Jurisdiction and Cooperation in Criminal Matters (3064JDCCVY)
Samenvatting
Literature summary Jurisdiction and Cooperation in Criminal Matters ()
7 keer bekeken 2 keer verkocht
Vak
Jurisdiction and Cooperation in Criminal Matters (3064JDCCVY)
Instelling
Universiteit Van Amsterdam (UvA)
This is the literature summary of all prescribed literature of the course jurisdiction and cooperation in criminal matters, part of the master International and Transnational Criminal Law at the UvA. This summary relates to the academic year of 2024/2025.
Jurisdiction and Cooperation in Criminal Matters (3064JDCCVY)
Alle documenten voor dit vak (2)
Verkoper
Volgen
GoudRenett
Ontvangen beoordelingen
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
Universiteit van Amsterdam
Jurisdiction and Cooperation in Criminal Matters – Transnational and International Criminal Law –
2024/2025
Literature summary Jurisdiction and Cooperation in Criminal Matters (3064JDCCVY).
Table of content
WEEK 2 – THE INTERNATIONAL LAW OF JURISDICTION IN RELATION TO INTERNATIONAL AND
TRANSNATIONAL CRIMES................................................................................................................................. 3
PRESCRIBED LITERATURE ........................................................................................................................................... 3
CC, PTC 14 November 2019, Decision Pursuant to Article 15 of the Rome Statute on the Authorisation of an
Investigation into the Situation in the People’s Republic of Bangladesh/Republic of the Union of Myanmar,
No. ICC-01/19 ................................................................................................................................................. 3
Annex I to the Referral pursuant to Article 14 of the Rome Statute to the Prosecutor of the International
Criminal Court by the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela with respect to Uniltateral Coercive Measures ...... 5
Martin Böse, `Jurisdiction`, in P. Caeiro, S. Gless, V. Mitsilegas, M. J. Costa, J. De Snaijer, and G.
Theodorakakou (eds.), Elgar Encyclopedia of Crime and Criminal Justice; Cheltenham, Edward Elgar,
forthcoming (2024)......................................................................................................................................... 7
L. Yanev, `Jurisdiction and Combatant’s Privilege in the MH17 Trial: Treading the Line Between Domestic
and International Criminal Justice`, 68(2) Netherlands International Law Review (2021) 163-188. ............ 10
Eurojust, `Guidelines for deciding `which jurisdiction should prosecute’ ..................................................... 12
D. Hovell and M. Malagodi, `Universal Jurisdiction: Law out of Context`, Modern Law Review (2024)....... 14
M. Boe, `Rethinking Universal Criminal Jurisdiction: Toward a Multidimensional Framework` (2024) ....... 20
WEEK 3 – FORMS OF MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE BETWEEN STATES ............................................................ 22
PRESCRIBED LITERATURE ......................................................................................................................................... 22
M. Böse, `Mutual Legal Assistance`, in P. Caeiro, S. Gless, V. Mitsilegas, M. J. Costa, J. De Snaijer, and G.
Theodorakakou (eds.), Elgar Encyclopedia of Crime and Criminal Justice; Cheltenham, Edward Elgar,
forthcoming .................................................................................................................................................. 22
A. Bissett, `The Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty for Core Crimes. A Project in Need of Purpose`, 92 Nordic
Journal of International Law (2023) 218-247 ............................................................................................... 26
A. Furger, `Can They Deliver? The Practice of Joint Investigation Teams (JITS) in Core International Crimes
Investigations`, 22(1) Journal of International Criminal Justice (2024) 43-58 .............................................. 30
Asymmetrical Haircuts: `Episode 81: Ljubljana Legal Lobbying with Koutroulis and Saveedra` .................. 33
K. Stavrou, `Open-Source Digital Evidence in International Criminal Cases: A Way Forward in Ensuring
Accountability for Core Crimes?`, Opinio Juris, 26 January 2021 ................................................................. 34
R. Vázquez Llorente and Y. McDermott, `Truth, Trust, and AI: Justice and Accountability for International
Crimes in the Era of Digital Deception`, Just Security, 17 June 2024 ............................................................ 36
WEEK 4 – GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF EXTRADITION .......................................................................................... 37
PRESCRIBED LITERATURE ......................................................................................................................................... 37
H. van der Wilt, The Law and Practice of Extradition: Chapter 1: ‘Introduction ........................................... 37
H. van der Wilt, The Law and Practice of Extradition: Chapter 2: On the (non-)extradition of nationals .... 39
H. van der Wilt, The Law and Practice of Extradition: Chapter 3: Dual Criminality ...................................... 42
H. van der Wilt, The Law and Practice of Extradition: Chapter 4: The Doctrine of Specialty ........................ 45
H. van der Wilt, The Law and Practice of Extradition: Chapter 5: The poltitical offence exception ............. 46
H. van der Wilt, The Law and Practice of Extradition: Chapter 7: Extradition of terrorism .......................... 48
WEEK 5 – EXTRADITION AND HUMAN RIGHTS ............................................................................................... 49
PRESCRIBED LITERATURE ......................................................................................................................................... 49
J. Silves (2014), ‘Extradition and Human Rights: Diplomatic Assurances and Human Rights in the
Extradition Context ....................................................................................................................................... 49
1
, PRESCRIBED CASE LAW ............................................................................................................................................ 54
ECtHR Application No. 14038/88, 7 July 1989 (Soering v. The United Kingdom) ......................................... 54
ECtHR Application No. 8139/09 (Othman (Abu Qatada) v. the United Kingdom) ........................................ 57
GHDHA ECLI:NL:GHDHA:2016:3606 (Uitleveringsverzoek pedofiel naar VS) ............................................... 59
HR ECLI:NL:HR:2022:1044 (Uitleveringsverzoek Iranier VS) ......................................................................... 60
WEEK 6 - ALTERNATIVES TO EXTRADITION – DISGUISED EXTRADITION, LURING AND ABDUCTION ................ 61
PRESCRIBED LITERATURE ......................................................................................................................................... 61
C. Paulussen, ‘Male captus bene detenus: origin and present meaning', Strafblad, Vol. 17, No. 3, July 2019,
pp. 30-37 ...................................................................................................................................................... 61
C. Paulussen, Male captus bene detenus? Surrendering suspects to the International Criminal Court:
Intersentia: Antwerp/Oxford/Portland 2010 ................................................................................................ 62
PRESCRIBED CASE LAW ............................................................................................................................................ 65
Prosecutor v. Nikolić, Case No. IT-94-2-AR73. Judgment on appeal ............................................................. 65
WEEK 7 - JURISDICTION AND COOPERATION IN CRIMINAL MATTERS IN RELATION TO CURRENT EVENTS AND
DEVELOPMENTS & DISCUSSION OF THE EXAM ............................................................................................... 66
PRESCRIBED LITERATURE ......................................................................................................................................... 66
M. BahaaEldein Thabet, `Lithuania refers ICC to investigate crimes against humanity in Belarus`, 1 October
2024, JURISTnews ......................................................................................................................................... 66
S. Ben-Natan and I. Mann, `Justice for Trans-border Torture Requires Rethinking the International Criminal
Court`s Jurisdiction in the Israel-Palestine Conflict`, 7 August 2024, Just Security ....................................... 67
C. McDougall, `The Imperative of Prosecuting Crimes of Aggression Committed against Ukraine`, 28(2)
Journal of Conflict and Security Law (2023) 203-230. .................................................................................. 68
Y. Tan and S. Yang, `The Joint Investigation Team in Ukraine: An Opportunity for the International Criminal
Court?, 22(1) Chinese Journal of International Law (2023) 103-119. ........................................................... 69
Eurojust, `Involvement of the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court in joint
investigation teams`, 13 February 2024 ....................................................................................................... 70
A. Ricci and J. Crawford, `Puzzling Pieces: OSINT and War Crime Accountability in Ukraine`, 26 September
2024, RUSI Commentary ............................................................................................................................... 72
2
,Week 2 – The international law of jurisdiction in relation to
international and transnational crimes
Prescribed literature
CC, PTC 14 November 2019, Decision Pursuant to Article 15 of the Rome Statute on the
Authorisation of an Investigation into the Situation in the People’s Republic of
Bangladesh/Republic of the Union of Myanmar, No. ICC-01/19
A. Jurisdiction ratione loci
1. Applicable law
Article 12(2)(a) of the Statute allows the ICC to exercise its jurisdiction when:
1. A State Party refers a case;
2. The Prosecutor initiates an investigation.
This jurisdiction applies if the crime occurred:
On the territory of a State Party; or
On a vessel or aircraft registered to a State Party; or
If the accused is a national of a State Party.
In the context of the Bangladesh/Myanmar situation, the Pre-Trial Chamber I concluded that the ICC
could assert jurisdiction if any part of a crime occurred on the territory of a State Party. This
interpretation aligns with the territoriality principle, which has generally been straightforward when
crimes are confined within a single State Party’s border. However, the Chamber is now required to
explore whether the ICC can exercise jurisdiction over crimes that partially occur on the territory of a
State Party and partially on a non-State Party's territory. This involves determining the meaning of
conduct (art. 12(2)(a) Statute) and whether the article mandates that all conduct must occur within
the territory of a State Party.
i. Meaning of the term ‘conduct’ (art. 12(2)(a) Statute
The term "conduct" is understood as a form of behavior that extends beyond a mere act. This
interpretation is supported by the French version of the Statute, which uses "comportement," implying
behavior in a broader sense. Comparing "conduct" with "crime" within the same article suggests that
"conduct" refers to criminal behavior without legal characterization, indicating that the two terms
function similarly in establishing territorial jurisdiction. The Chamber also considered the contextual
use of "conduct" in other Statute provisions, concluding that it refers to the factual actus reus element
underlying a crime.
Furthermore, depending on the crime, "conduct" may encompass both the act and its consequences.
Example to illustrate
For example, in a killing, both the act of killing and the resulting death must be established. In crimes
like deportation, the consequences of the perpetrator's conduct, such as victims being coerced to
leave an area, are essential for completing the crime.
The Chamber noted that in the alleged crime of deportation in Myanmar, the coercive acts that forced
the Rohingya population to cross into Bangladesh imply that part of the actus reus occurred on
Bangladeshi territory, thereby falling within the ICC's jurisdiction.
3
, ii. Location of the conduct
The second issue is whether all conduct must take place within the territory of one or more State
parties. To answer this question, one must look at the territoriality principle. Customary international
law does not prevent States from asserting jurisdiction over acts that took place outside their territory
based on the territoriality principle:
Objective territoriality principle: territorial jurisdiction amy asserted if the crime is initiated
abroad but completed in the State’s territory;
Subjective territoriality principle: State may assert jurisdiction when it is initiated on one
territory but completed in another;
Principle of ubiquity: State may assert jurisdiction if the crime took place in whole or in part
on the territory of the State irrespective of which element;
Constitutive element theory: State may assert jurisdiction if at least one constitutive element
occurred on the territory;
Effects doctrine: when it produces effects in the own territory.
Conform opinion juris, territorial jurisdiction over cross-boundary conduct is in line with international
law. Two conclusions:
1. States can assert territorial criminal jurisdiction even if part of the criminal conduct occurs
outside their territory, as long as there is a link to their territory;
2. States have significant discretion in defining this link.
Article 12(2)(a) does not explicitly limit the Court's jurisdiction to crimes entirely within State Party
territories. Imposing such a limitation would contradict the principle of good faith. When States
delegate authority to an international organization, they transfer all powers necessary to achieve its
purposes. Since the Statute does not explicitly limit the Court’s territorial jurisdiction, it is presumed
that the Court has the same territorial jurisdiction as States under international law. The only clear
limitation is that part of actus reus must occur within a State Party’s territory, allowing the Court to
exercise jurisdiction in such cases.
2. Conclusion
The alleged deportation of civilians from Myanmar to Bangladesh establishes a clear territorial link
through the victims' crossing into Bangladesh. This link is valid under various legal principles, fitting
within customary international law. Therefore, the Chamber does not find it necessary to define
general conditions for the Court's territorial jurisdiction over all transboundary crimes in the Statute.
4
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
√ Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, Bancontact of creditcard voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper GoudRenett. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €8,44. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
