Cookies Policy
X

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

Reflections on the ICC Prosecutor’s Recent “Selection Decisions”

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
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law Online

Taking the starting point in an assessment of three major “selection decisions” made by the ICC Prosecutor in the situation in Mali, this article provides for a discussion of the key challenges relating to explaining how the ICC Prosecutor undertakes its “selection decisions”. First, the article explores the Prosecutor’s justifications for acting positively on Mali’s self-referral to the ICC. Second, it examines how the Prosecutor justifies that some crimes, but not others, will be subject to further investigation. Third, it provides for a discussion of how the Prosecutor selects suspects for further investigation. These three “selection decisions” are examined in light of the governing law and policies as well as the Prosecutor’s earlier practice and the scholarly debate. Some of the broader legitimacy challenges facing the Court are also discussed. In contrast to what the Prosecutor suggests, the article concludes that the Office of the Prosecutor does appear to treat self-referrals as a special category of cases where different standards apply. The article also concludes that it is doubtful that the gravity concept provides a clear framework for making “selection decisions”.

10.1163/18757413-90000082
/content/journals/10.1163/18757413-90000082
dcterms_title,pub_keyword,dcterms_description,pub_author
6
3
Loading
Loading

Full text loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/18757413-90000082
Loading

Data & Media loading...

http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/18757413-90000082
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/18757413-90000082
2013-01-01
2016-12-02

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
     
    Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law Online — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation