2. R. v. Bartle and the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Others, ex parte Pinochet; R. v. Evans and another and the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Others, ex parte Pinochet, House of Lords, 25 November 1998 (Pinochet No. 1), 37 ILM (1998) p. 1302Google Scholar (= [1998] 3 WLR 1456); R. v. Bartle and the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Others, ex parte Pinochet; R. v. Evans and another and the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Others, ex parte Pinochet, House of Lords, 24 March 1999 (Pinochet No. 3), 38 LLM (1999) p. 581Google Scholar (= [1999] 2 WLR 827), both following Re: Augusto Pinochet Ugarte and R. v. Evans, Bartle and The Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Augusto Pinochet Ugarte, High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division, 28 October 1998, 38 ILM (1999) p. 70.Google Scholar

3. See, e.g, Chinkin, C., 93 AJIL (1999) p. 703, and most articles in the following footnotes.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4. The involvement of Lord Hoffmann with Amnesty International lead the House of Lords to set aside one of its decisions for the first time: House of Lords, 17 December 1998, 38 ILM (1999) p. 430 (= [1999] 2 WLR 272).

5. Cf., Bianchi, A., ‘Immunity versus Human Rights: The Pinochet Case’, 10 EJIL (1999) p. 237 at p. 248;CrossRefGoogle ScholarMahmoud, M.S., ‘Les leçons de l'affaire Pinochet’, 127 JDI (1999) p. 1021Google Scholar at p. 1022. According to Fox, H., ‘The Pinochet Case No. 3’, 48 ICLQ (1999) p. 687 at p. 687, ‘… the evaluation of the full implications of the case will take years'.Google Scholar

6. Cf., Bradley, C.A. and Goldsmith, J.L., ‘Pinochet and International Human Rights Litigation’, 97 Mich. L Rev. (1999) p. 2129 at p. 2130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7. The term ‘Pinochet syndrome’ was apparently created by the New York Times, 22 August 1999 (available at Westlaw). See also Bianchi, , loc. cit. n. 5, at p. 239;Google Scholar, Mahmoud, loc. cit. n. 5, at p. 1037 (’effet d'entrainement');Google ScholarRodley, N.S., ‘Breaking the Cycle of Impunity for Gross Violations of Human Rights: The Pinochet Case in Perspective’, 69 Nordic JIL (2000) p. 11Google Scholar at p. 25, and Wedgwood, R., ‘International Criminal Law and Augusto Pinochet’, 40 Va. JIL (2000) p. 829 at p. 831.Google Scholar

8. For the following facts, cf., Gattegno, Hervé, Le Monde (édition électronique), 8 September 2000 and 20 October 2000, available at: <http://www.lemonde.fr> (archives);+(archives);>Google ScholarKirgis, Frederic L., ASIL insight No. 56 (2000), available at: <http://www.asil.org/insights/insigh56.htm>..>Google Scholar

9. Cour d'appel de Paris, Chambre d'accusation, 2ème section, affaire no. A 99/05921, 20 October 2000, available at: <http://www.sos-attentats.org>.

10. Cour d'appel, supra n. 9, at p. 5.

11. Cour d'appel, supra n. 9, at p. 3; Gattegno, Le Monde, supra n. 8, last section.

12. Cour d'appel, supra n. 9, at p. 6.

13. Idem.

14. 10 ILM (1971) p. 1151.Google Scholar

15. United States v. Noriega, 117 F. 3d. 1206 (11th Cir. 1197).

16. Cour d'appel, supra n. 9, at p. 7.

17. Cour de cassation–Chambre criminelle, Arrêt no. 1414, 13 March2001, available at:<http://www. courdecassation.fr/agenda>. See Le Monde interactif, ‘Abandon des poursuites contre le colonel Kadhafi’, 13 March 2001, available at: <http://www.lemonde.fr/rech_art/0,5987,159530,00.html>.

18. ‘… [A]lors qu'en l'état du droit international, le crime dénonce, quelle qu'en soit la gravité, ne relève pas des exceptions au principe de l'immunité de juridiction des chefs d'Etat ètrangers en exercice …‘

19. This information is collected from the following sources: Kirgis, F.L., ASIL Insight No. 41 (2000), available at: <http://www.asil.org/insights/insigh41.htm>;;>Google ScholarSolomon, A., ‘The Politics of Prosecution under the Convention against Torture’, 2 Chi. JIL (2001) p. 309; several entries in Diplomatie Judiciaire, available at: <http./www.diplomatiejudiciaire.com/Habre.html>; Human Rights Watch Press Releases of 3 February 2000 and 4 July 2000, available at: <http://www.hrw.org/french/press/2000/habfr203.htm> and <http://www.hrw.org/hrw/press/2000/07/habre0705.htm>.Google Scholar

20. Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, 23 ILM (1984) p. 1027.Google Scholar

21. République du Sénégal, Cour de cassation, Arrét no. 14, 20 March 2001, Guengueng et at. v. Hissène Habré, available at: <http://www.hrw.org/fiench/themes/habre-cour_de_cass.html>. Cf., S. Maupas, ‘L'incompétence sénégalaise’, available at: <http://www.diplomatiejudiciaire.com/Habre3.htm>.

