The significance of International Law has developed in an undeniably global world. States and their nationals are interconnected and rely on each other to uphold and follow the universal law to meet normal objectives. On the enormous field of International Law, hardly could we abandon the extremely attractive part called State Jurisdiction. State Jurisdiction is the state’s capacity under International Law to prescribe the rule of laws, enforce the prescribed rules of laws and to adjudicate. Generally, there are four main principles of State Jurisdiction, which includes The Territorial Principle, The Nationality Principle, The Protective Principle, and The Universal Principle . Each of those, of course, asserts the strength and power of each …show more content…
Universal Jurisdiction is the expression "Universal Jurisdiction" alludes to the possibility that a national court may arraign people for any genuine wrongdoing against international law, for example, violations against mankind, war crime, genocide, and torture, in view of the rule that such crimes harm the global community or worldwide request itself, which singular States may act to secure . By and large, Universal Jurisdiction is conjured when other, customary bases of criminal jurisdiction do not exist, for instance: the defendant is not a national of the State, the respondent did not perpetrate a crime in that State's domain or against its nationals, or the State's own national advantages are not antagonistically influenced. The definition and exercise of Universal Jurisdiction shift far and wide. A national or universal court's power to indict people for worldwide violations committed in different regions relies upon the pertinent wellsprings of law and jurisdiction, such as national enactment or a global understanding, which may, for instance, require that only individuals within the country’s national territory be subject to prosecution …show more content…
The 21st century marks an era of globalization, and with the theory of Thomas L. Friedman: “The World is flat”, human kinds can clearly see the way the world change throughout the time . Globalization has been creating thousands of opportunities for all countries all over the world. Friedman once believed that by the end of the 20th century, the globe would turn to the age of Globalization 3.0, which undoubtedly, with the help of technology and agreements between countries, broke down the walls among states, shortened the distance, and brought the human kind closer together*. Although this is an extremely good news, it also brings a terrifying nightmare called “Terrorism”. From my own perspective as well as some documentaries, terrorism can be defined as one of the serious crimes that against humanity and harmful for the international community, and terrorists have been using the change of globalization to spread the fear to the globe. This international crime could be prevented only by the cooperation of all states, and Universal Jurisdiction is one of the effective tools. Each state will have the right to prosecute people who violate the laws of serious crimes no matter where they are . While it would ordinarily be ideal for casualties of grave worldwide violations to discover the change in the courts of the states where the crimes were submitted, universal jurisdiction
Drumbl, M. B. (2007). International Decisions. American Society of International Law , 101 (4), 841-848.
Within the United States’ Criminal Justice System, problems pertaining to jurisdiction issues are quite common due several reasons. The United States v. Thomas J. L Smiley case and the United States v. Jared Lee Loughner case both had jurisdiction issues. Smiley and several other men obtained permission through a license from Mexico to search for treasure on an expedition; the treasure belonged to the steamer Golden Gate, which belonged to the Pacific Mail Steamship Company located within the United States. Ultimately, federal charges were brought upon him from the United States for violating a statue regarding plundering a sunken and/or abandoned ship. In contrast, Loughner had federal charges brought upon him by the United States due to his act a shooting, which resulted in the injuries and deaths of federal officials and employees. Furthermore, both cases involve jurisdiction issues involving the fairest of the trials and the location of the alleged crime; however, they both differ due to the circumstances and nature of the alleged crimes.
This paper explores accusations of selective justice regarding the ICC, made by the African Union. It argues that the ICC can effectively contribute to peace and peacebuilding, so long as it involves a comprehensive approach to international justice that extends beyond criminal trials. The argument is reinforced through utilization of African case studies where the ICC has not been entirely effective. Furthermore a solution focusing on progressive initiatives of restorative international justice is outlined. The African case studies demonstrate a Western centric bias of the ICC; however, the progressive initiatives show a willingness to go forward with international justice and a shift toward a new consciousness. It is imperative that the world recognize the potential for the ICC and exercise patient while its identity and role is established. Key leaders must recognize that the ICC is still in its infancy, having been formed in 2002 (ICC, 2011).
The International Criminal Court’s Roman Statue has many problems but has still managed to gain enough support to act as an international law making body. The International Criminal Court has obtained the support of over a hundred nations, but the unwillingness of the United States to join could jeopardize the effectiveness of the Court. The foundation of the International Criminal Court is set up in the Roman Statue, which was drafted by many countries at a conference in Rome. The Statue states what crimes the Court has jurisdiction over and it explains the structure of the Court. The Statue illustrates that the main goal of the International Criminal Court is to prosecute the most serious international crimes. It is questionable whether the Court is achieving this goal. The Roman Statue restricts the International Criminal Court from prosecuting many crimes because the Court has a strict time frame of when crimes can be tried and limits the amount of countries under its jurisdiction. The United States does not support the content of the Statue and has taken actions to omit themselves from its jurisdiction. These actions could stop the Court from successfully accomplishing their goal. The International Criminal Court is not an effective international organization because of the language of the Roman Statue and its inability to gain essential participation of the most influential nation in the world, the United States, who fears being prosecuted and cannot accept lack of control.
“On November 21, 1947, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted resolution 174 (II), establishing the International Law Commission and approving its statute.”[2] The International Law Commission encourages the development of international law and its codification. The Commission deals primarily with public international law, but also hears private cases as well.[3] International law is applied within an international community, such as the United Nations, and functions to define the proper norms or standards for members to abide by in a collective manner. Examples of such standards could be a ruling on The Universal Declaration of Human Rights or on threats to peace within the International Community.
States ratify human right treaties to enter into agreements and commit each other to respect, protect and fulfill human rights obligations. However, the adherence to human rights treaties is not ensured by the same principle of reciprocity instead to ensure compliance, collective monitoring and enforcement mechanisms were introduced.8 International organizations and treaty ...
The International Criminal Court (ICC) was established by the Treaty of Rome in 1998 and commenced operations in 2002. The significance of the ICC is that it is a permanent international court dealing with individuals who perpetrate international crimes such as war crimes. It can impose penalties ranging from fines to imprisonment. Not all nations have become signatories to the treaty of Rome nor do they consent to the jurisdiction of the ICC, most notably the United States. Accordingly, as it does not have universal jurisdiction and cannot compel extradition, the ICC must rely on the support of signatory nat...
The first element of international law is state practice. There are certain behaviors that are regarded as customs once they are practiced by a substantial amount of states over a prolonged period of time. However, it is important to note that this stand...
Von Galhn and Taulbee. 2013. Law Among Nations. An Introduction to Public International Law. Pearson Education.
Bodin (Jean, 1576) definition, sovereignty may be defines absolute powers to command in a specific state. It is the quality and standard of having complete and independent authority over a particular region or a specific geographical area. The territory must be certain and has clear boundaries or demarcations (Biersteke & Weber, 1996). Thus in simple terms, it can denote the authority, power and mandate to make laws, enforce the laws and rule politically. There has never been a full and all encompassing definition legal definition. According to earliest scholars such as Socrates and Thomas Hobbes linked sovereignty to moral imperative and an entity to exercise it (Boucher, 1994).
International law is a body of legally binding rules that are suppose to govern the relations between sovereign states. (Cornell Law School) In order to be a qualified subject, a state has to be sovereign. To be considered sovereign the state needs to have territory, a population, and a government that is recognized or legitimized to most other states. In the more modern explanation of international law now can include the rights and obligation on intergovernmental international organizations and even individuals. Examples of an international organization would be Greenpeace or the United Nations and an example of an individual would be war criminals, a leader of a state that violated human rights during a time of war. When a dispute arise and cannot be solved amongst the two actors involved they can turn to the U.N. to arbitrate and to the International Court of Justice, one of many courts within the U.N. to find a resolution to their problem. The International Court of Justice’s main task is to help settle legal disputes submitted to it by states and...
Public International law International law contains of rules and principles, which preside over the relations and communication of nations with each other. International Law that is in most other countries referred to as Public International Law concerns itself only with questions of rights among more than a few nations or nations and the citizens or subjects of other nations. In dissimilarity, Private International Law deals with controversies among confidential persons, natural or juridical, arising out of situations having important association to further than one nation. In current years the line up connecting public and private international law have became more and more doubtful. Issues of private international law may also associate issues of public international law and numerous matters of private international law nave considerable meaning for the international group of people of nations. International Law consists of the basic, classic concepts of law in nationwide legal systems, status, property, responsibility, and tort. It also includes substantive law, procedure, process and remedies. International Law is rooted in receipt by the nation states, which comprise the system. Customary law and conventional law are primary sources of international law. Customary international law results when states trail convinced practices usually and time after time out of an intelligence of legal responsibility. Lately the customary law was codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Conventional international law derives from international agreements and may obtain any appearance that the constricting parties have the same opinion upon. Agreements may be complete in admiration to any substance except for to the leve...
Before we delve deeper into this topic, it is imperative to properly provide a definition of sovereignty and lay down some foundation on this topic. There are four different definitions of sovereignty – international legal sovereignty, Westphalia sovereignty, domestic sovereignty and interdependence sovereignty. International legal sovereignty deals with “the practices associated with mutual recognition, usually between territorial entities that have formal juridical independence” (Krasner 4). The main definition of sovereignty that this paper will use is the ...
The international law is the fundamental basis of sovereignty and equality of all states. It promotes peace, order, and justice to the international society. The effectiveness of the international law is also anchored to the international community whether they will follow or not. It is important that international community has rules and obligation to follow in order to prevent chaos in the society. The development of international law led to the understanding of different policies and sanctions for the states. It deals with conflict of the states to relieve destructive conflict. The international law is agreed upon by the international community but there is no enforcing body unlike in the domestic law. State has been relying to treaties and international agreements for the prevention of war.
The International Criminal Court (ICC), located in The Hague, is the court of last resort for prosecution of genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. Its founding treaty, the Rome Statute, entered into force on July 1, 2002. Over the last decade the court has made significant headway in putting international justice on the map. As of June 2015, the ICC had 123 states parties, had opened investigations in eight countries, and had issued three verdicts. But while the ICC is now responsible for international criminal accountability, its daunting mandate and world-wide reach have made the its flaws more visible. The court and its member countries face major challenges in meeting expanded expectations for the court in its second decade.