VIOLATION OF COOPERATION OBLIGATIONS WITH THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT AND ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS

Zeynep Erhan Bulut

Makale detayları

VIOLATION OF COOPERATION OBLIGATIONS WITH THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT AND ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS

Yazarlar:

Zeynep Erhan Bulut

Yayıncı:

Kirikkale University

Ana Başlıklar:

Uluslararası Ceza Hukuku | Uluslararası Hukuk

Dergi:

Kırıkkale Hukuk Mecmuası Vol.4 Issue 2, pp.703-738

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

10/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001310523

pISSN:

2757-9964

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 The founding treaty of the International Criminal Court, the Rome Statute, is an international treaty that envisions a cooperation regime based on consent. Due to lack of its own enforcement powers, the ICC relies on effective state cooperation for its activities such as gathering evidence, hearing witnesses, protecting witnesses, and arresting and surrendering individuals to the Court. Therefore the cooperation regime is considered the most crucial component of the Court. States which are parties to the Rome Statute are obligated to cooperate under Article 86 of the Statute. Non-party states, however, are not under such an obligation. Nevertheless, the Rome Statute grants certain powers to the UN Security Council. With this power the UN Security Council may refer a situation to the Court. This referral allows the Court to act in relation to crimes committed in the territory of non-party states. For example, investigations into crimes committed in Sudan and Libya, both non-party states, were initiated through UN Security Council Resolutions 1593 2005 and 1970 2011. The cooperation obligations of these non-party states stem from the UN Charter, not the Rome Statute. However, the Court has struggled to secure effective cooperation from both party and non-party states and has issued decisions under Article 877 of the Statute regarding violations of cooperation obligations. The Court has referred these violations to the Assembly of States Parties and the UN Security Council requesting necessary measures to be taken to ensure cooperation with the Court. Nonetheless, the measures taken by these bodies have not secured cooperation with the Court. In this context, the first part of this study will outline the legal framework of the cooperation regime envisaged by the Court. In the second part of the study, the voluntary cooperation regime will be analysed in light of the ICCs decisions on Sudan, Libya and Kenya. The final section of the study will critically examine the impact of the measures taken by the Assembly of States Parties and the UN Security Council on the functioning of the Court.

 The founding treaty of the International Criminal Court, the Rome Statute, is an international treaty that envisions a cooperation regime based on consent. Due to lack of its own enforcement powers, the ICC relies on effective state cooperation for its activities such as gathering evidence, hearing witnesses, protecting witnesses, and arresting and surrendering individuals to the Court. Therefore the cooperation regime is considered the most crucial component of the Court. States which are parties to the Rome Statute are obligated to cooperate under Article 86 of the Statute. Non-party states, however, are not under such an obligation. Nevertheless, the Rome Statute grants certain powers to the UN Security Council. With this power the UN Security Council may refer a situation to the Court. This referral allows the Court to act in relation to crimes committed in the territory of non-party states. For example, investigations into crimes committed in Sudan and Libya, both non-party states, were initiated through UN Security Council Resolutions 1593 2005 and 1970 2011. The cooperation obligations of these non-party states stem from the UN Charter, not the Rome Statute. However, the Court has struggled to secure effective cooperation from both party and non-party states and has issued decisions under Article 877 of the Statute regarding violations of cooperation obligations. The Court has referred these violations to the Assembly of States Parties and the UN Security Council requesting necessary measures to be taken to ensure cooperation with the Court. Nonetheless, the measures taken by these bodies have not secured cooperation with the Court. In this context, the first part of this study will outline the legal framework of the cooperation regime envisaged by the Court. In the second part of the study, the voluntary cooperation regime will be analysed in light of the ICCs decisions on Sudan, Libya and Kenya. The final section of the study will critically examine the impact of the measures taken by the Assembly of States Parties and the UN Security Council on the functioning of the Court.

 The founding treaty of the International Criminal Court, the Rome Statute, is an international treaty that envisions a cooperation regime based on consent. Due to lack of its own enforcement powers, the ICC relies on effective state cooperation for its activities such as gathering evidence, hearing witnesses, protecting witnesses, and arresting and surrendering individuals to the Court. Therefore the cooperation regime is considered the most crucial component of the Court. States which are parties to the Rome Statute are obligated to cooperate under Article 86 of the Statute. Non-party states, however, are not under such an obligation. Nevertheless, the Rome Statute grants certain powers to the UN Security Council. With this power the UN Security Council may refer a situation to the Court. This referral allows the Court to act in relation to crimes committed in the territory of non-party states. For example, investigations into crimes committed in Sudan and Libya, both non-party states, were initiated through UN Security Council Resolutions 1593 2005 and 1970 2011. The cooperation obligations of these non-party states stem from the UN Charter, not the Rome Statute. However, the Court has struggled to secure effective cooperation from both party and non-party states and has issued decisions under Article 877 of the Statute regarding violations of cooperation obligations. The Court has referred these violations to the Assembly of States Parties and the UN Security Council requesting necessary measures to be taken to ensure cooperation with the Court. Nonetheless, the measures taken by these bodies have not secured cooperation with the Court. In this context, the first part of this study will outline the legal framework of the cooperation regime envisaged by the Court. In the second part of the study, the voluntary cooperation regime will be analysed in light of the ICCs decisions on Sudan, Libya and Kenya. The final section of the study will critically examine the impact of the measures taken by the Assembly of States Parties and the UN Security Council on the functioning of the Court.

