Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Topic 3: International Criminal Tribunals and ICC - Coggle Diagram
Topic 3: International Criminal Tribunals and ICC
Tribunales which have been set up
Nuremberg Tribunal
Used to prosecute high ranking officials.
Jurisdiction over CAH, CAP, and War crimes
4 judges
Adversarial
Right to counsel
Right to trial in absentia
Victor's justice
Tokyo tribunal
Modelled on Nuremberg tribunal (11 judges)
Victor's justice
Importance of both NT and TT
Multi-national prosecution
Prosecution of high ranking officials
Initialisation of CAH and CAP
New legal rules and standards of reciprocity
Issues
Not impartial
Defendents could not quesiton judgements
Violations of retroactive law application
Victor's justice
ICTY and ICTR
ICTY
International criminal court for former Yugoslavia
Ad hoc solution
Prevent further killings
Was created to make up for poor political and diplomatic leadership
Only for the jursdiction of the Yugoslavian genocide (100,00 people dead)
ICTR
International Criminal Court of Rwanda
800,000 dead in 100 days
Hutu's and tutsi's
Criticisms
Too costly
Too slow
Remoteness to where the crimes occurred
No justice for the areas that incurred the damage
Prosecuted a number of low ranking staff.
Added to the slow nature fo the tribunal
Mixed courts were created to appease some of these criticisms
Mixed international and domestic rules, statutes, and prosecuted the most responsible
Justification of mixed courts
ICCis not appropriate
Let justice provail (Have intl. judges serve over the cases
Gradual reconciliation
Response to emergency situations, allow the punishment to be the peace keeping application
Problems with mixed courts
Who funds them
Lack of security of judges and prosecutors
Cultural differences, language barriers
Each intl. judge has their own speciiality, so may cause a lack of consistency.
ICTY and ICTR should take primacy when other courts: Belittle the seriousness of crimes, are unreliable and when the tribunal has other closely related cases it is presiding over
International Criminal Court (ICC)
Set up in Rome Statute
Court of last resort
Prosecute CAH, CAP and War crimes
Pros of international courts in general
More impartial than national courts
Judges are selected based on competance, speciality and collected evidence
Uniformity (Not affected by national law)
Intl. courts have more visability than ICTR and ICTY
Cons of international courts in general
Lack of enforcement capacity (Have to rely on state cooperation
Various judge approached
Adversarial nature of Judges
Mainly prosecuting high ranking officials (Not the people who caused the damage, just the ones who demanded it)
Victors are sheltered
ICC should intervene from national court if it is unwilling or unable to prosecute
Unwilling
State tries to protect accused
Not impartial
Unjustified delay
Unable
Cannot detain accused
Cannot collect evidence
Unable to carry out criminal proceedings due to legislative reasons
4 Principles to be aware of:
Principle of Territoriallity
National criminal law applies to acts withing the state's territory
Pros:
Collecting evidence is easier and quicker
Language is mostly the same
Relieving victims of trajedies
Legal system is scrutinised by public
Affirms authority and prevents future attackts
Cons:
Often committed by state officials, TF high bias
Definition of territory can be in dispute
Complex crimes
Principle of Active Nationality
National criminal law is applicable to a national citizen, outside of the country of nationality
Can be punishable if no law was broken in the country of perpetration or if there was no law broken
Time of naitonality, residents and stateless people
Principle of Passive Nationality
Crime committed abroad is prosecutable if against an Aussie in China
It's focus is to protect nationals and if there is any mistrust over the other country.
Needs double incrimination, should be a crime in both countries
Principle of Universality
Any state can prosecute
Conditional universal jurisdiction
Only if crime has occurred in the countries territory
Absolute universal jurisdiction
Any country can take action regardless of location of crime.
Legality, Not carrying out sentence, trial in absentia