PRINTED FROM OXFORD REFERENCE (www.oxfordreference.com). Jurisdiction based on the objective territorial principle can be slightly more complicated. Thus, while Art. This interpretation is supported by the deliberations of the Assembly of States Parties’ Working Group on the Crime of Aggression, where: “[b]road support was expressed for the view that concurrent jurisdiction arises where the perpetrator acts in one State and the consequences are felt in another…[w]hile some delegations expressed the possible need for clarifying language, possibly in the elements of crime, several stated that the Rome Statute was sufficiently clear and that ‘over-legislating’ should be avoided. Public users are able to search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter without a subscription. (2) The second strategy—which is supported by ICC’s Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda—is for the U.N. Security Council to refer the situation in Iraq and Syria to the ICC, in accordance with Art. However, there are several reasons why this interpretation is incorrect. The Appeals Chamber, in the Congo case, ruled that any provision of the Statute must be interpreted in light of the section within which it was drafted. objective territorial principle While jurisdiction is essentially based on the territorial principle (i.e. 12(2)(a) must be interpreted consistently with Arts. 20(1) & 20(3), were drafted together in Part II of the Statute, whereas Part III, which contains Art. David Blackman, Executive Editor He has been a member of the National Law School’s Jessup International Law Moot Court Team and is particularly interested in international criminal law. Jurisdiction under this principle is generally premised on the presence of at least two of the following three factors: act, intent, and effects, though isolated sources seem to … 12(2)(a) of the Rome Statute permits the ICC to try crimes that occur within the territory of a State-party. By continuing to use this website, you consent to Columbia University's usage of cookies and similar technologies, in accordance with the Columbia University Website Cookie Notice. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single entry from a reference work in OR for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice). However, political obstacles make this solution unlikely. This provision states that the ICC has jurisdiction to try a crime if “[t]he State on the territory of which the conduct in question occurred [emphasis added]” is party to the Rome Statute. | Login, Using the Objective Territorial Principle to Prosecute the Islamic State. Jeenie Kahng, Financial Editor. One should recall, however, that the subjective and objective applications of the territorial principle first developed in the late 19th and early 20th century as indepen-dent and exclusive principles of jurisdiction.9,10 Traditionally, subjective territoriality relies upon three main principles. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single entry from a reference work in OR for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice). The first is as a mere component of a crime, in the manner specified above. Leila Mgalablishvili, Head Articles Editor The decision of the Permanent Court of International Justice in the Lotus case supported this reasoning [emphasis added].”, This interpretation is also supported by ICC’s decisions, since the Court has used the term “conduct” in Art. 124 of the Rome Statute, Leila Mgalablishvili, Head Articles Editor, Caroline Wattenmaker, Executive Online Editor, Columbia University Website Cookie Notice. Much ink has been spilt on the prospect of bringing the leadership of the Islamic State to trial before the chambers of the International Criminal Court [hereinafter “ICC”]. Moreover, any other construction of Art. 25(3)(b), (c) & (d) of the Rome Statute, a crime is composed of three separate elements—conduct, consequences, and circumstances, when only the consequences of a crime occur within the territory of a State party, Art. 30, was drafted separately, deliberations of the Assembly of States Parties’ Working Group on the Crime of Aggression, Report on the Situation in the Republic of Korea, France had made a declaration under Art. ). The second is to denote the entire set of facts concerning a crime, including its consequences, and can be found in Arts. Caroline Wattenmaker, Executive Online Editor since neither Iraq nor Syria are parties to the Rome Statute, which is supported by ICC’s Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda, situations to the ICC, instead of cases or individuals. 7(1)(a) read with Arts. International Law, View all related items in Oxford Reference », Search for: 'objective territorial principle' in Oxford Reference ». International Criminal Court, The Hague. ... Access to the complete content on Oxford Reference requires a subscription or purchase. You could not be signed in, please check and try again. Enter your email address to subscribe to JTL and receive notifications of new articles by email. If the objective territorial principle is read into this provision, it would imply that the ICC is competent to try crimes whose consequences occur within the territory of a State-party, even when the criminal conduct occurred abroad. Kelly Tieu, Public Affairs Editor However, the consequences of their criminal conduct fall within the Court’s territorial jurisdiction. All Rights Reserved. The "objective territorial principle" is a common jurisdiction base used in the United States for the prosecution of extraterritorial crimes. the State within which a crime or act giving rise to the proceedings is committed or performed has jurisdiction), its objective application ‘allows jurisdiction over offences having their culmination within the state even if not begun there. While jurisdiction is essentially based on the territorial principle (i.e. the State within which a crime or act giving rise to the proceedings is committed or performed has jurisdiction), its ... From:  objective territorial principle. 