The possibility of the ICJ and the ICC taking action in the wake of Israel's operation "Cast Lead" in the Gaza Strip : a jurisdiction and admissibility analysis /
Saved in:
| Author / Creator: | Friedmann, Oded, 1978- author. |
|---|---|
| Imprint: | Frankfurt am Main : PL Academic Research, ©2013. |
| Description: | xiii, 275 pages ; 22 cm. |
| Language: | English |
| Series: | Internationales und Europäisches Strafverfahrensrecht ; Band 10 Internationales und Europäisches Strafverfahrensrecht ; Bd. 10. |
| Subject: | |
| Format: | Print Book |
| URL for this record: | http://pi.lib.uchicago.edu/1001/cat/bib/9848436 |
Table of Contents:
- List of Abbreviations
- Introduction
- 1. The Gaza armed conflict of 2008/2009
- 1.1. The situation in the region prior to the Israeli offensive
- 1.2. The twenty-two day armed conflict between Israel and Hamas
- 1.2.1. Armed conflict in a densely populated area
- 1.2.1.1. The controversial use of white phosphorus and flechettes
- 1.2.1.2. The destruction of civilian property in the Gaza Strip
- 1.2.1.3. The humanitarian situation during the conflict
- 1.2.2. The aftermath of the armed conflict
- 2. Purpose of the research
- 3. Summary of the research
- Chapter 1. The Possibility of the International Court of Justice Investigating the Alleged Violations of International Law During the Gaza Armed Conflict
- 1. The International Court of Justice
- 2. Possible ICJ contentious jurisdiction over the events of the Gaza armed conflict
- 2.1. The Court's personal jurisdiction (ratione personae)
- 2.1.1. Access to the Court
- 2.1.2. The consent requirement
- 2.2. The Court's subject-matter jurisdiction (ratione materiae)
- 2.3. Implementation in the case at hand
- 2.3.1. Conferment of jurisdiction by way of international agreement
- 2.3.2. Conferment of jurisdiction by unilateral declaration (optional clause)
- 2.4. Conclusion
- 3. Possible ICJ advisory jurisdiction over the events of the Gaza armed conflict
- 3.1. Jurisdiction to give an advisory opinion
- 3.1.1. Bodies authorized to request an ICJ advisory opinion
- 3.1.2. Advisory opinion concerning a legal question
- 3.1.3. Competence to request an ICJ advisory opinion
- 3.2. International legal disputes and the circumvention issue
- 3.2.1. Advisory opinions regarding inter-state disputes
- 3.2.2. The advisory function and the requirement of consent
- 3.3. The legal effect and consequences of the ICJ advisory opinion
- 3.3.1. The binding effect of the advisory opinion
- 3.3.2. Additional effects and consequences of the advisory opinion
- 3.4. Implementation in the case at hand
- 3.4.1. UN Security Council v. General Assembly
- 3.4.2. The discretion of the Court
- 3.5. Conclusion
- Chapter 2. Possible Investigation / Prosecution of Israeli Military Personnel and Government Officials by the International Criminal Court Following the Gaza Armed Conflict
- 1. The International Criminal Court
- 1.1. Basic facts
- 1.2. The establishment of the ICC
- 1.3. The structure of the ICC
- 1.4. Applicable law
- 1.5. The ICC in relation to the ICJ
- 2. Possible ICC jurisdiction over the events of the Gaza armed conflict
- 2.1. ICC subject-matter jurisdiction (ratione materiae)
- 2.1.1. The crime of genocide
- 2.1.2. Crimes against humanity
- 2.1.3. War crimes
- 2.1.3.1. War crimes categories under the Rome Statute
- 2.1.3.2. Additional requirements regarding the applicability of Art. 8 Rome-Statute
- 2.1.4. Implementation in the case at hand
- 2.1.4.1. The crime of genocide
- 2.1.4.2. Crimes against humanity
- 2.1.4.3. War crimes
- 2.1.5. Conclusion
- 2.2. ICC personal jurisdiction (ratione personae)
- 2.2.1. Jurisdiction over natural persons over the age of eighteen
- 2.2.2. Implementation in the case at hand and conclusion
- 2.3. ICC temporal jurisdiction (ratione temporis)
- 2.3.1. Temporal jurisdiction based on the entry into force of the Rome Statute
- 2.3.2. Temporal jurisdiction based on state ratification after entry into force of the Rome Statute