 Uluslararası bir andlaşma niteliğini haiz olan Uluslararası Ceza Mahkemesinin kurucu andlaşması Roma Statüsü, rıza temelli bir iş birliği rejimi öngörmektedir. Kendi kolluk gücü olmayan Uluslararası Ceza Mahkemesi, suçun işlendiği yer bakımından delillerin toplanması, tanıkların dinlenmesi, tanıkların korunması, kişilerin tutuklanıp Mahkemeye teslim edilmesi gibi konularda etkin bir devlet iş birliğine ihtiyaç duymaktadır. Bu nedenle iş birliği rejimi Uluslararası Ceza Mahkemesinin en önemli bileşeni olarak kabul edilmektedir. Roma Statüsüne taraf olan devletler, Statünün 86. maddesi kapsamında iş birliği yükümlülüğü altındadırlar. Roma Statüsüne taraf olmayan devletler bakımından ise böyle bir zorunluluk yoktur. Fakat Roma Statüsü çerçevesinde BM Güvenlik Konseyine tanımlanan bazı yetkiler taraf olmayan devlet ülkesinde işlenen suçlar bakımından da Mahkemenin harekete geçmesine olanak tanımaktadır. Örneğin Roma Statüsüne taraf olmayan devletlerden Sudan ve Libya üzerinde işlenen suçların soruşturulması BM Güvenlik Konseyinin sırasıyla 1593 2005 ve 1970 2011 sayılı Kararları ile olmuştur. Taraf olmayan her iki devletin de iş birliği yapma yükümlülüğü Roma Statüsünden değil BM Şartından kaynaklanmıştır. Ancak Mahkeme hem Statüye taraf olan hem de olmayan devletler bakımından etkin bir iş birliği elde edememiş ve Statünün 877 maddesi doğrultusunda iş birliği yükümlülüğünün ihlaline dair kararlar vermiştir. Mahkeme ihlal kararlarını Taraf Devletler Meclisine ve Birleşmiş Milletler Güvenlik Konseyine ileterek iş birliğinin sağlanması için gerekli önlemlerin alınmasını talep etmiştir. Fakat her iki organın da aldığı önlemler iş birliğinin güvence altına alınmasını sağlayamamıştır. Bu nedenle bu çalışma öncelikle Mahkemenin öngördüğü iş birliği rejiminin yasal çerçevesini çizecektir. Devamında Uluslararası Ceza Mahkemesinin kararları ışığında gönüllü iş birliği rejimi analiz edilecek ve iş birliği yükümlülüğünün ihlal edildiğine dair verilen üç temel karar Sudan, Libya ve Kenya inceleme konusu yapılacaktır. Çalışmanın son bölümünde ise Mahkemenin iş birliği konusunda verdiği ihlal kararlarını Taraf Devletler Meclisine ve Birleşmiş Milletler Güvenlik Konseyine iletmesi neticesinde alınan tedbirlerin devletler üzerindeki yaptırım gücüne eleştirel bir inceleme sunulacaktır.

Makale detayları

VIOLATION OF COOPERATION OBLIGATIONS WITH THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT AND ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS

Yazarlar:

Zeynep Erhan Bulut

Yayıncı:

Kirikkale University

Ana Başlıklar:

Uluslararası Ceza Hukuku | Uluslararası Hukuk

Dergi:

Kırıkkale Hukuk Mecmuası Vol.4 Issue 2, pp.703-738

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

10/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001310523

pISSN:

2757-9964

international criminal court

cooperation

un security council

un charter

sanctionsuluslararası ceza mahkemesi

iş birliği yükümlülüğü

bm güvenlik konseyi

bm şartı

yaptırım

Sayı

Makale detayları

Yazarlar: Zeynep Erhan Bulut

Yayıncı: Kirikkale University

Ana Başlıklar: Uluslararası Ceza Hukuku | Uluslararası Hukuk

Dergi: Kırıkkale Hukuk Mecmuası Vol.4 Issue 2, pp.703-738

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 10/2024

Belge Dili: Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.): 2001310523

pISSN: 2757-9964

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Zeynep Erhan Bulut

Yayıncı:

Kirikkale University

Ana Başlıklar:

Uluslararası Ceza Hukuku | Uluslararası Hukuk

Dergi:

Kırıkkale Hukuk Mecmuası Vol.4 Issue 2, pp.703-738

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

10/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001310523

pISSN:

2757-9964