- Jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court
- War Crimes
- Blogs:
– ‘Wheels have been set in motion for the indictment of western leaders as war criminals by the ICC.’
Jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court
States retain the primary responsibility in the prosecution of international crimes. Under the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol I of 1977, States must prosecute people accused of war crimes before their own national courts or extradite them for trial elsewhere.
The International Criminal Court (‘ICC’), headquartered in the Hague, exercises a complementary jurisdiction in respect of international crimes, and may take up a case when either:
- a State is unable or unwilling to prosecute the suspects, which include former and serving:
- heads of state;
- government ministers;
- public officials;
- military, intelligence, and police personnel of any rank;
- members of a paramilitary group; and
- civilians; or
- the Court is requested to initiate proceedings by the UN Security Council, acting under Chapter VII of the UN Charter.
The ICC is an independent international organisation, and is not part of the United Nations system. To download the ICC guide, ‘Understanding the International Criminal Court’ please click on this link*.
The jurisdiction of the ICC is limited to the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole, including war crimes.
The ICC also has jurisdiction over crimes against humanity, which include a range of acts committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population.
Together, this includes most of the serious violations of international human rights law covered by the 1949 Geneva Conventions and the 1977 Additional Protocols, whether committed during an international or non-international armed conflict.
The ‘crime of aggression’, also mentioned in the Statute, was not defined during the establishment of the Court, but will come within the ICC’s jurisdiction once it is.
Contrary to other international courts, the ICC may take action against individuals but not States.
However, nothing in the ICC Statute releases States from their obligations under existing international humanitarian law or customary international law.
War Crimes
‘All war crimes are crimes for which there is universal jurisdiction, so that any State can prosecute them. The most authoritative and convenient, list of war crimes, committed in international or internal armed conflicts, is now to be found in the ICC statute. The defence that an accused was acting under the order of a superior is available only in very limited circumstances.’ Handbook of International Law, by Anthony Aust (formerly legal advisor to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office).
Article 8 (‘War Crimes’) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court states,
- The Court shall have jurisdiction in respect of war crimes in particular when committed as part of a plan or policy or as part of a large-scale commission of such crimes. 2. For the purpose of this Statute, “war crimes” means:
(a) Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention:
(i) Wilful killing;
(ii) …inhuman treatment…;
(iii) Wilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health;
(iv) Extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly;
(vi) Wilfully depriving a prisoner of war or other protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial;
(vii) …unlawful confinement;
(viii) Taking of hostages.
(b) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts:
(i) Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities;
(ii) Intentionally directing attacks against civilian objects, that is, objects which are not military objectives;
(iii) Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict;
(iv) Intentionally launching an attack in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated;
(v) Attacking or bombarding, by whatever means, towns, villages, dwellings or buildings which are undefended and which are not military objectives;
(vi) Killing or wounding a combatant who, having laid down his arms or having no longer means of defence, has surrendered at discretion;
(ix) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military objectives;
(xii) Declaring that no quarter will be given;
(xiii) Destroying or seizing the enemy’s property unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war;
(xvi) Pillaging a town or place, even when taken by assault;
(xvii) Employing poison or poisoned weapons;
(xviii) Employing asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and all analogous liquids, materials or devices;
(xix) Employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions;
(xx) Employing weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare which are of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering or which are inherently indiscriminate in violation of the international law of armed conflict, provided that such weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare are the subject of a comprehensive prohibition and are included in an annex to this Statute, by an amendment in accordance with the relevant provisions set forth in articles 121 and 123;
(xxi) Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment;
(xxiv) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings, material, medical units and transport, and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions in conformity with international law;
(xxv) Intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions;
(c) In the case of an armed conflict not of an international character, serious violations of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts committed against persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention or any other cause:
(i) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
(ii) Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment;
(iii) Taking of hostages;
(iv) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgement pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all judicial guarantees which are generally recognized as indispensable.
(e) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in armed conflicts not of an international character, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts:
(i) Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities;
(ii) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings, material, medical units and transport, and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions in conformity with international law;
(iii) Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict;
(iv) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military objectives;
(v) Pillaging a town or place, even when taken by assault;
(x) Declaring that no quarter will be given;
(xii) Destroying or seizing the property of an adversary unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of the conflict;
- Nothing in paragraph 2 (c) and (e) shall affect the responsibility of a Government to maintain or re-establish law and order in the State or to defend the unity and territorial integrity of the State, by all legitimate means.
