Article contents
Report on the Facilitation on the Activation of the Jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court over the Crime of Aggression (Int’l Crim. Ct.) & Resolution ICC-ASP/16/RES.5 on the Activation of the Jurisdiction of the Court over the Crime of Aggression
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 July 2018
Extract
On December 14, 2017, the International Criminal Court's (ICC) Assembly of States Parties (ASP or Assembly) adopted a resolution activating the ICC's jurisdiction over the crime of aggression as of July 17, 2018. As a result, the leaders of states now face the possibility of being held individually criminally responsible for unlawful acts of inter-state armed force. The resolution has thus rightly been hailed as historic—notwithstanding the significant limitation on the Court's jurisdiction accepted as the price of activation.
- Type
- International Legal Documents
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © 2018 by The American Society of International Law
References
ENDNOTES
1 Assembly of States Parties Res. ICC-ASP/16/Res.5 (Dec. 14, 2017).
2 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, July 17, 1998, 2187 UNTS 90.
3 For additional background on the crime of aggression see in particular: Carrie McDougall, The Crime of Aggression Under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (2013); The Crime of Aggression: A Commentary (Claus Kress & Stefan Barriga eds., 2017).
4 The Facilitation established by the ASP was open to states parties only—a result of the fact that the majority of states parties considered that the views of non-states parties should not be taken into account in light of the exclusion of non-states parties from Article 15bis. A number of non-states parties, however, actively promoted their views outside of the Facilitation.
5 Assembly of States Parties Res. ICC-ASP/16/24 (2017).
6 Assuming in all cases that the aggressor state has not “opted out” under Article 15bis(4).
7 The second sentence of Article 121(5) states that “[i]n respect of a State Party which has not accepted the amendment, the Court shall not exercise its jurisdiction regarding a crime covered by the amendment when committed by that State Party's nationals or on its territory.”
8 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, May 23, 1969, 1155 UNTS 331 [hereinafter VCLT]. Proponents of the broad view noted that Article 39 of the VCLT provides that the specific amendment rules of a treaty prevail over the VCLT's general rules.
9 These can be accessed as a collected set of documents in The Travaux Préparatoires of the Crime of Aggression (Stefan Barriga & Claus Kress eds., 2012).
10 Article 15bis(4) reads: “The Court may, in accordance with Article 12, exercise jurisdiction over a crime of aggression, arising from an act of aggression committed by a State Party, unless that State Party has previously declared that it does not accept such jurisdiction by lodging a declaration with the Registrar. The withdrawal of such a declaration may be effected at any time and shall be considered by the State Party within three years.”
11 VLCT, supra note 8, art. 31(1).
- 2
- Cited by