Article 19 Challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court or the admissibility of a case
The Court shall satisfy itself that it has jurisdiction in any case brought before it. The Court may, on its own motion, determine the admissibility of a case in accordance with article 17.
Challenges to the admissibility of a case on the grounds referred to in article 17 or challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court may be made by:
An accused or a person for whom a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear has been issued under article 58;
A State which has jurisdiction over a case, on the ground that it is investigating or prosecuting the case or has investigated or prosecuted; or
A State from which acceptance of jurisdiction is required under article 12.
The Prosecutor may seek a ruling from the Court regarding a question of jurisdiction of admissibility. In proceedings with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility, those who have referred the situation under article 13, as well as victims, may also submit observations to the Court.
The admissibility of a case or the jurisdiction of the Court referred to in paragraph 2. The challenge shall take place prior to or at the commencement of the trial. In exceptional circumstances, the Court may grant leave for a challenge to be brought more than once or at a time later than the commencement of the trial. Challenges to the admissibility of a case, at the commencement of the trial, or subsequently with the leave of the Court, may be based only on article 17, paragraph 1 (c).
A State referred to in paragraph 2 (b) and (c) shall make a challenge at the earliest opportunity.
Prior to the confirmation of the charges, challenges to the admissibility of a case of challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court shall be referred to the Pre-Trial Chamber. After confirmation of the charges, they shall be referred to the Trial Chamber. Decisions with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility may be appealed to the Appeals Chamber in accordance with article 82.
If a challenge is made by a State referred to in paragraph 2 (b) or (c), the Prosecutor shall suspend the investigation until such time as the Court makes determination in accordance with article 17.
Pending a ruling by the Court, the Prosecutor may seek authority from the Court:
- To pursue necessary investigative steps of the kind referred to in article 18, paragraph 6;
- To take a statement or testimony from a witness or complete the collection and examination of evidence which had begun prior to the making of the challenge; and
- In cooperation with the relevant States, to prevent the absconding of persons in respect of whom the Prosecutor has already requested a warrant of arrest under article 58.
The making of a challenge shall not affect the validity of any act performed by the Prosecutor or any order or warrant issued by the Court prior to the making of the challenge.
If the Court has decided that a case is inadmissible under article 17, the Prosecutor may submit a request for review of the decision when he or she is fully satisfied that new facts hve arisen which negate the basis on which the case had previously been found inadmissible under article 17.
If the Prosecutor, having regard to the matters referred to in article 17, defers an investigation, the Prosecutor may request that the relevant State make available to the Prosecutor information on the proceedings. That information shall, at the request of the State concerned, be confidential. If the Prosecutor thereafter decides to proceed with an investigation, he or she shall notify the State in respect of the proceedings of which deferral has taken place.
Article 20 Ne bis in idem
Except as provided in this Statute, no person shall be tried before the Court with respect to conduct which formed the basis of crimes for which the person has been convicted or acquitted by the Court.
No person shall be tried before another court for a crime referred to in article 5 for which that person has already been convicted or acquitted by the Court.
No person who has been tried by another court for conduct also proscribed under articles 6, 7 or 8 shall be tried by the Court with respect to the same conduct unless the proceedings in the other court:
Were for the purpose of shielding the person concerned from criminal responsibility for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court; or
Otherwise were not conducted independently or impartially in accordance by international law and were conducted in a manner which, in the circumstances, was inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice.
Article 21 Applicable Law
The Court shall apply:
In the first place, this Statute, Elements of Crimes and its Rules of Procedure and Evidence;
In the second place, where appropriate, applicable treaties and the principles and rules of international law, including the established principles of the international law of armed conflict;
Failing that, general principles of law derived by the Court from national laws of legal systems of the world including, as appropriate, the national laws of States that would normally exercise jurisdiction over the crime, provided that those principles are not inconsistent with the Statute and with international law and internationally recognized norms and standards.
The Court may apply principles and rules of law as interpreted in its previous decisions.
The application and interpretation of law pursuant to this article must be consistent with internationally recognized human rights, and be without any adverse distinction founded on grounds such as gender, as defined in article 7, paragraph 3, age, race, color, language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, wealth, birth or other status.
No comments:
Post a Comment