22. Cour de cassation, supra n. 21, sixth and seventh grounds of appeal.

23. On the Committee see Sands, P. and Klein, P., Bowett's Law on International Institutions, 5th edn. (London, Sweet and Maxwell 2001) p. 13–068.Google Scholar

24. See the press release by Human Rights Watch: ‘Les Nations Unies demandent au Sénégal de retenir Hissène Habré’, 23 April 2001, available at: <http://www.hrw.org/french/press/2001/habrecatfrO423.htm>. In addition, the serving president of Chad promised to reopen the criminal files against Habré: Lutz, E. and Sikkink, K., ‘The Justice Cascade: The Evolution and Impact of Foreign Human Rights Trials in Latin America’, 2 Chi. JIL (2001) p. 1, sub VII.Google Scholar

25. Gerechtshof Amsterdam, Cases R 97/163/12 Sv and R 97/176/12 Sv, 20 November 2000, available at: <http://www.rechtspraak.nl/gerechtshofamsterdam/>.

26. Gerechtshof, supra n. 25, sub 5.

27. Gerechtshof, supra n. 25, sub 4.2.

28. Gerechtshof, supra n. 25, sub 5.2 (following the expert professor C.J.R. Dugard).

29. Gerechtshof, supra n. 25, sub 6.3–6.5.

30. Cf., Simons, M., ‘Dutch Court Orders an Investigation of ‘82 Killings in Suriname’, NY Times, 26 November 2000, p. 12 (available at Westlaw).Google Scholar

31. For the following see Kirgis, F.L., ASIL Insight No. 50 (2000), available at: <http://www.asil.org/insights/insigh50.htm>;;>Google ScholarMiller, B., ‘Mugabe Sued in N.Y. Over Rights Abuses’, The Washington Post, 9 September 2000 (available at Westlaw).Google Scholar

32. 28 USC para. 1350.

33. On this aspect of immunity, cf., Lüke, M., Die Immunität staatlicher Funktionsträger (Berlin, Berlin-Verlag 2000) pp. 128 et seq.Google Scholar

34. Shaw, A., ‘U.S. May Grant Mugabe Immunity’, Associated Press, Release of 24 February 2001 (available at Westlaw).Google Scholar

35. Cf., Kirgis, F.L., ASIL lnsigh No. 42 (2000), available at: <http://www.asil.org/insights/insigh42.htm>. These proceedings can be traced back to civil proceedings in Letelier v. Republic of Chile, 488 F. Supp. 665 (D.D.C. 1980)..+These+proceedings+can+be+traced+back+to+civil+proceedings+in+Letelier+v.+Republic+of+Chile,+488+F.+Supp.+665+(D.D.C.+1980).>Google Scholar

36. The application can be downloaded in its original version (quoted here) from the ICJ's homepage (<http://www.icj-cij.org>). On the ICJ's order concerning provisional measures see infra n. 146.

37. Loi du 16 juin 1993 relative à la répression des violations graves du droit international humanitaire, as amended on 10 February 1999, Moniteur beige, 23 March 1999 (English translation: 38 ILM (1999) p. 918).Google Scholar

38. Cf., the critical assessment by d'Argent, P., ‘La loi du 10 février 1999 relative à la répression des violations graves du droit international humanitaire’, 118 Journal des Tribunaux (1999) p. 549Google Scholar at pp. 554 et seq. and Verhoeven, J., ‘Vers un ordre reépressif universel?’, 45 AFDI (1999) p. 55 at pp. 57 et seq.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

39. Belgium itself brought proceedings against Pinochet simultaneously with the House of Lords’ proceedings. Juge d'instruction de Bruxelles, order of 6 November 1998, 118 Journal des Tribunaux (1999) p. 308; critically annotated by Verhoeven, J., ‘M. Pinochet, la coutume internationale et la compétence universelle’, idem, at p. 311.Google Scholar

