M. Cherif Bassiouni

International Crimes: Jus Cogens and Obligatio Erga Omnes

International crimes that rise to the level of jus cogens constitute obligatio erga omnes which are inderogable. Legal obligations which arise from the higher status of such crimes include the duty to prosecute or extradite, the nonapplicability of statutes of limitations for such crimes, the non-applicability of any immunities up to and including Heads of State, the non-applicability of the defense of “obedience to superior orders” (save as mitigation of sentence), the universal application of these obligations whether in time of peace or war, their non-derogation under “states of emergency,” and universal jurisdiction over perpetrators of such crimes.

Crimes against humanity in international criminal law

Preface. Acknowledgments. Introduction. Table of Abbreviations. 1. Emergence in Positive International Criminal Law. 2. Sources: The Law of Armed Conflicts. 3. Threshold Issues of Legal Philosophy. 4. Principles of Legality and the Law of the Charter. 5. Post-Charter Legal Developments. 6. The International or Jurisdictional Element. 7. The Method of Identifying Specific Contents and the Contents of the Specific Crimes Formulated in the Charter and in Subsequent Formulations. 8. Ratione Personae and Elements of Criminal Responsibility. 9. Defenses and Exonerations. 10. Individual Criminal Responsibility and International Prosecutions. Concluding Assessment.

Aut dedere aut judicare: The Duty to Extradite or Prosecute in International Law

Preface. Part I: The Duty to Extradite or Prosecute as a Rule of Conventional and Customary International Law:- 1. Introduction: The Principle aut dedere aut judicare. 2. The Principle in International Conventions. 3. The Case for Customary Status. 4. The Principle aut dedere aut judicare and the Hypothesis of a civitas maxima. 5. Evidence of Customary Status. 6. The Principle as a Rule of jus cogens. Part II: International Criminal Law Conventions Establishing a Duty to Extradite or Prosecute:- Introductory Note. A: Substantive Conventions. 1. The Prohibition against Aggression. 2. War Crimes. 3. Unlawful Use of Weapons. 4. Crimes against Humanity. 5. The Prohibition against Genocide. 6. Racial Discrimination and Apartheid. 7. Slavery and Related Crimes. 8. The Prohibition against Torture. 9. Unlawful Human Experimentation. 10. Piracy. 11. Aircraft Hijacking and Related Offenses. 12. Crimes against the Safety of International Maritime Navigation. 13. Use of Force against Internationally Protected Persons. 14. Taking of Civilian Hostages. 15. Drug Offenses. 16. International Traffic in Obscene Publications. 17. Protection of National and Archaeological Treasures. 18. Environmental Protection. 19. Theft of Nuclear Materials. 20. Unlawful Use of the Mails. 21. Interference with Submarine Cables. 22. Counterfeiting. 23. Corrupt Practices in International Commercial Transactions. 24. Mercenarism. B: Procedural Conventions. 1. United Nations. 2. Council of Europe. 3. Organization of American States. List of Documents Discussed.

Former Yugoslavia: Investigating Violations of International Humanitarian Law and Establishing an International Criminal Tribunal

This Article retraces some of the historic initiatives that have sought to establish a permanent international criminal court and focuses on the contemporary experience of the Commission of Experts Established Pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780 and the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. More particularly, it reflects upon the problems of investigating and prosecuting violations of international humanitarian law, and the interaction between pursuing an international criminal justice goal and political settlements of international disputes. FORMER YUGOSLAVIA: INVESTIGATING VIOLATIONS OF INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW AND ESTABLISHING AN INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL M. Cherif Bassiouni* To criticize is to serve justice.

Introduction to International Criminal Law, 2nd Revised Edition

Written by one of the worlds pioneers and leading authorities on international criminal law, this text book covers the history, nature, and sources of international criminal law; the ratione personae; ratione materiae--sources of substantive international criminal law; the indirect enforcement system; the direct enforcement system; the function of the international criminal court; rules of procedure and evidence applicable to international criminal proceedings; and the future of international criminal law. This textbook is fully updated, comprehensive, easy to read, and ideally suited for classroom use. Also available as hardback: isbn 9789004264977

International Criminal Law Conventions and their Penal Provisions

This unique and valuable sourcebook in international criminal law includes digests of 320 Conventions with all necessary treaty information; as well as relevant excerpts of the penal provisions in each and every treaty arranged under 25 subject categories with introductory notes. Two indexesa??one arranged chronologically, the other by regiona??are also included. Published under the Transnational Publishers imprint.

The History of the Draft Code of Crimes Against the Peace and Security of Mankind.

Since 1946, the United Nations efforts to codify international crimes and to establish an international criminal court have overlapped, with scant results from either endeavor.The Assembly began its efforts to codify international crimes in its first session when the United States sponsored resolution 95 (I), adopted on December 11, 1946, which affirmed “the principles of international law recognized by the Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal and the judgment of the Tribunal”. Furthermore, the Assembly directed the Committee on the Codification of International Law, the International Law Commissions predecessor, to formulate a general codification of offenses against the peace and security of mankind.In 1947, the United Nations established the International Law Commission (ILC). In a resolution again sponsored by the United States the United Nations directed the ILC to:(a) formulate the principles of international law recognized in the Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal, and(b) prepare a draft code of offenses against the peace and security of mankind, indicating clearly the place to be accorded to the principles mentioned in sub-paragraph (a) above.

Challenges to international criminal justice and international criminal law

In 1950, Professor Georg Schwarzenberger wrote an article expressing his doubts about the existence of international criminal law. In response, Professor Gerhard O. W. Mueller responded that international criminal law exists because it is being taught in universities. The Schwarzenberger approach reflects the positivist school, which in turn incorporates political realism. Thus, international criminal law exists only when States want it to exist. In other words, international criminal law does not exist per se – but only to the extent that States want it to exist and that this is reflected in positive international law. The proponents of the philosophical perspective advance the same claim for international law in general. This is the legacy of the 1648 Westphalian approach, which still lingers on in world affairs. The Mueller approach reflects the natural law philosophical approach, founded on higher values and overarching principles that should control State-action. These opposing views are both, to some extent, correct. Anything international is by its very nature conditioned by State interests and, maybe because of that, is sui generis and mostly ad hoc . But that does not mean that State interests always, and with respect to everything international, are devoid of or not subject to considerations based on higher values and enduring principles. In the course of time, particularly after the Second World War, the establishment of the United Nations and the development of international human rights law, international law has sought to reconcile conflicting and competing State interests while at the same time identifying commonly shared interests that reflect certain higher values and enduring principles. As is evident from what follows, history does not repeat itself; precedents are not comparable and are not necessarily binding upon States’ future conduct. Yet somehow, since 1648, there is evidence that commonly shared values have influenced the collective decision-making processes of States, notwithstanding State interests. In contemporary times, this is evident in matters of international trade and other areas where the common and mutual interest of States exists. In fact, in those areas much progress has been made in collective decision-making. Not so, however, in other areas where such mutuality of interest is evident, as is the case in the fields of human rights, international criminal justice, and international criminal law. By the Mueller postulate international criminal law and international criminal justice not only exist, but by now they are both doing very well.

Islam and Contemporary Radicalized Violence: A Historic Turning Point

Contemporary ideologically-motivated violence, using Islam as a justification, constitutes a new threat to the stability of Muslim states and escalates the confrontation between Islam and the West.1 Whether it will cause regime change in certain Muslim countries and whether it will lead to a clash of civilizations are still to be seen.2 In this writer’s opinion, it will not. Instead, it will wither away like the rise of Marxist/Maoist inspired ideologically-motivated violence in the 1960s and 1970s.3 In this age of globalization, with all which it comports of easy and rapid worldwide transmission of ideas, the violent radicalization of a few Muslims is facing increased opposition from many Muslims.4 This applies to Muslims living in Muslim states as well as non-Muslim states. But the potential for continued violence by different groups in Afghanistan, Egypt, Iraq, Libya, Mali, Nigeria, Somalia, and Syria, as well as by individuals in many more countries, including Western states, is a growing likelihood.

“Terrorism”: Reflections on Legitimacy and Policy Considerations

“Terrorism”1 can be defined as a strategy of violence designed to instill terror in a segment of a population or society in order to achieve a power outcome, propagandize a cause, or inflict harm for a vengeful purpose.2 Both state and non-state actors resort to such a strategy, whether in the context of war or peace. In the case of states, a state can direct terror-violence either against its own population, non-nationals under its control, or the population of another state. Similarly, non-state actors may target individuals or groups within their own state or those of another state, as well as states’ interests.