Much of the recent scholarly writings and debates on amnesty have revolved around its lawfulness, when granted in respect of the most serious crimes under international law committed in the context of civil armed conflicts. The inconclusiveness of international law on this issue - with positive international law and opinio juris calling for criminal prosecution, and State's practice favouring practical political solutions - does nothing more than deepen the confusion already affecting the international legality of national amnesties. Building on emerging trends in State's practice, this book attempts to clarify the question of the legality of national amnesties for crimes against humanity by suggesting a compromised legal framework within which amnesty and accountability can both be accommodated.

Drawing on crystallizing trends in State's practice in respect of amnesty, this book provides a comprehensive legal framework within which grants of amnesty can be reconciled with the duty to prosecute core crimes under international law.

This pioneering book explores the intersections of law and culture at the International Criminal Court (ICC), offering insights into how notions of culture affect the Court’s legal foundations, functioning and legitimacy, both in theory and in practice.

This book offers the first comprehensive and in-depth analysis of the provisions of the ‘Malabo Protocol’—the amendment protocol to the Statute of the African Court of Justice and Human and Peoples’ Rights—adopted by the African Union at its 2014 Summit in Malabo, Equatorial Guinea. The Annex to the protocol, once it has received the required number of ratifications, will create a new Section in the African Court of Justice and Human and Peoples’ Rights with jurisdiction over international and transnational crimes, hence an ‘African Criminal Court’. In this book, leading experts in the field of international criminal law analyze the main provisions of the Annex to the Malabo Protocol. The book provides an essential and topical source of information for scholars, practitioners and students in the field of international criminal law, and for all readers with an interest in political science and African studies. Gerhard Werle is Professor of German and Internationa l Crimina l Law, Criminal Procedure and Modern Legal History at Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin and Director of the South African-German Centre for Transnational Criminal Justice. In addition, he is an Extraordinary Professor at the University of the Western Cape and Honorary Professor at North-West University of Political Science and Law (Xi’an, China). Moritz Vormbaum received his doctoral degree in criminal law from the University of Münster (Germany) and his postdoctoral degree from Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin. He is a Senior Researcher at Humboldt-Universität, as well as a coordinator and lecturer at the South African-German Centre for Transnational Criminal Justice.

Explores how the first treaty-based UN international tribunal's judges innovatively applied the law to perpetrators of international crimes in one of the worst conflicts in recent history.

This volume presents and critiques the distorted effects of the international human rights movement's focus on the fight against impunity.

This book challenges the growing assumptions about the exercise of jurisdiction over international crimes – that legal impediments are invalid in the face of the imperative to prosecute crimes of this gravity. Six principal impediments to the exercise of jurisdiction over international crimes are individually and comparatively analysed from the perspective of their historical origins, the policy contexts justifying them, and the legal arguments used by courts and commentators to either uphold the barrier to prosecution or to reject its application so that prosecution remains unhindered. These six impediments are: (1) Amnesties; (2) Pardons; Statutes of Limitation; (4) Immunities; (5) Ne bis in Idem (double jeopardy); and (6) Abuse of process. The author proposes that an approach based upon an ‘interests analysis’, derived from policy oriented approaches to international law, provides a reasonable, coherent, and transparent means for courts to resolve the question of jurisdiction when faced with competing rules or principles such as those forming the basis of the research. Each chapter contains a theoretical evaluation of one of the mentioned impediments, as well as a comprehensive and up to date discussion of relevant case-law from both world-wide domestic and international jurisdictions. This volume builds upon Yasmin Naqvi’s expertise as a scholar and a lawyer working for the Chambers of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. She has also held positions at the International Committee of the Red Cross, the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies in Geneva, and as a legal consultant on transitional justice and special procedures at the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.