 'The Rise of International Criminal Law: Intended and Unintended Consequences', 20 EJIL (2009) 331, at 354-355.
8. Zimmermann, in O. Triffterer (ed.), Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (2nd edn, 2008), Art. 5 para. 41.
9. Report of the Special Working Group.
10. See, e.g., Ferencz, 'Ending Impunity for the Crime of Aggression', 41 Case Western Reserve J Int'l L (2009) 281, at 290.
11. R v. Jones and others [2006] UKHL 16, [2006] All ER 741, at paras 19 (Lord Bingham), 59 (Lord Hoffmann), 99 (Lord Mance).
12. Report of the Special Working Group on the Crime of Aggression
13. Definition of Aggression, Res 3314 (XXIX), Annex, UN GAOR, 29th Sess., Supp. No. 31, at 142, UN Doc. A/9631 (1974).
14. London Agreement of 8 Aug. 1945, Annex, 39 AJIL (1945) Suppl. 258.
15. See Affirmation of the Principles of International Law recognized by the Charter of the Nürnberg Tribunal, GA Res 95 (I), 11 Dec. 1946.
16. Nürnberg Principles, ILC Final Draft Articles and Commentary, 2 Yrbk Int'l Law Commission (1950) 374, Principle 6, paras 113, 117 (emphasizing character as leadership crime, but not defining it). Art. 16 of the Draft Code of Crimes Against the Peace and Security of Mankind of 1996 also fails to define aggression.
17. The commentary speaks only of a 'sufficiently serious violation of the prohibition' on the use of force: see Report of the Commission on the work of its 48th session, Yrbk Int'l L Commission (1996) II 2, at 42-43, at para. 50. Commentary to Art. 16, para. 5.
18. Commentary to Art. 16, para. 5; ILC Final Draft Statute, Yrbk Int'l L Commission (1994) II 2, at 39, para. 91; Commentary to Art. 20, at para. 7.
19. For its drafting history see T. Bruha, Die Definition der Aggression (1980), at 211-216 (emphasizing the divergence of views of the drafters).
20. B.B. Ferencz, Defining International Aggression. The Search for World Peace. A Documentary History and Analysis (1975), ii, at 43-45, with further references (criticizing the differentiation between 'act' and 'war' or aggression).
21. See Informal inter-sessional meeting of the Special Working Group on the Crime of Aggression, 8-11 June 2006, in Assembly of States Parties, 5th session 2006, Doc ICC-ASP/5/SWGCA/INF.1 (5 Sept. 2006), at paras 18, 20.
22. The reasons for the preference for the word 'manifest' over the 2002 term 'flagrant' are not explained. According to Barriga, supra note 2, at sect. 3 A 3, 'flagrant' was considered too high a barrier.
23. 1155 UNTS 331. For the drafting history, in which states expressed great reluctance towards accepting any grounds of invalidity, see I Sinclair, The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (2nd edn, 1984), at 171.
24. Entry 'manifest, adj. and adv.', A.1.a., Oxford English Dictionary Online (June 2009), available at
25. Informal inter-sessional meeting 2006.
26. See Tams, 'The Use of Force Against Terrorists', 20 EJIL (2009) 359, at 378-381
27. However, in front of the ICJ, only Belgium dared to make such an argument: see Legality of Use of Force (Yugoslavia v. Belgium), Verbatim Record, ICJ Doc. CR 99/15, 10 May 1999 (Me Ergec), at 15-18, available at: www.icj-cij.org (visited 5 Aug. 2009).
28. but cf. the positions of other states: A. Cassese, 'A Follow-Up: Forcible Humanitarian Countermeasures and Opinio Necessitatis', 10 EJIL (1999) 791, with further references; see also, in particular, the Belgian (!) statement before the General Assembly that Kosovo did not constitute a precedent for unilateral intervention
29. On the Russian justification for its attack against Georgia see Nußberger, 'The War between Russia and Georgia - Consequences and Unresolved Questions', 1 Göttingen J Int'l L (2009) 341, at 345.
30. on the justification under international law cf. Luchterhandt, 'Völkerrechtliche Aspekte des Georgien-Krieges', 46 Archiv des Völkerrechts (2008) 435, at 465-472.
31. on the one hand, and Kranz, 'Der Kampf um den Frieden und sein besonderer Facilitator. Anmerkungen zur Georgienkrise', 46 Archiv des Völkerrechts (2008) 481, at 489-494, on the other (with English summaries at 479 and 501, respectively).
32. 2005 World Summit Outcome, UN Doc A/RES/60/1 (2005), at para. 139.
33. see also SC Res. 1674 (2006), at para. 4
34. SC Res 1706 (2006), at preambular para. 2.
35. implementing the responsibility to protect see SG report, 12 Jan. 2009, A/63/677 (2009), at paras 9-10.
