Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-l4dxg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T16:22:06.736Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Mandatory Compliance Powers vis-à-vis States by the Ad Hoc Tribunals and the International Criminal Court: A Comparative Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 March 2004

Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In the absence of police powers, the International Criminal Court, like the Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, will depend on the co-operation of states in order to fulfil its mandate. Discussing the jurisprudence of the ad hoc Tribunals and the travaux préparatoires of the Rome treaty, the author compares the mandatory powers conferred on the respective institutions to this end. He concludes that the Security Council endowed the Tribunals with unequivocally binding powers, while under the Rome treaty regime, which resembles traditional inter-state co-operation in criminal matters, the ICC's powers are more limited and state obligations less stringent.

Type
HAGUE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS: International Criminal Court
Copyright
© 1999 Kluwer Law International