Articles for tag: IStGHKriegsverbrechenNagorno-KarabakhRome Statute

Why Armenia is Not Referring the Situation to the ICC

It has been a year since Armenia acceded to the Rome Statute, marking a new institutional chapter for the country. The decision to join the ICC reflects Armenia’s desire to align with international standards of justice and accountability. However, it has yet to refer the situation regarding crimes committed against Armenians from the second Nagorno-Karabakh war to the ICC, largely due to significant political pressure from Russia, Azerbaijan, and Turkey.

The ICC Under a New Threat

Since the ICC announced arrest warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant, the world has started to observe open equivocation from France and other European states about executing those arrest warrants. This inevitably raises the question whether it had been too easy in the past for nations of the West to profess “unflinching support” for the ICC when all the accused persons were Africans; even though the conducts of some of them (consider, for instance, the defendants from Kenya and Côte d’Ivoire) came nowhere close to the extravagant cruelty on full display in Gaza, despite rulings of the International Court of Justice and the relentless appeals of the UN Secretary General.

Paula Escarameia

Paula Ventura de Carvalho Escarameia’s legacy extends beyond classical legal achievements. With a diversified career over decades that got cut short way too soon at the age of fifty, she’s earned global acclaim for her expertise in public international law, especially concerning the situation in East Timor. She believed that public international law was no rigid construct but could and should be changed especially in the areas of self-determination and the protection of human rights – ultimately contributing to the establishment of the International Criminal Court.

A “Democratic Exception” to ICC Jurisdiction

On 21 November 2024, the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for the Israeli Prime Minister and the former Minister of Defence, for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes in the ongoing Israel-Gaza War. Equally contentious was the response of leading Western states – including Germany and France – who have questioned or openly rejected treaty obligations to enforce the warrants. This is a conspicuously fraught position for countries who previously welcomed 2023 ICC arrest warrants for Russian President Vladimir Putin in legally identical circumstances.

The Silence of the Israeli Supreme Court Judges

The arrest warrants by the ICC for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity are a red card for the Israeli legal system indicating grave doubts whether the Israeli legal system fulfills the complementarity requirement. Paradoxically, an indictment on the Israeli justice system arrives after the Israeli Supreme Court has recently fortified its position. Yet, the more the Court expanded its reach into the political arena, the less it could fulfill its core role of defending basic human rights.

Farewell to the Rules-Based Order

As political analysts debate the reasons for Trump’s victory, one contributing factor is surely the utter failure of Biden’s Gaza policies. As the US has continued to fund an Israeli war of annihilation against Gaza, the democratic ticket became a hard sell for many who care about Palestinians. Yet, Gaza has also triggered a veritable renaissance of international litigation. With Gaza destroyed and Trump in the White House, this tension may have reached a terminal point. And yet, I argue, the ghost of a rule-based order lingers in our political imagination despite its inability to shape outcomes.

Tackling Israel’s Interference with the International Criminal Court

On 8 October 2024, The Guardian reported that a criminal complaint had been filed in the Netherlands in connection with the shocking (yet unsurprising) revelations published by The Guardian, +972 Magazine, and Local Call on 28 May concerning hostile state activities targeting the International Criminal Court (ICC). The criminal complaint is both timely and viable and should lead to the expeditious opening of an investigation by the Dutch prosecution service. The political response by the Dutch and other governments of ICC States so far is insufficient to address the problem of interference with the ICC investigation in the Situation in the State of Palestine.

Roter Teppich statt Handschellen

Die Mongolei hat am 03. September 2024 den amtierenden russischen Präsidenten Wladimir Putin empfangen. Gegen Wladimir Putin besteht seit dem 17. März 2024 ein IStGH-Haftbefehl, der alle Vertragsstaaten dazu verpflichtet, diesen bei Betreten ihres Staatsgebietes festzunehmen und an den IStGH zu überstellen. Mit dem Nichtvollzug des Haftbefehls hat die Mongolei ihre aus dem IStGH-Statut erwachsende Kooperationspflicht verletzt. Sie kann dies nicht durch einen Verweis auf eine völkerrechtliche Immunität Putins rechtfertigen.

The Inadvertent Protagonist

The International Court of Justice (ICJ), a UN body essentially responsible for resolving inter-state disputes, has been increasingly asked to consider matters with implications for individual criminal responsibility – a predominant concern of international criminal law. In some cases, the link is direct; for instance, in the last two years, the Genocide Convention has been invoked twice on behalf of Ukraine and Gaza. Although for the ICJ, its application is a question of State responsibility, it will give rise to questions of individual responsibility in other international and domestic fora.

Cooperation à la Carte?

In a recent contribution to this platform, Kai Ambos, Stefanie Bock, and a number of other distinguished German scholars have presented a compelling and highly topical plea for a consistent and effective application of the Rome Statute "without fear or favour" by Germany, one of its 124 States Parties. A similar risk of selectivity concerning the question of cooperation with the ICC can be observed in the present public and political discourse in Austria. I argue that an 'à la carte' approach to cooperation with the Court in matters of arrest and surrender, as partially indicated in the current debate, is untenable when adopting the ICC's recent jurisprudence on the horizontal inapplicability of head of State immunity, irrespective of the prevailing political circumstances.