An Instance of Reasonable Universality

Pinzauti, Giulia

doi:10.1093/jicj/mqi075

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Giulia Pinzauti considers that the existence of an international norm, in this customary case, which establishes universal jurisdiction, is sufficient for an internal tribunal to be accused of acting ultra vires. 108 As I have stated, I believe she is correct; however, jurisdiction and lack of competence of a specific internal tribunal are two distinct issues. The principle of universal jurisdiction cannot be questioned on the grounds of the incompetence of the judges of a given state to try acts committed during periods of armed conflict that may be classed as internal.…”

Section: Non-conventional Grounds For the Application Of Universamentioning

confidence: 95%

Universal Jurisdiction and Terrorism

Fernández-Sánchez¹

2018

GroJIL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Universal jurisdiction has a relatively long history. There is evidence from the seventeenth century of recourse to this legal institution as a means of avoiding the existence of areas of impunity. State practice, however, is quite recent, emerging from the concepts of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Regardless of how they are classified or categorised, it is within this framework that terrorist acts need to be viewed. The issue of the exercise of universal jurisdiction for crimes classed as terrorism arises when they are qualified by taking into account certain specific acts, such as serious violations of IHL, illegal seizure of aircraft, hostage-taking, kidnapping, acts committed with bombs, etc. Most treaties therefore provide for application of the principle of aut dedere aut judicare as a corollary to universal jurisdiction. However, conventional law, general or specific, is not the only basis for the exercise of universal jurisdiction in the case of terrorism offences. The customary basis is also very important, as are the unilateral acts of states when they legislate or pass judgement taking this framework — conventional or not— into account. The purpose of this article is to analyse all such aspects.

show abstract

Section: Non-conventional Grounds For the Application Of Universamentioning

confidence: 95%

Universal Jurisdiction and Terrorism

Fernández-Sánchez¹

2018

GroJIL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At this early stage, proceedings in both cases are on-going and the outcome is unclear. But with Spain's demonstrated commitment to the application of universal jurisdiction, most notably in Pinochet and Scilingo, 115 it is quite possible that the outcome of these proceedings may prove more successful than those in Germany and France.…”

Section: The Spanish Proceedingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Universal Jurisdiction in Practice: Efforts to Hold Donald Rumsfeld and Other High-level United States Officials Accountable for Torture

Gallagher¹

2009

Journal of International Criminal Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the efforts to hold high-level US officials accountable for their alleged role in the torture and other serious abuse of detainees under US control through the principle of universal jurisdiction. First, it sets out what is known about United States detention and interrogation practices during the so-called 'war on terror', and what efforts, if any, have been undertaken in the United States to hold individuals accountable for their role in the torture and serious abuse of detainees. After a preliminary comment on the definition of torture, it examines the factual and legal underpinnings, and adjudicative results of the cases filed in this regard in Germany and France, and the recent efforts undertaken in Spain. It concludes by enquiring about the role and future of universal jurisdiction, particularly in cases of powerful defendants, in closing the impunity gap for serious violations of international law. After years of disclosures by government investigations, media accounts, and reports from human rights organizations, there is no longer any doubt as to whether the [Bush] administration has committed war crimes. The only question is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account. ç Maj. General Antonio M. Taguba (US-Ret.), led the US Army's official investigation into the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal. 1

show abstract

Introduction

Naqvi¹

2010

Impediments to Exercising Jurisdiction Over International Crimes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An Instance of Reasonable Universality

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Universal Jurisdiction and Terrorism

Universal Jurisdiction and Terrorism

Universal Jurisdiction in Practice: Efforts to Hold Donald Rumsfeld and Other High-level United States Officials Accountable for Torture

Introduction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About