Examining Enforcement Of Duty To Cooperate With International Criminal Court To Arrest Suspects Of Core International Crimes

Abstract

Core international crimes are the most serious crimes which concerns the international community as a whole. National jurisdictions are obliged to investigate and prosecute the crimes while ICC complements accountability gaps created by the states. States cooperation plays central role in execution of ICC arrest warrant due to absence of its own enforcement agents. This thesis examines enforcement of states obligation to execute ICC arrest warrant. It was conducted with doctrinal type research employing legal analysis of applicable laws of ICC and other sources of international law. The binding nature of obligation to enforce arrest warrant and its enforcement determines ICC’s success in ensuring accountability. Under Rome statute, state parties to Rome statute are bound to execute ICC arrest warrant while non-party states obligation is of voluntary nature. Nevertheless, there are circumstances in which non-party states obligation becomes obligatory under general principles of international law. States parties’ duty to effect the arrest warrant has been challenged by personal immunity of incumbent head of states of non-party states to Rome statute. When obligation to execute ICC arrest warrant and uphold personal immunity of incumbent senior officials of non-party states are in conflict, it is uneasy to reconcile. The rule of customary international law does not grant personal immunity before ICC and states cooperating with ICC to effect arrests. States immunity becomes restrictive and human rights protection elevates. ICC should not request arrest if it causes breach of immunity and execution of the arrest has to be postponed until removal of the immunities. Immunity may be waived through ratifying the Rome statute, accepting ICC jurisdiction or joining UN. To implement execution of arrest warrant, state parties are obliged to consult and provide information to the Court. Among others, negative perceptions of selective prosecution, Selective UNSC referral of situations without objective criterion, absence of actions taken against uncooperative states impedes states cooperation. Lack of alternatives to complement states cooperation challenges the Court. Thus, UNSC should extend the mandate of peacekeeping missions to effect arrest. It should set and employ consistent and objective criteria in order to refer situations in non-party states to Rome and to actively follow up and assist the ICC in bringing suspects to ICC. Failure to take actions against uncooperative states allow suspects to remain at large and creates injustices to Victims. ASP or UNSC should take coercive actions against uncooperative states to foster cooperation.