40. Application, supra n. 36, sub IV A.

41. Application, supra n. 36, sub IV B.

42. The ILC's Draft Articles on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property (ILC Yearbook (1991–11/); in particular Art. 3(2), p. 21) have not yet been signed and ratified in a binding convention. The European Convention on State Immunity (ETS, No. 74) does not cover head of state immunity; cf., G. Gornig, ‘immunitat von Staatsoberhêuptern’, in Ipsen, K. and Schmidt-Jortzig, E., eds., Festschrift für Dietrich Rauschning (Cologne, Heymann 2001) p. 457 at p. 461.Google Scholar

43. , Gornig, op. cit. n. 42, at p. 462.Google Scholar

44. Denza, E., ‘Ex Parte Pinochet: Lacuna or Leap?’, 48 ICLQ (1999) p. 949 at p. 951.Google Scholar

45. Barker, J. Craig, ‘The Future of Former Head of State Immunity after Ex Parte Pinochet’, 48 ICLQ (1999) p. 937 at p. 938;Google ScholarFox, , loc. cit. n. 5, at p. 692;Google ScholarMallory, J.L., ‘Resolving the Confusion over Head of State Immunity: The Defined Rights of Kings’, 86 Colum. L Rev. (1986) p. 169 at pp. 177, 179 and 197;CrossRefGoogle ScholarWatts, A., ‘The Legal Position in International Law of Heads of States, Heads of Governments and Foreign Ministers’, 247 RdC (1994-III) p. 9 at p. 52.Google Scholar

46. Pinochet No. 3, supra n. 2, at p. 598 per Lord Goff (diss. op.), p. 642 per Lord Saville, p. 644 per Lord Millett, and p. 653 per Lord Phillips; Hailbronner, K., in W., Graf Vitzthum, ed., Völkerrecht, 2edn. (Berlin, de Gruyter 2001) 3. Abschnitt, para. 50;Google ScholarLüke, , op. cit. n. 33, at p. 198;Google ScholarJennings, R. and Watts, A., Oppenheim's International Law, Vol. 1, 9th edn. (Harlow, Longman 1992) para. 109.Google Scholar

47. , Fox, loc. cit. n. 5, at p. 696;Google Scholar Ch. , Rousseau, Droit International Public, Vol. IV (Paris, Dalloz 1980) para. 100.Google Scholar

48. Dahm, G., Delbrück, J. and Wolfrum, R., Völkerrecht, Vol. 1/1, 2nd edn. (Berlin, de Gruyter 1989) para. 29 IV 1;Google ScholarGloria, C., in Ipsen, K., Völkerrecht, 4th edn. (Munich, Beck 1999) paras. 26–29;Google Scholar, Watts, loc. cit. n. 45, at pp. 88 et seq.Google Scholar

49. See expliciteiy Pinochet No. 1, supra n. 2, at p. 1334 per Lord Nicholls. Cf., also M. Cosnard, ‘Quelques observations sur les décisions de la Chambre des Lords du 25 novembre 1998 et du 24 mars 1999 dans l'affaire Pinochet’, 103 RGDIP (1999) p. 309 at p. 321;Google ScholarFox, H., ‘The First Pinochet Case: Immunity of a Former Head of State’, 48 ICLQ (1999) p. 207 at p. 210.Google Scholar

50. Pinochet No. 3, supra n. 2, at p. 592 per Lord Browne-Wilkinson; Bröhmer, J., State Immunity and the Violation of Human Rights (The Hague, Nijhoff 1997) p. 30;Google ScholarMallory, , loc. cit. n. 45, at p. 170;Google Scholar, Watts, loc. cit. n. 45, at pp. 35Google Scholar et seq. Sceptically Dominicé, C., ‘Quelques observations sur l'immunité de juridiction pénale de l'ancien Chef d'Etat’, 103 RGDIP (1999) p. 297 at p. 301.Google Scholar

51. Cf., Rousseau, , op. cit. n. 47, at paras. 101–102.Google Scholar

52. The other view taken by Chibundu, M.O., ‘Making Customary International Law through Municipal Adjudication: A Structural Inquiry’, 39 Va. JIL (1999) p. 1069 at p. 1138, is based on an appreciation of domestic (US) law which should not be assessed here.Google Scholar

53. Bröhmer, J., ‘Diplomatic Immunity, Head of State Immunity, State Immunity: Misconceptions of a Notorious Human Rights Violator’, 12 LJIL (1999) p. 361CrossRefGoogle Scholar at p. 369, and (apparently) , Cosnard, loc. cit. n. 49, at pp. 322 et seq. This would also have to entail overall domestic immunity, which is uncommon.Google Scholar

54. Bröhmer, , loc, cit. n. 53, at p. 369;Google ScholarBarker, J. Craig, ‘State Immunity, Diplomatic Immunity and Act of State: A Triple Protection against Legal Action?’, 47 ICLQ (1998) p. 950 at p. 951;Google ScholarDavis, M.P., ‘Acccountability and World Leadership: Impugning Sovereign Immunity’, 99 U Ill. L Rev. (1999) p. 1357, sub IV;Google Scholar, Dominicé, loc. cit. n. 50, at p. 301 (’finalité');Google Scholar, Lüke, op. cit. n. 33, at pp. 217 et seq.;Google ScholarRensmann, T., ‘Internationale Verbrechen und Befreiung von staatlicher Gerichtsbarkeit’, 19 Praxis des Inlernationalen Privat- und Verfahrensrechts (1999) p. 268 at p. 271.Google Scholar

55. Davis, loc. cit. n. 54, sub III. B., suggests that the development towards relative state immunity could serve as an example for reducing head of states’ immunity in human rights matters.

56. Cf., for the difference between state immunity and diplomatic immunity German Federal Constitutional Court, Decision of 10 June 1997 (2 BvR 1516/96), 96 Entscheidungen des Bundesverfassungsgerichts p. 68 at p. 85.

57. Bass, P.E., ‘Ex-Head of State Immunity: A Proposed Statutory Tool of Foreign Policy’, 97 Yale LJ (1987) p. 299 at p. 302;CrossRefGoogle ScholarWatts, , loc. cit. n. 45, at p. 40.Google Scholar But see also Berber, F., Lehrbuch des Völkerrechts, 2nd edn. (Munich, Beck 1975) p. 274, para. 39.Google Scholar

58. Cf., , Gornig, op. cit. n. 42, at p. 457;Google Scholar, Watts, loc. cit. n. 45, at p. 26.Google Scholar

59. Bröhmer, J., ‘Immunity of a Former Head of State General Pinochet and the House of Lords: Part Three’, 13 LJIL (2000) p. 229 at p. 235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

60. 17 ILM (1978)p. 1123.

61. 28 USC paras. 1330, 1602–1611 (1994). Para. 1603(a) refers to political subdivisions, which is not identical with heads of state.

62. , Watts, loc. cit. n. 45, at pp. 98 et seq., 103 and 105.Google Scholar

63. Oehler, D., ‘Immunităt, Extraterritorialităt und Asylrecht’, 91 Zeitschrift für die gesamte Strqfrechtswissenschaft (1979) p. 395 at p. 399.Google Scholar

64. Cf., the Convention on Special Missions of 8 December 1969, GA Res. 2530 (XXIV), Commentary: ILC Yearbook (1967–II) p. 347.

65. Cf., Jennings and Watts, op. cit. n. 46, at para. 459; , Gornig, op. cit. n. 42, at pp. 461 et seq.;Google Scholar, Luke, op. cit. n. 33, at p. 107.Google Scholar

66. ILC Yearbook, supra n. 42, at p. 22.

67. Bass, , loc. cit. n. 57, at pp. 316 et seq.; Rousseau, op. cit. n. 47, at para. 106;Google ScholarSears, J., ‘Confronting the “Culture of Impunity”: Immunity of Heads of State from Nuremberg to ex parte Pinochet’, 42 GYIL (1999) p. 125 at pp. 129 et seq;Google ScholarWatts, , loc. cit. n. 45, at pp. 82 et seq.Google Scholar

68. Cf., , Watts, loc. cit. n. 45, at p. 83.Google Scholar

69. , Bianchi, loc. cit. n. 5, at p. 238;Google Scholar, Rensmann, loc. cit. n. 54, at p. 270.Google Scholar

70. See Schröder, M., in Graf Vitzthum, op. cit. n. 46, 7. Abschnitt, para. 42.Google Scholar

71. 33 ILM (1994) p. 253; Barboza, J., ‘International Criminal Law’, 278 RdC (1999) p. 9 at pp. 43 et seq.;Google ScholarTomuschat, C., ‘Das Strafgesetzbuch der Verbrechen gegen den Frieden und die Sicherheit der Menschheit’, 25 Europäische Grundrechte Zeitschrift (1998) p. 1.Google Scholar

72. Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, Adopted by the United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminial Court on 17 July 1998, 37 ILM (1998)p. 1003.

73. Under SC Res. 1315 (2000) of 14 August 2000, an agreement between the government of Sierra Leone and the UN shall be negotiated.

74. It should be noted that Art. 27 presupposes that the person in question is available to the Court, Triffterer, O., in idem, ed., Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Baden Baden, Nomos 1999)Google Scholar Art. 27, para. 24. If that person happens to be in a third state, agreement with the state of whom the accused is a national must be reached (Art. 98). It has been criticized that the Articles have not been joined: Bassiouni, C., ‘Negotiating the Treaty of Rome on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court’, 32 Cornell ILJ (1999) p. 443 at p. 454.Google Scholar

75. Annex to SC Res. 827 (1993) as amended by SC Res. 1166 (1998) and 1329 (2000), Art. 7(2).

76. Annex to SC Res. 955 (1994) as amended by SC Res. 1165 (1998) and 1329 (2000), Art. 6(2).

77. Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948), 78 UNTS p. 277.Google Scholar

78. Cf., farreaching conclusions by Chibundu, , loc. cit. n. 52, at p. 1133.Google Scholar Cf., on the other hand the very sceptical approach of Oehler, D., Internationales Strafrecht, 2nd edn. (Cologne, Heymann 1983) para. 148Google Scholar

For a comprehensive assessment see ‘Final Report on the Exercise of Universal Jurisdiction in Respect of Gross Human Rights Offences’ (2000) by the ILA-Committee on International Human Rights Law and Practice (available at: <http://www.ila-hq.org>).

79. Doubts concerning the exact position of piracy are raised by , Verhoeven, loc. cit. n. 39, at p. 313.Google Scholar

80. The common text of the relevant articles of all of the Conventions is reproduced in Harris, D.J., Cases and Materials on International Law, 5th edn. (London, Sweet and Maxwell 1998) p. 289.Google Scholar

81. Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs (1961), 520 UNTS p. 204.Google Scholar

82. International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (1973), 1015 UNTS p. 243, Art. V.Google Scholar

83. Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons Including Diplomats (1973), 1035 UNTS p. 167, Art. 7.Google Scholar

84. Hague Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft (1970), 860 UNTS p. 105, Art. 7.Google Scholar

85. Montreal Convention, supra n. 14, Art. 7.

86. International Convention against the Taking of Hostages (1979), 18 ILM (1919) p. 456, Art. 8.Google Scholar

87. See supra n. 20, Art. 7.

Brownlie, I., Principles of Public International Law, 5th edn. (Oxford, Clarendon Press 1998) pp. 307Google Scholar et seq. differentiates between the universality principle and crimes under international law. The effect, i.e., the opportunity to prosecute without any other ground of jurisdiction, is identical. For a thorough historical analysis see Randall, K.C., ‘Universal Jurisdiction Under International Law’, 66 Tex. L Rev. (1986) p. 785 at pp. 791 etseq.Google Scholar

88. , Barboza, loc. cit. n. 71, at pp. 186 et seq., and Pinochet No. 3, supra n. 2, at pp. 601 et seq. per Lord Goff (diss. op.).Google Scholar

89. Cf., Pinochet No. 1, supra n. 2, at p. 1309 per Lord Slynn (diss. op), p. 1323 per Lord Lloyd (diss. op.), p. 1333 per Lord Nicholls, and p. 1337 per Lord Steyn, and Pinochet No. 3, supra n. 2, at p. 593 per Lord Browne-Wilkinson, p. 629 per Lord Hutton, and pp. 645–647 per Lord Millett.

90. Cf., also , Bianchi, loc. cit. n. 5, at p. 271.Google Scholar

91. , Denza, loc. cit. n. 44, at p. 952.Google Scholar

92. Independent of individual responsibility: , Gornig, op. cit. n. 42, at p. 483.Google Scholar

93. Cf., the analysis by Koskenniemi, M., From Apology to Utopia (Helsinki, Finnish Laywers’ Publishing Company 1989) pp. 192Google Scholar et seq. Cf., also generally Chayes, A. and Chayes, A. Handler, The New Sovereignty (Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press 1995).Google Scholar

94. Tomuschat, C., ‘Die internationale Gemeinschaft’, 33 Archiv des Völkerrechts (1995) p. 1.Google Scholar

95. Cf., Abi-Saab, G., ‘Whither the International Community?’, 9 EJIL (1998) p. 248;CrossRefGoogle ScholarSimma, B. and Paulus, A., ‘The “International Community”: Facing the Callenge of Globalization’, idem, at p. 266.Google Scholar

96. 1155 UNTS p. 331.

97. For a comprehensive overview, see Fassbender, B., ‘The United Nations Charter as Constitution of the International Community’, 36 Colum. J Transnat'l L (1998) p. 529 at pp. 538 et seq.Google Scholar

98. Charney, J.I., ‘Universal International Law’, 87 AJII (1993) p. 529;Google ScholarTomuschat, C., ‘Obligations Arising for States without or against their Will’, 241 RdC (1993–IV) p. 195 at pp. 275 et seq.Google Scholar

99. Delbrück, J., ‘Wirksameres Völkerrecht Oder neues Weltinnenrecht?, in Dicke, K., et al. , eds., Die Konstitution des Friedens als Rechtsordnung (Berlin, Duncker und Humblot 1996) p. 318 at pp. 344 and 348;Google ScholarSimma, B., ‘From Bilateralism to Community Interest in International Law’, 250 RdC (1994–VI) p. 21 at pp. 235 et seq.Google Scholar

100. Cf., , Dominicé, loc. cit. n. 50, at p. 305;Google Scholar, Gornig, op. cit. n. 42, at p. 481.Google Scholar

101. In that sense: Pinochet No. l, supra n. 2, at p. 1312 per Lord Slynn (diss. op.), Pinochet No. 3, supra n. 2, at p. 599 per Lord Goff (diss. op.).

102. Cf., Chibundu, , loc. cit. n. 52, at p. 1079;Google Scholar, Rensmann, loc cit. n. 54, at p. 273;Google Scholar, Wedgwood, loc. cit. n. 7, at p. 834.Google Scholar For the concept of decentralized enforcement see in general T. Stein, ‘Decentralized International Law Enforcement: The Changing Role of the State as Law Enforcement Agent’, in Delbrück, J., ed., Allocation of Enforcement in the International System (Berlin, Duncker und Humblot 1995) p. 107.Google Scholar

103. Cf., Pinochet No. 3, supra n. 2, at pp. 590 et seq. per Lord Browne-Wilkinson; , Cosnard, loc. cit. n. 49, at p. 317;Google Scholar, Craig Barker, loc. cit. n. 45, at p. 943, who rightly stresses that only official acts can lie at the basis of state responsibility.Google Scholar

104. Bradley and Goldsmith, , loc. cit. n. 6, at pp. 2144Google Scholar et seq.; Brö, hmer, loc. cit. n. 59, at p. 234;Google Scholar, Fox, loc. cit. n. 5, at p. 700Google Scholar, , Wedgwood, loc. cit. n. 7, at p. 841Google Scholar, and also Bothe, M., ‘Die strafrechtliche Immunität fremder Staatsorgane’, 31 ZaöRV (1971) p. 246 at p. 262.Google Scholar But see Ambos, K., ‘Der Fall Pinochet und das anwendbare Recht’, 54 Juristenzeitung (1999) p. 16 at p. 23.Google Scholar

105. Scelle, G., Manuel élémentaire de droit international public (Paris, Domat-Montchrestien 1943) p. 22.Google Scholar

106. See supra n. 27.

107. See Charney and Tomuschat, loc. cit. n. 98.

108. Cf., Pinochet No. 3, supra n. 2, at p. 594 per Lord Browne-Wilkinson.

109. See Hannikainen, L., Peremptory Norms (Jus Cogens) in International Law (Helsinki, Finnish Lawyers’ Publishing Company 1988) pp. 425 et seq.;Google ScholarKadelbach, S., Zwingendes Volkerrecht (Berlin, Duncker und Humblot 1992) pp. 306 et seq.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

110. On the review process in general see Crawford, J., ‘Revising the Draft Articles on State Responsibility’, 10 EJIL (1999) p.425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

111. On the discussion within the ILC see Gaja, G., ‘Should All References to International Crimes Disappear from the ILC Draft Articles on State Responsibility?’, 10 EJIL (1999) p. 365;CrossRefGoogle ScholarPellet, A., ‘Can a State Commit a Crime? Definitely, Yes!’, idem, at p. 425.Google Scholar

112. ILC, Report on the Work of Us Fifty-second Session (New York, United Nations 2000)Google Scholar Supplement No.10 (A/55/10), Annex after para. 405 and para. 358 of the report. The ILC is about to finish the second reading during its fifty-third session in summer 2001: Crawford, J., Bodeau, P. and Peel, J., ‘The ILC's Draft Articles on State Responsibility: Toward Completion of a Second Reading’, 94 AJIL (2000) p. 660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

113. Cf., the explanation by Tams, C.J., ‘Die Tatigkeit der International Law Commission im Jahre 2000’, 43 GYIL (2000) p. 402 at pp. 408 et seq.Google Scholar

114. , Crawford, loc. cit. n. 112, at p. 673.Google Scholar It is subject to debate whether this might include punitive damages: , Tams, op. cit. n. 113, at p. 410.Google Scholar

115. , Tams, op. cit. n. 113, at p. 417.Google Scholar

116. Cf., also Art. 42(3) which provides that Art. 42 is without any prejudice to other consequences under international law.

117. The relationship between ius cogens and erga omnes rules is an extremely difficult one: Byers, M., Custom, Power and the Power of Rules (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press 1999) p. 197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

118. Very strong argument in Horwitz, J., ‘Regina v. Bartle and the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Others Ex Parte Pinochet: Universal Jurisdiction and Sovereign Immunity for Jus Cogens Violations’, 23 Fordham ILJ (1999) p. 489 at pp. 521 et seq.Google Scholar

119. Kelley, G. A., ‘Does Customary International Law Supersede a Federal Statute?’, 37 Colum. JIL (1999) p. 507 at pp. 519 et seq.Google Scholar

120. Prosecutor v. Furundzija, ICTY, Case 17–95–17/1-T, para. 155.

121. Idem, at para 157. See also Pinochet No. 3, supran 2, at p. 589 per Lord Browne-Wilkinson; , Ambos, loc. cit. n. 104, at p. 22.Google Scholar

There is no allusion to ius cogens in Demjanjuk v. Petrovsky (1985), 603 F. Supp. 1468; 776 F. 2d 571, though this is often alleged.

122. Byers, . op. cit. n. 117, at p. 193Google Scholar; Cf., ingeneral Degan, V.D., Sources of International Law (The Hague, Nijhoff 1997) p. 219.Google Scholar

123. Gerechtshof Amsterdam, supra n. 28.

124. But cf., the suggestion by , Craig Barker, loc. cit. n. 45, at p. 949.Google Scholar

125. Cf., Degan, , op. cit. n. 122, at p. 149;Google ScholarMendelson, M.H., ‘The Formation of Customary International Law’, 272 RdC (1998) p. 155 at p. 198Google Scholar, and Verdross, A. and Simma, B., Universelles Völkerrecht, 3rd edn. (Berlin, Duncker und Humblot 1984) para. 584CrossRefGoogle Scholar, as opposed to Strupp, K., ‘Les règies générales du droit de la paix’, 47 RdC (1934) p. 257 at pp. 313–315Google Scholar, and Berber, , op. cit. n. 57, at para. 5, pp. 44 et seq.Google Scholar

126. Verdross and Simma, op. cit. n. 125, at para. 622 (including fn. 14); , Watts, loc. cit. n. 45, at p. 37.Google Scholar

127. , Mendelson, loc. cit. n. 125, at p. 200.Google Scholar

128. Cf., Verdross and Simma, op. cit. n. 125, at para. 563.

129. Starting point: H. Lauterpacht, ‘Survey of International Law in Relation to the Work of Codification of the International Law Commission’, UN Doc. A/CN.4/1/Rev. 1, paras. 27 et seq. (reprinted in Lauterpacht, E., ed., International Law Being the Collected Papers of Hersch Lauterpacht, Vol. 1 (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press 1970) pp. 469 et seq.).Google Scholar

130. Schröder, op. cit. n. 70, at para. 34.

131. See in particular Aceves, W.J., ‘’Liberalism and International Legal Scholarship: The Pinochet Case and the Move toward a Universal System of Transnational Law Litigation’, 41 Harv. ILJ (2000) p. 129 at pp. 160 et seq. in particular;Google Scholar, Chibundu, loc. cit. n. 52, at p. 1072. On the concept of transnational law litigationGoogle Scholar see generally Koh, H.H., ‘Transnational Public Law Litigation’ 100 Yale LJ (1991) p. 2347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

132. , Aceves, loc. cit. n. 131, at p. 137.Google Scholar See also , Bröhmer, loc. cit. n. 59, at p. 237: ‘… significant piece of state practice elevating the sovereignty of the individual …’Google Scholar

133. , Aceves, loc. cit. n. 131, at p. 134.Google Scholar

134. Lutz and Sikkink, loc. cit. n. 24, sub I A.

135. , Aceves, loc. cit. n. 131, at pp. 138 et seq.Google Scholar

136. Cf., Brownlie, op. cit. n. 87, at pp. 46 et seq.

137. Pinochet No. 3, supra n. 2, at p. 595 per Lord Browne-Wilkinson, pp. 621–626 per Lord Hope, p. 641 per Lord Hutton, and p. 643 per Lord Saville. Cf., , Bianchi, loc. cit. n. 5, at p. 243.Google Scholar

138. Cf., Villalpando, S., ‘L'affaire Pinochet: Beaucoup de bruit pour rien? L'apport au droit international de la decision de la Chambre des Lords du 24 mars 1999’, 104 RGDIP (2000) p. 393 at pp. 404 and 411.Google Scholar

