Ghana - Amnesty International

GHANA: END IMPUNITY THROUGH UNIVERSAL JURISDICTIONNo Safe Haven Series No. 1083prosecution for crimes under international law for any government official since the Second WorldWar. Those instruments articulated a customary international law rule and general principle of law.Indeed, several of the international instruments adopted over the past half century were expresslyintended to apply both to international and national courts. 246 Moreover, even the internationalinstruments establishing international criminal courts envisaged that the same rules of internationallaw reiterated in those instruments applied with equal force to prosecutions by national courts. 2476.6. BARS ON RETROACTIVE APPLICATION OF INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW INNATIONAL LAW OR OTHER TEMPORAL RESTRICTIONSStates have recognized for more than six decades since the adoption of the Universal Declaration ofHuman Rights that the prohibition of retroactive criminal laws does not apply to retrospectivenational criminal legislation enacted after the relevant conduct became recognized as criminal underinternational law. 248 Article 15 of the ICCPR, which Ghana has ratified, contains a similarprohibition. 249 The Committee against Torture has made clear that national legislation definingtorture as a crime under international law can apply to conduct which was considered as torture246These instruments include: Allied Control Council Law No.10, art. II (4) (a); U.N. G. A. Res. 95 (i), 11 Dec.1946; 1948 Genocide Convention, art. IV; 1950 Nuremberg Principles, principle III; 1954 Draft Code ofOffences, art. 3; 1973 Apartheid Convention, art. III; 1991 Draft Code of Crimes, art. 13 (Official position andresponsibility); 1996 Draft Code of Crimes, art. 6 (Official position and responsibility).247Statute of the Special Court for Sierra Leone, art. 6 (Individual criminal responsibility) (2); Law on theEstablishment of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia for the Prosecution of Crimes CommittedDuring the Period of Democratic Kampuchea, with inclusion of amendments as promulgated on 27 October 2004(NS/RKM/1004/006), art. 29. For further analysis on this point, see Amnesty International, UniversalJurisdiction: Belgian court has jurisdiction in Sharon case to investigate 1982 Sabra and Chatila killings, Index:EUR 53/001/2002, May 2002 (http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/IOR53/001/2002/en).248Article 11 (2) of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights states:“No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitutea penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavierpenalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.”249Article 15 of the ICCPR states:“1. No one shall be held guilty of any criminal offence on account of any act or omission which did notconstitute a criminal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Norshall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time when the criminal offencewas committed. If, subsequent to the commission of the offence, provision is made by law for theimposition of the lighter penalty, the offender shall benefit thereby.2. Nothing in this article shall prejudice the trial and punishment of any person for any act or omissionwhich, at the time when it was committed, was criminal according to the general principles of lawrecognized by the community of nations.”Index: AFR 28/004/2012 Amnesty International November 2012