IHL and ICL Past Paper PDF

Week 1 Friday, September 6, 2024 1:05 PM **Introduction to the historic foundations of IHL and ICL** **What is IHL** - It\'s part of international law - Set of rules which limit the conduct and effect of armed conflict in order to reduce the suffering. - Jus ad bellum (in the UN...

Week 1 Friday, September 6, 2024 1:05 PM **Introduction to the historic foundations of IHL and ICL** **What is IHL** - It\'s part of international law - Set of rules which limit the conduct and effect of armed conflict in order to reduce the suffering. - Jus ad bellum (in the UN charter) (which regulates the resort to armed force) refers to the principle of fighting a war based on precise causes, such as self-defence. On the other hand, jus in bello (the rules applicable in armed conflicts, aka IHL) refers to the principle of fighting a war justly and encompasses standards of proportionality and distinctions between civilians and combatants. - Protects people who are not (any longer) participating - Applies to armed conflict (international and non-international) **Law and War** - The law of war - War itself is not illegal but there are certain ways in which a country can start a war. (Article 51 or 42 of the UN charter) - Paradox of IHL - Blatantly disregarded while it is the most widely accepted body of international law   IHL doesn\'t deal with countries itself but with individuals   **Some history** - Solferino (Henry Dunant)\> ICRC & Geneva Convention (1864) - Law of the Hague (1899 and 1907) v. Law of Geneva - Ius ad bellum v ius in bello (IHL) **WWI and industrialisation** - Chemical warfare **WWII-breakthrough** - GCs (Geneva Convention) 1949 and APs (Additional Protocols) 1977 - Emblem The red cross isn\'t use internationally because of the emotional load it may carry to some countries, as a substitute they use the half crescent   **Basic rules of IHL** - Rules of War - Everyone fighting a war needs to respect IHL, both governmental forces and non-State armed groups. If the rules of war are broken, there are consequences. War crimes are documented and investigated by States and international courts. Individuals can be prosecuted for war crimes.   **How\'s IHL enforced?** - Teach rules to armed forces and general public. - Prevent violations and punish them. - Enact laws to punish war crimes. War crimes can be charged in international law - Tribunals? Sometimes is it necessary to create a tribunal for specific armed conflicts ongoing.   **The history of ICL** WWI led to Nuremberg and Tokyo Tribunals The Nuremberg tribunal was the first tribunal where a certain creation of international criminal law came to be. There was an international agreement made. In the Tokyo Tribunals they charged the highest authorities of China for war crimes. **Reasons** - Tyranny and disregard for human dignity - Overwhelming horrors **Criticisms** - Victor\'s justice - Nullum crimen sine lege (no crime without law) - Nullum poene sine lege (no punishment without law) - Violation of state sovereignty - Use of death penalty - Lack of fair trial rights - Proceedings in absentia   **The present of ICL** - International Law Commission (road to the Rome statute) - Addressing conflicts worldwide with national and international criminal tribunals and courts. - The Hague= city of peace and justice. There is the Peace Palace and ICJ, the ICC was created here because there was enough space there. - Nuremberg, Tokyo, The Hague, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Phnom Penh and back to The Hague (etc).   **What is ICL** Is a subset of international law. Places criminal responsibility on individuals and punishes acts that are defined as crimes by international law. - Those responsible for the most serious crimes of international concern. - Punishes war crimes\> connection to IHL. - Various courts around the world administer ICL and develop it. - National, hybrid, international. - Alternative accountability mechanisms. - IIIM, IIMM, UNITAD. - The mains court for ICL is now the ICC= only permanent court in this field.   What\'s the difference **International Law** **IHL** **ICL** **Human Rights** ---------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Traditionally: states = subjects Individual= subjects Individual= subjects Individual= subjects   Part of public int law Part of public int law Part of public int law Purpose Regulates the conduct of the parties to an armed conflict and the protection of categories of persons/civilians and civilian objects Provides for individual criminal responsibility for serious crimes of international concern Provides for certain rights to which accrue to individuals and groups vis-a-vis their government Main Int instruments: Geneva Conventions (1949) and Additional Protocols (1977) Statue of ad-hoc and hybrid tribunals and the Rome Statue (1998/2002) ICCPR, ICESCR, CERD,CAT,CEDAW, CRC, CMW, CEED, CRPD     Week 2 Friday, September 13, 2024 12:22 PM   **Key principles of IHL**   Content of the Geneva Conventions and the Additional Protocols The Geneva Conventions protect every individual or category of individuals not or no longer actively involved in hostilities: - First Geneva Convention: Wounded or sick soldiers on land and members of the armed forces' medical services. - Second Geneva Convention: Wounded, sick or shipwrecked military personnel at sea, and members of the naval forces' medical services. - Third Geneva Convention: Prisoners of war. - Fourth Geneva Conventions: Civilians, such as: -- foreign civilians on the territory of parties to the conflict, including refugees-- civilians in occupied territories-- civilian detainees and internees-- medical and religious personnel or civil defence units. **The four crimes international criminal law covers** - Genocide - War crimes - Crimes against humanity - Ethnic cleansing **Concepts:** Lex specialis derogat lex generalis (the special law over rights the general law). IHL only applies when there's an armed conflict. ICL interacts retro-active depending on the circumstances. IHL on essence is a set of rules which seeks for humanitarian reasons to **limit the effects** of armed conflict; it **protects** those who are not or no longer participating in hostilities, and it **regulates the means and methods of warfare.** - **International armed conflict (IAC)** - **Non-international armed conflict (NIAC)** - **Simultaneous existence of IAC and NIAC** **Belligerent occupation (ocupacion militar):** a situation when, in during an international armed conflict, a territory, comes under the effective provisional control of a foreign power, even if it is not met with armed resistance. **Where can we find IHL** - Geneva Conventions - Additional Protocols - Specific/thematic treaties - Customary international law (binding for everyone in an armed conflict \> look at the reading from week 2) - Jurisprudence and doctrine - International armed country - Non international armed conflict   - Not the parties themselves exclusively - International community - Authoritative statements ICRC (privately) - Judicial institutions ex. the UN - Military necessity may be defined as the principle that justifies the use of all measures needed. - Military necessity cannot justify departures from the law of war because States have crafted the law of was specifically with war\'s exigencies in mind. In devising law of war rules, States considered military requirements. Thus, prohibitions on conduct in the law of war may be understood to reflect State\'s determinations that such conduct is military unnecessary per se. - Each party (states, rebel, states helping, etc.) to the conflict will be violating international humanitarian law if engaged in any of the following: - Violence to life and persons, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture. - Taking of hostages. - Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment. - The passing of sentences and carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples. =\> minimum guarantee     Week 3 Friday, September 13, 2024 2:06 PM   **The three key principles of IHL**   **The treaty-based sources of IHL** The four Geneva Conventions of 1949 (GC I, II, III and IV), which have been universally acceded to or ratified, constitute the core treaties of IHL. The Conventions have been supplemented by Additional Protocols I and II of 1977 (AP I and AP II), relating to the protection of victims of international and non-international armed conflicts respectively; and by Additional Protocol III of 2005 (AP III), relating to an additional distinctive emblem (the red crystal).   **Customary law as a source of IHL** Customary law as a source of IHL Alongside treaties, customary law remains an important source of IHL. It can fill gaps if treaty IHL is not applicable. Customary IHL is formed by "a general practice accepted as law". In principle, customary IHL binds all states and, in non-international armed conflicts, non-state parties to the conflict.   **When does IHL apply?** IHL governs armed conflict. Apart from a few obligations that require implementation in peacetime, it does not apply outside armed conflict. It applies equally to all sides, regardless of who started the fighting and regardless of motives (jus ad bellum).   **What does IHL cover?** 1. The protection of those who are not, or are no longer, directly taking part in hostilities. The Geneva Conventions regulate the protection and treatment of four categories of persons who are not, or are no longer, directly participating in hostilities, during an international armed conflict: - the wounded and sick in armed forces in the field (GC I) - wounded, sick and shipwrecked members of the armed forces at sea (GC II) - prisoners of war (GC III) - civilians (GC IV) 1. Restrictions on the means of warfare -- in particular weapons -- and the methods of warfare, such as military tactics. IHL prohibits the use of means and methods of warfare that are of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering. IHL regulates the conduct of hostilities on the basis of three core principles: distinction, proportionality and precaution.   **Principles of IHL** 1. **Distinction** - Do not attack civilians unless they are a direct part of hostilities. - Do not attack civilian properties. 1. **Proportionality** 1. **Precaution**   **Definitions** **Military objective** Attacks shall be limited strictly to military objectives. In so far as objects are concerned, military objectives are limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military naturalization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers definite military advantage.   Military is always fair game when choosing whether or not to shoot them. They still contribute to the war and are part of the armed conflict so killing them is fair game but depending not necessarily needed or proportional.   **Who is protected by IHL** - Civilians (everyone who is not a member of armed forces!) - Wounded, sick & shipwrecked - PoWs Religious personnel - Medical personnel - Red Cross personnel - Peacekeeping forces   **What is protected by IHL** - Civilian objects - Hospital and safety zones, demilitarized zones - Neutralized zones - Cultural property - Objects indispensable for the survival of the civilian population - Works and installations containing dangerous forces - Natural environment   **How about children and women** - Children are granted special protection, see GC IV - Prohibition of recruitment of child soldiers and participation in hostilities - Child combatants are entitled to privileged treatment, see AP I (Art. 77) - Women are granted special protection (+ expectant mothers and mothers of small children) - Attack on honour, rape, enforced prostitution and assault are forbidden, see GC IV and AP I - Special consideration while in detention & no death penalty, see GC III, GC IV and AP I   **Cultural property** - War = worst threat for art, culture, monuments and cultural heritage - Cultural property can help in the reconstruction of destroyed communities & facilitate a return to peace - Cultural property is a reflection of identity, of culture and its heritage - 1945 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in Armed Conflict - Protocol I of 1954 Convention -- situations of occupation - 1977 Aps - 1999 Protocol II of 1954 Convention - CIL   **What is direct participation** Direct participation in hostilities consists of specific acts carried out by individuals as part of the conduct of hostilities between parties to an armed conflict.   Constitutive elements of direction participation in hostilities: In order to qualify as direct participation in hostilities, a specific act must meet the following cumulative criteria: 1. the act must be likely to adversely affect the military operations or military capacity of a party to an armed conflict or, alternatively, to inflict death, injury, or destruction on persons or objects protected against direct attack (threshold of harm); 2. there must be a direct causal link between the act and the harm likely to result either from that act, or from a coordinated military operation of which that act constitutes an integral part (direct causation); and 3. the act must be specifically designed to directly cause the required threshold of harm in support of a party to the conflict and to the detriment of another (belligerent nexus).   **IHL compliance** - Obligation to respect and to ensure respect - Dissemination and implementation in national legal order - Bring IHL 'home' - Ratifying/acceding to the treaties - Integrate in domestic law - Integrate in military training, planning and decision-making - States investigating own forces - Military lawyers & penal law - Fact-finding - International criminal liability - Public opinion - ICRC, UN, NGOs, States, civilians   **The role of the ICRC** - Founded in 1863 to examine the proposals made by Henry Dunant (Battle of Solferino) = principle of humanity! - Declare army medical services neutral and give them a distinctive emblem - Form voluntary relief societies to act as auxiliaries to army medical services - ICRC = neutral, impartial and independent humanitarian organization formally mandated by States party to the Geneva Conventions to ensure, among other activities, assistance to, and protection of, victims of armed conflict or other situations of violence - It is the guardian of IHL - Art.5 GCs = "to undertake the tasks incumbent upon it under the GC, to work for the faithful application of IHL and to take cognizance of complaints based on alleged breaches of that law" + "to work for the understanding and dissemination of knowledge of IHL and to prepare any development thereof"   **ICRC at work** So what does the ICRC really do? - Monitoring function -- constant reappraisal of IHL to ensure that this field of law reflects the reality of conflict -\> adapt where necessary - Catalyst function -- stimulate discussion of problems - Promotion function -- advocacy in favour of IHL -- disseminate & teach - Guardian angel function -- defending IHL against legal developments that may counter it - Direct action function -- contributing to the application of IHL - Watchdog function -- raising the alarm bell when serious violations occur   **The basic idea of IHL is simple:** Do not attack civilians, only military objectives The choice of means and methods is not unlimited, do not add unnecessary suffering Protect the victims, treat persons in your power humanely But at the same time, IHL can be very complex in practice.     