The aut dedere aut judicare, or “extradite or prosecute” clause is shorthand for a range of clauses that are almost compulsory in international treaties criminalizing conduct, obliging a State to either extradite or prosecute one accused of the crime the subject of the treaty. The obligation has become increasingly central in the emerging legal regime against impunity and has a role in States’ armoury of international criminal enforcement mechanisms. Yet there has been little academic consideration of the sources of the principle, including whether it exists at customary international law, and the scope and operation of the obligation. While the topic is currently being considered by the International Law Commission, this paper seeks to provide some of the empirical research that has to date been missing and to identify the sources and scope of the obligation to extradite or prosecute. The views reflected in this paper are personal and do not necessarily reflect those of the United Nations.

The aut dedere aut judicare, or “extradite or prosecute” clause is shorthand for a range of clauses that are almost compulsory in international treaties criminalizing conduct, obliging a State to either extradite or prosecute one accused of the crime the subject of the treaty. The obligation has become increasingly central in the emerging legal regime against impunity and has a role in States’ armoury of international criminal enforcement mechanisms. Yet there has been little academic consideration of the sources of the principle, including whether it exists at customary international law, and the scope and operation of the obligation. While the topic is currently being considered by the International Law Commission, this paper seeks to provide some of the empirical research that has to date been missing and to identify the sources and scope of the obligation to extradite or prosecute. The views reflected in this paper are personal and do not necessarily reflect those of the United Nations.

This fully updated second edition of Jurisdiction in International Law examines the international law of jurisdiction, focusing on the areas of law where jurisdiction is most contentious: criminal, antitrust, securities, discovery, and international humanitarian and human rights law. Since F.A. Mann's work in the 1980s, no analytical overview has been attempted of this crucial topic in international law: prescribing the admissible geographical reach of a State's laws. This new edition includes new material on personal jurisdiction in the U.S., extraterritorial applications of human rights treaties, discussions on cyberspace, the Morrison case. Jurisdiction in International Law has been updated covering developments in sanction and tax laws, and includes further exploration on transnational tort litigation and universal civil jurisdiction. The need for such an overview has grown more pressing in recent years as the traditional framework of the law of jurisdiction, grounded in the principles of sovereignty and territoriality, has been undermined by piecemeal developments. Antitrust jurisdiction is heading in new directions, influenced by law and economics approaches; new EC rules are reshaping jurisdiction in securities law; the U.S. is arguably overreaching in the field of corporate governance law; and the universality principle has gained ground in European criminal law and U.S. tort law. Such developments have given rise to conflicts over competency that struggle to be resolved within traditional jurisdiction theory. This study proposes an innovative approach that departs from the classical solutions and advocates a general principle of international subsidiary jurisdiction. Under the new proposed rule, States would be entitled, and at times even obliged, to exercise subsidiary jurisdiction over internationally relevant situations in the interest of the international community if the State having primary jurisdiction fails to assume its responsibility.

Since the mid-19th century military powers and various writers have tried to define the notion of belligerent occupation and, in particular, the beginning thereof. There are many situations in which a state of occupation is controversial or even denied. When is control so effective that an invasion turns into a state of belligerent occupation? What is the minimum area of a territory that can be occupied; a town, a hamlet, a house or what about a hill taken by the armed forces? This paper examines what seems to be an important gap of the Fourth Geneva Convention: contrary to the Hague Regulations of 1907 it does not provide a definition of belligerent occupation. It is argued that the Fourth Geneva Convention follows its own rules of applicability and that therefore the provisions relative to occupied territories apply in accordance with the “functional beginning” of belligerent occupation approach from the moment that a protected person finds him or herself in the hands of the enemy. Henry Dunant Prize 2010 from the Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights (ADH Geneva)

"Published with the support of Austrian Science Fund (FWF): PUB 644-G."

The Rome Statute of the ICC at its Twentieth Anniversary (Achievements and Perspectives) is an edited book comprising of 13 chapters written by contributors to a conference dedicated to discuss the development, achievements and possible future evolution of the Rome Statute and international criminal law. The authors include academics from various legal systems, practitioners from the ICC and the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, attorneys and other law experts. The International Criminal Court is the first universal international criminal tribunal. Though quite new, as the Rome Statute was adopted 20 years ago (1998) and only 16 years have passed since its entry into force, it has already developed interesting case-law and continues to elaborate on both substantive and procedural international criminal law. Contributors are Ivana Hrdličková, Claus Kreß, Tamás Lattmann, Jan Lhotský, Milan Lipovský, Iryna Marchuk, Josef Mrázek, Anna Richterová, Simon De Smet, Ondřej Svaček, Pavel Šturma, Kateřina Uhlířová, Kristýna Urbanová, Aloka Wanigasuriya.