Internationally Recognized Human Rights Before the International Criminal Court

DOI:  https://doi.org/10.12804/revistas.urosario.edu.co/anidip/a.11937

Article Sidebar

PDF (Español (España))

Published: Dec 2, 2022
Issue: No. 10 (2022): ANIDIP 10
Section ESSAY RESEARCH SECTION


Keywords: Human Rights International Criminal Court Rome Statute Applicable law Sources of law

Main Article Content

Authors

David Estévez Lledó
Universidad de Cádiz

Abstract

The sources of applicable law constitute a nuclear aspect of the judicial system of the International Criminal Court since it defines both its working tools and the method of using them. Such sources, enshrined in article 21 of its Statute, comprise a hierarchy of internal and external sources, the jurisprudence of the Court, and, finally, internationally recognized human rights.
The purpose of this essay is to study some of the questions raised by internationally recognized human rights as a source of law applicable by the Court. In particular, our analysis ranges from such basic concepts as "what should be understood by 'internationally recognized' human rights?", and "which are those rights?"; to the most complex problems, derived from the nature of these rights as the apex of the Court's normative hierarchy, and its legitimacy to act, ultimately, as "de facto legislator" to protect such rights in the event of a conflict with its Statute.
To do this, the main doctrinal and jurisprudential contributions that have tried to respond to the content, scope, and implications of the role that internationally recognized human rights play before the International Criminal Court will be taken as a reference.

How to Cite
Estévez Lledó, D. (2022). Internationally Recognized Human Rights Before the International Criminal Court. Anuario Iberoamericano De Derecho Internacional Penal, (10). https://doi.org/10.12804/revistas.urosario.edu.co/anidip/a.11937
References

Akande, D. (2009). Sources of International Criminal Law. En A. Cassese (Ed.), The Oxford Companion to International Criminal Justice (pp. 41-53). Nueva York: Oxford University Press.

Arsanjani, H. M. (1999). The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The American Journal of International Law, 93(1), 22-43.

Association Internationale de Droit Pénal, Draft Statute for an International Criminal Court – Alternative to the ILC-Draft-(Siracusa-Draft), julio de 1995, p. 68. Recuperado de: <https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/39a534/pdf/>.

Bailey, S. (2014). Article 21(3) of the Rome Statute: A Plea for Clarity. International Criminal Review, 14, 513-550.

Becerra Ramírez, M. (2017). Las fuentes contemporáneas del Derecho Internacional. México: Instituto de Investigaciones Jurídicas de la UNAM.

Bitti, G. (2009). Article 21 of the Statute of the ICC and the treatment of sources of law in the jurisprudence of the ICC. En C. Stahn, y G. Sluiter (Eds.), The Emerging Practice of the International Criminal Court (pp. 281-304). Leiden: BRILL.

Carrillo Salcedo, J. A. (2000). La criminalización de la barbarie: La Corte Penal Internacional. Madrid: Consejo General del Poder Judicial.

Cassese A., Gaeta, P. & Jones, J. (2002). The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Commentary (Vol. II). Nueva York: Oxford University Press.

Cassese, A. (2009). The Oxford Companion to International Criminal Justice. Nueva York: Oxford University Press.

Croquet, N. (2011). The ICC and the treatment of Defence Rights: A mirror of the European Court of Human Rights’ Jurisprudence? Human Rights Review, 11(1), 91-131.

De Guzman, M. (2016). Article 21, Applicable Law. En O. Triffterer (Ed.), Commentary on the Rome Statute of the ICC: Observers’ Notes, Article by Article (pp. 932-948), Philadelphia: Temple University Legal Studies.

Edwards, G. (2001). International Human Rights Law Challenges to the New International Criminal Court: The Search and Seizure Right to Privacy. The Yale Journal of International Law, 26, 323-412.

Fernández Sánchez, A. P. (2000). El derecho aplicable por la Corte Penal Internacional. En J. A. Carrillo Salcedo (Coord.), La criminalización de la barbarie: La Corte Penal Internacional (pp. 245-265). Madrid: Consejo General del Poder Judicial.

Fronza, E. (2010). Derechos Humanos y Crímenes Internacionales. Observaciones sobre el párrafo 3 del artículo 21 del Estatuto de Roma. En K. Ambos, G. Elsner, y E. Malarino (Coords.), Sistema Interamericano de Protección de los Derechos Humanos y Derecho Penal Internacional – Tomo II (pp. 229-248), Madrid: Fundación Konrad Adenauer.

