Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T07:22:39.848Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Testimony of ICRC delegates before the International Criminal Court

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 April 2010

Stéphane Jeannet
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Research Article
Information
International Review of the Red Cross , Volume 82 , Issue 840 , December 2000 , pp. 993 - 1000
Copyright
Copyright © International Committee of the Red Cross 2000

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 Stéphane Jeannet, “Recognition of the ICRC's long-standing rule of confidentiality: An important decision by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia”, IRRC, No. 838, 06 2000, pp. 403–425.Google Scholar

2 The tasks incumbent upon the ICRC under the Statutes of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement (1986), Arts 5.2c) and g) include “to undertake the tasks incumbent upon it under the Geneva Conventions, to work for the faithful application of international humanitarian law applicable in armed conflicts and to take cognizance of any complaints based on alleged breaches of that law” and “to work for the understanding and dissemination of knowledge of international humanitarian law applicable in armed conflicts and to prepare any developments thereof”. It should be noted that the Statutes have been unanimously adopted by the States party to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and the components of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement.

3 Roberge, Marie-Claude, “The new International Criminal Court”, IRCC, No. 325, 12 1998, pp. 671–677.Google Scholar

4 Dörmann, Knut, “Preparatory Commission for the International Criminal Court: The Elements of War Crimes”, IRRC, No. 839, 09 2000, pp. 771–796.Google Scholar

5 See Jeannet, , op. cit. (note 1), pp. 406–408.Google Scholar

6 Doc. PCNICC/2000/INF/3/Add.1. p. 39.

7 See also Knut Dörmann and Claus Kress, “Verfahrens- und Beweisregeln sowie Verbrechenselemente zum Römischen Statut des Internationalen Strafgerichtshofs: Eine Zwischenbilanz nach den ersten zwei Sitzungen der Vorbereitungskommission für den Internationalen Strafgerichtshof”, Humanitäres Völkerrecht - Informationsschriften, Heft 4, 1999, p. 202.Google Scholar

8 The ICTY decision was taken on 27 July 1999. The fact that it recognized the ICRC an absolute right to nondisclosure based on customary international law would undoubtedly have been extremely helpful in convincing the diplomats who had doubts about the draft rule. However, it was not until 8 October 1999 that this decision was made public, that is several weeks after the end of the second session of the PrepCom. Therefore, the ICRC did not use this information until the next session (29 November–17 December 1999), during which discussion on the draft rule was not reopened.

9 See: Piragoff, Donald P., “Protection of National Security Information”, in Roy S. Lee (Editor), “The International Criminal Court, The Making of the Rome Statute”, Kluwer Law International, The Hague, 1999, pp. 270–294.Google Scholar