The International Criminal Court’s Libya Case(s)—The Need for Consistency with International Human Rights as to Due Process and the Death Penalty

in International Criminal Law Review
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

The icc’s Libya cases raise interesting questions about the icc’s interaction with national jurisdictions that retain the death penalty. In the case against Abdullah Al-Senussi, the icc ruled he could be tried in Libya—his case was ‘inadmissible’—despite Libya retaining the death penalty and despite fair trial concerns. Yet, Rome Statute Article 21.3 directs the Court to be consistent with international human rights. Is it consistent with international human rights to indirectly authorize trial in a country that retains the death penalty, under conditions that cannot guarantee at least core due process protections? This article argues that it is not. Furthermore, this article argues that the Appeals Chamber in Senussi was insufficiently concerned with due process violation in the national jurisdiction—in a situation one could well-anticipate a former high-level regime official would not receive a fair trial post-regime change.

The International Criminal Court’s Libya Case(s)—The Need for Consistency with International Human Rights as to Due Process and the Death Penalty

in International Criminal Law Review

Sections

Index Card

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 36 36 23
Full Text Views 16 16 16
PDF Downloads 10 10 10
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0