The Principle of Complementarity in International Criminal Law Mohamed M El Zeidy Biography Mohamed M El Zeidy holds a Ph.D in International Law (2007) and an LL.M in International Human Rights Law (2001) from the Irish Centre for Human Rights, National University of Ireland, Galway He also holds an LL.M in Public Law (1999) from Cairo University, a Licence en Droit and Bachelor of Police Sciences (1993) from the Police College in Cairo He served as a Judge, Senior Public Prosecutor and Public Prosecutor at the Egyptian Ministry of Justice (1997-2007) He is a member of the Egyptian Society of Criminal Law and the International Association of Penal Law He has published widely in the area of International Criminal Law He is currently a Legal Officer at the Pre-Trial Division of the International Criminal Court This work was finalised prior to the current employment at the ICC The views expressed in it not necessarily reflect those of the International Criminal Court or the Egyptian Ministry of Justice The Principle of Complementarity in International Criminal Law: Origin, Development and Practice by Mohamed M El Zeidy leiden • boston 2008 This book is printed on acid-free paper isbn: 978 90 04 16693 Copyright 2008 by Koninklijke Brill nv, Leiden, The Netherlands Koninklijke Brill nv incorporates the imprints Brill, Hotei Publishers, idc Publishers, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and vsp http://www.brill.nl All rights reserved No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Brill provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers ma 01923, usa Fees are subject to change Typeset by jules guldenmund layout & text, The Hague printed in the netherlands Table of Contents Table of Cases ix List of Abbreviations xxvii Foreword xxix Introduction Part A Chapter I: Development of the Law on Complementarity between 1919 and 1937 Peace Treaties during the 20th Century: The Treaty of Versailles Other Peace Treaties: St Germain-En-Laye, Trianon, Neuilly-Sur-Seine, and Sèvres The 1920 Advisory Committee of Jurists The 1922 – 1924 Conferences of the International Law Association 1925 Inter-Parliamentary Union Conference 1926 International Congress of Penal Law 1937 League of Nations Convention for the Creation of an International Criminal Court Concluding Observations Chapter II: The Development of the Law of Complementarity between 1941 – 1998 London International Assembly International Commission for Penal Reconstruction and Development Draft Convention for the Establishment of a United Nations War Crimes Court prepared by the United Nations War Crimes Commission The Nuremberg International Military Tribunal The Principle of Complementarity in the Drafting History of the Genocide Convention The Role of the International Law Commission in the Development of the Principle of Complementarity (1950 – 1994) 11 11 18 26 31 34 38 43 56 59 59 64 70 74 76 83 vi Table of Contents 6.1 6.2 6.3 The 1951 Draft Code of Offences against the Peace & Security of Mankind The 1954 Draft Code of Offences against the Peace & Security of Mankind The 1949 – 1950 Meetings of the International Law Commission Concerning the Question of International Criminal Jurisdiction 6.4 The 1951 Committee on International Criminal Jurisdiction 6.5 The 1953 Committee on International Criminal Jurisdiction 6.6 Draft Code of Offences against the Peace & Security of Mankind (Resumed- First Phase 1983 – 1989) 6.7 Second Phase (1990 – 1994) 6.8 The Final Phase for the Adoption of the Principle of Complementarity (1995 – 1998) 6.9 The 1919 – 1994 Complementarity Models vis-à-vis the Rome Statute Model The Primacy of the Ad hoc Tribunals 7.1 From Primacy to Complementarity 7.2 The Legal Foundation of the Arising Complementarity Models Concluding Observations 84 87 90 92 99 102 109 126 132 137 140 141 152 Part B Chapter III The Principle of Complementarity in the International Criminal Court’s Statute The Rome Statute Complementarity Model 1.1 The Determination of Complementarity under Article 17 1.2 The Criterion of Unwillingness 1.2.1 Shielding a Person from Criminal Responsibility 1.2.2 The Leipzig Precedent 1.2.3 Some Guidelines Reflecting the Notion of Shielding 1.2.4 The Criterion of Unjustified Delay 1.2.4.1 Complexity of the Case 1.2.4.2 The Conduct of the Applicant 1.2.4.3 The Conduct of the Relevant Authorities 1.2.5 The Criterion of Independent or Impartial Proceedings 1.2.6 The Concept of Proceedings in Article 17(2) (a) – (c) 1.2.7 Crimes within the Jurisdiction of the Court versus Not Bringing the Person to Justice The Impact of Human Rights Bodies’ Decisions on Complementarity Determinations The Practice of Self-referrals and Waivers of Complementarity The Criterion of Inability 4.1 Pre-Trial Chamber I’s Approach to Self-referrals and Waivers of Complementarity Coupled with Inability in the DRC Case 4.2 Pre-Trial Chamber II’s Approach to Self-referrals and Waivers of Complementarity in Light of Inability in the Uganda Case Concluding Observations 157 157 158 163 170 172 175 181 187 188 189 195 203 205 207 211 222 228 233 236 Table of Contents Chapter IV: Complementarity – Related Provisions (Articles 18 – 20) Preliminary Rulings Regarding Admissibility in the Rome