Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Has the United Nations Security Council Implicitly Removed Al Bashir's Immunity?

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites

image of International Criminal Law Review

On 4 March 2009, the ICC issued an arrest warrant for Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, the incumbent Head of State of Sudan. This article's purpose is to suggest a legal basis for reconciling the well established rule on personal immunities under customary international law with the prosecution of Heads of State from non-parties to the ICC Statute. While arguing for the legality of Al Bashir's warrant as well as the legality of the warrant's enforcement, this article explores the basis upon which the UN Security Council can remove immunities. By giving special attention to the concept of waivers, the article suggests that the UN organ implicitly removed Al Bashir's immunity when it referred the situation of Sudan to the ICC in 2005.

Affiliations: 1: Office of the Co-Prosecutors, United Nations Assistance to the Khmer Rouge Trials, Cambodia


Full text loading...


Data & Media loading...

Article metrics loading...



Can't access your account?
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation