'State sovereignty' is often referred to as an obstacle to criminal justice for core international crimes by members of the international criminal justice movement. The exercise of State sovereignty is seen as a shield against effective implementation of such crimes. But it is sovereign States that create and become parties to international criminal law treaties and jurisdictions. They are the principal enforcers of criminal responsibility for international crimes, as reaffirmed by the complementarity principle on which the International Criminal Court (ICC) is based. Criminal justice for atrocities depends entirely on the ability of States to act. This volume revisits the relationship between State sovereignty and international criminal law along three main lines of inquiry. First, it considers the immunity of State officials from the exercise of foreign or international criminal jurisdiction. Secondly, with the closing down of the ad hoc international criminal tribunals, attention shifts to the exercise of national jurisdiction over core international crimes, making the scope of universal jurisdiction more relevant to perceptions of State sovereignty. Thirdly, could the amendments to the ICC Statute on the crime of aggression exacerbate tensions between the interests of State sovereignty and accountability? The book contains contributions by prominent international lawyers including Professor Christian Tomuschat, Judge Erkki Kourula, Judge LIU Daqun, Ambassador WANG Houli, Dr. ZHOU Lulu, Professor Claus Kre, Professor MA Chengyuan, Professor JIA Bingbing, Professor ZHU Lijiang and Mr. GUO Yang.

Scientific Essay from the year 2008 in the subject Law - Criminal process, Criminology, Law Enforcement, grade: 2:1, University of Leeds, course: Political Science, language: English, abstract: It is the argument of this dissertation that the International Criminal Court is an appropriate tool for the enforcement of international criminal law and embodies a shifting notion of state sovereignty. Historically, both multilateral and unilateral attempts to enforce international criminal law have been progressive but not wholly successful. The International Criminal Court is rooted in customary law and addresses the failures of past attempts. The Court's opposition has illustrated problems of state sovereignty, which in turn exemplifies how the International Criminal Court embodies a shifting notion of state sovereignty. The sources used are the existing academic literature, interviews, international statute, magazines, and newspaper articles.

This innovative text is shows how there has been a concerted effort, since the end of World War I, to curb a state's power and freedom of action through the concept of international accountability to a set of recognized rules and norms. A state not only is to adhere to these rules but also can be sanctioned by an international penal process through enforcement of international criminal law. Adoption of the Rome Statute and the creation of the International Criminal Court are the culmination of many years of effort to challenge the power of state action. Scholars and students of international law with an interest in international criminal law will find this volume an interesting narrative of how the developments of international penal mechanisms of the 20th century have contributed to a diminution of state sovereignty. Published under the Transnational Publishers imprint.

Galand critically spells out a comprehensive conception of the nature and effects of Security Council referrals that responds to the various limits to the International Criminal Court's exercise of jurisdiction over situations that concern nationals and territories of non-party States.

This is a review of five recent works which deal with international criminal law. By an analysis of those works, the essay queries whether the relationship between international criminal law and state sovereignty is always accurately conceptualized. International criminal lawyers often see sovereignty as the enemy of international criminal law, though frequently failing to discuss in any depth the nature and malleability of sovereignty. Although international criminal law does involve some challenges to sovereignty, it also needs, and in some ways empowers, that sovereignty too. The works under review tend to pay less attention to the substantive aspects of international criminal law than its institutional part. This is unfortunate, as some of the most interesting interactions between international criminal law and sovereignty occur at this level. The essay finishes with some broader reflections on how the works under review conceptualize the international legal order, regrets the absence at times of engagement with relevant constructivist scholarship but notes that the answer to the question of the precise relationship between international criminal law and sovereignty is unlikely to be agreed upon soon.

This anthology brings together legal and philosophical theorists to examine the normative and conceptual foundations of international criminal law. In particular, through these essays the international group of authors addresses questions of state sovereignty; of groups, rather than individuals, as perpetrators and victims of international crimes; of international criminal law and the promotion of human rights and social justice; and of what comes after international criminal prosecutions, namely, punishment and reconciliation. International criminal law is still an emerging field, and as it continues to develop, the elucidation of clear, consistent theoretical groundings for its practices will be crucial. The questions raised and issues addressed by the essays in this volume will aid in this important endeavor.

This book is an attempt to approach the issue of defining international terrorism, proposing that the most workable way to do so is to achieve due balance between the two principal driving forces of international law developments: State sovereignty interests and cosmopolitan ideals. All those who aspire to the promotion of international criminal justice and the fight against impunity agree that the formulation of a universal definition of international terrorism will further enhance the fight against terrorism and offer a universally acceptable legal framework within which this fight can be conducted. Discussed in an in-depth manner are, for instance, the UN Charter Provisions, the Rome Statute and the principle of complementarity, the Kampala amendments on the crime of aggression, the paradigms of aggression and terrorism, and prominent anti-terrorist Security Council Resolutions such as Resolution 1368 and Resolution 1373. The volume broadens the reader’s understanding on how State sovereignty interests and priorities as well as ideals of cosmopolitanism have influenced the development of international law in general and international criminal law in particular. Furthermore, it simplifies the complicated picture of defining international crimes by explaining how the ‘State sovereignty’ and ‘Cosmopolitanism’ dynamics have also been of relevance throughout the drafting process of the definition of the crime of aggression for the purposes of the Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court. In addition, it equips the reader with an understanding of the reasons behind the lack of an international definition for terrorism and suggests an appropriate context within which such a definition can take shape. It intends to appeal to academics and students with an interest in international criminal law and the international criminal justice system, international law and security, but also to anyone with an interest in transnational crime and counter-terrorism. Stella Margariti has recently graduated from the University of Dundee where she attained the title of Doctor from the School of Law.