Sportingology

Composition

Short for ICC according to Abbreviationfinder, The International Criminal Court is composed of 18 magistrates and its four main organs as established by article 34 of the Statute:

1. The Presidency, made up of the President, the First Vice President and the Second Vice President, who will hold office for a period of three years and may be re-elected once (Article 38).
2. An Appeals Section, composed of the President and four magistrates; a
3. Section of First Instance, this will have no less than six magistrates; and one
4. Preliminary Issues Section; also composed of no less than six magistrates (article 39).
5. The Office of the Prosecutor, directed by the Prosecutor, may be assisted by assistant prosecutors. In charge of receiving corroborated information on crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court to examine them and carry out investigations or bring criminal action before the Court (Article 42).
6. The Registry, composed of the Registrar and the Deputy Registrar, will be in charge of the non-judicial aspects of the administration of the ICC and of rendering services to them (Article 43). Within the Secretariat there will be a Victims and Witnesses Unit, established by the Secretary. It will be responsible for adopting protection measures and security devices and will provide advice and other assistance to witnesses and victims who appear before the ICC and to other persons who are in danger due to the testimony given (Article 43).

States Parties

The Statute establishes in its Part XI, the existence of an Assembly of the States Parties, made up of a representative of each State Party to supervise the different organs of the ICC, their budget, reports and activities of the Bureau of the Assembly. Representatives will have one vote and decisions will be reached either by consensus or by majority.

The Assembly of States Parties met for the first time from September 3 to 10, 2002 at the headquarters of the United Nations at its headquarters in New York., where the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, the Elements of Crimes, the Regulations and Detailed Financial Regulations, the Relationship Agreement between the Court and the United Nations, the Agreement on the Privileges and Immunities of the Court, the Principles Basics of the Agreement Relating to the Seat to be negotiated by the Court and the host country, the Regulations of the Assembly of States Parties, the Procedure for the Nomination and Election of Judges and the Prosecutor, and the budget for the first fiscal year of the Court.

The first resumed session of the Assembly of States Parties was held from the 3 to the 7 of February of 2003 at the headquarters of the United Nations in New York, where the first 18 judges of the International Criminal Court were elected.

Jurisdiction

States that become parties to the statute of the ICC thus accept the jurisdiction of the ICC, which may exercise jurisdiction if the crime has been committed in the territory of a State party or if the accused is a national of a State. part (Article 12), when the investigation has been initiated by a State Party or by the Public Prosecutor (Article 13). Article 13 also provides that the Security Council, acting in accordance with the provisions of Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, may refer to the Prosecutor a situation in which it appears that one or more of the crimes has been committed. jurisdiction of the ICC. But in the latter case, neither article 12 nor article 13 of the statute specifies whether the crime denounced by the Security Council must have been committed in the territory of a State party or whether the accused is a national of a State party. For this reason, when it is the Security Council that activates the procedure, it will be the only case in which the Court can exercise universal jurisdiction.

North American stance

The determination of these preconditions for the exercise of jurisdiction by the ICC has been a most contentious point, since the States had different positions in this regard. While some proposed that the Court exercise universal jurisdiction, others argued for the acceptance of jurisdiction by the State of which the perpetrator was a national and by the State in whose territory the crime was committed. This was the position adopted by the North American State.

Finally, it was decided that the ICC would exercise its jurisdiction when the State of which the accused is a national or the State in whose territory the crime was committed is a party to the Rome Statute. In the latter case, it leaves open the possibility that a national of a State that is not a party to the Statute who has committed a crime in the territory of a State Party, may be tried by the ICC. This decision made the United States strongly oppose the signing of the Statute. It must be taken into account that said national may only be tried by the Court if the State of nationality of the alleged perpetrator is unwilling or unable to judge him.

Declaration of inadmissibility

The ICC will declare a case inadmissible, in accordance with the provisions of Article 17, when the matter is the subject of an investigation or prosecution in the State that has jurisdiction over it, unless it is not willing to carry out the investigation, or is unable to carry out the trial, or when the matter has been investigated by the State that has jurisdiction over it and it has decided not to initiate criminal action, unless the decision is due to the fact that it is not willing to carry out the trial or cannot do it; when the person has already been prosecuted for the conduct charged or when the matter is not serious enough to justify the adoption of other measures by the ICC.

However, the ICC will examine those cases in which it determines that the State has initiated the process, but the purpose of the process is to remove the person from the jurisdiction of the ICC, or to delay it so that the person does not appear in justice, or when the court is not independent or impartial or the national administration of justice has collapsed, not being in a position to carry out the trial. In accordance with the aforementioned Article 17, the Court may determine the admissibility of a case ex officio (Article 19).

They are entitled to challenge the admissibility of the case, namely, the accused or the person against whom an arrest warrant or a summons has been issued, the State that has jurisdiction in the case because it is investigating or prosecuting it or has Done before; the State whose acceptance is required in accordance with article 12. The challenge of admissibility will be made before the trial or at its beginning.