International Court of Justice Part 21

Book Review: Bruce Broomhall, International Justice and the International Criminal Court Between Sovereignty and the Rule of law , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003, 215 pp
Christoph J.M. Safferling
Criminal Law Forum
Volume 14, Number 4, December 2003 p.455-465

ARTICLE 53 OF THE ROME STATUTE OF THE International Criminal Court : IN THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE?
GALLAVIN, CHRIS
King’s Law Journal
Volume 14, issue 2, 2003 p.179-198

International Justice and the International Criminal Court-Between Sovereignty and the Rule of law , by Bruce Broomhill (Ed.); Judging Criminal Leaders – The Slow Erosion of Impunity, by Yves Beigbeder (Ed.)
GUà‰NAà‹L M?TTRAUX
International Criminal Law Review
Volume 3, Number 4, 2003 p.415-419

The Use and Abuse of the International Court of Justice : Cases concerning the Use of Force after Nicaragua
Christine Gray
European Journal of International law
Volume 14, Number 5, November 2003 p.867-905

Judging Global Justice: Assessing the International Criminal Court
Diane F. Orentlicher
Wisconsin International Law Journal
Volume 21, Number 3, Fall 2003 p.495

TO KEEP YOU IS NO GAIN, TO KILL YOU IS NO LOSS-SECURING JUSTICE THROUGH THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT
Talitha Gray
Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law
Volume 20, Number 3, Fall 2003 p.645

While the Holocaust is recognized worldwide as the ultimate example of man’s inhumanity toward his fellow man, seventeen separate genocides of comparable magnitude have been perpetuated since 1950 and have gone relatively unnoticed by the international community. In the rare instance where trials actually occurred, swift and impartial justice was notably absent. This Note enumerates the existence of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes in recent history and argues that both victims and perpetrators deserve an impartial, independent, and prompt trial. An overview of the International Criminal Court is provided, as well as descriptions of the United States’ objections to the Court and the corresponding responses of the Court’s proponents. This Note further examines domestic courts in Cambodia and East Timor, the international tribunals in former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, and the genocide in Iraq, as the basis for its conclusion that the International Criminal Court is the only feasible forum for trying future crimes of this magnitude.

JUSTICE FOR SOME? U.S. EFFORTS UNDER ARTICLE 98 TO ESCAPE THE JURISDICTION OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT
Cosmos Eubany
Hastings International and Comparative Law Review
Volume 27, Number 1, Fall 2003 p.103

In April 2002, ten countries ratified the Rome Statute and deposited their instruments with the United Nations. These actions brought the International Criminal Court into force with over sixty ratifications. A month later, the United States declared that it no longer intended to pursue ratification of the treaty and asked to remove its signature from the statute. The United States then launched a campaign to ensure that its nationals would not fall within the jurisdiction of the Court. To ensure that the ICC does not gain jurisdiction over its nationals under any circumstance, the United States is currently seeking “non-surrender”bilateral agreements with other states. This note discusses how U.S. bilateral agreements will effect the legitimacy of the ICC by examining the U.S. position on the ICC and then tracing U.S. efforts to secure immunity from the Court, focusing on the U.S. interpretation of Article 98, Paragraph 2.

Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mexico v. United States)
William J. Aceves
American Journal of International Law
Volume 97, Number 4, October 2003 p.923

International Court of Justice Order of Provisional Measures in case alleging breaches of Vienna Convention on Consular Relations .

Author: international

Mentioned in these Entries

International Court of Justice, International Criminal Court, International Criminal Law, Rule of law.