Statute Complementarity Model Challenges to the Jurisdiction of the Court or the Admissibility of a Case Consequences of Self-referrals and Waivers of Complementarity in Light of Articles 18 – 19 and 53 3.1 Consequences of a Self-referral or Waiver in Light of Article 53 3.2 Consequences of a Self-referral or Waiver in the Light of Article 18 3.3 Consequences of a Self-referral or Waiver in Light of Article 19 The Relationship between Complementarity and Ne Bis In Idem Final Thought on Complementarity: Positive – Dynamic versus Traditional Complementarity Concluding Observations 239 Conclusions 309 Bibliography 325 Index 349 239 247 274 275 276 279 283 298 306 vii Table of Cases The Ad hoc Tribunals Prosecutor v Duško Tadić, Case No (IT-94-1-AR72), Decision on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction, 2/10/1995 Prosecutor v Duško Tadić , Case No (IT-94-1-T), Decision on the Defence Motion on the Principle of Non Bis In Idem, 14/11/1995 Prosecutor v Duško Tadić A/K/A “Dule”, Case No (IT-94-1-T), Decision on the Defence Motion on Jurisdiction, 10/08/1995 Prosecutor v Duško Tadić, Case No (IT-94-1-T), Sentencing Judgment, 14/07/1997 Prosecutor v Duško Tadić, Case No (IT-94-1-Tbis-R117), Sentencing Judgment, 11/11/ 1999 Prosecutor v Duško Tadić, Case No (IT-94-1-A and IT-94-1-Abis), Judgment in Sentencing Appeal, 26/01/2000 Prosecutor v Duško Tadić, Case No (94-1-A-R77), Judgment on Allegations of Contempt Against Prior Counsel, Milan Vujin, 31/01/2000 Prosecutor v Alfred Musema, Case No (ICTR-96-5-D), Decision on the Formal Request for Deferral Presented by the Prosecutor, 12/03/1996 Prosecutor v André Rwamakuba, Case No (ICTR-98-44C-PT), Decision on Defence Motion for Stay of Proceedings Article 20 of the Statute, 3/06/2005 Prosecutor v Anto Furundžija, Case No (IT-95-17/1-A), Judgment 21/07/ 2000 Prosecutor v Bernard Ntuyahaga, Case No (ICTR-98-40-T), Decision on the Prosecutor’s Motion to Withdraw the Indictment, 18/03/1999 354 Index International Commission for Penal Reconstruction and Development establishment of  64 forum to deal with war criminals, consideration of  151 international criminal court, proposal for adequate jurisdiction  64 complementarity model  310 complementary jurisdiction, system of  67-8 complementary manner  65 concentration camps  67 domestic jurisdiction, renunciation  67 German courts 69 high level war criminals  70 international criminal court  65-6, 69-70 jurisdiction of national courts not curtailed  69 Leipzig experience 69 less grave cases, trial of  70 limited jurisdiction, with  65 national jurisdictions  68 national sovereignty  67, 69 obstacles to  67 ordinary military courts  64 principle of territoriality  69 quasi-international courts of appeal as substitute for  68 questionnaire  68 report on  152 residuary jurisdiction  70 residue of crimes, jurisdiction over  69 special Inter-Allied Court, as  66 specified situations  65 subsidiary jurisdiction  66-7 supplementary jurisdiction  68 system of complementarity, application of  69 World War II  64 members of  64 role of  64 trial of war crimes by national jurisdictions  65-7 International Congress of Penal Law 1926 international penal code  38 international penal jurisdiction  38-9 aggression  41 complementarity  41-2 complementary jurisdiction  42 conflict of jurisdiction  42 concurrent jurisdiction  39 conflict of jurisdiction  38-9 criminal chamber  39 exclusive jurisdiction  39-41 extent of competence  43 foreign jurisdiction 38 impartiality  39 impunity gap 39 international crimes  40 international criminal jurisdiction  43 jurisdiction of penal chamber, triggering  40 national courts  41, 43 national criminal jurisdiction doubtful  39 failure  40 nature of competence  38 nature of jurisdiction  41-2 ordinary crimes  40 piracy  39 renunciation of jurisdiction  43 sham proceedings  40 sovereign rights  38 subsidiary jurisdiction  42 supreme penal jurisdiction  39 International Criminal Court acts of terrorism, to try  44 admissibility challenges to  247-74 see also challenge to admissibility below complementarity model, preliminary rulings regarding  239-47 criteria for inadmissibility, exceptions  315 interpretation  322-3 determination of  311 first test of  301 initial provision, philosophy of  301 negative form, rules drafted in  159-60 preliminary rulings see preliminary rulings on admissibility below  rules of  159 State unwilling or unable to carry out genuine domestic proceedings  161-2, 315-16 statement, twofold  161 uncontested  276 arrest warrant, issue of  251-4 blocking, bona fide action required for  162 challenges to admissibility Index appeals  266-7 arrest warrant, issue of  251-4 Articles  247-8 case having been investigated or prosecute  261 categories of parties  248 confirmation hearing, examination in  255 Court’s own motion, on  248, 256 discretion, exercise of  254 fairness of proceedings, maintenance of  254 gravity, lack of reference to criterion of  261 grounds for  260 investigating State, by  260 more than one, leave for  267-8 one only, person allowed  266 person accused, submission of views by  255 person making  252 Pre-Trial Chamber, State having challenged ruling of  262-5 prior to issue of arrest warrant  254 process  