Derecho aplicable por la CPI: ¿cuándo se procede a la aplicación de las "fuentes externas" enunciadas en el artículo 21.1.B) del Estatuto de Roma?
Keywords:
international criminal court, applicable law, sources of criminal international law, international treaties, international customary law, hierarchy among sourcesAbstract
The following essay analyzes art. 21.1.b of the Rome Statue. Particularly, it attempts to clarify if the implementation of “applicable treaties and the principles and rules of international law, including the established principles of the international law of armed conflict” only proceeds when a situation is not regulated or foreseen under the Rome Statute, the Elements of Crimes or the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, or if on the contrary there are other possible interpretations, and if so, which would be their consequences. It will be concluded that the application of “external sources” –such as treaties and international customary law– will always be exceptional and subsidiary, having the judges of the International Criminal Court a limited margin of discretion.
Downloads
References
BITTI, G. “Article 21 of the Statute of the International Criminal Court and the treatment of the sources of law in the jurisprudence of the ICC” en STAHN, C. y SLUITER G., The Emerging Practice of the International Criminal Court, Leiden/Boston, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2009, pp. 285-304.
CAROCCIOLLO, Ida, “Applicable Law” en LATTANZI, Flavia y SCHABAS, William A., “Essays on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court”, Ripa Fagnano Alto, Editrice Il Sirente, 1999, Volumen 1, pp. 211-232.
CASSESE, Antonio., International Criminal Law, New York, Oxford University Press, 2003.
——., The Statute of the International Criminal Court: Some Preliminary Reflections, consultado en [http://www.ejil.org/pdfs/10/1/570.pdf] el 09/03/2016.
CDI, Informe del Grupo de Estudio de la Comisión de Derecho Internacional, Fragmentación del Derecho Internacional: dificultades derivadas de la diversificación y expansión del derecho internacional”, elaborado por Martti Koskenniemi, adoptado en el 58º período de sesiones, Ginebra, 1º de mayo a 9 de junio y 3 de julio a 11 de agosto de 2006.
HEIKKILA, Mikaela, Commentary on the Rome Statute, consultado en [http://www.casematrixnetwork.org/cmn-knowledge-hub/icc-commentary-clicc/commentary-rome-statute/commentary-rome-statute-part-2-articles-11-21/] el 09/03/16.
MCAULIFFE DE GUZMAN, Margaret, “Article 21”, en TRIFFTERER, Otto, Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court- Observers Notes, Article by Article, Munich, C.H Beck-Hart-Nomos, 2008, pp. 701-712.
NERLICH, Volker, “The Status of ICTY and ICTR precedent in proceedings before the ICC” en STAHN, C. y SLUITER, G., The Emerging Practice of the International Criminal Court, Leiden/Boston, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2009, pp. 305- 326.
PELLET, Alain, “Applicable Law” en CASSESE, A, GAETA, P. y JONES, J.R.W.D, The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A commentary, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2002, pp. 1050-1084.
POCAR, Fausto, Interacción de las fuentes del derecho penal internacional: de la teoría a la práctica, consultado en [http://www.ehu.eus/cursosderechointernacionalvitoria/ponencias/pdf/2009/2009_4.pdf] el 09/03/2016.
SADAT, Leila N., The International Criminal Court and The Transformation of International Law: Justice for the New Millennium, Transnational Publishers, 2002
SALAND, Per, “International Criminal Law Principles” en LEE, Roy S., The International Criminal Court: The Making of the Rome Statute, Issues, Negotiations, Results., The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 1999, pp. 189-216.
SCHABAS, William A., An Introduction to the International Criminal Court, Second Edition, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2004.
——., The International Criminal Court: A Commentary on the Rome Statute, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2010
VAN SLIEDREGT, Elies, “Pluralism in international criminal law”, en Leiden Journal of International Law, Volume 25, Leiden, 2012, pp. 847-855.
B. Jurisprudencia:
Corte Penal Internacional:
Appeals Chamber, Judgment on the Prosecutor’s Application for Extraordinary Review of Pre-Trial Chamber I’s 31 March 2006 Decision Denying Leave to Appeal, AC, 13 July 2006.
ICC, Appeals Chamber, Situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo in the Case of The Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, Judgment on the Appeal of Mr. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo against the Decision on the Defence Challenge to the Jurisdiction of the Court pursuant to article 19 (2) (a) of the Statute, 3 October 2006.
ICC, Pre-Trial Chamber, Prosecutor v. Al Bashir, Decision on the Prosecution’s Application for a Warrant of Arrest against Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, 4 March 2009.
ICC, Pre-Trial Chamber I, Situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo in the Case of The Prosecutor v. Germain Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui, Decision on the confirmation of charges.
ICC, Trial Chamber, Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, Decision Regarding the practices Used to Prepare and Familiarise Witnesses for Giving Testimony at Trial, 01/04-01/06-1049, 30 November 2007.
ICC, Pre-Trial Chamber, Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, Decision on the Practice of Witness Familiarization and Witness Proofing, 8 November 2006, II-01/04-01/06-679.
ICC, The Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo¸ Case No. ICC-01/04-01/06, Decision on the Confirmation of Charges, 29 January 2007.
Tribunal Penal Internacional para la Ex Yugoslavia:
ICTY, Trial Chamber, 14 January 2000, Kupreškić, IT 95-16-T.
ICTY, Appeals Chamber, 2 October 1995, IT-94-1-AR72.
ICTY, Trial Chamber, 14 January 2000, Kupreškić, IT 95-16-T.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
