اختصاصات المحكمة الجنائية الدولية ICC: نقاش قانوني حول الحالة السودانية

افتتاح البوست

«دعونا بكل موضوعية نتحدث عن اختصاصات محكمة الجنايات الدولية ICC»

«لإسهاماتكم القانونية بعيدًا عن السياسة»

القسم الأول: الوثائق القانونية الإنجليزية

1. How the Court Works

States Parties or the United Nations Security Council may refer situations of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court to the Prosecutor. The Prosecutor evaluates the available information and commences an investigation unless he determines there is no reasonable basis to proceed.

The Prosecutor may also begin an investigation on his own initiative. In doing so, he receives and analyzes information submitted by a variety of reliable sources. If the Prosecutor concludes there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation, he asks a Pre-Trial Chamber to authorize an investigation.

The Prosecutor's investigations cover all facts and evidence relevant to an assessment of criminal responsibility. The Prosecutor investigates incriminating and exonerating circumstance equally and fully respects the rights of the accused.

During the duration of an investigation, each situation is assigned to a Pre-Trial Chamber. The Pre-Trial Chamber is responsible for the judicial aspects of proceedings. Among its functions, the Pre-Trial Chamber, on the application of the Prosecutor, may issue a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear if there are reasonable grounds to believe a person has committed a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court. Once a wanted person has been surrendered to or voluntarily appears before the Court, the Pre-Trial Chamber holds a hearing to confirm the charges that will be the basis of the trial.

Following the confirmation of charges, a case is assigned to a Trial Chamber of three judges. The Trial Chamber is responsible for conducting fair and expeditious proceedings with full respect for the rights of the accused. The accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty by the Prosecutor beyond reasonable doubt. The accused has the right to conduct the defence in person or through counsel of his or her choosing. Victims may also participate in proceedings directly or through their legal representatives.

Upon conclusion of the proceedings, the Trial Chamber issues its decision, acquitting or convicting the accused. If the accused is convicted, the Trial Chamber issues a sentence for a specified term of up to thirty years or, when justified by the extreme gravity of the crime and the individual circumstances of the convicted person, life imprisonment. The Trial Chamber may also order reparations to victims.

Throughout the Pre-Trial and Trial phases, the accused, the Prosecutor or a concerned State may appeal decisions of the Chambers as specified by the Statute. Following the decision of the Trial Chamber, the Prosecutor or the accused may appeal the decision or sentence as provided in the Statute. Legal representatives of victims, the convicted person or bona fide owners of adversely-affected property may appeal reparations orders. All appeals are decided by the Appeals Chamber of five judges.

While the ICC claims to consider only "genocide," "war crimes," and "crimes against humanity," the definitions of those terms has been left so vague as to be open to virtually any interpretation. Dr. Wilkins gave LifeSite permission to publish his latest just-completed paper on the ICC wherein he warns, "Despite the best intentions of the Court founders, the Rome Statute transfers a vast amount of decision making authority from previously sovereign nations to an international court that will be remote (and unable to be controlled by or accountable) to the diverse peoples and cultures of the world."

"Under the Court's universal and complementary jurisdiction, the Court can and probably will attempt to change social norms in sometimes troublesome areas not admitting of a single, world-wide solution," writes Dr. Wilkins. "The International Criminal Court could well become the mechanism by which the Western innovation of judicially (rather than legislatively) crafted social policy - and its accompanying consequences are exported to the rest of the world. Of all revolutions through the centuries, this is the quietest. Of all the attempts made over the years to foist one group's will on everyone else, this is the most subtle and simultaneously the most far-reaching - the world-wide constitutional convention no one knew about."

2. Jurisdiction

Once a State becomes a party to the Statute, it accepts the Court's jurisdiction with respect to crimes under the Statute. For the Court to exercise its jurisdiction, the territorial State (the State on whose territory the situation which is being investigated has taken or is taking place), or the State of nationality (the State whose nationality is possessed by the person who is being investigated) must be a party to the Statute.

National Court

The ICC will not replace national courts, but will be complementary to national criminal jurisdictions. The Court will only investigate and prosecute if a State is unwilling or unable to genuinely prosecute. This will be determined by the judges. Unjustified delays in proceedings as well as proceedings which are merely intended to shield persons from criminal responsibility will not render a case inadmissible before the ICC.

Subject Matter

The Court's jurisdiction will be limited to the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole. It will therefore have jurisdiction with respect to the crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, all of which are fully defined in the Statute and further elaborated by the Elements of Crimes.

Even though the Court has jurisdiction over aggression, it will not exercise such jurisdiction until the crime has been further defined and conditions under which the Court will exercise its jurisdiction have been agreed upon. The First Session of the Assembly of States Parties created a subcommittee of its Bureau to continue work on the crime of aggression. The subcommittee will be chaired by Allieu Ibrahim Kanu of Sierra Leone, and is expected to report and make proposals to the Assembly during its meeting in February 2003. Once agreement is reached, the Statute will be amended accordingly and the Court will be in a position to exercise its jurisdiction.

Personnel

The Court only has jurisdiction over natural persons aged 18 and above. Official capacity as a Head of State or Government, a member of a Government or parliament, an elected representative or a government official does not exempt a person from criminal responsibility.

Commanders and superiors will also be held liable for criminal offences committed by forces under their effective command and control or effective authority and control.

Preconditions to the exercise of jurisdiction

The Court may exercise its jurisdiction with respect to the crime of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes either when the situation is referred to the Prosecutor by a State Party or by the Security Council, or when the Prosecutor decides to initiate an investigation his or her own decision and on the basis of information received. However, in this last case, the Prosecutor must seek the authorization of the Pre-Trial Chamber before proceeding with the investigation.

When the situation is referred to the Prosecutor by the Security Council, the Court may exercise its jurisdiction in all cases and no preconditions are applicable.

However, in the two other cases, when the Prosecutor decides to initiate an investigation on his or her own decision with the authorization of the Pre-Trial Chamber, or when the situation is referred to the Prosecutor by a State Party, strict preconditions shall be met before the Court can exercise its jurisdiction.

Indeed, in those two cases, the Court may exercise its jurisdiction only if either the State on the territory of which the suspected crime occurred (State of territoriality), or the State of which the person suspected of having committed the crime is a national (State of nationality of the suspected person), is a State Party to the Statute.

If neither of these two States is a State Party to the Statute, the Court will not be in a position to investigate the suspected crimes, except if either the State of territoriality or the State of nationality of the suspected person accepts the exercise of jurisdiction of the Court by declaration lodged with the Registrar. Such a declaration may be made for all suspected crimes committed after 1 July 2002 (taking into consideration that crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court are not subject to any statute of limitations).

Thus, if nationals of States Parties to the Statute are victims of suspected crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court in the territory of a State which is not a Party to the Statute committed by persons who are not nationals of a State Party, the Court wouldn't be in a position to investigate except if either the State of territoriality or the State of nationality of the suspected person accepts the jurisdiction of the Court, or if the situation is referred to the Court by the Security Council.

القسم الثاني: المناقشة الثنائية الإنجليزية

Hassan Omer

UN Security Council Resolution 1593, which referred the situation in Darfur to the ICC, requires the government of Sudan to cooperate with the court even though it is not a state party to the Rome Statute. State cooperation is essential for the ICC to function. Because the ICC lacks the ability to enforce its own orders, it relies on state cooperation in order to conduct investigations or make arrests.

If Sudan refuses to cooperate, the prosecutor should go to the Security Council for assistance. Resolution 1593 requires the prosecutor to report to the Security Council on the progress of his work in Darfur at least every six months. The next mandatory report will take place in June 2007. The prosecutor should use this opportunity to raise any concerns related to Sudan's cooperation with its investigations. He may also seek to report to the Security Council at an earlier time. Under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, the Security Council has the ability to enforce Resolution 1593 and oblige Khartoum to cooperate if it is unwilling to do so voluntarily.