Grover, L. (2010). A Call to Arms: Fundamental Dilemmas Confronting the Interpretation of Crimes in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The European Journal of International Law, 21(3), 543-583.

Hafner, G. & Binder, C. (2004). The Interpretation of Article 21(3) ICC Statute, Opinion Reviewed. Austrian Review of International and European Law, 9, 163-190.

Heikkilä, M. (2017). Article 21, Applicable law. En M. Klamberg (Ed.), Commentary on the Law of the International Criminal Court (pp. 242-252). Bruselas: Torkel Opsahl Academic EPublisher (TOAEP).

Hochmayr, G. (2014). Applicable Law in Practice and Theory. Interpreting Article 21 of the ICC Statute. Journal of International Criminal Justice, 12, 655-679.

Kiss, A. & Olásolo, H. (2010). El Estatuto de Roma y la Jurisprudencia de la Corte Penal Internacional en materia de participación de víctimas. Revista Electrónica de Ciencia Penal y Criminología, 12(3), 125-164.

Klamberg, M. (2017). Commentary on the Law of the International Criminal Court. Bruselas: Torkel Opsahl Academic EPublisher (TOAEP).

Moura Vicente, D. (2016). Towards a Universal Justice? Putting International Courts and Jurisdictions into perspective.

ONU, General Assembly, Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law, No.: A/RES/60/147, 21 de marzo de 2006. Recuperado de: <https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/60/147>.

ONU, High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Advisory Opinion on the Extraterritorial Application of Non-Refoulement Obligations under the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol, 26 de enero de 2007. Recuperado de: <https://www.unhcr.org/4d9486929.pdf>.

ONU, Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK), Regulation No. 2000/6, No.: UNMIK/REG/2000/6, 15 de febrero de 2000. Recuperado de: <https://undocs.org/en/S/2000/177/Add.2>.

ONU, Preparatory Committee on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, Report of the inter-sessional meeting from 19 to 30 January 1998 in Zutphen, The Netherlands, No.: A/AC.249/1998/L.13, 4 de febrero de 1998. Recuperado de: <https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/7ba9a4/>.

ONU, Report of the Preparatory Committee on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court – Addendum, Official Records, No.: A/CONF.183/2/Add.1, 14 de abril de 1998. Recuperado de: <https://undocs.org/A/CONF.183/2/Add.1>.

ONU, United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court (Vol. II): Summary records of the plenary meetings and of the meetings of the Committee of the Whole, Official Records, No.: A/CONF.183/13 (Vol. II), 15 de junio a 17 de julio de 1998. Recuperado de: <https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/253396/>.

ONU, United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court – Committee of the Whole, Report on the Working Group on Applicable Law, ADDENDUM, Official Records, No.: A/CONF.183/C.1/WGAL/L.2/Add.1, 14 de julio de 1998. Recuperado de: <https://undocs.org/en/A/CONF.183/C.1/WGAL/L.2/Add.1>.

OSCE, General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina, 21 de noviembre a 14 de diciembre de 1995. Recuperado de: <https://www.osce.org/bih/126173>.

Pellet, A. (2002). Applicable Law. En A. Cassese, P. Gaeta, y J. Jones (Eds.), The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Commentary (Vol. II) (pp. 1051-1084), Nueva York: Oxford University Press.

Salado Osuna, A. (2000). El Estatuto de Roma de la Corte Penal Internacional y los Derechos Humanos. En J. A. Carrillo Salcedo (Coord.), La criminalización de la barbarie: La Corte Penal Internacional (pp. 267-300). Madrid: Consejo General del Poder Judicial.

Schabas, W. A. (2016). The International Criminal Court. Nueva York: Oxford University Press.

Sheppard, D. (2010). The International Criminal Court and ‘Internationally Recognized Human Rights’: Understanding Article 21(3) of the Rome Statute”. International Criminal Law Review, 10, 43-71.

Stahn, C., y Sluiter, G. (2009). The Emerging Practice of the International Criminal Court. Leiden: BRILL.

Svaček, O. (2016). The International Criminal Court and Human Rights: Achievements and challenges. En D. Moura Vicente (Ed.), Towards a Universal Justice? Putting International Courts and Jurisdictions into perspective (pp. 206-221). Leiden: BRILL.

Triffterer, O. (2008). Commentary on the Rome Statute of the ICC: Observers’ Notes, Article by Article. C.H.Beck.

Vasiliev, S. (2009). Proofing the ban on ‘Witness proofing’: Did the ICC get it right?. Criminal Law Forum, 20(2-3), 193-261.

Werle, G. (Trad. C. Cárdenas Aravena et al.) (2017). Tratado de Derecho Penal Internacional. Valencia: Tirant lo Blanch.

Young, R. (2011). Internationally Recognized Human Rights’ before the International Criminal Court. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 60(1), 189-208.

JURISPRUDENCIA

CPI, Presidencia. (2009). The Prosecutor v. Katanga and Ngudjolo Chui. Caso Nº ICC-RoR217-02/08-8, Decision on “Mr Mathieu Ngudjolo's Complaint Under Regulation 221(1) of the Regulations of the Registry Against the Registrar's Decision of 18 November 2008”, 10 de marzo de 2009.

CPI, Registro. (2008). The Prosecutor v. Katanga and Ngudjolo Chui. Caso Nº ICC-RoR217-02/08-2-Red-tENG, Decision of the Registrar under Regulation 220 on Mathieu Ngudjolo's Challenge of the 7 November 2008 Decision of the Chief Custody Officer, 18 de noviembre de 2008.

CPI, Sala de Apelación. (2006). The Prosecutor v. Lubanga. Caso Nº ICC-01/04-01/06-772, Judgment on the Appeal of Mr. Lubanga against the Decision on the Defence Challenge to the jurisdiction of the Court pursuant to article 19(2)(a) of the Statute, 14 de diciembre 2006.

CPI, Sala de Apelación. (2007). The Prosecutor v. Lubanga. Caso Nº ICC-01/04-01/06-824, Judgment on the appeal of Mr. Lubanga against the decision of Pre-Trial Chamber I entitled “Décision sur la demande de mise en liberté provisoire de Lubanga”, 13 de febrero 2007.

CPI, Sala de Apelación. (2007). The Prosecutor v. Lubanga. Caso Nº ICC-01/04-01/06-925, Decision of the Appeals Chamber on the Joint Application of Victims a/0001/06 to a/0003/06 and a/0105/06, 13 de junio de 2007.

CPI, Sala de Apelación. (2008). The Prosecutor v. Lubanga. Caso Nº ICC-01/04-01/06-1432, Judgment on the appeals of The Prosecutor and The Defence against Trial Chamber I's Decision on Victims' Participation, 11 de julio de 2008.

CPI, Sala de Apelación. (2008). The Prosecutor v. Lubanga. Caso Nº ICC-01/04-01/06-1486, Judgment on the appeal of the Prosecutor against the decision of Trial Chamber I entitled “Decision on the consequences of non-disclosure of exculpatory materials covered by Article 54(3)(e) agreements and the application to stay the prosecution of the accused, together with certain other issues raised at the Status Conference”, 21 de octubre de 2008.

CPI, Sala de Apelación. (2008). The Prosecutor v. Lubanga. Caso Nº ICC-01/04-01/06-1487, Judgment on the appeal of the Prosecutor against the decision of Trial Chamber I entitled “Decision on the release of Lubanga”, 21 de octubre de 2008.

CPI, Sala de Apelación. (2014). Caso Nº ICC-01/04-02/12-158, Order on the implementation of the cooperation agreement between the Court and the Democratic Republic of the Congo concluded pursuant article 93 (7) of the Statute, 20 de enero de 2014.

CPI, SCP I. (2006). Situation on the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Caso Nº ICC-01/04-101, Decision on the Applications for Participation in the Proceedings of VPRS 1, VPRS 2, VPRS 3, VPRS 4, VPRS 5 and VPRS 6, 17 de enero de 2006.

CPI, SCP I. (2007). The Prosecutor v. The Prosecutor v. Lubanga. Caso Nº ICC-01/04-01/06-803-tEN, Decision on the confirmation of charges, 29 de enero de 2007.

CPI, SCP I. (2008). Situation in Darfur, Sudan. Caso Nº ICC-02/05-121, Decision on the Requests for Leave to Appeal the Decision on the Application for Participation of Victims in the Proceedings in the Situation, 6 de febrero de 2008.

CPI, SCP I. (2008). The Prosecutor v. Katanga. Caso Nº ICC-01/04-01/07-257, Decision on the Joinder of the Cases against Katanga and Ngudjolo Chui, 10 de marzo de 2008.