250 prosecution evidence, reliance on  255 Prosecutor seeking ruling on  263-5 review of decision, request for  271-2 scope of  248-9 second chance of  321 Security Council referrals  249 self-referral see self-referral  situation, referral to prosecutor  249-50 State becoming able to try case, from  263 State from which acceptance of jurisdiction required, from  262 State having jurisdiction, by  257-8 suspension of investigation on  268-70 unnecessary, reducing  322 waiver of complementarity see waiver of complementarity  challenges to jurisdiction abuse of process, involving doctrine of  259 appeals  266-7 Articles  247-8 Court’s own motion, on  256 defence application  258 more than one, leave for  267-8 one only, person allowed  266 Pre-Trial Chamber, State having challenged ruling of  262-5 Prosecutor seeking ruling on  263-5 review of decision, request for  271-2 scope of  248-9 Security Council referrals  249 self-referral see self-referral  situation, referral to prosecutor  249-50 State becoming able to try case, from  263 State with jurisdiction, complementarity invoked by  256-7 suspension of investigation on  268-70 waiver of complementarity see waiver of complementarity  commencement of case  251-2 competence, scenarios for  33 complementary jurisdiction  157 conditional waiver 281 Convention for creation of  crimes within jurisdiction of  205-7 decisions of human rights bodies, not bound by  208 domestic courts, relationship with  draft statute  32 extradition, questions of  54 formal attempt to create  43 genuine existence of dispute, jurisdiction resting on  165-6 inability to prosecute, criterion of  222-35 see also inability to prosecute inadmissibility, cases of  223 India, opposition by  48 internal armed conflicts, jurisdiction over  224 International Commission for Penal Reconstruction and Development, consideration by  64-70 see also International Commission for Penal Reconstruction and Development International Law Association resolution for creation of  31-2 International Law Commission, consideration by see International Law Commission jurisdiction admissibility test  61 challenges to  247-74 see also challenge to jurisdiction above complementary, philosophy for  62, 67 compulsory  311 355 356 Index jurisdictional parameters, degrees of certainty as to  248 lack of power to exercise  312 nature and scope of  62-3 universal  259 jurisdictional powers  32-3 League of Nations Convention, proposal in see League of Nations London International Assembly, proposals in  59-64 see also London International Assembly national courts, not replacing  215 national jurisdiction, waiver of in favour of  63-4 necessity for, disagreement on  50 Office of the Prosecutor  challenges to jurisdiction and admissibility  247-74 see also challenge to admissibility; challenge to jurisdiction above decision to file case  251 discretionary assessment by  243-4 duties and powers of  303 execution of mandate, formal policy  215 future investigations, notification of  243 impunity, combating  299 information collected, keeping confidential  273-4 investigations, carrying out  303-4 investigative steps, authorization for  244 national prosecutions, encouraging  299300, 307 Northern Uganda, selection of cases in  305 powers, tensions with priorities of States  274 proprio motu powers, threat to use  324 prosecutorial priorities  215 reasonable basis for commencing investigation, identifying  240 request for deferral, opposition to  245-6 resumption of investigation by  274 review of admissibility decision, request for  271-2 ruling on jurisdiction or admissibility, seeking  263-5 self-referral, authorization of investigation of  279 State with jurisdiction, reference of case to  273 State’s investigation, deferring to  244-5 State, communication with  304 submissive role of  216 Sudan, reports on  323-4 suspension of investigation on challenge to jurisdiction or admissibility  268-70 opposition to  48-9 optional complementary jurisdiction  133 permanent institution, as  157 power over irresponsible states  158 Pre-Trial Chamber  136 preliminary rulings on admissibility complementarity model  239-47 construction  242 control procedure  240 discretionary assessment by OTP  243-4 examination of provision  239-40 letters of notification  240-3 mechanism for  239 procedural filter, as  240 response of States to requests  242 self-referral see self-referral  third States, reference to  242 waiver of complementarity see waiver of complementarity  proper execution of justice by national courts, determination of  33 repression of terrorism by, opposition to  48-9 responsibility for prosecution, allocation of  159 Rome Statute see ICC Rome Statute self-referral to see self-referral State unwilling or unable to carry out genuine domestic proceedings, admissibility in case of ability, determining  318 burden of proof  163 crimes within jurisdiction of court  205-7 criterion of unwillingness  163-70 determination of  162-3 impact of decisions of human rights bodies  207-11 due process, principles of  169-70, 174 effectiveness of proceedings, testing  175 genuine existence of dispute  165-6 genuine, addition of  164-5 genuine investigation, need for  167 independent or