36. Leclerc-Gagné and Byers, 'A Question of Intent: The Crime of Aggression and Unilateral Humanitarian Intervention', 41 Case Western Reserve J Int'l L (2009) 379
37. Kress, 'Strafrecht und Angriffskrieg im Licht des "Falles Irak"', 115 Zeitschrift für die gesamte Strafrech-tswissenschaft (2003) 294, at 302-303
38. But see Ambos, 'Strafrecht und Krieg: strafbare Beteiligung der Bundesregierung am Irak-Krieg?', in J. Arnold, B. Burkhardt, and W. Gropp (eds), Menschengerechtes Strafrecht, Festschrift für Albin Eser (2005), at 671, 676, 681-682.
39. See Compilation of proposals on the crime of Aggression, Preparatory Commission for the ICC, 2 Aug. 1999, Doc PCNICC/1999/INF/2 (1999), at 20.
40. See also Kaul, 'Definitional Options for the Way Forward', in M. Politi and G. Nesi (eds), The International Criminal Court and the Crime of Aggression (2004), at 97-108. For an overview of the debates.
41. (in German) (since a respectable view exists which holds that the war was legal, the Iraq war does not constitute a war of aggression)
42. See Greenwood, in D. Fleck (ed.), The Handbook of International Humanitarian Law (2nd edn, 2008), at para. 101.
43. Greenwood, 'International Law and the Pre-emptive Use of Force: Afghanistan, Al-Qaida, and Iraq', 4 San Diego Int'l LJ (2003) 7, at 34-35
44. See, e.g., Bybee, 'Standards of Conduct for Interrogation', in K.J. Greenberg and J.L. Dratel (eds), The Torture Papers. The Road to Abu Ghraib (2005), at 172.
45. Cf. the arguments made by Serbia in the Use of Force cases, Provisional Measures [1999] ICJ Rep. 136, at paras 34-35 (Belgium case), and in Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro), Judgment of 26 Feb. 2007, at para. 278, and Public Hearings, CR 2006/18-20 14-15 June 2006 (Me de Roux), available at: www.icj-cij.org (visited 6 Aug. 2009).
46. See Introduction and draft elements 4 and 6, in Informal inter-sessional meeting on the Crime of Aggression, ICC Assembly of States Parties, 8th sess., Doc ICC-ASP/8/INF.2 (10 July 2009), at 12.
47. Even the ICJ, which views the use of force under any circumstance with great suspicion, seems to be sympathetic to that view: Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion [2004] ICJ Rep. 136, at 194, para. 134.
48. Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion [1996] ICJ Rep 226.
49. On the self-congratulatory reaction see, e.g., Neubauer, 'Remarks' [1997] ASIL Proceedings 11.
50. Final Report to the Prosecutor by the Committee Established to Review the NATO Bombing Campaign Against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, 13 June 2000, available at: www.icty.org/sid/10052 (visited 5 Aug. 2009).
51. On the possible consequences of the codification of the crime of aggression see Murphy, 'Criminalizing Humanitarian Intervention', 41 Case Western Reserve J Int'l L (2009) 341, showing that a failure to prosecute humanitarian interventions may eventually lead to their legalization.
52. The only cases in which the Security Council has condemned 'acts of aggression' were not adopted under Chapter VII: see Res. 455 (1979), at para. 1, Res. 573 (1985), at para. 1, and Res. 577 (1985), at para. 2.
53. For an argument in this regard see Meron, 'Defining Aggression for the International Criminal Court', 25 Suffolk Transnat'l L Rev (2001) 1, at 13-14 (arguing in favour of mandatory SC designation)
54. See SC Res 1593 (2005), at para. 6, and SC Res 1422 (2002).
55. see also Stahn, 'The Ambiguities of Security Council Resolution 1422 (2002)', 14 EJIL (2003) 85.
56. See Questions of Interpretation and Application of the 1971 Montreal Convention arising from the Aerial Incident at Lockerbie (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya v. United Kingdom), Provisional Measures, Order of 14 Apr. 1992, [1992] ICJ Rep 3, at 15, paras 39-42.
57. See US Policy Toward the International Criminal Court: Furthering Positive Engagement, Report of an Independent Task Force Convened by the American Society of International Law, Mar. 2009, available at: www.asil.org/files/ASIL-08-DiscPaper2.pdf
58. In a similar vein see Anderson, 'The Rise of International Criminal Law: Intended and Unintended Consequences', 20 EJIL (2009) 331, at 354.
59. See the letter reprinted in Bush, 'The "Supreme Crime" and its Origins: The Lost Legislative History of the Crime of Aggressive War', 102 Columbia L Rev (2002) 2324, at 2402, and the analysis contained therein
60. For an example of such research, see Murphy in ths issue
61. See Akande, 'Is the Rift between Africa and the ICC Deepening? Heads of States Decide Not to Cooperate with ICC on the Bashir Case', available at: www.ejiltalk.org/is-the-rift-between-africa-and-the-icc-deepening-heads-of-states-decide-not-to-cooperate-with-icc-on-the-bashir-case/(last visited 4 Aug. 2009).
62. For a more extensive treatment see the other contributions to this Symposium