Ministry of justice
tải về 1.09 Mb.
|
- Điều hướng trang này:
- GROUP 01 GROUP’S MEMBERS
- TRẦN NGỌC HÀ - 453313 LÊ THỊ KHÁNH LINH - CLASS
- ĐÁNH GIÁ CỦA GIÁO VIÊN A B
- I. The necessity and legal basis for establishing The International Criminal Court.
|
MINISTRY OF JUSTICE HANOI LAW UNIVERSITY INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW - TEAMWORK ASSIGNMENT TOPIC 3: THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT - SITUATION IN DARFUR, SUDAN
BIÊN BẢN XÁC ĐỊNH MỨC ĐỘ THAM GIA VÀ KẾT QUẢ THAM GIA LÀM BÀI TẬP NHÓM Ngày: 09/04/2022 Địa điểm: Trường Đại học Luật Hà Nội Khoa: Luật Chất lượng cao Khóa: 45 Nhóm: 03 Lớp: N06 – TL1 Tổng số sinh viên của nhóm: 05 Có mặt: 05 Bài tập: Từ thực trạng pháp luật Thuế Tiêu thụ đặc biệt hiện nay, cho biết các đề xuất, kiến nghị nhằm hoàn thiện các quy định về Thuế Tiêu thụ đặc biệt ở Việt Nam. Môn học: Luật Tài chính Xác định mức độ tham gia và kết quả tham gia của từng sinh viên trong việc thực hiện bài tập nhóm. Kết quả như sau:
ABSTRACT: Back in 2003, it was reported that millions of citizens in Sudan had been forced to leave their homes and seek refuge in other countries. hundreds of thousands of people were estimated to have died as a result of the persecution of non-Muslims. It was the Sudanese government's duty to be the first to hear about this and take concrete actions, but instead, they chose to turn a blind eye to the current crisis and authorized the Janjaweed (Arabic pro-government militias) to suppress the rebellious groups who opposed the government, which turned the conflict into full-scale genocide. This has caught the international community's attention, which eventually called for the ICC's involvement. Accordingly, this essay shall demonstrate the legal foundation for the intervention of ICC and the international community while providing a brief historical context of the conflict that occurred in Darfur to gain a better understanding of the need for such an international mechanism. The essay will also tackle and address related issues regarding the case of the Sudan government and the ICC. I. The necessity and legal basis for establishing The International Criminal Court. The international community has long aspired to the creation of a permanent international court and, in the 20th century, it reached a consensus on definitions of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. The Nuremberg and Tokyo trials addressed war crimes, crimes against peace, and crimes against humanity committed during the Second World War. In the 1990s after the end of the Cold War, tribunals like the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda were the result of a consensus that impunity is unacceptable1. Specifically, after the conflicts in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, and the absence of a permanent international criminal court, the international community chose to establish two ad hoc International Criminal Tribunals to prosecute individuals responsible for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and acts of genocide in these two specific situations. The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) was established in 1993, and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) in 1994, to investigate and punish the perpetrators of the egregious crimes committed during those conflicts2. However, because they were established to try crimes committed only within a specific time frame and during a specific conflict, there was general agreement that an independent, permanent criminal court was needed. Since then, on 17 July 1998, States adopted the Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), called the Rome Statute, which entered into force on 1 July 2002. The ICC is responsible for bringing to justice persons accused of genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. The ICC’s jurisdiction is subject to certain preconditions, and it operates only when the concerned State or States are unwilling or unable to carry out the necessary investigations and prosecutions. The UN Security Council, however, can impose the ICC’s jurisdiction on a given State by adopting a resolution under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. Besides, the Court is intended to complement3, not replace, national criminal justice systems. It can prosecute cases only if national justice systems do not carry out proceedings or when they claim to do so but in reality, are unwilling or unable to carry out such proceedings genuinely. This fundamental principle is known as the principle of complementarity. The Court will not be in a position to bring to justice every person who has committed crimes of concern to the international community. Therefore, the gray line between the ICC having jurisdiction over Sudan’s situation or not still creates a debate up till today for researchers and scholars, for that matter our essay will not conclude the conclusion but rather we will analyze the situation and give our best to come up with an explanation for the jurisdiction of The ICC. tải về 1.09 Mb. Chia sẻ với bạn bè của bạn:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||