About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


14 Eur. J. Crime Crim. L. & Crim. Just. 46 (2006)
Universal Jurisdiction in an ICC Era: A Role to Play for EU Member States with the Support of the European Union

handle is hein.journals/eccc14 and id is 54 raw text is: Cedric Ryngaert* Universal Jurisdiction in an ICC Era A Role to Play for EU Member States with the Support of the European Union It is submitted that the international jurisdiction of the ICC, which carries more international legitimacy than national courts, is the final substitute for universal jurisdiction.' It has even been argued that the entry into force of the Rome Statute of the ICC prohibits the exercise of universal jurisdiction.2 In this note, I will argue that this is a misconception and that the European Union, one of the staunchest support- ers of the ICC, should encourage and assist its Member States to exercise universal jurisdiction over crimes against international humanitarian law (hereinafter referred to as 'IHL'), while continuing its support for the ICC. After distinguishing between universal jurisdiction as exercised by States (herein- after referred to as 'bystander States') and international jurisdiction as exercised by the ICC (Part 1), I will argue that the ICC might, upon applying the complementarity * Research Fellow Fund for Scientific Research Flanders Institute for International Law, University of Leuven, Visiting Researcher European Law Research Center, Harvard Law School. See, e.g., R. Rabinovitch, 'Universal Jurisdiction In Absentia' 28 Fordham Int'l L. J. 500, 525 (2005) ('[Ilt is arguable that if the ICC is successful in bringing criminals to justice, municipal courts and prosecutors will stop exercising universal jurisdiction altogether'). By creating the ICC, States Parties to the Rome Statute expressly agreed to delegate power to the Court. In contrast, States have not for all international crimes expressly delegated the power to exercise universal jurisdiction to bystander States. This may undercut the legitimacy of universal jurisdiction. See G. Bottini, 'Universal Jurisdiction After the Creation of the International Criminal Court', 36 N.YU. J. lnt'l L. & Pol. 503, 512-13 (2004). Compare, before the ICC came into being: I. Sinclair, in Yb. ILC (Vol. 1) (1986), 141, para. 55 ('it is implied that there are two alternatives: universal jurisdiction or an international criminal jurisdiction'). 2 ICJ, Arrest Warrant, 14 February 2002, Memorial of the Congo, p. 59 (referring to the 'obligation de ne pas priver le Statut de la C.P.I. de son objet et de son but' (Article 18 of the Vienna Convention of the Law of Treaties)). European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, Vol. 14/1, 46-80, 2006 0 Koninkljke Brill NV. Printed in the Netherlands.