12 interchangeably with the word “crime” in Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui and the investigation authorizations in Kenya and Cote d’Ivoire. Art. objective territorial principle  nationality principle. Consequently, such a referral would grant the ICC jurisdiction not only over the Islamic State’s crimes, but also the atrocities committed by the Assad regime, such as the intentional bombing of civilians in Aleppo. Moreover, in the Katanga Confirmation decision, the Court affirmed that such statutory interpretation should exclude unrelated provisions, whose “application would engender an asystematic corpus juris.” Hence, the term ‘conduct’ in Art. This is not a prospect that Russia or China will welcome, and both are likely to continue using their veto powers to protect their ally from prosecution. The Territorial Principle in Criminal Law* By Rollin M. Perkins** THRE are four' different theories of criminal jurisdiction, namely: (1) territorial, (2) Roman, (3) injured forum, and (4) cosmopoli-tan. Encyclopaedic Dictionary of International Law ». There is however a third approach, which may avoid the obstacles impeding the other approaches—the objective territorial principle. 30. U.S. jurisdiction derived from the principle of territoriality, the effects doctrine/objective territoriality and special maritime and territorial jurisdiction – are discussed infra § II.A.3.a. The objective territorial principle allows the Office of the Prosecutor to directly target the Islamic State’s leadership, overcoming the drawbacks of founding jurisdiction based on the accused’s nationality. This is because the provision states that the Court has jurisdiction if “[t]he State on the territory of which the conduct in question occurred or, if the crime was committed on board a vessel or aircraft, the State of registration of that vessel or aircraft [emphasis added]” is party to the Rome Statute. If these two terms are not read synonymously, it implies that when criminal conduct occurs outside the territory of a State-party, the Court has jurisdiction if the consequences were felt onboard the vessel of a State-party, but not if they occur within its territory. Xi (Brooke) Zheng, Public Affairs Editor in  Brittany Davis, Head Notes Editor Much like Mbarushimana, the leaders of the Islamic State orchestrate attacks from the territory of non-States-parties. 12 uses the word “conduct” in relation to the territory of a State-party, it uses the word “crime” for the purposes of jurisdiction over vessels or aircrafts of such a party. Law 12 and Arts. The court considered these grounds sufficient to establish jurisdiction over him, because the campaign provided “motivation … and encouragement to the FDLR troops on the ground.” Crucially, the relevant criminal conduct—campaign orchestration—was carried out by Mbarushimana while he lived in Paris, France. 13(b) only allows the Security Council to refer situations to the ICC, instead of cases or individuals. As observed by the Office of the Prosecutor in the Report on the Situation in the Republic of Korea, such a reading would, for no clear reason, “create an artificial distinction when the acts are one and the same.”. 12 explicitly uses the word conduct instead of crime, it could be interpreted as excluding the ICC from exercising jurisdiction when only the consequences of a crime occur within the territory of a State party. This form of personal jurisdiction initially seems promising, since a large portion of the Islamic State’s troops come from States-parties such as Tunisia and Jordan. A few months earlier, on November 13, 2015, it also acknowledged responsibility for the attack in Paris, France which killed at least 130 people and wounded more than 350. As Dr. Michael Vagias has pointed out, the Rome Statute uses the term “conduct” in two distinct senses. In these circumstances, if the objective territorial principle is applied, the leadership of the Islamic State could be tried for ordering, facilitating or contributing to murder, a crime against humanity, under Art. 20(1) & 20(3), were drafted together in Part II of the Statute, whereas Part III, which contains Art. — transnational@law.columbia.edu, Frank Colleluori, Editor-in-Chief With increased globalization, it becomes easier for a prosecutor to demonstrate that conduct occurring outside … M Hayashi, ‘Objective Territorial Principle or Effects Doctrine? For questions on access or troubleshooting, please check our FAQs, and if you can''t find the answer there, please contact us. 12 would lead to absurd results. New York, NY 10027 20(1) & 20(3). 124 of the Rome Statute, excluding the Court’s jurisdiction over war crimes committed on its territory, or by its nationals, for a period of seven years. If you have purchased a print title that contains an access token, please see the token for information about how to register your code. The two attacks in Sousse and Tunis, Tunisia, which killed scores of people, were also attributed to the Islamic State. Thus, both approaches to establish ICC jurisdiction over the Islamic State prove to be unsatisfactory. Ships of a sovereign are considered to be part of the sovereign’s territory while they are on the high seas. Under the Rome Statute’s framework, a crime is composed of three separate elements—conduct, consequences, and circumstances.