Readings week 5 Sunday, September 29, 2024 11:27 AM **International Criminal Justice: the institutions** In 1945 the first successful international organs of criminal justice (The Nuremberg and Tokyo International Military Tribunals) were stablished, to address war crimes, crimes against peace and crimes against humanity committed during the Second World War.   The ICC is the first treaty-based, permanent international criminal court established to help end impunity for the perpetrators of the most serious crimes of international concern. Several mixed tribunals, comprising elements of both international and domestic jurisdiction, and special chambers within national courts have subsequently been established to try those responsible for crimes committed in specific contexts.   **The Ad hoc tribunals** **The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY)**, based in The Hague, Netherlands, was established in May 1993 by Security Council Resolution 827. Its jurisdiction was limited to acts committed in the former Yugoslavia since 1991 and covered four categories of crimes (violations of the laws and customs of war, genocide and crimes against humanity).   **The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR)**, with its Trial Chambers based in Arusha, Tanzania, and its Appeals Chamber in The Hague (shared with the ICTY), was established in November 1994 by Security Council Resolution 955. Its jurisdiction was limited to acts committed in Rwanda or by Rwandan nationals in neighbouring States during 1994 and covered three categories of crimes, namely, genocide, crimes against humanity and violations of Article 3 common to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol II, which set out rules applicable to non-international armed conflicts.   The ICTR and the ICTY closed in 2015 and 2017   **The United Nations Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals (MICT)** was created to carry out a number of essential functions of both tribunals as part of their completion strategy. The MICT has jurisdiction to supervise the enforcement of sentences, designate the State in which convicted persons will serve their sentences and decide on requests for pardon or commutation of sentence. In addition, the MICT is responsible for the protection of victims and witnesses in the cases before it and in cases completed by the tribunals.. The MICT also retains jurisdiction over three of the remaining fugitives still wanted by the ICTR.   **Mixed tribunals and special chambers** Established in 2000 pursuant to Security Council Resolution 1315, the **Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL)** had jurisdiction over all violations of Sierra Leonean law and international humanitarian law (IHL) committed in Sierra Leone since 30 November 1996. **The Residual Special Court for Sierra Leone** took over the SCSL's functions after the latter closed in 2013.   The **Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL)** has jurisdiction over the crimes committed under Lebanese criminal law in the attack on the former Lebanese prime minister Rafic Hariri, carried out on 14 February 2005. It is the first tribunal of international character to try crimes under domestic law and to deal with terrorism as a distinct crime.   Special Chambers were established in the courts of East Timor **(Special Panel for Serious Crimes)**, Cambodia **(Extraordinary Chambers)**, Serbia **(War Crimes Chamber)** and Bosnia-Herzegovina **(War Crimes Chamber).** In Kosovo, a hybrid entity known as the **"Regulation 64 panels"**, established in 2000 by the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK, established by UN Security Council Resolution 1244), allowed international judges to serve alongside domestic judges to try crimes under domestic law. UNMIK's involvement with the Kosovo judiciary ended for the prosecution of war crimes, organised crime and other serious crimes under Kosovo law was formally transferred to the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo (EULEX). EULEX war crimes trials in Kosovo are conducted through the ordinary court system by mixed panels of international EULEX judges and Kosovo judges.   In 2016, the Kosovo Specialist Chambers and Specialist Prosecutor's Office (KSC-SPO) based in The Hague. The KSC has jurisdiction over crimes under international and national law. It forms part of the Kosovo judicial system and administers justice under Kosovo law with jurisdiction over war crimes, crimes against humanity, as well as transnational crimes committed or commenced in Kosovo. However, it is independent from, and has primacy over, Kosovo courts. Its judges and staff are exclusively international.   **The International Criminal Court (ICC)** The Statute of the ICC entered into force on 2002 after 60 States became party to it. The ICC is the first treaty-based, permanent international criminal court established to help end impunity for the perpetrators of the most serious crimes of international concern.   **National enforcement systems, state responsibility and the ICC** The ICC is not intended to replace national criminal justice systems but rather to complement them. Nothing in the ICC Statute releases States from their obligations under customary international law and existing instruments of IHL to investigate and prosecute war crimes allegedly committed by their nationals or armed forces or on their territory. States are thus still required to enact implementing legislation giving effect to these obligations.   The ICC\'s jurisdiction is intended to come into play only when a State is unwilling or unable to investigate or prosecute alleged war crimes over whom it has jurisdiction. The ICC is thus intended to be a last resort in the event that a State fails.   **Crimes under the ICC\'s jurisdiction** According to its Statute, the ICC has jurisdiction over aggression, genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. Article 8 of the Statute lists the war crimes over which the ICC has jurisdiction. These include most of the grave breaches listed in the 1949 Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol I. Offences specifically identified as war crimes in the Statute include: - rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy or other forms of sexual violence - conscripting or enlisting children under the age of 15 into armed forces or groups or using them to participate actively in hostilities.   The Statute also contains a number of provisions concerning certain weapons whose use is prohibited under various existing treaties, such as poison or poisoned weapons, asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases and all analogous liquids, materials or devices and, more broadly, weapons and methods of warfare which are of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering.   **General principles of international criminal law** International criminal law is the body of law that prohibits certain categories of conduct deemed to be serious crimes, regulates procedures governing investigation, prosecution and punishment of those categories of conduct, and holds perpetrators individually accountable for their commission.   **Bases of jurisdiction** A State exercises jurisdiction within its own territory. Such jurisdiction includes the power to make law, to interpret or apply the law, and to take action to enforce the law. A number of principles have invoked as the basis for extraterritorial jurisdiction. These are: - The nationality or active personality principle (acts committed by persons having the nationality of the forum State); - The passive personality principle (acts committed against nationals of the forum State); or - The protective principle (acts affecting the security of the State).   