The Statute of the Iraqi Special Tribunal for Crimes Against Humanity– Progressive or Regressive?
By Olaoluwa Olusanya
The global effort to establish an effective system of international justice is at an important phase in its history. After close to 50 years of relative stagnation following the Nuremberg trials at the end of World War II, the field of international criminal law has been revitalised. The establishment of the International Criminal Court, the ad hoc tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda, "hybrid" or "internationalised" processes such as the Special Court in Sierra Leone, and national criminal justice systems exercising universal jurisdiction, have all lent substance and credibility to the assertion that the most grievous human rights crimes are subject to international scrutiny and legal action.
It is therefore within this context that the Statute of the Iraqi Special Tribunal for Crimes Against Humanity (ISTCH Statute) needs to be evaluated. This is because the ISTCH Statute, unlike previous international criminal law statutes, was adopted unilaterally as part of the obligations of an occupying power,[10] who seemingly violated international law.[11] In contrast, previous international criminal law statutes were adopted multilaterally and in accordance with internationally accepted forms of intervention.[12]
This Article intends to examine the impact of the ISTCH Statute on the norms and credibility of contemporary international criminal law. In other words, despite its legislative history, can the ISTCH Statute nevertheless constitute a step forward for international criminal law, ŕ la Nuremberg? Or is it essentially a step backward?
These questions will be tackled by examining the following aspects of the ISTCH Statute: the organizational structure of the ISTCH, the legislative history of the ISTCH Statute, its territorial, personal, temporal and subject matter jurisdiction, and the penalties it recognizes. The methodology of this article will involve an analytical and comparative assessment of the aforementioned provisions with equivalent provisions under the statutes of other international criminal law enforcement...
GLJ Editors
Gralf-Peter Calliess
and
Peer Zumbansen
have published
their study on
the growing gap
between law and
transnational
governance.
* * *
"Its theorizing is
rich and ecumenical
in scope"
- Gregory Shaffer
* * *
The book "makes one
realize how truncated
and hamstrung most
prior studies ...
have been"
- Fleur Johns
* * *
"Essential reading for
anyone who wants to
understand how
transnational law
works."
- Sally Merry
