The Quarterly Journal of Judicial Law Views

The Quarterly Journal of Judicial Law Views

The Jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court in Trying Offences against the Administration of Justice:Case study of Thomas Lubango

Authors
Hosein Mirmohammad Sadeqi 1
Rasoul Abed 2
1 Shahid Beheshti University.
2 Tehran University
Abstract
  Jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court includes the international crimes which stipulated in the Statute of ICC. Criminal procedure of international crimes needs the protection of the Court’s criminal process. This protection is provided by conviction of persons who perverting the course of international justice. The issue of this paper is to answer this question that do the ICC has jurisdiction to try the offenses against the administration of justice and the extent of this jurisdiction is.

  So, considering the major legal systems’ approaches and international criminal law is explained the foundations of this jurisdiction (part one). The extent of the jurisdiction is understood by examining of the Articles 70 and 71 of statute (part two). Finally, it is ended by taking the first case into account which related to offenses against the administration of justice in Court’s procedure (part three).
Keywords
International Criminal Court
Criminal Process
Jurisdiction
Administration of Justice
. Bohlander, Michael, International Criminal tribunals and Their Power to Punish Contempt and False Testimony, Criminal Law Forum 12: 91–118, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands, 2001
2. Keijer, N, (2000), Contempt of court, Devender, Gouda Quint.
3. Miller, C.J, (2000), Contempt of Court, London, OUP.
4. Silvia, D’Ascoli, (2007), Sentencing Contempt of Court in International Criminal Justice: An Unforeseen Problem Concerning Sentencing and Penalties, Journal of International Criminal Justice 5.
5. Scheb, John M & Scheb, II John M, (2005), Criminal Law, Wadsworth, Cengage learning.
B) Reports:
1. Contempt of Court and Reprimands, 15 LRTWC (965 –1039), 1949.
2. International Law Commission (ILC), Working Group Report, 1993.
3. International Law Commission (ILC), Final Report, 1994.
4. Preparatory Committee for ICC, Report, Vol. I, 1996. 5. Preparatory Committee for ICC, Report, Vol. II, 1996. 6. Proposal submitted by the United States on offences against the integrity of the Court, UN Doc.A/ AC.249/WP.41, fn. 3. 7. Report of the Working Group on Procedural Matters, UN Doc. A/CONF.183/C.1/WGPM/L.2/ Add.7. 8. Working paper submitted by Australia and the Netherlands, UN Doc. A/AC.249/L.2.
1- Brđanin (IT-99-36-R77), Order Instigating Proceedings against Milka Maglov, 8 May 2003. 2- Brđanin (IT-99-36-R77), Decision on Motion for Acquittal Pursuant to Rule 98 bis, para. 15. 3- Cf. Nuclear Tests Case (Australia v. France), Judgment of 20 December 1974, ICJ Reports 1974, 259- 260. 4- Cf. Case Concerning to the Northern Cameroon, Judgment of 2 December1963, ICJ Reports1963. 5- Decision on the Prosecution's Urgent Request for Variation of the Time-Limit to Disclose the Identity of Intermediary 143 or alternatively to Stay Proceedings Pending Further Consultations with the VWU. 6- Hartmann (IT-02-54-R77.5), Order in Lieu of an Indictment on Contempt, 27 August 2008. 7- Judgment on Allegations of Contempt Against Prior Counsel MilanVujin,Tadic (IT-94-1- A-R77), Appeals Chamber, 31 January 2000, x 24.
8- Judgment on Contempt Allegations, Beqa Beqaj (IT-03-66-TR77), Trial Chamber, 27 May 2005, x 13. 9- Judgment on Contempt Allegations, Jovic (IT-95-14/2-R77), Trial Chamber, 30 August 2006, x 11. 10-World War II Collections, Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10 (Green Series) October 1946April 1949: US v. Karl Brandt, 27 June 1947, at 968-970; US v. Joseph Altstoetter, 17 July 1947, at 974 to 975, 978, 992; and US v. Alfried Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach, 21January 1948, at 1003, 1005, 1006, 1008, 1011