Abstract
AbstractThis article assesses the legal and policy arguments for and against determination by the Security Council of the occurrence of a State act of aggression for the purpose of the prosecution of a crime of aggression before the International Criminal Court, investigating several issues largely neglected by commentators and States Parties to date. It concludes that legal and policy arguments overwhelmingly favour independent determination by the ICC, but nonetheless recognises that the constraints of international politics mean it is unlikely the Assembly of States Parties will be able to reach agreement on provisions that allow for such independent determination. As such, the article assesses the merits of existing compromise proposals, before concluding by offering an alternative compromise provision for the conditions under which the ICC can exercise its jurisdiction over the crime of aggression.
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.
