Abstract
Much scholarship has taken place in the field of international relations theory directed at identifying and understanding the impact of expanded global interrelations in the modern era. The emergence of phenomena such as “globalization” and “global governance” has excited areas of intensive study, providing new conceptual frameworks through which to explore international relations.
This chapter evolved from a paper submitted in partial fulfillment of the doctoral comprehensive examinations at UBC. The presentation of this paper at the Roundtable was made possible by grants from both the Law Foundation of British Columbia and the Faculty of Law at UBC. Thanks are due to Dr. Wouter Werner for providing a number of insightful and helpful comments on this chapter subsequent to its presentation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
A. Slaughter et al., “International Law And International Relations Theory: A New Generation Of Interdisciplinary Scholarship”, 92 AJIL, 1998, 378.
S.R. Ratner, J.S. Abrams, Accountability For Human Rights Atrocities In International Law (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1997), pp. 165–167.
United Nations Diplomatie Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, Rome, Italy, 15 June to 17 July 1998.
The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court is a multilateral treaty; see UN Doc. A/CONF.183/9 (1998) [hereinafter “Rome Statute” or “Statute”]. A complete, corrected text of the Rome Statute can be viewed at <http://www.un.org/law/icc/statute/romefra.htm>. For detailed commentary on the conference and the Statute see R.S. Lee (ed.), The International Criminal Court: The Making of the Rome Statute: Issues, Negotiations, Results (The Hague, Kluwer, 1999)
and O. Triffterer (ed.), Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: Observers Notes, Article by Article (Baden-Baden, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft, 1999).
The crimes within the subject-matter jurisdiction of the ICC are the crime of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and the crime of aggression; see Rome Statute, Article 5, paragraph 1 (a)-(d). However, the ICC will not exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression until “... a provision is adopted... defining the crime and setting out the conditions under which the Court shall exercise jurisdiction with respect to this crime.” (Rome Statute, Article 5 (2)).
M. Mozaffari, “Mega Civilization: Global Capital and the New Standard of Civilization”, in Krishna-Hensel, (ed.), The New Millennium: Challenges and Strategies For A Globalizing World (Aldershot, Ashgate Publishing, 2000), p. 37.
J. Rosenburg, The Follies of Globalization Theory (London, Verso, 2000), p. 28.
S.D. Krasner, Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1999), p. 82.
Rosenburg (note 7), p. 28.
B. Buzan, R. Little, “Beyond Westphalia? Capitalism after the ‘Fall’“, 25 Review International Studies (Special Issue), 1999, 89.
M. Wind, “Legal Globalization and the New Human Rights Regime: Human Rights in a Post-Sovereign World”, in Krishna-Hensel (note 6), p. 270.
R. Plant, “Rights, Rules and World Order”, in Desai, Redfern, (eds.), Global Governance: Ethics And Economics Of The World Order (London, Pinter, 1995), p. 192.
P. Hirst, G. Thompson, Globalization in Question (Cambridge, Polity Press, 1996), p. 171.
Buzan, Little (note 10), 90.
D. Held et al., Global Transformations: Politics, Economics and Culture (Cambridge, Polity Press, 1999), p. 32.
Held et al. (note 15), p. 37.
See generally, Krasner (note 8), p. 73.
Hirst, Thompson (note 13), p. 172.
Held et al. (note 15), p. 29.
Hirst, Thompson (note 13).
P. Malanczuk (ed.), Akehurst’s Modem Introduction To International Law, 7 th ed. (London, Routledge, 1997), p. 75. The Montevideo Convention on Rights and Duties of States, from which Malanczuk’s list is drawn, adds a fourth qualification: the capacity to enter into relations with other states, however, as Malanczuk observes, this qualification is not generally accepted as necessary (p. 79).
Malanczuk (note 21), p. 83: the declaratory theory holds that “the existence of a state or government is a question of pure fact, and recognition is merely an acknowledgement of the facts”. Malanczuk notes that the prevailing view in international law is that “recognition is declaratory” (p. 84).
Held et al. (note 15), p. 49.
C. Ansell, S. Webber, “Organizing International Politics: Sovereignty and Open Systems”, 20 International Political Science Review, 1999, 73, at 74.
