Back
 BLR  Vol.7 No.4 , December 2016
Unresolved Jurisprudence of Crime against Humanity under Article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
Abstract: Crime against humanity is one of international crimes. The “validity” of this crime as a criminal offence under International Criminal law can be traced to the Rome Statute, which by virtue of Article 7, makes it an offence. The International Criminal Court (ICC) is a court saddled with the responsibility of interpreting and also bringing to book those who have violated international criminal laws. The paper therefore examines how the broad couching of article 7 has brought complexity into the jurisprudence of “crime against humanity” and how it has created interpretation problems; not only to the court, but to victims and accused persons. A good law must be concise, precise and must not be too broad. This article, therefore, argues that an appraisal of Article 7 will go a long way in clarifying the ambiguity created by this article.
Cite this paper: Mimiko, M. , Olaseeni, O. and Oluwadayisi, A. (2016) Unresolved Jurisprudence of Crime against Humanity under Article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Beijing Law Review, 7, 420-429. doi: 10.4236/blr.2016.74033.
References

[1]   Antonio (2002). The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Commentary. London: Oxford University Press.

[2]   Broomhall, B. (2003). International Justice and the International Criminal Court (1st ed., p. 67). New York: Oxford University Press.

[3]   Cassese, A. (2002). The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Commentary (4th ed., pp. 10-11). New York: Oxford University Press.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/law/9780198298625.001.0001

[4]   Dadrian, V. (1989). Genocide as a Problem of National and International Law: The World War I Armenian Case and Its Contemporary Legal Ramifications. Yale Journal of International Law, 14, 275-295.

[5]   Diane, F. (1991). Settling Accounts: The Duty to Prosecute Human Rights Violations of a Prior Regime. Yale Law Journal, 100, 2567-2690.

[6]   Ebrucoban, O. (2014). The International Criminal Jurisdiction and the Concept of Sovereignty. European Scientific Journals, 10, 142-155.

[7]   Henckaerts, M. (2005). Study on Customary International Humanitarian Law (1st ed., p. 5). New York: Cambridge University Press.

[8]   Linda, E. (2010). The Principle of Complementarity and International Criminal Court: The Role of Ne Bis in Idem. Santa Clara Law Journal, 8, 165-198.

[9]   Mauro, P., & Giuseppe, N. (2001). The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. A Challenge to Impunity. Burlington: Ashgate.

[10]   Otto (1999). Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (2nd ed.). Novos, Verlagsgesellschaft, Beck/Hart, xix.

[11]   Russell, C. (2011). The Chapeau of Crime Against Humanity: The Impact of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Eyes on the ICC, 8, 25-72.

[12]   Soanes, C., & Stevenson, A. (2004). Concise Oxford English dictionary (11th ed., pp. 1462, 1095). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[13]   The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948) 78 U.N.T.S. 277.

[14]   The Prosecutor v. Jean paul Akayesu (Judgement) Case no. ICTR-96-4-T, TRIAL CHAMBER 1, 2 September, 1998.

[15]   The Prosecutor vs Francis Kirmin Mutaura, Uhuru Mulgai Kenyatta and Mohammed Hussein Ali (2012) ICC 01/09-2/11-382. (International Criminal Court’s Case).

[16]   The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969), 1155 U.N.T.S. 331.

[17]   Theodorakis, N., & Farrington, D. (2013). Emerging Challenges for Criminology: Drawing the Margins of Crimes against Humanity. International Journal of Criminology and Sociological Theory, 6, 1150-1160.

 
 
Top