Blogs
‘Wheels have been set in motion for the indictment of western leaders as war criminals by the ICC’
The ICC has been called on by a Geneva-based NGO with consultative status at the United Nations, to Indict Ursula von der Leyen For Complicity In War Crimes. See: ICC-Communication-re-UvdL-Final-version-22.05.2024.pdf (neutralitystudies.com)
Also listen to – ICC Called On To Indict Ursula von der Leyen For Complicity In War Crimes! | Dr. Alfred de Zayas (youtube.com)
Professor Alfred De Zayas, who is a leading International Law expert, said that a legal case for the indictment of Rishi Sunak, Olaf Schultz & Emmanuel Macron may also be presented to the ICJ.
In other words, it appears not to be a question of whether, but of when.
If/when this happens, it will be shameful moment. Will such an event permanently blemish the moral standing of Britain on the world stage? For what? For whom – Zionists & the Israel Lobby in London? These are the soul-searching questions that our mainstream media commentators & news journalists will have to ask members of the British public. It this causes irretrievable harm to the reputation of Britain around the world, then axiomatically – our soft power, which is our greatest diplomatic asset, will be eroded. That is because Britian will have found itself standing on the wrong side of history. If indicted, Sunak will become notorious as the first former British Prime Minister to stand accused at the Hague as a war criminal. If he & his ministers think that they are immune from arrest & prosecution for war crimes in any jurisdiction which recognises the court, or indeed in a UK court, then as Professor De Zayas, who is a legal expert explains in detail – they are wrong. Reliance upon erroneous legal advice is not a defence.
‘[A] precedent has been set and more communications from civil society toward the ICC to investigate the nature of the complicity of western leaders toward the various war crimes committed in Gaza and the West Bank might be yet a new route to bring to an end the impunity of these leaders in their support for the most horrific crimes against humanity. To all international lawyers and human rights lawyers out there: Please do study the above communication and think about submitting your own communication to the ICC if you are in a position to do so with institutional support behind you. Pressure from civil society through the international legal system (even a flawed one) is a good way of increasing the heat on the warmongers and maniacs in these elites.’ (Dr Pascal L.ottaz, Kyoto University, see Members – Neutrality Studies).
So the door to indictment has been opened. The question now, whether the ball that these leading International Law experts have set in motion, will gather such momentum with the public and other lawyers, that the will to issue international arrest warrants against these politicians, will become irresistible. Let’s see what happens.
Note also – 11. June 2024:
‘Western leaders are experiencing two stunning events: defeat in Ukraine, and genocide in Palestine. The first is humiliating, the other shameful. Yet, they feel no humiliation or shame. Their actions show vividly that those sentiments are alien to them – unable to penetrate the entrenched barriers of dogma, arrogance, and deep-seated insecurities. The last are personal as well as political. Therein lies a puzzle. For, as a consequence, the West has set itself on a path of collective suicide. Moral suicide in Gaza; diplomatic suicide – the foundations laid in Europe, the Middle East, and across Eurasia; economic suicide – the dollar-based global financial system jeopardized, Europe deindustrializing. It is not a pretty picture. Astoundingly, this self-destruction is occurring in the absence of any major trauma – external or internal. Therein lies another, related puzzle.
Some clues for these abnormalities are provided by their most recent responses as deteriorating conditions tighten the vise – on emotions, on prevailing policies, on domestic political worries, on ginger egos. Those responses fall under the category of panic behavior. Deep down, they are scared, fearful, and agitated. Biden et al in Washington, Macron, Schulz, Sunak, Stoltenberg, von der Leyen. They lack the courage of their stated convictions or the courage to face reality squarely. The blunt truth is that they have contrived to get themselves, and their countries, in a quandary from which there is no escape conforming to their current self-defined interests and emotional engagement. Hence, we observe an array of reactions that are feckless, grotesque, and dangerous. ‘ (‘The West’s Reckoning?’ by Dr Michael Brenner).
See: The West’s Reckoning? – Neutrality Studies
[Dr Brenner is a Professor Emeritus of International Affairs at the University of Pittsburgh and Fellow at the Center for Transatlantic Relations at John Hopkins]. In other words, he is a highly credible independent Foreign Affairs specialist and diplomatic insider.
* to view pdf files you will need a suitable viewer, if you need to download one click on the link of your choice below: