Complementarity, Amnesties and Alternative Forms of Justice: Some Interpretative Guidelines for the International Criminal Court

Posted: 29 Feb 2008

See all articles by Carsten Stahn

Carsten Stahn

Leiden University - Leiden Law School

Date Written: July 2005

Abstract

The question to what extent amnesties and pardons may bar criminal investigations or prosecutions under the Statute of the International Criminal Court (the Statute) has been left unresolved by the Rome process. This essay seeks to develop some general guidelines that may help the Court to address this problem, should it arise in a specific case. It suggests four basic principles to deal with the issue of amnesties and pardons: (i) the Court has interpretative autonomy to decide whether an amnesty or a pardon is permissible under the Statute; (ii) exemptions from criminal responsibility for the core crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court by amnesties or pardons should generally be considered incompatible with the Statute; (iii) prosecution by states and by the Court may be limited to the most serious crimes and the most responsible perpetrators (targeted prosecution); (iv) amnesties or pardons should, if it all, only be permitted in exceptional cases, namely where they are conditional and accompanied by alternative forms of justice.

Suggested Citation

Stahn, Carsten, Complementarity, Amnesties and Alternative Forms of Justice: Some Interpretative Guidelines for the International Criminal Court (July 2005). Journal of International Criminal Justice, Vol. 3, Issue 3, pp. 695-720, 2005, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=915730

Carsten Stahn (Contact Author)

Leiden University - Leiden Law School

P.O. Box 9520
2300 RA Leiden, NL-2300RA
Netherlands

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

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
874
PlumX Metrics