Advertisement

The Principle of Universal Jurisdiction

  • Harry D. Gould
Chapter
  • 56 Downloads

Abstract

In Chapter 2 we identified the component practices constituting international punishment: a set of nonvoluntary categorical obligations of universal scope and reach, universal interest in compliance with them, and universal standing to enforce compliance or sanction noncompliance. In Chapter 3 we traced the development of a new conceptualization of categorical obligation befitting the modern Positivist-Voluntarist understanding of obligation. In Chapter 4 we analyzed a sort of obligation that while not in se peremptory is still universally binding and ex hypothesi universally enforceable. Unlike classical punishment, however, these forms of obligation grant at most standing to take legal action and pursue legal vindication of the obligations; they do not entail grounds for the use of force.

Keywords

International Crime Slave Trade Arrest Warrant Universal Jurisdiction Criminal Jurisdiction 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 2.
    Edward M. Wise, “Extradition: The Hypothesis of a Civitas Maxima and the Maxim Aut Dedere Aut Judicare” Revue Internationale de Droit Penal/International Review of Penal Law 62 (New Series) (1991): 109–133;Google Scholar
  2. Colleen Enache-Brown and Ari Fried, “Universal Crime, Jurisdiction and Duty: The Obligation of Aut Dedere Aut Judicare in International Law,” McGill Law Journal/Revue de Droit de McGill 43 (1998): 613–633;Google Scholar
  3. M. Cherif Bassiouni, Introduction to International Criminal Law (Ardsley: Transnational Publishers, 2003), 334–346.Google Scholar
  4. 3.
    Jordan J. Paust et al., International Criminal Law: Cases and Materials 3rd (Durham: Carolina Academic Press, 2007), 155.Google Scholar
  5. Thomas H. Sponsler, “The Universality Principle and the Threatened Trials of American Airmen,” Loyola Law Review 15 (1968): 43–44;Google Scholar
  6. Kenneth C. Randall, “Universal Jurisdiction Under International Law,” Texas Law Review 66 (1988): 788;Google Scholar
  7. Jon B. Jordan, “Universal Jurisdiction in a Dangerous World,” MSU-DCL Journal of International Law 9 (2000): 3–5;Google Scholar
  8. Leila Nadya Sadat, “Redefining Universal Jurisdiction,” New England Law Review 35 (2001): 246;Google Scholar
  9. Bartram S. Brown, “The Evolving Concept of Universal Jurisdiction,” New England Law Review 35 (2001): 383–384;Google Scholar
  10. Luc Reydams, Universal Jurisdiction: International and Municipal Legal Perspectives (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003);Google Scholar
  11. Bruce Broomhall, International Justice and the International Criminal Court (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), 106;Google Scholar
  12. Stephen Macedo, ed. Universal Jurisdiction: National Courts and the Prosecution of Serious Crimes under International Law (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004), 21Google Scholar
  13. Yana Shy Kraytman, “Universal Jurisdiction—Historical Roots and Modern Implications,” BSIS Journal of International Studies 2 (2005): 94–95;Google Scholar
  14. Beth van Schaack and Ronald C. Slye, International Criminal Law and Its Enforcement: Cases and Materials (New York: Foundation Press, 2007), 100;Google Scholar
  15. Alexander Zahar and Göran Sluiter, International Criminal Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), 496;Google Scholar
  16. Florian Jessberger, “Universal Jurisdiction,” in Antonio Cassese, ed., The Oxford Companion to International Criminal Justice (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), 555–558.Google Scholar
  17. 5.
    M. Cherif Bassiouni, Crimes Against Humanity in International Criminal Law 2nd (Dordrecht: Kluwer Law International, 1999), 229.Google Scholar
  18. Wade Estey, “The Five Bases of Extraterritorial Jurisdiction and the Failure of the Presumption Against Extraterritoriality,” Hastings International and Comparative Law Review 21 (1997–1998): 204.Google Scholar
  19. 7.
    Henry J. Steiner, “Three Cheers for Universal Jurisdiction—Or Is It Only Two?” Theoretical Inquiries in Law 5 (2004): 204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 8.
    M. Cherif Bassiouni, “Universal Jurisdiction for International Crimes: Historical Perspectives and Contemporary Practice,” Virginia Journal of International Law 42 (2001): 88;Google Scholar
  21. Christopher C. Joyner, “Arresting Impunity: The Case for Universal Jurisdiction in Bringing War Criminals to Accountability,” Law and Contemporary Problems 59 (1997): 169.Google Scholar
  22. 10.
    Gerhard Werle, Principles of International Criminal Law (Cambridge T.M.C. Asser Press, 2005), 58–59.Google Scholar
  23. 13.
    Willard B. Cowles, “Universality of Jurisdiction over War Crimes,” California Law Review 33 (1945): 188–194;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Madeline H. Morris, “Universal Jurisdiction in a Divided World,” New England Law Review 35 (2001): 339–340;Google Scholar
  25. Michael P. Scharf, “Application of Treaty-Based Universal Jurisdiction to Nationals of Non-Party States,” New England Law Review 35 (2001): 369–370;Google Scholar
  26. Bruce Broomhall, “Toward the Development of an Effective System of Universal Jurisdiction for Crimes under International Law,” New England Law Review 35 (2001): 402;Google Scholar
  27. Antonio Cassese, “Is the Bell Tolling for Universality? A Plea for a Sensible Notion of Universal Jurisdiction,” Journal of International Criminal Justice 1 (2003): 284;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lassa Oppenheim, International Law: A Treatise (8th ed. vol. 1, Hersch Lauterpacht, ed.) (New York: Longman, Green, 1955), 609.Google Scholar
  29. J.L. Brierly, The Law of Nations 6th ed. (Sir Humphrey Waldock, ed.) (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1963), 311.Google Scholar
  30. Georges Abi-Saab, “The Proper Role of Universals Jurisdiction,” Journal of International Criminal Justice 1 (2003): 599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Jörg Kammerhofer, “Uncertainty in the Formal Sources of International Law: Customary International Law and Some of Its Problems,” European Journal of International Law 15 (2003): 534–535;Google Scholar
  32. Ian Brownlie, “Methodological Problems in International Law and Development,” Journal of African Law 26 (1982): 10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Anthony Aust, Modern Treaty Law and Practice 2nd (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 256–261;Google Scholar
  34. Bassiouni, “Enslavement as an International Crime,” New York University Journal of International Law and Politics 23 (1991): 461.Google Scholar
  35. 49.
    Fischer, “The Suppression of Slavery in International Law (1),” International Law Quarterly 3 (1950): 45.Google Scholar
  36. Dame Rosalyn Higgins, Problems and Process: International Law and How We Use It (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994), 58.Google Scholar
  37. Gary Bass, Stay the Hand of Vengeance: The Politics of War Crimes Tribunals (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000), 58–146Google Scholar
  38. Eugene Davidson, The Trial of the Germans: An Account of the Twenty-Two Defendants before the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg (New York: Macmillan, 1966).Google Scholar
  39. Henry T King Jr., “Universal Jurisdiction: Myths, Realities, Prospects, War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity: The Nuremberg Precedent,” New England Law Review 35 (2001): 281–282.Google Scholar
  40. Hannah Arendt, Eichman in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil (New York: Viking Press, 1964);Google Scholar
  41. Gideon Hausner, Justice in Jerusalem (New York: Harper & Row, 1966);Google Scholar
  42. Lord Russell of Liverpool, The Record: The Trial of Adolf Eichmann for his Crimes against the Jewish People and against Humanity (New York: Alfred P. Knopf, 1963).Google Scholar
  43. 82.
    Neil Boister and Richard Burchill, “The Pinochet Precedent: Don’t Leave Home Without It,” Criminal Law Forum 10 (1999): 412–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 84.
    Henley, “Sovereignty, Augusto Pinochet, and Legal Positivism,” Human Rights Review 8 (2006): 72–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lord Millett, “The Pinochet Case— Some Personal Reflections,” in Malcolm Evans, ed., International Law 2nd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), 9.Google Scholar
  46. 89.
    Naomi Roht-Arriaza, “The Pinochet Precedent and Universal Jurisdiction,” New England Law Review 35 (2001): 313.Google Scholar
  47. Antonio Cassese, “When May Senior State Officials Be Tried for International Crimes? Some Comments on the Congo v. Belgium Case,” European Journal of International Law 13 (2002): 856.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 93.
    For a detailed history of changes to the Belgian legislation, see Luc Reydams, “Belgium Reneges on Universality: The 5 August 2003 Act on Grave Breaches of International Humanitarian Law,” Journal of International Criminal Law 1 (2003a): 679–689;Google Scholar
  49. Steven R. Ratner, “Belgium’s War Crimes Statute: A Postmortem,” American journal of International Law 97 (2003): 889–892;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tom Ongena and Ignace van Daele, “Universal Jurisdiction for International Core Crimes: Recent Developments in Belgium,” Leiden Journal of International Law 15 (2002): 696–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Luc Reydams, “Universal Criminal Jurisdiction: The Belgian State of Affairs,” Criminal Law Forum 11 (2000): 186–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. See Malvinia Halberstam, “Belgium’s Universal Juris-dictional Law: Vindication of International Justice or Pursuit of Politics?” Cardozo Law Review 25 (2003): 247–266Google Scholar
  53. Christian Tomuschat and Jean-Marc Thouvenin, eds, The Fundamental Rules of the International Legal Order: Jus Cogens and Obligations Erga Omnes (Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2006), 249.Google Scholar
  54. Steffen Wirth, “Immunity for Core Crimes? The ICJ’s Judgment in the Congo v. Belgium Case,” European Journal of International Law 13 (2002): 883–891;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Maria Spinedi, “State Responsibility v. Individual Responsibility for International Crimes: Tertium non Datur?” European Journal of International Law 13 (2002): 897–899;Google Scholar
  56. Phillipe Sands, “International Law Transformed? From Pinochet to Congo …?” Leiden Journal of International Law 16 (2003): 49–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 113.
    James Crawford, The International Law Commission’s Articles on State Responsibility: Introduction, Text, and Commentaries (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 48.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Harry D. Gould 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harry D. Gould

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations