Universal Jurisdiction: Clarifying the Basic Concept

2 Journal of International Criminal Justice 735–760 (2004)

26 Pages Posted: 3 Dec 2019 Last revised: 14 Dec 2019

See all articles by Roger O'Keefe

Roger O'Keefe

Bocconi University - Department of Law

Date Written: 2004

Abstract

Academic analysis of the Arrest Warrant case in the ICJ has tended to focus to date on the Court’s judgment on immunity. Comparatively little attention has been paid to the question of universal jurisdiction, as discussed in detail in most of the separate and dissenting opinions and declarations. The following article focuses less on the various judges’ conclusions as to the international lawfulness of universal jurisdiction than on their treatment of the basic concept. The article argues that this treatment is open to question, reflecting as it does both a conceptual conflation of states’ jurisdiction to prescribe their criminal law with the manner of that law’s enforcement and an inattention to crucial temporal considerations. As well as fostering debatable terminology, these factors lead some judges to an unsatisfying conclusion regarding the permissibility of the enforcement in absentia of universal jurisdiction, and cause others to underestimate the degree of state practice in favour of universal jurisdiction over crimes under general international law.

Keywords: Universal Jurisdiction, International Criminal Law, Arrest warrant, International Court of Justice

JEL Classification: K33

Suggested Citation

O'Keefe, Roger, Universal Jurisdiction: Clarifying the Basic Concept (2004). 2 Journal of International Criminal Justice 735–760 (2004), Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3496574 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3496574

Roger O'Keefe (Contact Author)

Bocconi University - Department of Law ( email )

Via Roentgen, 1
Milan, Milan 20136
Italy

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
1,044
Abstract Views
2,086
Rank
44,712
PlumX Metrics