Universal jurisdiction is held to apply to the core international crimes, namely war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide.   **Statutory limitations** Time-barring, or the application of a statutory limitation on legal action in the event of an offence, may relate to either of two aspects of legal proceedings. - The time bar may apply to prosecution: if a certain time has elapsed since the breach was committed, this would mean that no public action could be taken and that no verdict could be reached. - The limitation may apply only to the application of the sentence itself: in this case, the fact that a certain amount of time had elapsed would mean that the criminal sentence could not be applied. Most legal systems have time bars for minor offences. But for serious crimes, several legal systems, particularly those based on common law, do not permit a time bar for prosecution. Where it does exist, the time bars are generally very long for the most serious offences and do not apply for certain types of offences   **The absence of statutory limitations for certain crimes in international law** Applies to both prosecution and application of sentences and covers war crimes -- in particular grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions -- and crimes against humanity, including apartheid and genocide, committed in times of war and of peace.   The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) stipulates the non-applicability of statutory limitations for war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide and the crime of aggression (Art. 29).   Several factors have helped bring to the fore the customary nature of war crimes and crimes against humanity and the non-applicability of statutory limitations to them:   - The growing number of States having stipulated the non-applicability of statutory limitations to these crimes in their penal legislation. - The codification of this concept in Article 29 of the ICC Statute, which its drafters considered crucial to preventing impunity for these crimes; - The growing number of States party to United Nations and Council of Europe conventions.   **Forms of criminal responsibility** 1. [Individual criminal responsibility ] 1. [Command responsibility ]   **Immunity** The purpose of immunity is to allow State representatives to effectively exercise their official functions and represent the State in international relations. Two types of immunity have emerged.   - Personal immunity protects the acts of persons essential to a state's administration, whether in their personal or official capacity, for the duration of their term in office. - Functional immunity protects official acts of State representatives carrying out their functions for the State and continues to protect those acts after the end of their term in office.   Immunity thus acts as a procedural bar to the initiation of proceedings against protected persons by foreign jurisdictions; the official's State of nationality may nevertheless waive the immunity.     Week 5 Friday, October 4, 2024 1:27 PM   **The role of the international criminal court** **Crimes covered by the ICC** [Genocide (ICC RS Art. 6) ] For the purpose of this Statute \'genocide\' means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or not in part, a national, ethnical racial or religious group, as such: \(a) Killing members of the group. \(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; \(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.   [Key elements of Genocide] Intent = mens rea - Genocide is distinct from the other crimes as it requires a special intent = dolus specialis - The victim of genocidal acts are singled out not by reason of their individual identity, but rather on account of them being a member of a national, ethnical, racial or religious group - Genocidal intent may be established by circumstantial evidence, as long as it is the only reasonable inference from the totality of the evidence; if no intent -\> no genocide! - \'as such\': the intention must be to destroy the group \'as a separate and distinct entity, and not merely some individuals because of their membership in a particular group\' -\> this is different to persecution! - \'in whole or in part\' - \'protected groups\' - Acts [Crimes against humanity (ICC RS Art. 7) ] I. For the purpose of this Statute, \'crime against humanity\' means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack: \(a) Murder; \(b) Extermination; \(c) Enslavement; \(d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population; \(e) Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law; \(1) Torture; \(g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity; \....persecution, enforced disappearances, apartheid, etc.   [Key elements of CAH] Three main contextual elements: 1. Widespread or systematic attack 1. Directed against a civilian population 2. With knowledge of the attack   [War crimes (ICC RS Art. 8) ] 1. The Court shall have jurisdiction in respect of war crimes in particular when committed as part of a plan or policy or as part of a large-scale commission of such crimes. 2. For the purpose of this Statute, \'war crimes\' means: \(a) Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949,\... \(b) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established framework of international law, \... \(c) In the case of an armed conflict not of an international character, serious violations of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, \... (d)\... does not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence\... \(e) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in armed conflicts not of an international character, within the established framework of international law   [Key elements of war crime] Recall your IHL knowledge! - An armed conflict must have existed at the time when the acts were committed - There is a nexus between the armed conflict and the acts committed - The acts were committed with the awareness of factual - circumstances that established the existence of an armed conflict - Can be implied by circumstances (position of the Accused, news - reporting etc.)   [Crime of aggression (ICC RS Art. 8*BIS*) Not studying it because is too tricky ] 1. For the purpose of this Statute, "crime of aggression" means the planning, preparation, initiation or execution, by a person in a position effectively to exercise control over or to direct the political or military action of a State, of an act of aggression which, by its character, gravity and scale, constitutes a manifest violation of the Charter of the United Nations. 2. For the purpose of paragraph 1, "act of aggression" means the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations. Any of the following acts, regardless of a declaration of war, shall, in accordance with United Nations General Assembly resolution 3314 (XXIX) of 14 December 1974, qualify as an act of aggression: a. The invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another State, or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such invasion or attack, or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State or part thereof; b. Bombardment by the armed forces of a State against the territory of another State or the use of any weapons by a State against the territory of another State; c. The blockade of the ports or coasts of a State by the armed forces of another State; d. An attack by the armed forces of a State on the land, sea or air forces, or marine and air fleets of another State; e. The use of armed forces of one State which are within the territory of another State with the agreement of the receiving State, in contravention of the conditions provided for in the agreement or any extension of their presence in such territory beyond the termination of the agreement; f. The action of a State in allowing its territory, which it has placed at the disposal of another State, to be used by that other State for perpetrating an act of aggression against a third State; g. The sending by or on behalf of a State of armed bands, groups, irregulars or mercenaries, which carry out acts of armed force against another State of such gravity as to amount to the acts listed above, or its substantial involvement therein.   - Art. 1 UNC "suppression of acts of aggression" = primary purpose of the UN - Was included as one of the crimes back in 1998 in the RS -- participants could not agree on a common definition or on the conditions for the exercising of jurisdiction - Art. 8bis RS - Currently 41 States Parties have ratified the Kampala amendment of 2010 (1st Review Conference) - Jurisdiction was activated December 2017 - No current ICC case focusing on this crime   E.g.   **When can the ICC exercise its jurisdiction?** States that become party to the Statute accept the jurisdiction of the ICC in respect of the abovementioned crimes. Under Article 25 of the Statute, the ICC has jurisdiction over individuals, not States, and, unlike the ICTY and ICTR, it does not have primacy over national courts.   **Procedure and evidence before the ICC** The Prosecutor must investigate both incriminating and exonerating evidence equally in order to "establish the truth" as he is required to do under Article 54(1)(a) of the Statute. One particular feature of the ICC is that victims have the right to participate in proceedings and request reparations. They may also present their views and concerns at all stages of the proceedings.   **States and the ICC** States have clear obligations to cooperate with the ICC. These include, where necessary, the enactment of legislation to ensure the collection of evidence and the arrest and transfer of those accused of crimes under the ICC's jurisdiction. In addition, by virtue of the principle of universal jurisdiction, States are themselves obliged to bring persons accused of grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and 1977 Additional Protocol I for trial before their national courts or to extradite them for trial elsewhere, regardless of their nationality and of the place of the offence.   **Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege** Also known as the principle of legality, this principle, which is enshrined in Article 15 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, states that no one may be convicted or punished for an act or omission that did not violate a penal law in existence at the time it was committed. Therefore, the existence of a particular crime depends on the existence of legislation stating that the particular act is an offence.   The purpose of this principle is to ensure that legislation is specific and predictable so that individuals may reasonably foresee the legal consequences of their actions. The ICC Statute contains a specific provision on the principle of legality (Art. 22).   **Ne bis in idem** This Latin maxim enunciates the principle that no person should be tried or punished more than once for the same crime. It ensures fairness for defendants since they can be sure that the judgment will be final and protects against arbitrary or malicious prosecution at both domestic and international level.   It is important to note that the specific application of ne bis in idem at the international level depends upon its formulation in the relevant statutes of international tribunals.   **What is needed to ensure the ICC\'s effectiveness?** - States should ratify the ICC Statute as soon as possible, since universal ratification is essential to allow the Court to exercise its jurisdiction effectively and whenever necessary. - States should carry out a thorough review of their domestic legislation to ensure that their laws and institutions are in compliance with their IHL obligations and that the ICC crimes are integrated into their domestic legislation and tried and punished at domestic level. - States should assist each other and the ICC in connection with proceedings relating to crimes that come under the Court's jurisdiction. This requires the enactment or amendment of legislation to ensure any necessary transfer of those accused of such crimes and of required evidence and information.   **International & Criminal Law** +-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+ | International law | Criminal law | International | | | | criminal law | +=======================+=======================+=======================+ | - Rights and | - Prohibitions | - Imposes | | obligations of | addressed to | responsibilities | | states | individuals | directly on | | | | individuals | | | - Violations are | | | | subject to penal | - Punishes | | | sanction by a | violations | | | State | through | | | | international | | | | judicial | | | | mechanisms | +-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+   **Sources of ICL**    **What are international crimes** - Crimes against humanity - War crimes - Genocide - Crime of Aggression (ICC)   [Genocide (ICC RS Art. 6)] For the purpose of this Statute, \'genocide\' means any of the following acts committed with **intent to destroy, in whole or in part, national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such**: - Killing members of the group - Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group - Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part - Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group - Forcibly transferring children of the group of the group to another group.   [Crimes against humanity (ICC RS Art. 7)] For the purpose of this Statute, \'crimes against humanity\' means any of the following when committed as part of a **widespread** or **systematic attack** directed against any **civilian population**, with knowledge of the attack: - Murder - Extermination - Enslavement - Deportation of forcible transfer of population - Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law - Torture - Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity; - Persecution, enforced disappearances, apartheid, etc.   [War crimes (ICC RS Art. 8)] I. The Court shall have jurisdiction in respect of war crimes in particular when committed as part of a **plan** or **policy** of a **large-scale** commission of such crimes.   I. For the purpose of this Statute, \'war crimes\' means: a. Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 of August 1949 b. other serious violations of the law and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established framework of international law c. In the case of an armed conflict not of an international character serious violations of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions of 12 of August 1949 d. Does not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence e. Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in armed conflicts not of an international character, within the established framework of international law **What is the purpose** +-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+ | Retribution | Deterrence | Incapacitat | Rehabilitat | Denunciatio | | | | ion | ion | n/Education | +=============+=============+=============+=============+=============+ | Necessity | Future-rela | Prevent | Reformation | Opportunity | | of | ted | crimes by | of the | to | | punishment | benefits of | keeping | offender | communicate | | Perpetrator | prosecution | relevant | | with | | focused | | person in | Human | offender, | | | Prevent the | detention | rights | victim and | | | engagement | | element | wider | | | in | Future-look | | society | | | prohibited | ing | | | | | conducted | | | Understand | | | | | | the | | | | | | 'wrongdoing | | | | | | ' | | | | | | | | | | | | Reaffirming | | | | | | norms | | | | | | | | | | | | Educating | | | | | | society | +-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+   **Wider goals** +-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+ | Vindicating Rights of | Recording History | Post-Conflict | | Victims | | Reconciliation | +=======================+=======================+=======================+ | Sense of justice | Truth telling | Societal | | | | Reconciliation for | | Closure | Permanent record of | durable peace | | | crimes | | | ICC | | 'No peace without | | | Writing history?! | justice' Many doubts | | Highly questionable | | | | effect | Highly criticized | | +-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+   **Where are international crimes prosecuted?** 1. International (courts and tribunals) 2. National (domestic courts)   **International criminal courts and tribunals**   **Nuremberg** 24 Nazi leaders were prosecuted by the allied leaders, for crimes of aggression, war crimes and crimes against humanity. 12 were sentenced to death, 3 were acquitted and 7 were sentenced to imprisonment.   **Nuremberg charter\'s principles guidelines for the ICC** - Any person who commits or is an accomplice in the commission of an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefore and liable to punishment. - The fact that a person who committed an international crime acted as Head of State or public official does not free him/her from responsibility under international law or mitigate punishment. - Any person charged with a crime under international law has the right to a fair trial on the facts and law.   **Nuremberg principles** I. Individual criminal responsibility II. International law can criminalise acts III. No Head-of-State immunity IV. No defence of superior orders V. Right to a fair trial VI. Criminalise aggression (cap), crimes against and war crimes VII. Complicity is a crime   **Tokyo** The Tokyo IMT was set up in January 1946 by General Douglas MacArthur. 28 defendants were charged in a trial that lasted 2,5 years. All accused were found guilty, 7 were sentenced to death, 1 to 20 years imprisonment, 1 to 7 years imprisonment, and the rest to incarceration for life.   **Criticism of Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals** - Violation of principle of legality? - Nullum crimen sine lege Nullum poene sine lege - Violation of Doctrine of State sovereignty? - Victors' justice? Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden?     Week 7 Friday, October 18, 2024 12:23 PM **The International Criminal Court I** The International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (MICT) took over the legacy and residual issues of the ICTY and the ICTR.   **Rule Ilbis** The courts of the EU Member State in which the defendant is domiciled will have jurisdiction to hear the dispute, regardless of the defendant\'s nationality.   **Elements of a crime** Article 9. Elements of Crimes Elements of Crimes shall assist the Court in the interpretation and application of articles 6, 7, 8 and 8 bis. They shall be adopted by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties.   **The steps**    **The International Criminal Court II** **The procedure at the ICC** - Preliminary examination → situation →Investigation - Arrest warrant/summons to appear - Confirmation of charges (ICC/ECCC) - Jurisdiction - Admissibility - Trial/case presentation (evidence) - Contextual elements - Specific elements - Individual criminal responsibility - Defences - Verdict - Sentencing - (possible appeal) - Reparations   **Jurisdiction** [Temporal Jurisdiction: Article 11 \'Ratione Temporis\'] 1. The Court has jurisdiction only with respect to crimes committed after the entry into force of this Statute. 2. If a State becomes a Party to this Statute after its entry into force, the Court may exercise its jurisdiction only with respect to crimes committed after the entry into force of this Statute for that State \[\...\].   [Territorial & Personal Jurisdiction: Article 12] 1. A State which becomes a Party to this Statute thereby accepts the jurisdiction of the Court with respect to the crimes referred to in article 5. 2. In the case of article 13, paragraph (a) or (c), the Court may exercise its jurisdiction if one or more of the following States are Parties to this Statute or have accepted the jurisdiction of the Court in accordance with paragraph 3: 1. If the acceptance of a State which is not a Party to this Statute is required under paragraph 2, that State may, by declaration lodged with the Registrar, accept the exercise of jurisdiction by the Court with respect to the crime in question. The accepting State shall cooperate with the Court without any delay or exception in accordance with Part 9.   [Material Jurisdiction: Article 13] The Court may exercise its jurisdiction with respect to a crime referred to in article 5 in accordance with the provisions of this Statute if: \(a) A situation in which one or more of such crimes appears to have been committed is **referred to the Prosecutor by a State Party** in accordance with article 14; \(b) A situation in which one or more of such crimes appears to have been committed is referred to the **Prosecutor by the Security Council** acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations (used very rarely); or \(c) **The Prosecutor has initiated an investigation** in respect of such a crime in accordance with article 15 (proprio motu).   **The principle of Complementary: Article 17** 1. Having regard to paragraph 10 of the Preamble and article I, the Court shall determine that a case is inadmissible where: \(a) The case is being investigated or prosecuted by a State which has jurisdiction over it, unless the State is unwilling or unable genuinely to carry out the investigation or prosecution; \(b) has been investigated by State with jurisdiction and has decided not to prosecute; \(c) ne bis in idem you cannot be tried for the same thing multiple times in multiple levels (Art. 20); \(d) gravity. [A case is inadmissible before the ICC when:] a. National authorities are already dealing with the same case. b. National authorities have investigated the same case and decided not to prosecute. c. The same case has already been prosecuted at the national level.   **Tow-step process** Article 17(1)(C) the national Has the same case been prosecuted at the national level? - usually no need to consider state\'s inability - no need to consider \'delays\' because trial has already taken place - was there intention to shield the Accused or hold a sham trial? -\> potential admissibility - Is it questionable whether the case was conducted - impartially independently? -\> potential admissibility   **Same-case test**  **The principle of Gravity & Interests of justice** - Part of the admissibility test - No common definition - Factors influencing a determination on gravity: - Scale (number of direct and indirect victims; extent of the damage caused; geographical and temporal spread etc.) - Nature (factual evidence etc.) - Manner of commission of the crimes (means employed, systematic, plan or policy etc.) - Impact (vulnerability, terror, social/economic/environmental damage, etc.) - Those most responsible - Can lead to not opening an investigation or declaring a case inadmissible - The threshold his higher at case selection than at the admissibility stage - Focus on the most serious crimes of concern to the international community - Resources **Interests of Justice Art 53 RS** - Can lead to a decision not to proceed with a case - Determined on a case-by-case basis - OTP must inform the Pre-Trial Chamber if decision not to prosecute - Arts. 53(1)(c) and 53(2)(c) balancing test: - Factors to be considered   **Head of State Immunity** IRRELEVANCE OF OFFICIAL CAPACITY - Art. 27 Rome Statute (1): This Statute shall apply equally to all persons without any distinction based on official capacity. In particular, **official capacity as a Head of State or Government, a member of a Government or parliament, an elected representative or a government official** shall in no case exempt a person from criminal responsibility under this Statute, nor shall it, in and of itself, constitute a ground for reduction of sentence. (2): **Immunities or special procedural rules** which may attach to the official capacity of a person, whether under national or international law, shall not bar the Court from exercising its jurisdiction over such a person.       