Die Idee eines Internationalen Strafgerichtshofs von Professor. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling, LL.M. (LSE)

Präsentation zum Thema: "Die Idee eines Internationalen Strafgerichtshofs von Professor. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling, LL.M. (LSE)"—  Präsentation transkript:

1 Die Idee eines Internationalen Strafgerichtshofs von Professor. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling, LL.M. (LSE)

2 Prof. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling Nürnberg und die Idee I.Nürnberg: Beginn und Ende der Völkerstrafjustiz? II.Der sog. Kalte Krieg III.Die neue Weltordnung nach dem Fall der Mauer IV.Die Zukunft des Völkerstrafrechts

3 Prof. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling I. Nürnberg: Beginn und Ende I.Urteil im Hauptkriegsverbrecherprozess am 30. Sept./1. Oktober 1946 II.Nachfolgeprozesse als nationale Prozesse: Ende 11. April 1949 (Wilhelmstraßenprozess) III.Ferner Osten: Urteil 12. Nov. 1948 IV.Eichmann-Prozess: Ende 29. Mai 1962

4 Prof. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling II. Der Kalte Krieg Individuelle Verantwortlichkeit Nationale Strafgerichte Indirekte Durchsetzung Nationales Strafprozessrecht Internationale Gerichtsbarkeit Direkte Durchsetzung Völkerstrafprozessrecht IMT Nürnberg ICTY Den Haag ICTR Arusha ICC Den Haag

5 Prof. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling II. Der Kalte Krieg Kritik an internationaler Durchsetzung von Strafrecht Souveränität der Na- tionalstaaten Misstrauen gegenüber ausländischen Gerichten Schutz der eigenen Staatsangehörigen Skepsis gegenüber fremden Prozess- ordnungen

6 Prof. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling II. Der Kalte Krieg 1945: Gründung der Vereinten Nationen 1946: Die „Nürnberg principles“ 1948: Die Allgemeine Erklärung der Menschenrechte 1948: Die Völkermordkonvention 1949: Die Genfer Konventionen 1950: Die Europäische Menschenrechtskonvention 1966: Menschenrechtspakte 1977: Zusatzprotokolle zu den GK

7 Prof. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling II. Der Kalte Krieg 1954: ILC Draft Code of Offences against the Peace and Security of Mankind 1991: ILC Draft Code of Crimes against Peace and Security of Mankind 1994: ILC Draft Statute for an International Criminal Court 1996: ILC Draft Code of Crimes against Peace and Security of Mankind 1996: Siracusa-Draft

8 Prof. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling III. Die neue Weltordnung Aufbruchstimmung nach dem Fall der Mauer –Neues Zeitalter des Völkerrechts –Der Weg vom soft law zum hard law Baldige Enttäuschung –Desintegration von Staaten –Grausamkeit ethnischer/religiöser Konflikte –Brutalität der Kriegsführung

9 Prof. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling III. Die neue Weltordnung Völkerstrafrecht als Antwort? –ICTY – UN SC –ICTR – UN SC –Sierra Leone – hybrid –Cambodia – hybrid –Irak – internationalisiert –ICC – international Wahrheitskommissionen als Gegenentwurf – Südafrika; Sierra Leone; Chile.

10 Prof. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling RESOLUTION 827 (1993) (ADOPTED 25 MAY 1993) (S/RES/827 (1993)) The Security Council, Reaffirming its resolution 713 (1991) of 25 September 1991 and all subsequent relevant resolutions, Having considered the report of the Secretary-General (S/25704 and Add.1) pursuant to paragraph 2 of resolution 808 (1993), Expressing once again its grave alarm at continuing reports of widespread and flagrant violations of international humanitarian law occurring within the territory of the former Yugoslavia, and especially in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, including reports of mass killings, massive, organized and systematic detention and rape of women, and the continuance of the practice of "ethnic cleansing", including for the acquisition and the holding of territory, Determining that this situation continues to constitute a threat to international peace and security, Determined to put an end to such crimes and to take effective measures to bring to justice the persons who are responsible for them, Convinced that in the particular circumstances of the former Yugoslavia the establishment as an ad hoc measure by the Council of an international tribunal and the prosecution of persons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law would enable this aim to be achieved and would contribute to the restoration and maintenance of peace, Believing that the establishment of an international tribunal and the prosecution of persons responsible for the above-mentioned violations of international humanitarian law will contribute to ensuring that such violations are halted and effectively redressed, Noting in this regard the recommendation by the Co-Chairmen of the Steering Committee of the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia for the establishment of such a tribunal (S/25221), (…)

11 Prof. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling RESOLUTION 827 (1993) (ADOPTED 25 MAY 1993) (S/RES/827 (1993)) Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, 1. Approves the report of the Secretary-General; 2. Decides hereby to establish an international tribunal for the sole purpose of prosecuting persons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in the territory of the former Yugoslavia between 1 January 1991 and a date to be determined by the Security Council upon the restoration of peace and to this end to adopt the Statute of the International Tribunal annexed to the above-mentioned report; (…)

12 Prof. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling RESOLUTION 955 (1994) Adopted by the Security Council at its 3453rd meeting, on 8 November 1994 The Security Council, Reaffirming all its previous resolutions on the situation in Rwanda, Having considered the reports of the Secretary-General pursuant to paragraph 3 of resolution 935 (1994) of 1 July 1994 (S/1994/879 and S/1994/906), and having taken note of the reports of the Special Rapporteur for Rwanda of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights (S/1994/1157, annex I and annex II), Expressing appreciation for the work of the Commission of Experts established pursuant to resolution 935 (1994), in particular its preliminary report on violations of international humanitarian law in Rwanda transmitted by the Secretary-General's letter of 1 October 1994 (S/1994/1125), Expressing once again its grave concern at the reports indicating that genocide and other systematic, widespread and flagrant violations of international humanitarian law have been committed in Rwanda, Determining that this situation continues to constitute a threat to international peace and security, Determined to put an end to such crimes and to take effective measures to bring to justice the persons who are responsible for them, Convinced that in the particular circumstances of Rwanda, the prosecution of persons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law would enable this aim to be achieved and would contribute to the process of national reconciliation and to the restoration and maintenance of peace, Believing that the establishment of an international tribunal for the prosecution of persons responsible for genocide and the other above-mentioned violations of international humanitarian law will contribute to ensuring that such violations are halted and effectively redressed, Stressing also the need for international cooperation to strengthen the courts and judicial system of Rwanda, having regard in particular to the necessity for those courts to deal with large numbers of suspects, (…)

13 Prof. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling RESOLUTION 955 (1994) Adopted by the Security Council at its 3453rd meeting, on 8 November 1994 Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, 1.Decides hereby, having received the request of the Government of Rwanda (S/1994/1115), to establish an international tribunal for the sole purpose of prosecuting persons responsible for genocide and other serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in the territory of Rwanda and Rwandan citizens responsible for genocide and other such violations committed in the territory of neighbouring States, between 1 January 1994 and 31 December 1994 and to this end to adopt the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda annexed hereto; 2.Decides that all States shall cooperate fully with the International Tribunal and its organs in accordance with the present resolution and the Statute of the International Tribunal and that consequently all States shall take any measures necessary under their domestic law to implement the provisions of the present resolution and the Statute, including the obligation of States to comply with requests for assistance or orders issued by a Trial Chamber under Article 28 of the Statute, and requests States to keep the Secretary- General informed of such measures; (…)

14 Prof. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling IMT Nürnberg „I am too well aware of the weaknesses of juridical action alone to contend that in itself your decision under this Charter can prevent future wars. Judicial action always comes after the event. Wars are started only on the theory and in the confidence that they can be won. Personal punishment, to be suffered only in the event the war is lost, will probably not be a sufficient deterrent to prevent a war where the warmakers feel the chances of defeat to be negligible. But the ultimate step in avoiding periodic wars, which are inevitable in a system of international lawlessness, is to make statesmen responsible to law. And let me make clear that while this law is first applied against German aggressors, the law includes, and if it is to serve a useful purpose it must condemn aggression by any other nations, including those which sit here now in judgment.“

15 Prof. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling III. Die neue Weltordnung

16 Prof. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling Rome Statute 17 Juli 1998 The States Parties to this Statute, Conscious that all peoples are united by common bonds, their cultures pieced together in a shared heritage, and concerned that this delicate mosaic may be shattered at any time, Mindful that during this century millions of children, women and men have been victims of unimaginable atrocities that deeply shock the conscience of humanity, Recognizing that such grave crimes threaten the peace, security and well-being of the world, Affirming that the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole must not go unpunished and that their effective prosecution must be ensured by taking measures at the national level and by enhancing international cooperation, Determined to put an end to impunity for the perpetrators of these crimes and thus to contribute to the prevention of such crimes, Recalling that it is the duty of every State to exercise its criminal jurisdiction over those responsible for international crimes, Reaffirming the Purposes and Principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and in particular that all States shall refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations, Emphasizing in this connection that nothing in this Statute shall be taken as authorizing any State Party to intervene in an armed conflict or in the internal affairs of any State, Determined to these ends and for the sake of present and future generations, to establish an independent permanent International Criminal Court in relationship with the United Nations system, with jurisdiction over the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole, Emphasizing that the International Criminal Court established under this Statute shall be complementary to national criminal jurisdictions, Resolved to guarantee lasting respect for and the enforcement of international justice, (…)

17 Prof. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling III. Die neue Weltordnung Eingeschränkte Kompetenz ratione materiae nach Art. 5 Statut ICC: 1. The jurisdiction of the Court shall be limited to the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole. The Court has jurisdiction in accordance with this Statute with respect to the following crimes: (a) The crime of genocide; (b) Crimes against humanity; (c) War crimes; (d) The crime of aggression. 2. The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression once a provision is adopted in accordance with articles 121 and 123 defining the crime and setting out the conditions under which the Court shall exercise jurisdiction with respect to this crime. Such a provision shall be consistent with the relevant provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.

18 Prof. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling III. Die neue Weltordnung Die Straftatbestände (according to Rome Statute of ICC – 104 Member States) –Genocide: destruction (killing, serious bodily harm, birth control et al.) with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such. –Crimes against humanity: widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population. –War crimes: unnecessary suffering, unproportionate attack on civilian population. –Aggression: no definition yet.

19 Prof. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling III. Die neue Weltordnung Völkerstrafprozess erst dann, wenn nationale Gerichtsbarkeit versagt Verbürgt beim ICC im Grundsatz der Komplementarität Identischer Zweck bei nationalem wie internationalem Strafverfahren?

20 Prof. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling Völkerstrafprozess 1.Wahrheits- suche Materielle oder prozessuale Wahrheit Ermittlerische s Element 2.Verfahrens- fairness Grundrechts- schutz oder Waffengleichheit Prozessuales Element 3.Sanktions- ausspruch Richter oder Geschworene Urteilendes Element

21 Prof. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling Lösungsversuche Souveränität der Nationalstaaten Misstrauen gegenüber ausländischen Gerichten Schutz der eigenen Staatsangehörigen Skepsis gegenüber fremden Prozess- ordnungen Komplementarität Menschenrechte als Legitimation Komplementarität Analyse der Ver- schiedenheit

22 Prof. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling IV. Die Zukunft Probleme der Durchsetzbarkeit – Kooperation der Mitgliedstaaten Problem der globalen Ratifizierung Problem der grundsätzlichen Überzeugungskraft von Strafrecht Gelingen der ad-hoc und der hybriden Tribunale Sensibilität für Menschenrechte

23 Prof. Dr. Christoph J.M. Safferling IV. Die Zukunft „We must never forget that the record on which we judge these defendants today is the record on which history will judge us tomorrow. To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well. We must summon such detachment and intellectual integrity to our task that this Trial will commend itself to posterity as fulfilling humanity's aspirations to do justice.“ Justice Robert H. Jackson, Nürnberg 21. November 1945