Held et al. (note 15), p. 4.
S. Strange, The Retreat of the State (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1998), p. 4.
Strange (note 26), p. 73.
S.D. Krasner, “Problematic Sovereignty”, in S.D. Krasner (ed.), Problematic Sovereignty (New York, Columbia University Press, 1999), p. 11.
Krasner (note 8), p. 223.
Krasner (note 28), p. 6.
Krasner (note 8), p. 24.
Ibid., p. 5.
Held et al. (note 15), p. 6.
D. Held, A. McGrew, “The End of the World Order? Globalization and the Prospects for World Order”, 24 Review International Studies (Special Issue), 1998, 243.
Held et al. (note 15), p. 9.
Ansell, Webber (note 24), p. 75.
Ibid., p. 74.
Held et al. (note 15), p. 9.
Ansell, Webber (note 24), p. 86.
Krasner (note 8) p. 6; Held et al. (note 15), p. 442.
T. Buergenthal, “International Human Rights in an Historical Perspective”, in Symonides (ed.), Human Rights: Concepts and Standards (Aldershot, Dartmouth Publishing, 2000), p. 5.
R. Falk, Human Rights Horizons (New York, Routledge, 2000), pp. 68–72.
N.H. Jorgensen, The Responsibility of States for International Crimes (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2000), p. 139.
See generally G. Triggs, “National Prosecutions of War Crimes and the Rule of Law”, in Durham, McCormack (eds.), The Changing Face of Conflict and the Efficacy of International Humanitarian Law (The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 1999), p. 176.
Ratner, Abrams (note 2), p. 6.
Ibid., pp. 20–21. The Genocide Convention contemplated, in Article 6, the creation of an international penal tribunal to try allegations of genocide but such a tribunal was never formed.
Ratner, Abrams (note 2), pp. 20–21.
Wind (note 11), p. 265.
Krasner (note 8), pp. 25–32.
Ibid., pp. 113–120.
See generally Krasner (note 8), p. 120.
Held et al. (note 15).
Ibid., p. 52.
Wind, supra note 11, p. 273.
Wind, supra note 11, p. 273.
Falk (note 42), p. 59.
Ibid., p. 59.
See generally A.D. Efram, Sovereign (In)Equality in International Organizations (The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 2000), p. 5.
Held et al. (note 15), p. 53.
Ibid., p. 67.
For example, the chapter by Joyeeta Gupta in this volume acknowledges the role of non-state actors in the arena of international environmental law. (See, Chapter 11, pp. 297–320).
Krasner (note 8), p. 119.
E. McWhinney, The United Nations And A New World Order For A New Millennium: Self-determination, State Succession, and Humanitarian Intervention (The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 2000), p. 21 and see Chapter 12 of Michael Struett in this volume (pp. 321–354).
Held et al. (note 15), p. 50.
Hirst, Thompson (note 13), p. 184.
Ibid., p. 184.
Although, in relation to the crime of aggression (see note 5).
Falk (note 42), p. 9.
Rome Statute, Art. 17.
Rome Statute, Art. 17, paragraph 2.
Rome Statute, Art. 17, paragraph 1 (c) and Article 20, paragraph 3.
Rome Statute, Art. 17, paragraph 3.
Rome Statute, Art. 12.
See generally K.L. Doherty, T.L. McCormack, “ ‘Complementarity’ As A Catalyst For Comprehensive Domestic Penal Legislation”, 5 U.C. Davis Journal of International Law & Policy, 1999, 152.
C. Douzinas, The End of Human Rights (Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2000), p. 121.
Rome Statute, Art. 25, paragraphs 1 and 2 (note 4).
D.D. Nsereko, “The International Criminal Court: Jurisdictional And Related Issues”, 10 Criminal Law Forum, 1999, 97.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2004 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Jensen, R. (2004). Globalization and the International Criminal Court: Accountability and a New Conception of State. In: Dekker, I.F., Werner, W.G. (eds) Governance and International Legal Theory. Nova et Vetera Iuris Gentium, vol 23. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-6192-5_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-6192-5_6
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-04-14033-2
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-6192-5
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive