Untitled

saerTaSoriso samarTlis Jurnali, #1, 2008 JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, N1, 2008
http://69.94.11.53/ENGLISH/basicdocs/statute/2004.pdf
The Versailles Treaty June 28, 1919
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/partxiv.htm
UN Resolution 95/1 Principle III: Principles of the Nuremberg Tribunal, 1950 http://deoxy.org/wc/wcnurem.htm
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969:
http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/1–1–
1969.pdf#search='Vienna%20Convention%20on%20the%20Law%20of%20Treaties'
United Nations Security Council Resolutions:
808 (1993): Resolution of 22 February 1993 http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N93/098/21/
IMG/N9309821.pdfOpenElement
827 (1993): Resolution of 25 May, 1993
http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N93/306/28/IMG/N9330628.pdfOpenElement
955 (1994), Resolution of 8 November, 1994 http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N95/140/97/
PDF/N9514097.pdfOpenElement
1
Justice Jackson, in the Opening Statement before the International Military
Tribunal: Jackson, R. (1947) The Nuremberg Case as Presented by Robert H.
Jackson, Chief of Counsel for the United States, pp.82-83.
2
On the notion of “international crimes” in general see: e.g., De Than, C.& Shorts,
E. (2003) Interna-tional Criminal Law and Human Rights, pp.13-14; Kittichaisaree,
K. (2001) International Criminal Law, pp.3-4; Steiner, H.J.& Alston, P. (ed.) (2000)
Inter-na-tional Human Rights in Context: Law, Politics, Moral, pp.1132-38;
Cassese, A. (2003) Interna-tional Criminal Law, pp. 23-25.
3
As defined by the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Art. 2(7).
4
United Kingdom House of Lords, Regina v. Bartle and the Commissioner of
Police for the Metropolis and Other (Appellants), Ex Parte Pinochet (Res-pon-dent)
(Second Appeal hearing from a Divisional Court of the Queen's Bench Division
holding that former heads of state are entitled to immunity), House of Lords, 24
March 1999 [1999] 2 All ER 97, [1999] 2 WLR 827.
5
See: Tams, C.J. “Well-Protected Enemies of Mankind”, in The Cambridge Law
Journal (July, 2002) vol.61, part 2, at 246, pp. 246-249.
6
See: O’Neill, K.C. “A New Customary Law of Head of State Immunity: Hirohito and
Pinochet”, in Stanford Journal of International Law (2002), vol. 38, at 289, pp. 314-317.
7
See: Bianchi, A. “Immunity Versus Human Rights: The Pinochet Case”, in EJIL
(1999), vol.10, No.2, at 237, pp. 254-62.
8
See, in general: Greenwood, C. “Is There a Right of Humanitarian Intervention”,
in The World Today (February 1993) vol. 49, pp.34-40, (cited from the LSE Course
Pack for LL461); Simma, B. “NATO, the UN and the Use of Force: Legal Aspects”,
in EJIL, (1999), vol.10, No.1, pp.1-22; Kritsiotis, D. “The Kosovo Crisis and NATO’s
Application of Armed Force Against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia”, in ICQL
(2000), vol.49(2), at 330; “Kosovo: House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee
4 th Report, June 2000”, in ICLQ (2000), vol.49(4), pp. 876-943.
9
As in the case of humanitarian intervention of NATO states in Kosovo.
10
In the face of the United Nations’ Security Council.
11
See: Charter of the International Military Tribunal, Art.7; Charter of the International
military Tribunal for the Far East, Art.6; Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal
for The Former Yugoslavia, Art. 7(2); Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal
for Rwanda, Art.6(2); Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, Art. 27.
12
e.g. courts already exist, no additional expenses are needed, etc.
78