The triggering procedure of the International Criminal Court, procedural treatment of the principle of complementarity, and the role of office of the prosecutor

International Criminal Law Review

Volumn 5, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 121-146

  Olásolo, Héctor ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84856877154     PISSN: 1567536X     EISSN: 15718123     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1163/1571812053320129     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Amore comprehensive and in-depth analysis of the issues addressed in this article and many others related to the ICC Criminal Justice System, the Triggering Procedure and the General Powers of the Office of the Prosecutor can be found in: OLÁSOLO, H., Corte Penal Internacional: ¿Dónde Investigar? Especial Referencia a la Fiscalía en el Proceso de Activación, Tirant lo Blanch/Centro de Derecho Internacional Humanitario (Cruz Roja Española), Valencia, November 2003;
2. OLÁSOLO, H., The Prosecutor of the ICC before the Initiation of Investigations: A Quasi-Judicial or a Political Body, in The International Criminal Law Review, 2003/2;
3. OLÁSOLO, H., Issues Regarding the General Powers of the ICC Prosecutor under Art. 42 of the Rome Statute (available at
4. OLÁSOLO, H., Reflexiones sobre el Principio de Complementariedad en el Estatuto de Roma, in Revista Espanola de Derecho Militar, March-April 2004
5. and OLÁSOLO, H., Discrecionalidad u Obligatoriedad en el Desarrollo de las Actividades de Investigacion y Ejercicio de la Acción Penal, en Boletin Europeo de la Universidad de la Rioja, N. 12-13, pp. 115-120;
6. and OLÁSOLO, H., Spain, in Lattanzi, F./Kress, K. (editors), The Rome Statute and Domestic Legal Orders Vol II: International Cooperation and Judicial Assistance (forthcoming January 2005).
7. The Rome Statute uses the term "situation/s" as opposed to "cases" in Arts. 13 (a) and (b), 14(1), 15(5) and (6), 18(1), and 19(3).
8. BERGSMO, M./HARHOFF, F., Article 42. The Office of the Prosecutor, in Commentary to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, Thriftier, O. (Coord.), Ed. Nomos, Baden-Baden, 1999, pp. 627-636, p. 631.
9. FERNANDEZ DE GURMENDI, S. A., The Role of the International Prosecutor, in The International Criminal Court: The Making of the Rome Statute. Issues, Negotiations, Results, Lee, R. (Coord.), Ed. Kluwer Law International, The Hague/London/Boston, 1999, pp. 175-188, p. 181.
10. Regarding the introduction of the notion of "situations" as the object of the Triggering Procedure, FERNANDEZ DE GURMENDI, S. A., The Role of the International Prosecutor, Prosecutor, in The International Criminal Court. The Making of the Rome Statute. Issues, Negotiations, Results, Lee, R. (Coord.), Ed. Kluwer Law International, The Hague/London/Boston, 1999, pp. 175-188, p. 180, states: "The main reason for this support was that many States were uneasy with the regime provided for in the ILC draft, which allowed a State Party to select individual cases of violations and lodge complaints with the Prosecutor with respect to such cases. This could, in their view, encourage politicization of the complaint procedure".
11. As YEE, L., The International Criminal Court and the Security Council, in The International Criminal Court: The Making of the Rome Statute, Issues, Negotiations, Results, Lee, R. (Coord.), Kluwer Law International, The Hague/London/Boston, 1999, pp. 143-152, p. 147, has stated: "Many felt that the Council should only be empowered to refer a general matter or situation rather than a specific case to the Court in order to preserve the Court's independence in the exercise of its jurisdiction".
12. In the same way, FERNANDEZ DE GURMENDI, S A., The Role of the International Prosecutor, Lee, R. (Coord.), op. cit., at pp. 180-182, holds that "[t]his proposal [U. S. proposal to change the content of the 'notitia criminis' communicated by States Parties from cases to situations to be found at 1996 PrepCom Report, Vol. II, at 109, par. 2], which was ultimately included in Article 14 of the Rome Statute, did have the effect of broadening the role of the Prosecutor who in this way obtained the power to investigate a 'situation' referred to him or her by the Security Council or by a State Party".
13. The same explanation is offered by WILMSHURST, E., Jurisdiction of the Court, in Lee, R. (Coord.), op. cit., pp. 127-142, p. 131.
14. As HOLMES, H. T., The Principle of Complementarity, in Lee, R. (Coord.), op. cit., pp. 41-78, p. 71, states in footnote 40, referring to the term "situation" in Art. 18 RS: "The word 'situation' was used to replace 'matter' in light of the change of terminology on questions of jurisdiction". essary to decide whether a request for authorisation for the initiation of an investigation is warranted with respect to the crisis situation in the context of which the facts complained of were committed.
15. HALL, C. K. seems to reach the same conclusion in Article 19: Challenges to jurisdiction to admissibility, in Triffterer, O. (ed.), Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, ed. Nomos, Baden-Baden, 1999, p. 407.
16. (see WILLIAMS, S. A., Article 17. Issues of Admissibility, in Triffterer, op. cit., pp. 383-394, pp. 387-388). As a result, each time the RS or the Rules of Procedure and Evidence refer to the concepts of admissibility or inadmissibility they use the term "admissibility of the case" or "inadmissibility of the case" (see e.g. Art. 53.1 (b) RS and Rule 48). Now, as it has just been pointed out, this does not mean that the RS did not adopt the distinction between "situations" and "cases". In this same sense
17. see HALL, C. K., Article 19..., p. 408, footnote 242.
18. NTANDANSEREKO, DD., Article 18. Preliminary Rulings Regarding Admissibility, in Triffterer, op. cit., p. 404;
19. and HOLMES, J. T., The Principle of'Complementarity, in Lee, op. cit., pp. 72-73.
20. Negotiations between the United Nations and the Sierra Leonese Government concluded on 16 January 2000, with an agreement for the establishment of the Special Court (Agreement between the United Nations and the Government of Sierra Leone on the Establishment of a Special Court for Sierra Leone, concluded in Freetown on 16 January 2002). Article 1 of this Agreement defines the situation of crisis over which this new ad hoc tribunal can exercise jurisdiction in the following terms: grave violations of international humanitarian law and of the law of Sierra Leone committed in the territory of Sierra Leone after 30 November 1996.
21. Peace Agreement between the Government of Sierra Leone and the Revolutionary United Front of Sierra Leone, celebrated in Lomé on 7 July 1999.
22. Article 49 of the Geneva Convention (No. I) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, Aug. 12, 1949, 75 UNTS 31;
23. Art. 50 of the Geneva Convention (No. II) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea, Aug. 12, 1949, 75 UNTS 85;
24. Art. 129 of the Geneva Convention (No. III) Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Aug. 12, 1949, 75 U. N. T. S. 238, Art. 129;
25. and Art. 146 of the Geneva Convention (No. IV) Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Aug. 12, 1949, 75 UNTS 287.
26. Art. 85(1) of Protocol Additional I to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts, June 8, 1977, 1125 UNTS 3.
27. Art. 5(2) of the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Dec. 10, 1984, 1465 UNTS 85.
28. See in this regard JONES, J. R. W. D., The Practice of the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, Second Edition, Transnational Publishers, Irvingtonon-Hudson (New York), 2000, pp. 151-154 and 504-505.