139. Gormley, L. W., Kapteyn, P.J.G. and VerLoren, P. van , Themaat, Introduction to the Law of the European Communities, 3rd edn. (The Hague, Kluwer Law International 1998) pp. 525 et seq.;Google ScholarRuffert, M., in Calliess, C. and Ruffert, M., eds., Kommentar zum Vertrag über die Europaöische Union und zum Vertrag zur Gründung der Europöischen Gemeinschaft – EUV/EGV (Neuwied, Luchterhand 1999) Art. 249 EGV, paras. 17 et seq.Google Scholar

140. Cf., the famous dichotomy established by Koskenniemi, op. cit. n. 93.

141. See the press release by Human Rights Watch, supra n. 24.

142. It should be noted that there are also proceedings against Habré in Belgium; cf., ‘Hissène Habré fait 1'objet d'une plainte en Belgique pour crimes centre l'humanité’, available at: <http://www. diplomatiejudiciaire.com/Habre.html>.

143. A different opinion taken by , Cosnard, loc. cit. n. 49, at p. 323;Google Scholar, Mahmoud, loc. cit. n. 5, at p. 1026 (but see also p. 1039, where he underlines the factual impossibility to prosecute rather than legal obstacles);Google ScholarStern, B., ‘La compétence universelle en France: Le cas des crimes commis en ex-Yougoslavie et en Rwanda’, 40 GYIL (1997) p. 280Google Scholar at p. 283. Cf., also Randall, , loc. cit. n. 87, at pp. 808, 818 and 840.Google Scholar

The Gerechtshof Amsterdam appears to follow the Belgian standpoint in the Bouterse case: Gerechtshof, supra n. 25, sub 5. 4.

144. This factual assessment might allay the fear of disorder as formulated by d'Argent, loc. cit. n. 37, at p. 555.

145. Cf., , Watts, loc. cit. n. 45, at p. 111.Google Scholar

146. ICJ, Case Concerning the Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (Democratic Republic of Congo v. Belgium), Provisional Measures, Order of 8 December 2000 (available at: <www.icj-cij.org>), paras. 51 and 72.

147. ICJ, supra n. 146, at para. 56.

148. 630 F. 2d 876 (2nd Cir. 1980).

149. United States v. Noriega, supra n. 15, at pp. 1211 et seq.

150. There are now criminal proceedings against Pinochet in Chile: Kirgis, F.L., ASIL Insight December 2000, available at: <http://www.asil.org/insights/insigh58.htm>;;>Google ScholarPenrose, M.M., ‘It's Good to Be the King!: Prosecuting Heads of State and Former Heads of State under International Law’, 39 Col. J Tranat'l L (2000) p. 193 at p. 203.Google Scholar

151. Argentine Republic v. Amerada Hess Shipping Corp., 488 US 428 at 438 (1989). This applies also to torture: Saudi Arabia v. Nelson, 507 US 349 at 361 (1993). See , Bröhmer, loc. cit. n. 53, at pp. 46 et seq.Google Scholar

152. Supra n. 61.

153. See the assessment by , Bradley and , Goldsmith, loc. cit. n. 6, at pp. 2166 et seq.Google Scholar

154. Lafontant v. Aristide, 844 F. Supp. 128 at 137 (E.D.N.Y. 1994); Jungquist v. Nahyan, 940 F. Supp. 312 at 321 (D.D.C. 1996); First American Corp. v. Al-Nahyan, 948 F. Supp. 1107 at 1121 (D.D.C. 1996).

155. See supra n. 34.

156. There is, however, no way to deny Mugabe's position as head of state, as this could be held with respect to Noriega in United States v. Noriega, supra n. 15, at p. 1212.

157. , Sears, op. cit. n. 67, at p. 146.Google Scholar

158. See also , Gornig, op. cit. n. 42, at p. 485.Google Scholar

159. Paraguay's former dictator Alfredo Stroessner might be added to the list eventually, as Paraguay may request his extradition from Brazil where he is actually exiled: Rohter, L., New York Times, 8 June 2001, available at Westlaw.Google Scholar

160. Byers, M., ‘The Law and Politics of the Pinochet Case’, 10 Duke J Comp. and Int'l L (2000) p. 415Google Scholar at p. 416 and passim, Cosnard, , loc. cit. n. 49, at p. 311.Google ScholarVery sceptical J.-Y. deCara, ‘L'affaire Pinochet devant la Chambre des Lords’, 45 AFDl (1999) p. 72 at pp. 99 et seq.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

161. Cf., Cassese, A., International Law in a Divided World (Oxford, Clarendon Press 1986)Google Scholar para. 13.