impartial proceedings, criterion of  195-203 see also independent or impartial proceedings Index interpretations of  165 investigations, including  203-5 notions underlying  236 objective evaluation of genuineness  166 outcome of trial, depending on  174-5 proceedings, concept of  203-5 quality of domestic proceedings  166-7 quality of justice, assessment of  169 self-referral see self-referral  shielding person from criminal responsibility see criminal responsibility  statement of  161-2 test of unwillingness  315-16 unjustified delay, criterion of  181-95 see also unjustified delay unwillingness, determination of  167-9 validity of domestic proceedings, testing  163 waiver of complementarity see waiver of complementarity  States, relationship with  surrender to  54 unofficial bodies favouring establishment of  56-7 voluntary relinquishing of jurisdiction in favour of  213 war criminals, trying  33 international criminal law complementarity, concept of  origins of  5-6 conflict of jurisdictions  36 individuals, acts committed by  36 international criminal court, exclusive jurisdiction of  36 international public proceedings  36 international repression  35 national courts, jurisdiction of  penal code, establishment of  35 Professor Pella, report by  34-8 International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda absolute primacy, exercise of  142, 146, 148 basis of regime  139 complementarity models, legal foundation of  141-51, 152-3 completion strategy  140, 143-4, 150, 153, 313 creation of  137-8 domestic proceedings, interference with  148-9 failure of diligent prosecution in domestic court, competence following  149 from primacy to complementarity  140 implied complementarity  151 national authorities, cases referred to  145 national courts referral of cases to  313-14 request to defer competence  139 nature of jurisdiction, extension of  143 ne bis in idem, principle of  289-90 primacy of  137-9, 153 primacy proper vested with  150 Prosecutors, practice of  147 request to transfer case to Norway  259-60 Rules of Procedure and Evidence  138 sham proceedings in national court, request for adoption of proceedings in case of  142 special mission  138 State, reference of case to  140 underlying philosophical foundation  146-7 unjustified delay in practice of  191 International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia absolute primacy, exercise of  142, 146, 148 basis of regime  139 complementarity models, legal foundation of  141-51, 152-3 completion strategy  140, 143-4, 150, 153, 313 creation of  137 domestic proceedings, interference with  148-9 failure of diligent prosecution in domestic court, competence following  149 from primacy to complementarity  140 impartiality, determination of  201-2 national authorities, cases referred to  144-5 national courts referral of cases to  313-14 request to defer competence  139 nature of jurisdiction, extension of  143 ne bis in idem, principle of  285, 288-90 people accused before, complaints to ECHR  207-8 primacy of  137-9, 153 primacy proper vested with  150 Prosecutors, practice of  147 Rules of Procedure and Evidence  138 special mission  138 357 358 Index State, reference of case to  140 underlying philosophical foundation  146-7 unjustified delay in practice of  191 international law primacy, principle of  75 International Law Association Conference 1922-1924  31-4 foundation of  31 International Criminal Court, resolution for  31-2 International Law Commission Crawford, James  124,126 draft code of offences against peace and security of mankind see peace and security of mankind, offences against Graefrath, Mr 109-11, 114, 124 international criminal court, consideration of absolute domestic repression  92 accessibility  95 ad hoc Committee for study of  126 admissibility of case 123 adoption of complementarity principle, final phase  126-32 aggression 108, 116 alternative proposals  121 alternative proposals for  110 appeal court 119 appeal or cassation, powers of  111-12 aut dedre aut judicare 104-7, 113,115 binding in nature  91 cases, filtering  125-6 combined system of national and international jurisdictions 107 competence  90 jurisdiction over cases within  112 limited  91, 100 complementary jurisdiction/regime/relationship/function  90, 92, 104, 107-8, 113-15, 118-19 complementarity as product of work of  5-6 complementarity first time introduced  124 complementarity model  134 complementary jurisdiction, with  92 mechanism of  91, 93-4, 109-10, 134 use of term  123-4 compulsory jurisdiction 107, 117-19 compulsory powers, whether acceptable  98-9 concurrent and complementary jurisdiction  153 concurrent jurisdiction  101, 105, 111-13, 115-16 conferment of jurisdiction, system of  118 court of first instance 111,115 court of reviewing final national judgments 111 court of second instance 112 criminals to be tried by  96-7 declining jurisdiction  123-4 determination of jurisdiction  94 deterrent effect  91 division of responsibilities 108 domestic courts, nature of competence between  93 domestic repression, members favouring  92 draft code of offences against peace and security of mankind, under  88-90 draft conventions and proposals  92-3 draft jurisdictional clauses  152-3 