- 2.3.3. Nullum crimen sine lege
- 2.3.4. Limits to ICC temporal jurisdiction
- 2.3.5. Implementation in the case at hand and conclusion
- 2.4. State consent as a precondition to the exercise of ICC jurisdiction
- 2.4.1. ICC nationality based jurisdiction (active personality jurisdiction)
- 2.4.1.1. Israel and the ICC
- 2.4.1.2. Implementation in the case at hand and conclusion
- 2.4.2. ICC territorial jurisdiction (ratione loci)
- 2.4.2.1. The lawfulness of the ICC's jurisdiction over nationals of non-States Parties
- 2.4.2.2. Implementation in the case at hand
- 2.5. Ad hoc acceptance of ICC territorial jurisdiction
- 2.5.1. The nature of declarations under Art. 12(3) Rome-Statute
- 2.5.2. Implementation in the case at hand
- 2.5.2.1. The Palestinian Authority's declaration as that of a full-fledged state
- 2.5.2.2. The Palestinian Authority's declaration as that of a quasi-state for the purpose of the Rome Statute only
- 2.5.3. Conclusion
- 3. The ICC and individual participants in the Gaza armed conflict
- 3.1. Official capacity and immunity
- 3.1.1. Immunity ratione materiae
- 3.1.2. Immunity ratione personae
- 3.1.2.1. Art. 27(2) Rome-Statute and officials of non-States Parties
- 3.1.2.2. Art. 27(2) in relation to Art. 98(1) Rome-Statute
- 3.1.3. Implementation in the case at hand and conclusion
- 3.2. Individual criminal responsibility
- 3.2.1. Commission of a crime
- 3.2.1.1. Immediate perpetration
- 3.2.1.2. Co-perpetration
- 3.2.1.3. Perpetration by means
- 3.2.2. Encouragement of a crime
- 3.2.2.1. Ordering the commission of a crime
- 3.2.2.2. Soliciting or inducing the commission of a crime
- 3.2.3. Assisting the commission of a crime
- 3.2.4. Any other contribution to the commission of a crime
- 3.2.5. Superior responsibility
- 3.2.5.1. Superior responsibility of military commanders
- 3.2.5.2. Superior responsibility of civilians
- 3.2.6. Implementation in the case at hand
- 3.2.6.1. The individual criminal responsibility of senior military commanders
- 3.2.6.2. The individual criminal responsibility of non-military (civilian) leaders
- 3.2.6.3. The individual criminal responsibility of lower-level military commanders and soldiers
- 3.2.7. Conclusion
- Chapter 3. Possible Admissibility of Cases Related to the Gaza Armed Conflict Before the International Criminal Court
- 1. The rationale behind the principle of complementarity
- 2. The criteria for admissibility of cases before the ICC
- 2.1. Unwillingness-Art. 17(1)(a) and (b) Rome-Statute
- 2.2. Inability - Art. 17(1)(a) and (b) Rome-Statute
- 2.3. Gravity of the offence - Art. 17(1)(d) Rome-Statute
- 3. Implementation in the case at hand
- 3.1. Investigations conducted by Israel following the Gaza armed conflict
- 3.1.1. Israel's system for investigating misconduct allegations
- 3.1.1.1. The military justice system
- 3.1.1.2. Civilian supervision over the military justice system
- 3.1.1.3. The IDF investigation procedure regarding alleged violations of the Law of Armed Conflict
- 3.1.2. Israeli investigations of misconduct allegations following the Gaza armed conflict
- 3.1.2.1. The launch of five special (expert) command investigations
- 3.1.2.2. The sixth special (expert) command investigation
- 3.1.2.3. Other command investigations
- 3.1.2.4. Criminal investigations
- 3.1.3. Changes to IDF operational guidelines as a result of the investigations
- 3.1.3.1. New written procedures regarding the protection of civilians in urban warfare
- 3.1.3.2. New order regulating the destruction of private property for military purposes
- 3.1.4. The Turkel Commission
- 3.2. The view of the international community regarding the Israeli investigations
- 3.3. Analysis
- 3.3.1. Sufficient gravity-Art. 17(1)(d) Rome-Statute
- 3.3.2. Admissibility - Art. 17 Rome-Statute
- 3.3.2.1. Inability - Art. 17(3) Rome-Statute
- 3.3.2.2. Unwillingness - Art. 17(2) Rome-Statute
- 4. Conclusion
- Summary and Conclusion
- Bibliography and Sources
- Cases, Decisions, Judgments and Advisory Opinions
- Index
