Assessing the African Union Concerns about Article 16 of the Rome State of the International Criminal Court

C. Jalloh, Dapo Akande, M. du Plessis
{"title":"Assessing the African Union Concerns about Article 16 of the Rome State of the International Criminal Court","authors":"C. Jalloh, Dapo Akande, M. du Plessis","doi":"10.1163/170873811X563947","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article assesses the African Union’s (AU) concerns about Article 16 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC). It seeks to articulate a clearer picture of the law and politics of deferrals within the context of the AU’s repeated calls to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC, or the Council) to invoke Article 16 to suspend the processes initiated by the ICC against President Omar Al Bashir of Sudan. The UNSC’s failure to accede to the AU request led African States to formally withhold cooperation from the ICC in respect to the arrest and surrender of the Sudanese leader. Given the AU’s continued concerns, and the current impasse, fundamental questions have arisen about the Council’s authority to exercise, or not exercise, its deferral power. This culminated into a November 2009 African proposal for an amendment to the Rome Statute to empower the UN General Assembly to act should the UNSC fail to act on a deferral request after six months. Although ICC States Parties have so far shown limited public support for the AU’s proposed amendment to the deferral provision, this article examines its merits because a failure to engage the “Article 16 problem” could impact international accountability efforts in the Sudan, and further damage the ICC’s credibility in Africa. This unresolved issue also has wider significance given that the matters underlying the tension – how ICC prosecutions may be reconciled with peacemaking initiatives and the role and power of the Council in ICC business – will likely arise in future situations from around the world.","PeriodicalId":106035,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights & the Global Economy eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"52","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Rights & the Global Economy eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/170873811X563947","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 52

Abstract

This article assesses the African Union’s (AU) concerns about Article 16 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC). It seeks to articulate a clearer picture of the law and politics of deferrals within the context of the AU’s repeated calls to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC, or the Council) to invoke Article 16 to suspend the processes initiated by the ICC against President Omar Al Bashir of Sudan. The UNSC’s failure to accede to the AU request led African States to formally withhold cooperation from the ICC in respect to the arrest and surrender of the Sudanese leader. Given the AU’s continued concerns, and the current impasse, fundamental questions have arisen about the Council’s authority to exercise, or not exercise, its deferral power. This culminated into a November 2009 African proposal for an amendment to the Rome Statute to empower the UN General Assembly to act should the UNSC fail to act on a deferral request after six months. Although ICC States Parties have so far shown limited public support for the AU’s proposed amendment to the deferral provision, this article examines its merits because a failure to engage the “Article 16 problem” could impact international accountability efforts in the Sudan, and further damage the ICC’s credibility in Africa. This unresolved issue also has wider significance given that the matters underlying the tension – how ICC prosecutions may be reconciled with peacemaking initiatives and the role and power of the Council in ICC business – will likely arise in future situations from around the world.
评估非洲联盟对国际刑事法院罗马国第16条的关切
本文评估了非洲联盟(AU)对《国际刑事法院罗马规约》(ICC)第16条的关切。在非盟一再呼吁联合国安理会(UNSC)援引第16条,暂停国际刑事法院针对苏丹总统奥马尔·巴希尔(Omar Al Bashir)发起的诉讼程序的背景下,该报告试图更清晰地阐明延期的法律和政治图景。联合国安理会没有同意非盟的要求,导致非洲国家在逮捕和交出苏丹领导人的问题上正式拒绝与国际刑事法院合作。鉴于非盟的持续关切和目前的僵局,安理会是否有权行使或不行使其延期权力的根本问题已经出现。2009年11月,非洲提议修改《罗马规约》,授权联合国大会在安理会六个月后未能就延期请求采取行动的情况下采取行动。尽管国际刑事法院缔约国迄今为止对非盟提出的延期条款修正案表示有限的公开支持,但本文将探讨其优点,因为未能解决“第16条问题”可能会影响在苏丹的国际问责努力,并进一步损害国际刑事法院在非洲的信誉。这一尚未解决的问题也具有更广泛的意义,因为造成紧张局势的问题- -国际刑事法院的起诉如何与缔造和平的倡议相协调以及安理会在国际刑事法院事务中的作用和权力- -很可能在世界各地的未来局势中出现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信