draft statute, complementarity model  126-32 exclusive jurisdiction  91, 106, 109, 114-16, 153 exclusive/quasi-exclusive jurisdiction, competence 104, 106, 108, 111-12, 114-19 flexible system 107 voluntary jurisdiction  91 facility of States, as  118 implementation of code 103 ineffective procedures, complexity of  129 international criminal court 103-4, 108 King of Yugoslavia, assassination of  91 limited powers, having  102 modified scheme of complementarity  310-11 national and international jurisdictions, relationship between  109-10, 113, 121-2 national courts concurrent jurisdiction with  104-5, 1079, 112 refusing to institute proceedings, jurisdiction in case of  115 relationship with  121-2, 124 national jurisdiction, inadequacy  91 New Zealand , new idea proposed by  124 Index nature of competence 110 opting in system  121 opting out system  121 optional, concurrent and complementary jurisdiction  120, 133 optional jurisdiction  94, 116-19 subsidiary jurisdiction 116, 119 successor Government unwilling or unable to try 118 surrender of national criminal jurisdiction 114 unavailability or ineffectiveness of trial procedures  123 organization and competence  91 preferential jurisdiction  119 realities of international criminal law 114 replacement, competition with or complementing national jurisdiction 111, 114 review court, as  111, 114-15 competence and function 111-13, 115 revised draft statute  112-13 sovereign rights 110 sovereignty, question of  110-11 special agreement, cases sent by  95 State consent, system of 113 State sovereignty 114 State unwilling or unable to try case, use on event of  118-19, 129-30 state’s failure to act 115 Statute of the International Criminal Court 110 system of competence, criticism of  97-8 transitional/ system, period 105-8 type of jurisdiction 103 territorial jurisdiction did not exclude international jurisdiction 107 underlying philosophy 110 universal jurisdiction, principle of 107 unwilling State 109, 119 voluntary jurisdiction  91, 96-7, 100 voluntary submission to  133 1951 Committee on International Criminal Jurisdiction, work of  92-9 1953 Committee on International Criminal Jurisdiction, work of  99-102 international criminal jurisdiction meetings concerning  90-2 1951 Committee  92-9 1953 Committee  99-102 principle of complementarity, role in development of  83-4 international penal jurisdiction competence of court  38 desirability of establishing  38 impunity gap  39 International Congress of Penal Law, 1926, discussion by  38-43 negative conflict of  39 sovereign rights, submission of  38 J jurisdiction conflict, solving  132 crime or threat of aggression, over  108 ICC, of see International Criminal Court waiver of, historical context  211-12 L League of Nations Convention for Creation of International Criminal Court see League of Nations Convention for Creation of International Criminal Court Covenant, implementation of  26 League of Nations Convention for Creation of International Criminal Court assassination 43-4 aut dedere aut punier/judicare 56 choice of trial in national courts  56 committee of experts 44-6, 48, 52, 54 committee of experts report  54 competence  47-8, 50-2, 55 complementary jurisdiction  46 complementarity model  133, 310 complementary relationship  54 concurrently with national courts  45 contracting parties to  47 default jurisdiction  45 Diplomatic Conference  54-5 domestic courts  48, 54 draft, adoption of  48 draft resolution, adoption of  51-2 drafting committee  55 extradition  44-5, 47, 50-5 final review  52-3 first formal attempt to create court, as  43 forum deprehensionis  53, 54 French suggestions for  45-6 general discussion on  50 359 360 Index governments, submission to  48 international criminal court  43, 44-9, 53-5 international political crimes  44 international convention for the suppression of terrorism  44 jurisdiction by delegation  46 King Alexander, assassination of  43-4 national courts  52-3, 56 nature of jurisdiction  46 original scheme  54 primary jurisdiction  45 priority of jurisdiction for national courts  45 proposed amendments  55 proposed jurisdiction, comments on  50-1 sovereignty  56 subsidiary jurisdiction  46 subsidiary or complementary system  50 surrender  47 terrorism  43, 46 unwillingness or inability to try case  48 waiving prosecution  45,48 Leipzig 15 life, right to serious and effective criminal investigation, requirement of  176 light nature of  London International Assembly creation of  59 domestic court and future international criminal court, proposal of complementary relationship  59 forum to deal with war criminals, consideration of  151 international criminal court, proposal for ability of State to take up proceedings  63 admissibility test  61 Allied court  61 Commissions I and II, discussions before  60 competence, lack of  60-1 complementary jurisdiction, with  62 complementary model  310 complementary relationship  59 court with complementary jurisdiction, philosophy behind opting for  62 crimes committed against Jews and stateless people  62 domestic court in position of and willing to exercise jurisdiction 63 exclusive jurisdiction  62 forum conveniens 62 German courts 62 international criminal court  59-63 international judicial organ  60 Leipzig trials 62 most serious crimes  60 national courts, jurisdiction lacking  60, 62 nature and scope of jurisdiction  62-3 outcome of discussions  62-3 preliminary report  61-2 recommendation for  152 optional concurrent and complementary jurisdiction 61 primary jurisdiction  63 prisoners of war 62 State neither willing nor able to deal with case 63 test of willingness of the State to take up proceedings  63 trial by a national court impossible or inconvenient  61 United Nations Court  61 waiving jurisdiction  61,63 waiver of complementarity 64 war crimes  59-60 war criminals 62 M mandatory complementarity  7, 135, 137, 312 military leaders  15 military tribunals independent or impartial proceedings  201 N national courts core crimes in Rome Statute, jurisdiction over  crimes against universal law of nations, trial of  3decision to acquit or convict, whether final  295-6 international tribunals referral of cases to  313-14 request to defer competence  139 Nuremberg international Military Tribunal Index complementary relationship with  133-4, 146-7 lack of direct relationship with  75 proper execution of justice by, determination of  33 nature analysis of  2-3 complementary descriptions of  ne bis in idem acquittal, effect of  286 complementarity, relationship with  283-98 crime against humanity  288-9 aggression, trial of  289 conduct constituting  286 international criminal law, under  290-1 jurisdiction of Court, within  292 legal characterization  290-2 ordinary  288-90 proscribed conduct  287-9, 307 domestic court having tried case, in event of  285 human rights provisions  284 ICTR, principle in  289-90 ICTY, principle in  285, 288-90 international criminal tribunals, on context of  284-5 lack of sufficient evidence, case not proceeding on ground of  294 national court decision to acquit or convict, whether final  295-6 new facts, review of case on  293-4 other terms for  284 pardons, issue of  296-7 principle of  283-4 proscribed conduct, in case of  287-9, 307 Rome, discussions in  285 sham or show proceedings  285-6, 292-3 trial by another court, meaning  295 Nuremberg International Military Tribunal Allied Control Council 76 another form of complementarity  74 approach of  75 complementarity principle  76, 310 deferral of jurisdiction, concept of  75 different categories of war criminals  76 different jurisdictions 76 direct application of complementarity 75 establishment of  74 German courts failing to act  75 German war criminals  74 London Agreement  74 major war criminals, trying  74, 76, 146 minimum common basis for trials  76 minor criminals  76 Moscow Declaration  74 national courts complementary relationship with  133-4, 146-7 lack of direct relationship with  75 national criminal jurisdictions, cooperation with  74-5 primacy, principle of  75 role of national jurisdictions, recognition of  74-5 state sovereignty  75 subsidiary manner  74 supremacy element  75 underlying philosophical foundation  146-7 O optional complementarity meaning  6, 318 self-referral, application to  137, 312-13, 318-19 P peace and security of mankind, offences against draft codes administration  104 aggression, jurisdiction over crime or threat of  108 aggressor state, action on defeat of  116 domestic punishment under  105 enforcement by national courts  104 implementation machinery  103-5 international tribunal, establishment of  88-90 list of crimes, objection to  116 national courts, functioning of  89-90 national and international jurisdictions, relationship between  109-10, 113, 121-2 national courts refusing to institute proceedings, jurisdiction in case of  115 punishment  88 resumed consideration of, first phase  1029 361 362 Index resumed consideration of, second phase  109-26 sovereignty, question of  110-11 1951,  84-7 competent tribunal  84 complementary relationship  85 exclusive competence, jurisdiction  86 extradition  85 Leipzig experience  86 national courts alongside an international tribunal  85 political crimes  85 1954,  87-90, 152 absolute domestic jurisdiction  90 exclusive competence, jurisdiction  8890 international criminal court  89 international tribunal  88-90 national courts not to be deprived of jurisdiction  89 no reference to type of tribunal  87-8 organizing the relationship  90 punishment by State apprehending the offender  89 role of national courts  88-9 transitional period  88, 90 extradition  85 national versus international penal jurisdiction  86 political crimes  85 Permanent Court of International Justice Advisory Committee of Jurists appointment  26-7 mandate  28 exceptionally grave cases, trial of  29 international crimes and offences, power to adjudicate exclusive jurisdiction  37-8 interpretation  37 special criminal chamber  37 jurisdiction  27-9 national courts alongside, role of  41-2 need for creation of  31 objections to  27-8 penal chamber, draft statute for  42-3 plan for  27 repressive powers in penal matters, recommendations  41 sham proceedings before  40 supreme penal jurisdiction, argument for  39-41 war crimes, trial of  29 piracy peace, in time of  39 repression of  39 political crimes international, fighting  44 primacy  16 shift to complementarity  16 prosecution trial, and  