The ICC’s Appeals Chamber Judgments in the Jordan Case Regarding Al Bashir and Ntaganda Case: Victories for the Fights against Impunity and Immunity for Serious Crimes

Article Sidebar

PDF
Published: Dec 22, 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.33258/polit.v1i4.546
Keywords:
fights against immunities and impunity; Rome Statute of the ICC; serious international crimes; Jordan case regarding Al Bashir; Ntaganda case

Main Article Content

Aghem Hanson Ekori
Department of Public, Constitutional and International Law, University of South Africa

Abstract

The creation of the ICC was a turning point in the fights against impunity for serious international crimes affecting mankind. Accordingly, the ICC does not recognise any form of immunities before its jurisdiction. Consequently, individuals and senior state officials cannot rely on any form of immunities if accused of any of the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. In the Jordan case regarding Al Bashir’s immunity, the ICC’s Appeals Chamber held that by ratifying the Rome Statute, states parties have consented to waive the immunity of their officials regarding proceedings before the Court. As a result of this, there is no immunity between the Court and states parties and between states parties themselves, and Sudan was bound by the Statute of the Court based on the United Nations Resolution 1593. In the Ntaganda case, the Court held there is no impunity for serious international crimes before its jurisdiction. This article examines both cases and concludes that while in the Jordan case there is victory for serious international crimes and the fights against human rights violations over immunity before the ICC, there is also victory for serious international crimes over impunity before the Court as seen in the Ntaganda case.

Article Details

How to Cite
Ekori, A. H. (2021). The ICC’s Appeals Chamber Judgments in the Jordan Case Regarding Al Bashir and Ntaganda Case: Victories for the Fights against Impunity and Immunity for Serious Crimes. Polit Journal Scientific Journal of Politics, 1(4), 150-156. https://doi.org/10.33258/polit.v1i4.546
Issue
Vol 1 No 4 (2021): Polit Journal: Scientific Journal of Politics, November
Section
Articles

References

Article 13 (b) of the Rome Statute. See also Resolution 1593 (2005) adopted by the Security Council at its 5158th meeting on 31 March 2005, (S/RES/1593 (2005) [1], where the situation of Darfur was referred to the Prosecutor of the ICC.
Article 13(a) of the Rome Statute.
Article 13(b) of the Rome Statute.
Article 13(c) of the Rome Statute.
Article 12(3) of the Rome Statute.
Coman, K., (2017) Prosecuting Crimes of International Concern: Islamic State at the ICC. Utrecht Journal of International and European Law Vol 33: 120-145; Al Bashir Case available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/darfur/albashir#icc-timeline, accessed October 08, 2021.
Frulli, M., .(2018). The Draft Articles on Crimes Against Humanity and Immunities of State Officials. Journal of International Criminal Justice (JICJ) Vol.16: 775-793.
Greenawalt, A.K.A., (2012) Introductory Note to the International Criminal Court: Decisions Pursuant to Article 87(7) of the Rome Statute on Failure by the Republic of Malawi and the Republic of Chad to Comply with the Cooperation Requests issued by the Court with respect to Arrest and Surrender of Omar Hassan Ahmed Al Bashir & African Union Response. International Legal Materials Vol 51: 393-417.
Kohn, L. (2016). The Bashir Judgment Raises the Red Flag for the Rule of Law and the Judiciary. South African Law Journal Vol 133: 246-258.
Nesrine, M. (2021) Omar al Bashir is gone. It was Sudan’s 30 years of anger that ousted him available at: https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org, accessed September 10, 2021.
Schwartz, R. (2016). South Africa Litigation Centre v. Minister of Justice & Constitutional Development: Balancing Conflicting Obligations-Prosecuting al-Bashir in South Africa. Tulane Journal of International & Comparative Law Vol 24: 407-426.
States Parties to the Rome Statute available at: https://asp.icc-cpi.int/en_menus/asp/states%20parties/Pages/the%20states%20parties%20to%20the%20rome%20statute.aspx, accessed September 08, 2021.
The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court circulated as document A/CONF.183/9 of 17 July 1998 and came into force on 1 July 2002 (Rome Statute), available at: https://www.icc-int/resource-library, accessed September 06, 2021.
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir No. ICC-02/05-01/09 OA2 06-05-2019 (2019) [132].
The Ntaganda Case available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/drc/ntaganda#icc-timeline, accessed August 09, 2021.
The Prosecutor v. Bosco Ntaganda, No.ICC-01/04-02/06 (2019) [1].
The Prosecutor v. Bosco Ntaganda, No.ICC-01/04-02/06 (2019) [2].
The Prosecutor v. Bosco Ntaganda, No.ICC-01/04-02/06 (2019) [246].
The Situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/drc, accessed August 11, 2021.
The Prosecutor v. Bosco Ntaganda, No.ICC-01/04-02/06 A3 (2021) [7].
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir No. ICC-02/05-01/09 OA2 06-05-2019 (2019) [113].
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir No. ICC-02/05-01/09 OA2 06-05-2019 (2019) [120].
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir No. ICC-02/05-01/09 OA2 06-05-2019 (2019) [132].
The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir No. ICC-02/05-01/09 OA2 06-05-2019 (2019) [130].
The Prosecutor v. Bosco Ntaganda, No.ICC-01/04-02/06 A A2 (2021) [27].
The Prosecutor v. Bosco Ntaganda, No.ICC-01/04-02/06 A A2 (2021) [28].
The Ntaganda Case available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/drc/ntaganda#icc-timeline, accessed August 09, 2021.
The Prosecutor v. Bosco Ntaganda, No.ICC-01/04-02/06 (2019) [1].
The Prosecutor v. Bosco Ntaganda, No.ICC-01/04-02/06 (2019) [2].
The Prosecutor v. Bosco Ntaganda, No.ICC-01/04-02/06 (2019) [246].
The Situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/drc, accessed August 11. 2021.
The Prosecutor v. Bosco Ntaganda, No.ICC-01/04-02/06 A3 (2021) [7].
The Prosecutor v. Bosco Ntaganda, No.ICC-01/04-02/06 A A2 (2021) [30].
The Prosecutor v. Bosco Ntaganda, No.ICC-01/04-02/06 A A2 (2021) [1170].
The Prosecutor v. Bosco Ntaganda, No.ICC-01/04-02/06 A3 (2021) [284].