Abstract
The rise of Islamic State (IS) has fundamentally altered the conception of terrorism, a development which international criminal law is arguably unprepared for. Given the scale and gravity of the group’s crimes, questions abound as to how those responsible will be held accountable. In the absence of significant domestic prosecutions and short of the establishment of a dedicated accountability mechanism, the International Criminal Court (ICC) stands as the forum of last resort in which IS members could stand trial. Such a proposition is not without significant challenges, however. This article addresses some key issues facing any potential prosecutions from the perspective of: (i) jurisdiction; (ii) applicable crimes; and (iii) modes of liability. First, as Syria, Iraq, and Libya are not States Parties to the Rome Statute, the available avenues for asserting jurisdiction will be assessed, namely: a Security Council referral; jurisdiction over so called ‘foreign fighters’ who are State Party nationals; and jurisdiction over attacks on the territory of a State Party and whether they could be considered part of a broader series of criminal acts in IS held territory. Second, as there is no crime of terrorism in the Rome Statute, the question of prosecuting acts encapsulated in a systematic campaign of terror through existing provisions will be assessed. Third, the regime of accountability at the ICC will be analysed in light of IS’s purported structure and the crimes with which it stands accused. Focus will be directed to those responsible for the propagation of genocidal propaganda and individuals who provide aid or assistance to IS which contributes to its crimes. These questions are far from theoretical. The UN has designated IS a threat to international peace and security. There follows an expectation that international criminal law should play a role in tackling one of the major criminal concerns of our time and ensure that impunity for those responsible for IS’s atrocities is avoided.
Highlights
The rise of Islamic State (IS)1 represents an unprecedented challenge to international criminal law
While in theory any of the modes of liability across Articles 25 and 28 could apply to members of IS, the present study focuses on three provisions in Article 25 for trying an individual for criminal acts under the Rome Statute
The changing landscape of international justice since the horrors wrought in various conflicts at the latter end of the twentieth century prompted the establishment of various ad hoc institutions and the International Criminal Court (ICC)
Summary
The rise of Islamic State (IS) represents an unprecedented challenge to international criminal law. The article will analyse why the ICC should seek to assert jurisdiction over IS, rather than leave prosecution to domestic forums It deals with the three primary spheres in which challenges present themselves: (1) jurisdictional —given the limitations contained in the Rome Statute in terms of what events can be prosecuted; (2) subject matter —focusing on acts of terrorism in light of the absence of a specific criminalisation thereof in the Statute; and (3) the means of holding certain types of participants in IS crimes to account —looking at the regime of liability contained in the Rome Statute
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
