Crime of aggression as an international criminal act

Abstract

Aggression as an international crime against peace is classified as an international criminal act that entails international responsibility. Since the time of World War I, attempts have been made to define and regulate aggression. Under the Treaty of the League of Nations, which was founded in 1919, the member states were obliged to protect the territorial integrity and political independence of all other member states in case of an external aggression. However, the Treaty did not contain a definition of aggression. In order to fill in the gaps of the League of Nations Treaty, the Kellogg-Briand Pact was signed in 1928, whereby the countries renounced the war as an instrument of national policy. A member state, which was the target of an aggressive war, had the legal right to request compensation against the aggressor. At the 1933 Conference on Disarmament, the Soviet Union submitted a draft declaration on the definition of an aggressor, which, however, was not officially adopted. Neither did the 1945 UN Charter contain a definition of aggression. Only under the UN General Assembly Resolution the definition was adopted according to which the aggression was the use of armed force by any state against the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of another state. This document legally qualified aggression as crime against international peace, which entailed international responsibility. In the UN system, the Security Council was empowered to determine whether there was a threat to peace, violation of peace, or aggression. Aggression was often defined in treaties on military alliances. As a rule, any launch of aggression against a member state would activate the mechanism of collective action of member states against the aggressor. Finally, the definition of aggression was introduced in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. However, it should be noted that the International Criminal Court would have jurisdiction over the crime of aggression only in the events that occurred after the Statute entered into force, and would only apply to the parties to the Statute. The crime of aggression could be done only in the name of the state. Therefore, its perpetrator can only be the person making decisions at the highest military and political levels of the state.