

Author: Boister Neil
Publisher: Springer Publishing Company
ISSN: 1046-8374
Source: Criminal Law Forum, Vol.23, Iss.4, 2012-12, pp. : 295-318
Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.
Abstract
The negotiation of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court was initiated not by states eager to remove impunity for core international crimes such as genocide or crimes against humanity, but by small states that wanted an international tribunal to try drug trafficking offences. Their motivations were complex. The system of indirect control over transnational crimes-drug trafficking, terrorism, corruption and so forth-is heavily skewed towards the interests of large `consumer' states. It supports the harmonized criminalization of these offences in national laws around the world, and the articulation of national criminal justice systems through increased international cooperation in policing, legal assistance and ultimately extradition of offenders. But small developing states resent the erosion of sovereignty involved in the extradition of offenders to states like the US, the EU, and Australia. They also fear the political consequences of such cooperation for their internal sovereignty as they live cheek by jowl with the criminals. Prosecution at home on the basis of the obligation
Related content




The Appeals Chambers of the International Criminal Tribunals
By Tracol X.
Criminal Law Forum, Vol. 12, Iss. 2, 2001-02 ,pp. :