204 psychology complementary concepts in  3-4 Q quantum mechanics complementarity in interpretation of  S self-referral admissibility challenge by defendant following  282 authorization of investigation of  279 challenges to admissibility or jurisdiction, in light of  279-83 connotations of  214 crimes committed on State territory, as to  217-18 decisions on  319 drafting history  216-18 DRC case, in  228-32 duty of action at national level, and  218-20 factual situation of  213-14 first instances of  215-16 future admissibility challenge, reservation of right of  280-1 implications of  322 inability to prosecute, and  228-32 inaction, in case of  319 intention as to  216-17 international criminal justice, contemporary practice of  212 invitation to  216 jurisdiction of ICC, triggering  212 legally problematic, being  237 legitimate reason for  221-2 limitations of ICC  235 method and implications of  313 Index no intention of opening investigation, effect of  278-9 obstacles to  218 optional complementarity  137, 312-13, 318-19 practice of  211-22 historical context, in  211-12 Pre-Trial Chamber I, approach of  228-32, 237 Pre-Trial Chamber II, approach of  233-5 preliminary rulings, consequence in light of  276-9 primacy, waiver of  280 procedural regimes, impact on  306 regime governing  276 rejection by ICC  222 relinquishment of jurisdiction, as  214 Rome Statute, term not used in  213 states’ inaction resulting from  221 subsequent determinations of Court  275 Uganda case, in  233-5 uncontested admissibility  276 voluntary relinquishing of jurisdiction in favour of ICC  213 waiver of complementarity, and  212 waiver of duty to act, as  220 sovereignty exterior and interior  35 international penal jurisdiction, surrender under  38 limitation  35 T terrorism early 1930s, in  43-4 international convention for suppression of call for  44, 46 committee of experts report  54 Diplomatic Conference  54-5 draft, adoption of  48 final review  52-3 governments, submission to  48 obligation to prosecute  53-4 International Criminal Court, trial in  44 international repression of  46 repression by International Criminal Court, opposition to  48-9 torture, prohibition of serious and effective criminal investigation, requirement of  176 Treaty of Versailles Covenant of the League of Nations, implementation of  26 deferral of jurisdiction, concept of  75 drafting  12 jurisdictional mechanism  30 notion of complementarity under  16-18, 75 penalty provisions  12-13, 17, 29 suspected war criminals, Germany turning over to allies  14 unconditional signature  13-14 unsatisfactory verdicts, setting aside  15-18 trial continental law systems, no power to halt in  294-5 independent or impartial proceedings see independent or impartial proceedings lack of sufficient evidence, case not proceeding on ground of  294 prosecution not serving interests of justice, not proceeding on ground of  294 prosecution, and  204 reasonable time, within  182-3 unjustified delay see unjustified delay Truth Commission investigations by  315 U United Nations Security Council referrals to ICC  249 United Nations War Crimes Commission ceding primacy to the international court  71 conveniently or effectively punished  72 country concerned preferred to refrain from exercising jurisdiction  71 establishment of  70 Lord Chancellor, recommendation of  70 national courts, acknowledgement of role of  73 official body, as  70 task of  70-1 United Nations War Crimes Court basis for  72 campaign for  71 complementarity, system of  72 complementary model  310 draft convention  71-2 inadequate penalties  73 363 364 Index Inter-Allied tribunal  71 lack of jurisdiction 73 major war criminals  71,73 mixed military tribunals  73 Moscow Declaration  71-3 national courts, primacy of  71-2 opposition to  73 primacy of national courts  71 proposal for  70-2 proposed court’s jurisdiction  72 unwilling State  72 war crimes court  71 unjustified delay ad hoc tribunals, in practice of  191 applicant, conduct of  188 circumstances of case, in  184 complementarity test, criterion to facilitate  181 complexity of case, element of  187, 192 criminal responsibility, shielding person from  183 criteria  184-5 delay, determining  184 deliberate  181, 193 determination on complementarity, making  316-17 evaluation of conditions  190-1 excessive case load as excuse for  190 factors implicitly explaining  193 goal in context of ICC  183-4 guidance on  317 Human Rights Committee, practice of  184 human rights provisions  182-4 ICC Rome Statute and Rules or Regulations, failure to spell out in  182 inconsistent decisions on  210 poor administration of justice, in case of  182 questions to be asked  181 reasons for  182 relevant authorities, conduct of  189-95 rights of accused, violating  183 shielding, concept of  193 trial within reasonable time, guarantee of  182-3 underlying meaning  182 undue delay, replacing  181 usual procedure, comparison with  194-5 W waiver of complementarity admissibility, waiving  214 challenges to admissibility or jurisdiction, in light of  279-83 DRC case, in  228-32 factual situation of  213 formal declaration  214 general terms, ion  212 implications of  275, 322 inability to prosecute, and  228-32 inaction, in case of  320 international criminal justice, contemporary practice of  212 legally problematic, being  237 method and implications of  313 narrow interpretation  214, 229 Pre-Trial Chamber I, approach of  228-32 Pre-Trial Chamber II, approach of  233-5 preliminary rulings, consequence in light of  276-9 Preparatory Committee, consideration by  213 primacy, waiving  214 procedural mechanism of Statute, not to hinder  277 procedural regimes, impact on  306 rejection by ICC  222 Rome States, term not used in  213 self-referral, and  212 subsequent determinations of Court  275 Uganda case, in  233-5 voluntary relinquishing of jurisdiction in favour of ICC  213 war felonies and misdemeanours during  39 war crimes Breisach trial 211 international court, number too large for  60 international juridical body to try, focus on  59 Moscow Declaration  72-4 Nuremberg International Military Tribunal see Nuremberg International Military Tribunal Professor Pella, consideration of report by  34-8 right of jurisdiction over own citizens, giving up  65 trial of Index ability and willingness of State to take up proceedings  63 belligerent states, by  36 conclusion of peace, after  33-4 high magnitude, cases of  70 International Commission for Penal Reconstruction and Development, consideration by  64-70 see also International Commission for Penal Reconstruction and Development international court, by  36 International Law Association proposals  33 national courts, by  60-1 national jurisdictions, by  65-7, 73 quasi-international courts of appeal, proposal for  68 sham proceedings  33 special Inter-Allied Court, by  66 tribunal for, consideration of  64-5 waiver of jurisdiction  63-4 UN Court, proposal for see United Nations War Crimes Commission World War I, trial following see World War I war criminals criminal responsibility, shielding person from  171-5 forum to deal with, question of  151 heroes, treated as  173 wars of aggression international legal code, preliminary draft  37 Professor Pella, report by  34-8 sub-committee, study by  37 World War I alleged war criminals, surrender of Allies demanding  17 Bulgarian  20 Bulgarian opposition to  20 Greek agreement to  21 Hungarian  20 lack of success  56 objections to  20 prosecution, for  22 reduction of initial lists  22 reduction of names on list  21 Romanian agreement to  21 Serbo-Croat/Slovenian  21 steps to ensure compliance, absence of  20 test lists  21 Turkey, by  24 Allied National Military Tribunals Hungarian objection to surrender to  20 surrender of alleged war criminals, request for  20-1 surrender of German citizens to, resistance to  15 suspected war criminals turned over to  14 Austrian courts, trial of war criminals in  22 Bulgarian courts, trial of war criminals in  22 Bulgarian war criminals, punishment of  20 Commission on the Responsibility of the Authors of the War and on Establishment of Penalties alleged war criminals, list of  14-15 prosecution, suitable forum for  11 Sub-Commission III  11 task of  11 criminal responsibility, shielding person from  171-5 German Supreme Court, trial of offenders before  15, 19 High Tribunal, proposal for  11-12 international criminal tribunal, creation of  11-12 Mixed (Inter-Allied) Military Tribunal, suspected war criminals turned over to  14 peace treaties complementarity schemes  19 deferral of jurisdiction, concept of  75 enemy governments, with  18-26 penalty clauses  19-20 Treaty of Versailles see Treaty of Versailles  Preliminary Peace Conference  11 suspected war criminals, Germany turning over to allies  14 Treaty of Neuilly, penalty clauses  19, 24, 29 Treaty of Sèvres British prisoners, release of  25 exemption form inclusion of penalty clauses, refusal of demand for  24 penalty clauses  19, 24, 29 revision, attempted  25 trial of war criminals, resolution for  23 Treaty of St Germain amnesty clause, demand for  22 365 366 Index penalty clauses  19, 24, 29 Treaty of Trianon, penalty clauses  19, 24, 29 Treaty of Versailles see Treaty of Versailles Turkish officials, trial for war crimes  22-3 British custody, transfer to  23-4 complementarity scenario  25 dropping of  26 exchange of prisoners  25-6 outcome of  23 release of suspects  25 unsatisfactory German trials, rights as to  15-18 World War II atrocities, dealing with  59 war criminals London International Assembly, role of  59-64 see also London International Assembly Nuremberg International Military Tribunal, trial in see Nuremberg International Military Tribunal  punishment of  60 tribunal for punishment of, consideration of  64-5 Y yin and yang archetypal poles of  ... Military Tribunal The Principle of Complementarity in the Drafting History of the Genocide Convention The Role of the International Law Commission in the Development of the Principle of Complementarity. .. Criminal Law and the International Association of Penal Law He has published widely in the area of International Criminal Law He is currently a Legal Officer at the Pre-Trial Division of the International. .. as The Principle of Complementarity in International Criminal Law? ??23 Michigan JIL (2002); The Ugandan Government Triggers the First Test of the Complementarity Principle? ??5 ICLR (2005); The International