Preface

Contents

Table of Figures

Abbreviations and Terminology

Part I: Introduction

A. Introduction to the problem

B. Research objective, research questions and structure

C. Methodology

I. Applicable law

1. Proper law of the ICC

2. The external general law sources

3. Intermediary conclusion

II. Rules of interpretation

III. Comparative law methodology

IV. Conclusion

Part II: Structure of the Office of the Prosecutor

A. Overview: Structure of the Court

B. Office of the Prosecutor

C. Conclusion

Part III: The pre-investigation stage

A. Overview of proceedings before the ICC

B. Initiation of analysis – the triggering procedure

I. Introduction

1. Democratic Republic of Congo

2. Uganda

3. Central African Republic

4. Darfur, Sudan

5. Article 15 situations (Côte d’Ivoire, Iraq, Venezuela, Palestine, Kenya, etc.)

II. Definition of the term "referral"

III. Distinguishing situation v. case

1. Defining a situation

2. Defining a case

3. Demarcation line between situation and case

4. Conclusion

IV. State referral

1. Drafting history

2. Preconditions of a State referral

3. Self-referrals

4. Waivers of complementarity (including articles 18 and 19 proceedings)

5. Withdrawal of a referral

6. Conclusion

V. Security Council referral

1. Preconditions of a referral under article 13 (b)

2. Application of the principle of complementarity to SC referrals

3. Deferral according to article 16

a) Drafting history

b) Interpretation of elements

aa) Investigation or prosecution

bb) Commence or proceed

cc) Period of twelve months

dd) Resolution adopted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter

ee) SC request

ff) Renewal of the request

c) Practice of the SC under article 16

aa) SC-Res. 1422 (2002), 1487 (2003)

bb) SC-Res. 1497 (2003)

cc) SC-Res. 1593 (2005)

4. Conclusion

VI. Proprio motu power – article 15 analysis

1. Introduction

2. Drafting history

3. Initiation of pre-investigations (paragraph 1)

4. Analysis of communications (paragraph 2)

5. Submission to the PTC/Victim's representations (paragraph 3)

6. Authorization to commence the full investigation (paragraph 4)

7. Subsequent requests (paragraph 5)

8. Duty to notify information providers (paragraph 6)

9. Intermediary conclusion regarding article 15

10. Article 12 (3) declarations

VII. Conclusion on the trigger mechanisms

C. Preliminary examination process

I. Relationship between article 15 and article 53

II. Overview of evaluation criteria

III. Preliminary examination method – OTP practice

IV. Preliminary examination method – statutory basis

D. Seizure of pre-investigations

E. Concluding observations Part III

Part IV: Selection criteria

A. Introduction

B. The initiation of an investigation, article 53 paragraph 1

I. Drafting history of article 53

II. Chapeau

1. Duty to investigate

2. Exception to the duty to investigate

3. Determination of reasonable basis to proceed

4. OTP selection strategy approach

5. Academic approaches towards prosecutorial discretion at the ICC

6. Intermediary conclusion

III. Evaluation criteria (subparagraphs a–c)

1. Subparagraph a – jurisdiction

a) Reasonable basis to believe that a crime exists

b) Jurisdiction of the Court

2. Subparagraph b – admissibility (article 17)

a) Drafting history overview

b) Complementarity

aa) Complementarity regarding situations – "in a general manner" (degree and standard of specificity)

bb) Grounds for inadmissibility

cc) Exceptions to the ground of inadmissibility

(1) Inactivity

(2) Unwillingness (article 17 (2))

(3) Inability (article 17 (3))

(4) Genuineness

(5) Ne bis in idem principle

c) Legal gravity threshold – article 17 (1) (d)

aa) Drafting history

bb) Interpretation of gravity

(1) OTP approach

(2) PTC I arrest warrants decision (Lubanga and Ntaganda)

(3) Judgment on appeal against PTC I’s arrest warrants decision

(4) Academic approaches

(5) Interpretation of gravity: Linking gravity to articles 53 (1) (b), 17 (d) and 53 (1) (c)

cc) Criteria for the gravity threshold

(1) PTC I arrest warrants decision (Lubanga and Ntaganda)

(2) OTP criteria

(3) Gravity and sentencing (ad hoc tribunals, SCSL)

(4) Recommendation regarding the legal gravity criteria

dd) Conclusion: Interpretation and criteria for legal and relative gravity

3. Subparagraph c – interests of justice

a) Interests of justice

aa) Literal, contextual and teleological interpretations

(1) NGO input on the "interests of justice"

(2) OTP policy

(3) Academic approaches

(4) Own hypothesis: Broader concept of the "interests of justice"

bb) Drafting history

cc) Interests of justice in the law of domestic jurisdictions and legislation

dd) International(ized) jurisdictions

ee) Conclusion and summary

b) Nonetheless substantial reasons: Proportionality test

c) All the circumstances – open list of sub-criteria

d) Explicit factors to be considered

aa) Gravity of the crime – relative gravity under article 53 (1) (c)

bb) Interests of victims

e) Other potential considerations

aa) Impact of an investigation (peace and security)

bb) Feasibility and effectiveness of an investigation

cc) Other alternative justice mechanisms

dd) Amnesties (and truth commissions revisited)

f) Conclusion

C. Article 53 paragraph 2

I. Chapeau

II. Warrant or summons under article 58

III. Admissibility

IV. Interests of Justice

1. Taking into account all the circumstances

2. Gravity of the crime – relative gravity under article 53 (2) (c)

3. The interest of the victims

4. Particular circumstances of the accused

a) The age or infirmity of the alleged perpetrator

b) Role in the alleged crime – those bearing the greatest responsibility

aa) Big fish v. small fish debate: Focused investigations on those "bearing the greatest responsibility"

bb) ICTY and ICTR completion strategies (and sentencing decisions)

cc) SCSL and ECCC

dd) PTC I arrest warrants decision (Lubanga and Ntaganda)

ee) OTP policy

ff) Conclusion

D. Duty to notify of a decision not to investigate

E. Article 53 paragraph 3

F. Concluding observations Part IV: Prosecutorial guidelines approach and referrals to national jurisdictions

Part V: Concluding remarks

A. Summary of Parts I and II

B. Summary of Part III

C. Summary of Part IV

Part VI: Zusammenfassung

Annex 1: Graphs of the Pre-Investigation Stage

A. Graph of the distinction situations and cases (Part III, B., III.)

B. Pre-Investigation Stage as conducted by the OTP (Situation Selection)

C. OTP Analysis Phase I-III (in detail)

Annex 2: Country analysis

A. Working hypothesis

B. Country analysis

I. Austria (Civil law, Germanic family)

II. Canada (Common law and Civil law)

III. Cameroon (civil law and common law influence; African family)

IV. China (Chinese law)

V. Colombia (Civil law, Romanistic family, potential situation country)

VI. Côte d’Ivoire (Civil law, Romanistic family, African family, situation country)

VII. Democratic Republic of Congo (Civil law, Romanistic family, African family, situation country)

VIII. France (Civil law, Romanistic family)

IX. Germany (Civil law, Germanic family)

X. India (Common law, Hindu law)

XI. Kenya (Common law, African family, situation country)

XII. The Netherlands (Civil law)

XIII. Norway (Civil law, Nordic family)

XIV. South Africa (Common law)

XV. Sudan (Common law, Sharia law)

XVI. Uganda (Common law, African family, situation country)

XVII. United Kingdom (England and Wales) (Common law)

XVIII. United States (Common law)

C. Conclusion regarding the country analysis

Annex 3: SC-Res. 1593 (2005)

Bibliography

1. Books and monographs

2. Articles (journals, yearbooks and posted on the internet)

3. Contributions to collected work

4. International documents and reports

5. Domestic legislation

Table of Cases

1. International

2. Internationalized

3. National

Index