CPI, SCP I. (2008). The Prosecutor v. Katanga and Ngudjolo Chui. Caso Nº ICC-01/04-01/07-579, Public Redacted Version of the “Decision on the 97 Applications for Participation at the Pre-Trial Stage of the Case”, 10 de junio de 2008.

CPI, SCP I. (2008). The Prosecutor v. Katanga and Ngudjolo Chui. Caso Nº ICC-01/04-01/07-474, Decision on the Set of Procedural Rights Attached to Procedural Status of Victim at the Pre-Trial Stage of the Case, 13 de mayo de 2008.

CPI, SCP I. (2009). The Prosecutor v. Al Bashir. Caso Nº ICC-02/05-01/09-3, Decision on the Prosecution’s Application for a Warrant of Arrest Against Al Bashir, 4 de marzo de 2009.

CPI, SCP I. (2006). The Prosecutor v. Lubanga. Caso Nº ICC-01/04-01/06-268, Decision on the Requests of the Defence, 4 de agosto de 2006.

CPI, SCP III. (2008). The Prosecutor v. Bemba. Caso Nº ICC-01/05-01/08-320, Fourth Decision on Victims' Participation, 12 de diciembre de 2008.

CPI, SCP III. (2008). The Prosecutor v. Bemba. Caso Nº ICC-01/05-01/08-75, Decision on the Prosecutor's application for leave to appeal Pre-Trial Chamber Ill's decision on disclosure, 25 de agosto de 2008.

CPI, SPI I. (2008). The Prosecutor v. Lubanga. Caso Nº ICC-01/04-01/06-1556-Corr-Anx1, Decision on the applications by victims to participate in the proceedings, 15 de diciembre de 2008.

CPI, SPI I. (2008). The Prosecutor v. Lubanga. Caso Nº ICC-01/04-01/06-1119, Decision on victim’s participation, 18 de enero de 2008.

CPI, SPI I. (2008). The Prosecutor v. Lubanga. Caso Nº ICC-01/04-01/06-1248, Prosecution's submission on undisclosed documents containing potentially exculpatory information, 28 de marzo de 2008.

CPI, SPI I. (2008). The Prosecutor v. Lubanga. Caso Nº ICC-01/04-01/06-1259, Order on the “Prosecution's submission on undisclosed documents containing potentially exculpatory information”, 3 de abril de 2008.

CPI, SPI I. (2008). The Prosecutor v. Lubanga. Caso Nº ICC-01/04-01/06-1267, Prosecution's submission on Article 54(3)(e) confidentiality agreements, 7 de abril de 2008.

CPI, SPI I. (2008). The Prosecutor v. Lubanga. Caso Nº ICC-01/04-01/06-1401, Decision on the consequences of non-disclosure of exculpatory materials covered by Article 54(3)(e) agreements and the application to stay the prosecution of the accused, together with certain other issues raised at the Status Conference, 13 de junio de 2008.

CPI, SPI II. (2009). The Prosecutor v. Katanga and Ngudjolo Chui. Caso Nº ICC-01/04-01/07-1336, Decision on the "Prosecution's Urgent Application to Be Permitted to Present as Incriminating Evidence Transcripts and translations of Videos and Video DRCOTP-1042-0006”, 27 de julio de 2009.

CPI, SPI II. (2011). The Prosecutor v. Katanga and Ngudjolo Chui. Caso Nº ICC-01/04-01/07-3003-tENG, Decision on an Amicus Curiae application and on the “Requête tendant à obtenir présentations des témoins DRC‐D02‐P‐0350, DRC‐D02‐P‐0236, DRC‐D02‐P‐0228 aux autorités néerlandaises aux fins dʹasile” (articles 68 and 93(7) of the Statute), 9 de junio de 2011.

CPI, SPI II. (2012). The Prosecutor v. Ngudjolo Chui. Caso Nº ICC-01/04-02/12-4, Judgment pursuant to Article 74 of the Statute, 18 de diciembre de 2012.

TPIY, Sala de Apelación. (2009). Prosecutor v. Mrkšić and Šljivančanin. Caso Nº IT-95-13/1-A, Judgement, Partially Dissenting Opinion of Judge Pocar, 5 de mayo de 2009.

Query Statistics

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Publcation metrics

270 496




 

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Authors retain copyright and ensure the magazine's right to be the first publication of the work as licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of authorship of the work and the initial publication in this magazine.