Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T02:38:26.042Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Establishment of an International Criminal Jurisdiction: The First Phase

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 April 2017

Yuen-li Liang
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The need for an international criminal jurisdiction was recognized by the General Assembly of the United tjations in a resolution adopted in 1948, in which it was stated in the preamble thalt “in the course of development of the international community, there will be an increasing need of an international judicial organ for the trial of certain crimes under international law.”

Type
Notes on Legal Questions Concerning the United Nations
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 46 , Issue 1 , January 1952 , pp. 73 - 88
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1952

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Resolution 260 B(III) of Dec. 9, 1948, General Assembly, Official Becords, 3d Sess., Pt. I, Resolutions, p. 177.

2 Ibid. As to the background on this question see a note in this JOUENAL, Vol. 43 (1949), pp. 478–486.

3 U.N. Doc. A/1316; this Journal, Supp., Vol. 44 (1950), pp. 136–137.

4 On this question see a note on “The Second Session of the International Law Commission: Review of its Work by the General Assembly,” this Journal, Vol. 45 (1951), pp. 524–525.

5 General Assembly, 5th Sess., Official Records, Resolutions, pp. 77–78.

6 For the names of the representatives of the Member States selected by the General Assembly and of the officers of the Committee, see report of the Committee, U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/4, pp. 5–6. See also below, Supplement to this Journal, p. 1, footnote 1.

7 U.N. Doe. A/AC.48/SR.2, par. 5.

8 Ibid., pars. 5, 17 and 33.

9 Ibid., pars. 56 and 41.

10 The Draft Statute appears as Annex I of the Committee’s report, U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/4, and is reprinted in the Supplement to this Journal, p. 1.

11 See U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/1, pp. 7–14.

12 U.N. Docs. A/AC.48/SE.3, par. 32; A/AC.48/SB.22, par. 6.

13 U.N. Doc. A/AG.48/SE.3, par. 34. For the views of the International Law Commission on this matter, see this Journal, Supp., Vol. 44 (1950), pp. 134–137.

14 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SR.22, pars. 35 and 63.

15 Ibid., pars. 2, 28.

16 Ibid., pars. 9–12.

17 Ibid., par. 58.

18 U.N. Doc. A/A0.48/SB.21, pars. 64–68.

19 Ibid., par. 71.

20 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/8R.3, pars. 26–29; see also statement by the representative of Uruguay, U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/8B.4, pars. 56–61.

21 See statements by the representatives of Brazil, Israel, The Netherlands and the United States, U.N. Docs. A/AC.48/SB.3, pars. 49–52, 72–73; A/AC.48/SB.4, pars. 13–23; A/AC.48/SB.5, pars. 56, 67, 69, 71; A/A0.48/SE.25, pars. 4, 6–7, 12–14.

22 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SR.4, pars. 19, 22.

23 U.N, Doc. A/AC.48/SR.25, par. 31.

24 What was important in the view of the majority of members of the Committee was to reaffirm and consolidate the newly established principle that individuals may be held internationally responsible for criminal acts. TJ.N. Doc. A/AC.48/4, p. 31.

25 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SR.9, pars. 77, 83.

26 See statements by the representatives of Australia, Prance, Israel, Pakistan, The Netherlands, TJ.K. Ibid., pars. 73, 74, 77, 81–83, 84.

27 The Committee, wishing to confirm the precedents established by the Niirnberg and Tokyo judgments and also the corresponding rule expressed in Art. IV of the Genocide Convention, agreed that no person should be exempt; from the jurisdiction of the court merely because of his position as a responsible rujer, public official, etc. U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/4, p. 32.

28 U.N; Doc. A/AC.48/1, pp. 56–65.

29 U.N. Doe. A/AC.48/SR.11, pars. 8, 20–21. The Secretary of the Committee pointed out, however, that Judge Hudson had described how the Permanent Court of International Justice had been scrupulous in the application of international law on the basis of the enumeration in Art. 38 of its Statute (Hudson, The Permanent Court of International Justice, 1920-1942 (New York, 1943)), and that, in his view, the International Court of Justice had been equally scrupulous in applying the provisions of Art. 38 of its Statute. Ibid., par. 11.

30 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/4, pp. 16–17.

31 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SR.4, pars. 58–60, 70.

32 U.N. Docs. A/AC.48/SR.3, pars. 51, 52; A/AC.48/SB.4, pars. 30, 32, 33, 41, 46; A/AC.48/SB.6, pars. 61, 62, 70.

33 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/4, p. 23.

34 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SB.7, pars. 14–17.

35 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/4, p. 25.

36 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SR.7, pars. 102, 107.

37 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SE.8, par. 42.

38 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SB.7, par. 31.

39 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SR.6, pars. 14, 32, 34.

40 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SR.5, pars. 73–74. See also U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SR.6, par. 9.

41 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SE.6, pars. 20–21.

42 A proposal to give the Security Council also the right to institute proceedings was defeated by a vote of 7 to 2, with 4 abstentions. U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SR.26, par. 95.

43 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SR.8, par. 87.

44 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SB.8, pars. 103–105.

45 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/L.7.

46 U.N. Doe. A/AC.48/4, p. 28.

47 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SR.9, pars. 14–15.

48 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SR.28, pars. 27–33.

49 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SB.23, par. 59.

50 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/L.13.

51 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SB.24, pars. 25, 31, 42.

52 Ibid., par. 48.

53 U.N. i Doc. A/AC.48/L. 7.

54 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SK.11, pars. 38, 49, 59, 73.

55 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SR.12, par. 68.

56 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SR.28, pars. 92–109.

57 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SB.15, par. 28.

58 Ibid., pars. 1–37.

59 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/L.9.

60 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SE.15, pars. 3–43.

61 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/4, p. 49. The possibility of a trial in absentia was envisaged but not recommended by the Committee. Ibid., p. 33.

62 U.N. Doe. A/AC.48/SE.29, par. 3.

63 U.N. Docs. A/AC.48/SE.9, pars. 101, 105, 107, 111-112; A/AC.48/SE.10, pars. 8, 13, 14–16.

64 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/8E.9, pars. 97, 98, 99, 108; A/AC.48/8B.10, pars. 32, 49.

65 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SB.21, pars. 23–24, 32.

66 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/1, p. 105.

67 U.N. Doe. A/AC.48/L.9, p. 7.

68 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SB.21, par. 19.

69 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SR.20, pars. 83–87.

70 U.N. Doc. A/AC.48/SE.20, pars. 94–118.