Abstract
AbstractThe UN Security Council's involvement in the area of international criminal justice raises concerns about judicial independence. Of primary concern in this study is the degree to which this political organ has come to determine and restrict jurisdiction of international criminal tribunals, with the effect of excluding cases involving alleged grave crimes by actors whose presence in situations of which the Council is seized is supported by its permanent members. This control, it will be argued, undermines the basic conditions for a sound administration of justice, as it impedes these tribunals from selecting the cases that may come before them in accordance with respect for human rights and the rule of law. More specifically, restrictions imposed by political organs, leading to unjustified unequal treatment before the law and the courts of perpetrators and victims of grave crime in a given situation, are contrary to principles of equality and non-discrimination. A theory of international judicial independence should therefore extend to a consideration of the legality of such restrictions and acknowledge it as an essential requirement of independence.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Law,Political Science and International Relations
Reference28 articles.
1. The Relationship between the Security Council and the Projected International Criminal Court;Gowlland-Debbas;Journal of Armed Conflict,1998
2. Independent Judges, Dependent Judiciary: Explaining Judicial Independence;Ferejohn;Southern California Law Review,1998–99
3. Evolution and Application of Independence Rules of International Judiciary
4. Legal Equality on Trial: Sovereigns and Individuals before the International Criminal Court;Nouwen;Netherlands Yearbook of International Law,2012
5. The Competence of the Security Council to Terminate the Jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court;Abass;Texas Journal of International Law,2005
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献