الطيب شيقوق

Dear Omar thax a lot for ur very interesting contribution. My question is Is it regardless of whether the state is a siginatory to or not Omer?

Hassan Omer

Yes, although Sudan is not a signatory to the ICC document it is till under the court juristiction by virtue of the UN Resolution with regard to Darfur under Article 7 of the UN Charter. Sudan is a member of the United Nations and signatory to its Charter. The ICC investigation to Darfur case is based on the UN security coucil request. Sudan need to cooperate or else face the UN possible sanctions.

The significance of Darfur trials, to many International Relations scholars and lawers is its importance as a presedence and a test to the ability of the court to extend its jurisdiction even to those countires that are not signatories to the Court Document. It is also a test for the ability of the UN of using this new international tool, and to the new international reinterpretation of the concept of Sovereignity, and the new international principle of the Resposiblity To Protect.

الطيب شيقوق

My legal view point, Mr. Omer, is that if Sudan does not cooperate with the Court this doesn't mean it is still under the court jurisdiction. To me submission to the court jurisdictiin depends upon whether it is signotary or not.

I believe non-cooperation would stimulate the Security Council to resort to Article 7 of the UN Charter in which case a use of force not for submitting the sudan to the court, but for taking whatever action the Security Council deems fit against the state and the accused as well.

The first action for the Securty council to do is to, successfully, issue a resolution under Article 7 as there no such resolution till now.

All the best

القسم الثالث: CHAPTER VII of the UN Charter

Article 39

The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security.

Article 41

The Security Council may decide what measures not involving the use of armed force are to be employed to give effect to its decisions, and it may call upon the Members of the United Nations to apply such measures. These may include complete or partial interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication, and the severance of diplomatic relations.

Article 42

Should the Security Council consider that measures provided for in Article 41 would be inadequate or have proved to be inadequate, it may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security. Such action may include demonstrations, blockade, and other operations by air, sea, or land forces of Members of the United Nations.

Article 51

Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

القسم الرابع: JURISDICTION OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT

By Johan D. van der Vyver

In 1994, when the International Law Commission submitted its Draft Statute for an International Criminal Court (ICC) to the United Nations Organization, the United States Senate came out in full support of such a tribunal, stating that an international criminal court with jurisdiction over international crimes "would greatly strengthen the rule of law," that such a court "would serve the interests of the United States and of the world community," and that the United States delegation "should make every effort to advance this proposal at the United Nations."1

However, it soon emerged that American support for the ICC was conditional upon exempting U.S. citizens from the exercise of jurisdiction by the Court. Ambassador at Large for War Crimes Issues and leader of the American delegation in Rome, David Scheffer, in an interview with the Washington Post said it quite bluntly: "Any arrangement by which a UN-sponsored tribunal could assert jurisdiction to prosecute Americans would be political poison in Congress."2

Having been confronted by the choice between American exceptionalism and the principle of equal justice for all, the Rome Conference was constrained by the elementary dictates of criminal justice to opt for the latter. This created conflict with the U.S. government. John Bolton, U.S. Under-Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, leaves one in no doubt as to the current strategy of the U.S. toward the ICC. Writing in The National Interest, he proclaimed:

"[W]hether the ICC survives and flourishes depends in a large measure on the United States. We should therefore ignore it in our official posture, and attempt to isolate it through our diplomacy, in order to prevent it from acquiring any further legitimacy or resources."3

The International Criminal Court (ICC) was formally established on July 1, 2002. There are currently 92 States Parties. The judges have been elected, the Prosecutor and Deputy Prosecutor have assumed office, the Registrar has been appointed, the budget for the first year of operation has been approved, and everything is ready to go. At the third session of the Assembly of States Parties in September 2003, Chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo announced that he will soon be seeking authorization from a Pre-Trial Division of the ICC to proceed proprio motu with investigations of alleged crimes committed in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

القسم الخامس: التعليقات والمداخلات العربية

سيف الدولة

«الأخ والصديق الطيب، مع نشاطك المكثف على هذا البورد إلا أني كنت في حالة غيرة من عدم استثمار إمكاناتك القانونية وسعة حصيلتك في التطرق لمواضيع من هذه الشاكلة، واكتفيت ببوستات المشاغبات التي على ظرافتها إلا أنها حرمتنا من وجهك الآخر الذي أحكي عنه. أحييك وأشتاق إليك وإلى مسقط... ولي عودة لهذا الموضوع».

