Journalartikel

Jahr der Veröffentlichung: 2019

Seiten: 593-616

Zeitschrift: Journal of Conflict & Security Law

Bandnummer: 24

Heftnummer: 3

ISSN: 1467-7954

eISSN: 1467-7962

Open Access Status: Bronze

DOI Link: https://doi.org/10.1093/jcsl/krz028

Verlag: Oxford University Press

Abstract: 
Twenty years after the adoption of the Rome Statute questions concerning complementarity remain. There is no clear indication as to how international involvement would influence the admissibility of a case. One of the responses to human rights violations and possible international crimes that has risen to prominence in the past decades is fact-finding mandated by UN organs. At the same time these mechanisms have started to incorporate a focus on issues of international criminal law and individual criminal responsibility. As these mechanisms are starting to attempt to resemble a criminal investigation in some regards the question starts to rise as to what effect an international fact-finding mechanism can have on the admissibility of a case before the International Criminal Court. This article explains how these mechanisms need to be viewed in the context of the complementarity-regime of the Rome Statute.

Harvard-Zitierstil: de Vries, B. (2019) Could International Fact-Finding Missions Possibly Render a Case Inadmissible for the ICC? Remarks on the Ongoing Attempts to Include International Criminal Law in Fact-finding, Journal of Conflict & Security Law, 24(3), pp. 593-616. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcsl/krz028

APA-Zitierstil: de Vries, B. (2019). Could International Fact-Finding Missions Possibly Render a Case Inadmissible for the ICC? Remarks on the Ongoing Attempts to Include International Criminal Law in Fact-finding. Journal of Conflict & Security Law. 24(3), 593-616. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcsl/krz028