Week 8 Friday, November 8, 2024 12:24 PM   **The International Criminal Court**   **Individual criminal responsibility** **Article 25 of the Rome Statute** a. **Commits** such a crime, whether as an individual, jointly with another or trough another person, regardless of whether that other person is criminally responsible; b. **Orders, solicits and induce**s the commission of such a crime which in fact occurs or is attempted; c. For the purpose of facilitating the commission of such a crime, **aids, abets or otherwise assists** in its commission or its attempted commission, including providing the means for its commission, d. **In any other way contributes** to the commission or attempted commission of such a crime by a group of persons acting with a common purpose→(aim of furthering the criminal activity or purpose made in the knowledge of the internet) e. **Direct and public incitement** to genocide f. Attempts to commit such a crime by taking action that commences its execution by means of a substantial step, but the crime does not occur because of circumstances independent of the person\'s intentions.   **Responsibility of commanders and other supervisors** **Article 28 Rome Statute** a. A military commander or person effectively acting as a military commander shall be criminally responsible for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court committed by forces under his or her effective command and control, or effective authority and control as the case may be, as a result of his or her failure to exercise control properly over such forces, where: - that military commander/person either **knew or** \[\...\] **should have known;** - that military commander/person failed to take all **necessary and reasonable** measures \[\...\] to **prevent** or **repress** \[\...\] or submit the matter to the competent authorities \[\...\]. b. With respect to superior and subordinate relationships not described in paragraph (a), a superior shall be criminally responsible \[\...\] for crimes \[\...\] committed by subordinates under his or her effective authority and control, as a result of his or her failure to exercise control properly \[\...\]: - superior either **knew**, or consciously **disregarded information;** - crimes/activities within **effective responsibility and control** of superior; - superior **failed** to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power to prevent or repress \[\...\] or to submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecution.   **Defences** - General lines of defence: - Denial of involvement - Challenge of interpretation of principles of IL - Challenge of the individual criminal responsibility - Unfit to stand trial - Specific defences - Specific defences - Alibi-not a defence in the strict sense of the word - Insanity (Art. 31(1)(a) RS) - Intoxication (Art. 31(1)(b) RS) - Self-Defence/Defence of Another (Art. 31(1)(c) RS) - Superior Orders (Art. 33(1) RS) - Duress (Art. 31(1)(d) RS) - Consent (Rule 70 RPE -sexual violence) - Mistake of Fact (Art. 32(1)) - Mistake of Law (Art. 32(2))   **Sentencing** - Aggravating factors - Include any fact or circumstance that increases the severity or culpability of a criminal act - Mitigating factors - Are any information or evidence presented to the court regarding the defendant or the circumstances of the crime that might result in a reduced sentence - Important elements - Gravity - Position of the offender   **Victim\'s rights - the needs** - Emotional - Informational - Practical - Medical - Etc - Not homogenous- not one voice **Victim\'s participation- the needs** - Have a say about what happened. Seeking to hold those victimised responsible - Recognise the suffering. Reparation as satisfaction - Experience justice - Reconciliation in affected communities - Promote healing and rehabilitation - Establish the truth - Enhance legitimacy of criminal trial   **Victim\'s participation at the ICC** Article 68(3): Where the personal interests of the victims are affected, the Court shall permit their views and concerns to be presented and considered at stages of the proceedings determined to be appropriate by the Court and in a manner which is not prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial.   Who can be a victim? ICC RPE, Rule 85: - Natural persons who have suffered harm, direct or indirect, as a result of the commission of any crime within the ICC's jurisdiction - Organisations or institutions that have sustained direct harm to any of their property that is dedicated to religion, education, art or science or charitable purposes, and their historic monuments, hospitals or other places and objects for humanitarian purposes - Scope and manner - ICC RS, Article 68(3): - Present their views and concerns where their personal interests are affected - At stages of the proceedings determined appropriate by the court - In a manner which is not prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial - Opening/closing remarks -- oral submissions -- question witnesses -- written submissions (law/fact) -\>(8 modalities -- Rules 91/92/144)   **Victims at the ICC: reparations to victims Article 75 (biggest Human Rights aspect in ICL)** 1. The Court shall establish principles relating to reparations to, or in respect of, victims, including restitution, compensation and rehabilitation. \[\...\] 2. The Court may make an order directly against a convicted person specifying appropriate reparations to, or in respect of, victims, including restitution, compensation and rehabilitation. 3. Where appropriate, the Court may order that the award for reparations be made through the Trust Fund provided for in article 79. [Five general elements that all orders for reparations must include: ] - An order for reparations must be made against the convicted person; - The order must establish and inform the convicted person of his or her liability; - The order must specify the type of reparations that are to be awarded, including whether they will be individual, collective or both; - The order must define the harm caused to direct and indirect victims as a result of the crimes for which the person was convicted and identify the appropriate modalities of reparations (such as restitution, compensation, etc.) based on the circumstances of the case; and finally - The order must identify the victims that are eligible to benefit from the reparations or set out the criteria for eligibility based on the link between the harm suffered by the victims and the crimes for which the person was convicted   **Article 79: The Trust Fund** 1. A Trust Fund shall be established by decision of the Assembly of States Parties for the benefit of victims of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court, and of the families of such victims. 2. The Court may order money and other property collected through fines or forfeiture to be transferred, by order of the Court, to the Trust Fund. 3. The Trust Fund shall be managed according to criteria to be determined by the Assembly of States Parties.   Week 11 Friday, November 29, 2024 12:15 PM **International Criminal Justice in Europe** **How to exercise their own jurisdiction** - Monist: In States with a monist system international law does not need to be translated into national law. The act of ratifying an international treaty immediately incorporates that international law into national law. The ICC Statute, therefore, can be directly applied and adjudicated in national courts. - Dualist: For States with a "dualist system", international law is not directly applicable domestically. It must first be translated into national legislation before it can be applied by the national courts. Therefore, for a dualist State ratification of the ICC Statute is not enough and national implementing legislation is necessary. Examples: [Netherlands (Monist System):] The Netherlands follows a monist approach, meaning international treaties automatically become part of national law once ratified. However, for certain treaties (like the Rome Statute), implementing legislation may still be enacted to ensure alignment with domestic law. Dutch courts can directly apply treaty provisions if they are deemed self-executing---meaning they can create direct rights and obligations for individuals without additional legislation. For instance, the International Crimes Act was passed to align with ICC requirements, even though the Netherlands adheres to a monist system [Germany (Monist System with Constitutional Precedence):] In Germany, international law has a prominent place in the legal order. The German Basic Law (Grundgesetz, Article 25) states that general principles of international law are part of federal law and take precedence over ordinary statutes. Treaties are incorporated into national law once ratified, and they can override conflicting federal or state laws. However, the German constitutional court has reserved the right to examine if EU law or interna​ [Sweden (Dualist System):] Sweden operates under a dualist system, where international treaties do not automatically become part of domestic law. For treaties to take effect, they must be explicitly transformed or incorporated through national legislation. For ratifying an international treaty, the Swedish Parliament must pass corresponding domestic laws to give the treaty legal force within the country​.  **Relationship International and domestic law** - When IL creates obligations for states, states must make sure that national law allows them to comply with these international obligations - Direct application of international rules; or - Implementing legislation - State cooperation - Arrest, surrender, assistance (evidence and witnesses), enforcement of penalties - Problems with extradition and mutual legal assistance; constitutional immunities; - Darfur, Libya, Ukraine - Heavy dependence of international criminal justice upon the cooperation of states and other actors: "giants without arms and legs" (A. Cassese). - Vertical vs. horizontal cooperation - State cooperation is key for effectiveness and ultimately for credibility **Alternatives to International and National Criminal Justice** 1. Amnesties 2. Truth commissions 3. Lustration 4. Reparations and civil claims 5. Local justice mechanisms \*May fulfil similar purposes as trials or purposes trials can\'t cover **Universal jurisdiction** - Provides for a state's jurisdiction over crimes against international law, even when the crimes did not occur on that state's territory, and neither the victim nor the perpetrator is a national of that state (ECCHR) - National courts in third countries can address international crimes occurring abroad - Climax of accountability and preventing immunity -- no borders! - The notion is that certain crimes are so grave that they affect the international community as a whole (Geneva Conventions -\> war crimes) - International legal principle since WWII and has been enshrined in international conventions, such as in the CAT [Mandatory UJ ] States are obliged to investigate (e.g. Treaty CAT) [Permissive UJ] States may choose to investigate [Legislative UJ ] - enactment of national law - necessary basis for investigation and trial - not necessary, courts could directly rely on international law [Adjudicative UJ ] - investigation and trial of alleged offenders - Some member states exercising universal or extraterritorial jurisdiction over war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide: Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Estonia, Finland - Member states exercising universal or extraterritorial jurisdiction over the crime of aggression: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland - Crime of aggression implemented but universal jurisdiction excluded: Germany, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden and Czech Republic **Complementarity (Article 17)** Encourage states to use their own courts and take their own responsibility in issues. Use as a last resort the ICC **EU** The EU views the ICC as a big cornerstone to fight impunity and to help victims of atrocities get their accountability. They believe in the principle of complementarity and the RS **Eu timeline** - 11 June 2001: EU adopts a Common Position on the ICC; reviewed and reinforced on 20 June 2002 and 16 June 2003 -\> Action Plan in February 2004; - In 2010, the EU revised and replaced its Common Position via a Council Decision (21 March 2011) -\> revised Action Plan in July 2011; - EU Focal Point on the ICC established by the EEAS + national focal points; - EU Commission and EEAS developed a 'Complementarity Toolkit' in 2012/2013 - European Parliament has been a very consistent and vocal supporter of the ICC - 2011: resolution on 'EU support for the ICC: Facing challenges and overcoming difficulties' **EU additional support** - 2005: Agreement on cooperation and assistance with the ICC; - 2008: Council of the EU agreed on security arrangements for the protection of classified information exchanged between the EU and the ICC; - 2013: EU MS consider that non-cooperation constitutes one of the most serious challenges to the effective functioning of the ICC -\> 'Information Note on EU's Response to Non-Cooperation with the ICC by Third States';  **EU Actions** - Direct funding for ICC outreach activities, global civil society campaigns and projects to promote the ratification of the RS; - Programmes aimed at improving national justice systems (training & capacity building); - Support for TJ mechanisms and investigative mechanisms; - New project: "Global initiative to fight against impunity for international crimes: make justice work!" - 21 million Euros **EU genocide network** - June 2002: the EU set up the Genocide Network -\> in 2011, a Secretariat was added (The Hague -- Eurojust); - This network includes practitioners who participate in bi-annual meetings; - Aims at facilitating inter-state cooperation and several serious international crimes cases prosecuted by MS; - Facilitates the exchange of information amongst practitioners and encourages cooperation between national authorities in different MS - Knowledge-sharing and best practices - 2014: GN Strategy to combat impunity for the crime of genocide, cah and wc within the EU and its MS'; - 2015: renewed commitment: Conclusions on strengthening the fight against impunity for the crime of genocide, cah and wc within the EU and its MS'. **Eurojust** - Its 'role involves cooperating with practitioners in the field, as well as NGOs and international bodies (e.g. ICC) to ensure best practice and serve as a central hub for information and knowledge-sharing during cases' (Eurojust 2024) - Challenges: - Growing caseload - Complex cross-border assignments - Links with other types of crimes - Need for more cooperation and coordination -\> cohesive strategy