رد الطيب شيقوق

«أخي الأستاذ سيف الدين حمدنا الله، أرجو أن أكون محقًا، لك عميق مودتي. ومساحتك المهنية والاجتماعية في مسقط لم توفق حتى الآن في الحصول على من يملؤها... ولكل مقام مقال يا سيد الناس. إليكم أعزائي اختصاصات محكمة الجنايات الدولية لتقديركم وليس لتقديري».

خالد المحرب

«شكيتك على الله... بعيد عن السياسة».

رد الطيب شيقوق

«ود المحرب، أنا قصدت أسلم الناس معطيات قانونية مسلم بها، فلكل واحد الحق في إلباسها الثوب الذي يناسبه.

>

أنا ما عدت أطمئن لسلامة تمسك أي سوداني بمبادئه السياسية بعد الإحباط الذي أصابنا من غازي سليمان وغيره.

>

فإن كنت جبهويا إسلاميًا فأنت كاذب، وإن كنت ديمقراطيًا فأنت كاذب، وإن كنت تنتمي لحزب سياسي فأنت أيضًا هكذا.

>

ولهذا آثرت أن أكون بعيدًا عن مساحات النفاق، وأن أكتب حسب قناعاتي المهنية. لك مودتي».

تعليق الطيب شيقوق على الحوار الإنجليزي

«السؤال المحوري الآن هو: هل ينعقد الاختصاص في الحالة السودانية هذه إلى محكمة الجنايات الدولية؟

>

إذا ما كانت الإجابة بالإيجاب، عندئذ يمكن الانتقال إلى الموقع الذي أشرت إليه، وذلك لأن الحديث عن طبيعة إجراءات المحكمة ومن له الحق في المطالبة بالتعويض، قبل البت في موضوع الاختصاص، يكون سابقًا لأوانه.

>

لك عميق مودتي».

ياسر الشريف

اختصاصات محكمة الجنايات الدولية من هنا:

#### 1. جريمة الإبادة الجماعية

تعني أي فعل يرتكب بقصد إهلاك جماعة قومية أو إثنية أو عرقية أو دينية إهلاكًا كليًا أو جزئيًا، دون الأخذ بعين الاعتبار الجماعات الاجتماعية والسياسية؛ أي قتل أفراد الجماعة، وإلحاق ضرر جسدي أو عقلي بهم، وإخضاعهم عمدًا لأحوال معيشية مزرية، وفرض تدابير لمنع الإنجاب أو نقل الأطفال إلى جماعات أخرى.

#### 2. الجرائم ضد الإنسانية

تعني أي فعل ارتكب ضمن إطار هجوم واسع النطاق موجه ضد أية مجموعة من السكان المدنيين، كالقتل عمدًا، والإبادة، والاسترقاق، والإبعاد القسري للسكان، والسجن والحرمان الشديد من الحرية البدنية، والتعذيب، والاغتصاب أو الاستعباد الجنسي، أو الإكراه على البغاء أو الحمل القسري، أو التعقيم القسري، أو أي شكل من أشكال العنف الجنسي، واضطهاد أية جماعة لأسباب سياسية أو عرقية أو قومية أو إثنية أو ثقافية أو دينية أو متعلقة بنوع الجنس، والاختفاء القسري للأشخاص، وجريمة الفصل العنصري.

