Sten Verhoeven

The Prohibition of Genocide as a Norm of Ius Cogens and its Implications for the Enforcement of the Law of Genocide

This contribution aims to investigate how the prohibition of genocide can be easily and more swiftly enforced by focusing on the allegedly peremptory nature of this prohibition. In the first part, it will be demonstrated that genocide, as defined in the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (“Genocide Convention”), is peremptorily prohibited in international law. Secondly, the relation between ius cogens and obligations erga omnes will be established and the practical consequences of this corollary examined. In particular, the focus will be placed on the ability to launch a case against States violating the prohibition of genocide before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and to impose countermeasures.

The International Criminal Court's Office of the Prosecutor: navigating between independence and accountability?'

This contribution critically appraises the institutional position which is held by the International Criminal Courts Office of the Prosecutor. Especially, it will be asked whether and to what extent the latter is « independent » in its activities, or whether and to what extent other actors – both inside and outside the Court – can hamper the Office of the Prosecutors margin to independently manoeuver. Against the background of the debates preceding the Rome Statutes adoption, where it was feared that the Office of the Prosecutor would become an actor that would no longer be controllable by anyone, the logical counterpart of the first question will necessarily need to assess to what extent the Office of the Prosecutor has been rendered instutionally accountable. Throughout, particular emphasis will be put on the oversight which can be exercised by the Pre-Trial Chamber. This, together with other practical factors which can constrain the Prosecutors scope of action, leads to the conclusion that many checks and balances seriously hamper the realities of the theoretical affirmation that the Office of the Prosecutor would be an institutionally independent actor.