Interest of Justice PDF

Preview

Summary

Analysis of Art.53 of ICJ Statute...

Description

‘Interest of justice’ is a consideration when deciding whether to proceed with an investigation according to the Statute of the International Criminal Court 1 (the Statute). However, there is no concrete definition of this concept in the Statute. Therefore, it should be interpreted ‘in accordance with the ordinary meaning to be given to the term’ 2. The issue is that there is no ‘ordinary meaning’ of justice; justice is a complex concept which involves careful balance with the ‘seemingly conflicting objectives of (…) peace.’3 This article will discuss how the ‘interest of justice’ are enshrined in Article 53, and how the complexity of that concept means that it cannot be cohesive. The ‘interest of justice’ is enshrined in Article 53 of the Statute Could there be a ‘common meaning’ which we could attribute to extremely vast concept of ‘justice’? There are multiple allusions to it throughout judicial decisions made in the context of International Criminal Law4. Recently, the International Criminal Court (ICC) mentioned ‘the most elementary principles of morality’5. This seems to be an attempt to interpret what is the ‘interest of justice’, according to its ‘ordinary meaning’6. The following table dissects Article 53, showing how its provisions serve the ‘interest of justice’, with reference to the sources the ICC is bound by.

Peace and Justice in conflict As mentioned in the table above, the Security Council may refer an investigation by making a case under Article 13(b). That article points to Chapter VII of the United Nations (UN) Charter, i.e.: ‘action with respect to threats of the peace, breaches of the peace and acts of aggression’ 7. The UN Charter 1 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (last amended 2010), 17 July 1998, ISBN No. 92-9227-227-6, (i.e.: the international legal document that legitimises the operation of the International Criminal Court, through the consent of the State parties which ratified it) 2 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969) Art. 31(1) 3 Human Rights Watch, The Meaning of "the Interests of Justice" in Article 53 of the Rome Statute (2005) Human Rights Watch Policy Paper, 4 Judgment of the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal 1946 (1947) 41 AJIL 172, for example, references the ‘the laws and customs’ ‘recognised by all civilised nations’ to legitimise the decision that individuals should be held accountable for breaches of ‘crimes against peace’, recognising that it is bound by the Charter of the United Nations 5 Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2007, p. 43 6 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969) Art. 31(1) 7 Charter of the United Nations, 24 October 1945, 1 UNTS XVI, Chpt. VII

is the founding document of the UN and furthermore; what gives the UN legitimacy under International Law8. The parties which ratified the treaty have implicitly agreed to give the UN the legal powers under international law to perform the functions that the States have agreed the UN should perform9. Therefore, by acting under Chapter VII, the UN is exercising the legal powers within the scope of the international legal functions the UN was intended to have under international. Therefore, it could be inferred that the States which ratified the UN Charter, have agreed that upkeeping the international peace is in the ‘interest of justice’. 10 11 However, this is in direct conflict with a principle also agreed to serve the interest of justice, enshrined in Article 5 of the Statute. The possibility of allowing considerations under Chapter VII to inform the decision of whether proceeding with an investigation is in the ‘interest of justice’, means...