#### 3. جرائم الحرب

تعني الانتهاكات الجسيمة لاتفاقيات جنيف المؤرخة في 12 آب 1949، أي التعذيب أو المعاملة اللاإنسانية، بما في ذلك التجارب البيولوجية، والقيام عمدًا بإحداث معاناة شديدة أو إصابات خطيرة بالجسم أو الصحة، وتدمير الممتلكات والاستيلاء عليها، وإرغام أسير حرب على الخدمة في صفوف معادية، وحرمانه من المحاكمة العادلة، والإبعاد أو النقل أو الحبس غير المشروع، وأخذ الرهائن، وتوجيه هجمات ضد السكان أو منشآت مدنية، وتعمد شن هجمات ضد الموظفين أو المنشآت الإنسانية، وقصف المدن والقرى المجردة من الأهداف العسكرية، وقتل أو جرح مقاتل ألقى سلاحه أو استسلم مختارًا، وتعمد توجيه الهجمات ضد المباني المخصصة للأغراض الدينية أو التعليمية أو الخيرية أو المستشفيات وأماكن تجمع المرضى والجرحى، وتجنيد الأطفال دون الخامسة عشرة من العمر إلزاميًا أو طوعيًا للمشاركة في الحروب.

#### 4. جريمة العدوان

لم ينجح المؤتمر في استخلاص تعريف لها. أما تعريف القانون الدولي، وحسب قرار الجمعية العامة للأمم المتحدة في 14/12/1974، فهو التالي: العدوان هو استعمال دولة ما القوة المسلحة ضد دولة أخرى ضد السيادة وسلامة الأرض والحرية السياسية أو بأية طريقة أخرى.

من الملفت أن بعضًا من مواد النظام الأساسي من معاهدة روما قد نص على وجوب إدخال قضاة إلى المحكمة ذوي خبرة كافية في القانون الدولي، كالقانون الإنساني الدولي وقانون حقوق الإنسان، بالإضافة إلى خبرة قانونية في مجال العنف ضد النساء والأطفال واختصاصيين في جرائم العنف الجنسي، بالإضافة إلى منع عقوبة الإعدام.

كما أنها، ودفاعًا عن المرأة، اعتبرت أن الاغتصاب وكافة أنواع العنف الجنسي تشكل جرائم ضد الإنسانية وجرائم حرب.

القسم السادس: مقتطف صحفي حول الموقف السوداني

خبراء قانونيون سودانيون يحذرون من رفض الخرطوم خطوات المحكمة الجنائية

حذر خبراء سودانيون في القانون الدولي من مخاطر رفض السودان خطوات المحكمة الجنائية الدولية، وقالوا إن الرفض يضع السودان في مواجهة مع المجتمع الدولي، خاصة مجلس الأمن الدولي.

وقال المحامي كمال الجزولي، الخبير في القانون الدولي، لصحيفة «الشرق الأوسط» إن السودان طالما وقع على نظام روما 1998 الذي أنشئت بموجبه المحكمة الدولية فإنه ملزم بقرارات المحكمة، رغم أنه لم يصادق على قانون المحكمة حتى الآن.

وقال إن الرفض يعرض السودان أولًا إلى تدابير دولية لا ترقى إلى مستوى العمل المسلح، وتنحصر في العقوبات الاقتصادية وحظر التنقل والحركة، وإذا لم تجد هذه التدابير فإنه يتم الانتقال إلى الخطة التالية وهي استخدام القوة العسكرية.

وقال خبير القانون الدولي الدكتور أمين مكي مدني إن المدعي العام الدولي سيقوم بتوجيه إعلان التهم لأشخاص محددين، واستبعد أن تقود قرارات المحكمة إلى عقوبات تطال الدولة لأن الأمر، برأيه، يتعلق بأفراد متهمين في القضية.

ومن جانبه قال المدير التنفيذي للمجموعة السودانية لحقوق الإنسان عز الدين عثمان إن رفض الحكومة التعامل مع المحكمة الدولية لا يمنعها من استصدار أحكام غيابية على المتهمين حال ثبوت تورطهم في القضايا قيد النظر.

فتح الموضوع الأصلي في سودانيز أونلاين