Abstract
When the International Court of Justice issued its Arrest Warrant Judgment in 2002, it indicated that personal immunities do not prevent proceedings in front of “certain international criminal courts” and provided three demonstrative examples of such courts. After the full-scale invasion of Ukraine commenced in February 2022, debates ensued regarding the elements necessary to qualify a court within the meaning of the Arrest Warrant Judgment. They particularly concern two types of tribunals (“fully international” and “hybrid / internationalized”). This article suggests that only fully international courts qualify as “certain international criminal courts”, while hybrid tribunals are far too attached to the sovereignty of State(s) to meet its criteria. The determination of a court as hybrid or international is rather fluid however, and the qualification as “a certain international criminal court” depends on various elements (the establishing mechanism; applicable law; and reflection of the will of the international community) in each individual case.
Published Version
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.
