Human Rights Protection before the International Criminal Court

Assessing the Scope and Application of Article 21(3) of the Rome Statute

in International Community 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

This article assesses the human rights framework of those accused before the International Criminal Court, with particular emphasis on Article 21(3) of the Rome Statute. Part 2 examines a number of obstacles currently impinging the successful operation of human rights protection before the Court, which Article 21(3) may remedy. Part 3, drawing on strands of interpretative analysis, seeks to interpret and illuminate Article 21(3), arguing that a broad scope ought to be adopted for determining the substantive content encapsulated by ‘internationally recognized human rights’. Moreover, Article 21(3) should be recognised as containing the hierarchical standard of what has been termed ‘super-legality’. Part 4 then highlights the interpretive potential for Article 21(3) as both a tool of innovation and as a remedial device for human rights violations before the Court that are not explicitly provided for in the Rome Statute.

Human Rights Protection before the International Criminal Court

Assessing the Scope and Application of Article 21(3) of the Rome Statute

in International Community Law Review

Sections

References

1

As of October 2015.

18

Mégretsupra note 14 p. 79.

19

Sluitersupra note 5 pp. 466–67.

27

Ibid. p. 116.

29

Ryngaertsupra note 15 p. 4.

30

Schabassupra note 5 p. 211.

33

Ibid. p. 59.

40

Groversupra note 7 p. 560.

41

Baileysupra note 8 p. 513.

42

Verhoevensupra note 35 pp. 2–22.

44

Sluitersupra note 5 p. 467.

46

Youngsupra note 37 pp. 192–93.

47

Ibid. p. 193.

49

Groversupra note 39 p. 119.

51

Pikissupra note 31 p. 89.

52

Pelletsupra note 7 p. 1079.

53

Bittisupra note 48 p. 303.

54

Youngsupra note 37 p. 193.

55

Kleffnersupra note 28 p. 129.

56

Ibid. pp. 129–130.

58

Bittisupra note 48 p. 301.

62

Schabassupra note 5 p. 211.

64

Baileysupra note 8 p. 530.

67

Groversupra note 39 p. 117.

74

Youngsupra note 37 p. 203.

77

Sheppardsupra note 43 p. 65.

79

Hochmayrsupra note 38 p. 674.

80

Baileysupra note 8 p. 532.

81

Sheppardsupra note 43 p. 49.

88

Bittisupra note 48 p. 303.

90

Sheppardsupra note 43 p. 63.

91

Baileysupra note 8 p. 546.

94

Schabassupra note 5 p. 215. Article 22(2) of the Rome Statute makes clear that the definitions of crimes should be interpreted in favour of the person being investigated prosecuted or convicted.

97

Hochmayrsupra note 38 p. 674.

100

Pelletsupra note 7 p. 1081.

101

Verhoevensupra note 35 pp. 17–18.

102

Groversupra note 7 p. 560.

103

Pelletsupra note 7 p. 1079.

105

Verhoevensupra note 35 p. 14.

109

Sheppardsupra note 43 p. 59.

111

Sluitersupra note 5 p. 466.

112

Schabassupra note 108 p. 398.

115

Bittisupra note 48 p. 304.

116

Sheppardsupra note 43 pp. 59–60.

118

Baileysupra note 8 pp. 536–538.

131

Schabassupra note 108 p. 398.

132

Schabassupra note 5 pp. 211–12.

Information

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 28 28 12
Full Text Views 90 90 77
PDF Downloads 11 11 8
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0