Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The International Criminal Court’s Libya Case(s)—The Need for Consistency with International Human Rights as to Due Process and the Death Penalty

The International Criminal Court’s Libya Case(s)—The Need for Consistency with International... The icc’s Libya cases raise interesting questions about the icc’s interaction with national jurisdictions that retain the death penalty. In the case against Abdullah Al-Senussi, the icc ruled he could be tried in Libya—his case was ‘inadmissible’—despite Libya retaining the death penalty and despite fair trial concerns. Yet, Rome Statute Article 21.3 directs the Court to be consistent with international human rights. Is it consistent with international human rights to indirectly authorize trial in a country that retains the death penalty, under conditions that cannot guarantee at least core due process protections? This article argues that it is not. Furthermore, this article argues that the Appeals Chamber in Senussi was insufficiently concerned with due process violation in the national jurisdiction—in a situation one could well-anticipate a former high-level regime official would not receive a fair trial post-regime change. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Criminal Law Review Brill

The International Criminal Court’s Libya Case(s)—The Need for Consistency with International Human Rights as to Due Process and the Death Penalty

International Criminal Law Review , Volume 17 (5): 41 – Oct 15, 2017

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/the-international-criminal-court-s-libya-case-s-the-need-for-bUhuel7uj1

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
Copyright © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
1567-536X
eISSN
1571-8123
DOI
10.1163/15718123-01751373
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The icc’s Libya cases raise interesting questions about the icc’s interaction with national jurisdictions that retain the death penalty. In the case against Abdullah Al-Senussi, the icc ruled he could be tried in Libya—his case was ‘inadmissible’—despite Libya retaining the death penalty and despite fair trial concerns. Yet, Rome Statute Article 21.3 directs the Court to be consistent with international human rights. Is it consistent with international human rights to indirectly authorize trial in a country that retains the death penalty, under conditions that cannot guarantee at least core due process protections? This article argues that it is not. Furthermore, this article argues that the Appeals Chamber in Senussi was insufficiently concerned with due process violation in the national jurisdiction—in a situation one could well-anticipate a former high-level regime official would not receive a fair trial post-regime change.

Journal

International Criminal Law ReviewBrill

Published: Oct 15, 2017

There are no references for this article.