Ramona Pedretti offers, for the first time, a comprehensive assessment of the rules of customary international law relating to immunity of Heads of State and other State officials in the context of crimes pursuant to international law and their relationship with core principles of international law. The book gives the reader a full picture of this topical issue which is located at the heart of today's development of international law. It contains an in-depth evaluation of a vast amount of relevant material, ranging from domestic laws to judicial decisions of domestic and international courts. The fact that the International Law Commission is deliberating the issue with a view to drafting an international treaty underscores the book's importance and timeliness.

Since after the Second World War, the crime of aggression is – along with genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes – a “core crime” under international law. However, despite a formal recognition of aggression as a matter of international criminal law and the reinforcement of the international legal regulation of the use of force by States, numerous international armed conflicts occurred but no one was ever prosecuted for aggression since 1949. This book comprehensively analyses the historical development of the criminalisation of aggression, scrutinises in a detailed manner the relevant jurisprudence of the Nuremberg and Tokyo Tribunals as well as of the Nuremberg follow-up trials, and makes proposals for a more successful prosecution for aggression in the future. In identifying customary international law on the subject, the volume draws upon a wealth of applicable sources of national criminal law and puts forward a useful classification of States ́ legislative approaches towards the criminalisation of aggression at the national level. It also offers a detailed analysis of the current international legal regulation of the use of force and of the Rome Statute ́s substantive and procedural provisions pertaining to the exercise of the International Criminal Court ́s jurisdiction with respect to the crime of aggression, after 1 January 2017.

This book theorizes the ways in which states that are presumed to be weaker in the international system use the International Criminal Court (ICC) to advance their security and political interests. Ultimately, it contends that African states have managed to instrumentally and strategically use the international justice system to their advantage, a theoretical framework that challenges the “justice cascade” argument. The empirical work of this study focuses on four major themes around the intersection of power, states' interests, and the global governance of atrocity crimes: firstly, the strategic use of self-referrals to the ICC; secondly, complementarity between national and the international justice system; thirdly, the limits of state cooperation with international courts; and finally the use of international courts in domestic political conflicts. This book is valuable to students, scholars, and researchers who are interested in international relations, international criminal justice, peace and conflict studies, human rights, and African politics.

This book focuses on the concept of state responsibility for international crimes, which gained support following the First World War, but was pushed into the background by the development of the principle of individual criminal responsibility under international law after the Second World War. Jorgensen considers the history and merits of a concept that, it is argued, is currently on the threshold between lex ferenda and lex lata.

Presents theories, practices and critiques alongside each other to engage students, scholars and professionals from multiple fields. This title is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.

This book aims to investigate whether, and if so, how, an institution designed to bring to justice perpetrators of the most heinous crimes can be regarded a tool of oppression in a (neo-)colonial sense. To do so, it re-invents the concept of neo-colonialism, which is traditionally associated more with economic or political implications, from an international criminal law perspective, combining historical, political and legal analyses. Allegations of neo-colonialism in relation to the International Criminal Court (ICC) became widespread after the Court had issued an arrest warrant against the Sudanese President Omar Al-Bashir in 2009. While the Court, since its entry into function in 2002, has been confronted with criticism from various corners, the neo-colonialism controversy was sparked by African stakeholders. Unlike other contributions in this domain, thus, this book provides a Western perspective on an issue more often addressed from an African standpoint, with the intention of distinguishing itself from the more political and emotive and sometimes superficial arguments that exist within critical legal approaches towards the ICC. The subject matter will primarily be of interest to scholars of international criminal law or those operating at the intersection of law and politics/history, nationals of African states and from other parts of the world professionally interested and/or involved in international criminal law and justice and the ICC, and governmental and non-governmental organizations. Secondly, the book will also appeal and speak to critical legal scholars and those interested in historical legal analysis. Res Schuerch is a Swiss lawyer specialized in the field of International Criminal Law and the ICC. He previously worked as a researcher at the University of Amsterdam and as an academic assistant at the University of Zürich.