Este blog é uma ferramenta de comunicação com meus alunos e outras pessoas interessadas em Direito Internacional. Sou professor da Universidade Estadual do Maranhão (UEMA) e Bacharel (UFMA), Mestre (UFSC) e Doutor (UERJ) em Direito. Queridos visitantes, ao comentar, por gentileza informem nome, sobrenome e instituição de origem. Obrigado por acessar e sejam bem-vindos! Rodrigo Bastos Raposo (29/08/2022).
Páginas
terça-feira, 31 de janeiro de 2012
CIJ decidirá o caso Ferrini (Alemanha x Itália) nesta 6ª, 3/1/2012
A Corte Internacional de Justiça irá prolatar a decisão no caso Imunidades Jurisdicionais do Estado (Alemanha versus Itália) nesta 6ª, dia 3 de janeiro.
quarta-feira, 7 de dezembro de 2011
Centro de Estudos e Pesquisas da Academia de Direito Internacional da Haia
Programme : Centre for Studies and Research in International Law and International Relations
The Centre is designed to bring together young international lawyers of a high standard from all over the world, to undertake original research on a common general theme which is determined each year by the Academy. The research work undertaken at the Centre may be included in a collective work published by the Academy.
There are between 20 and 24 participants, half in the English-speaking section and half in the French-speaking section.
Organisation : The Hague Academy of International Law
Topic: Criminal Acts at Sea
Period: 20 August – 7 September, 2012
Venue : Peace Palace, The Hague Netherlands
Directors of Studies:
French-speaking section: Dr. Kimberley N. TRAPP, Lecturer at Newnham College, University of Cambridge
English-speaking section: Dr. Douglas GUILFOYLE, Lecturer at University College London
Fee : free of charge, each participant receives a daily allowance of 35 euros according to the length of the stay and the reimbursement of half of the travel expenses, up to a maximum of 910 euros.
Application : online registration form, deadline to register : April 1st 2012
sábado, 26 de novembro de 2011
Does Libya Have to Surrender Saif to the ICC? (Answer: Yes)
by Kevin Jon Heller
Most commentators have assumed — Julian included — that Libya has an obligation under the Rome Statute to surrender Saif Gaddafi to the ICC before it can challenge the admissibility of the case against him. At The Multilateralist today, David Bosco quotes a UN diplomat who believes that Libya can challenge admissibility without first surrendering Saif:
[Y]esterday, an extremely well informed diplomat at the UN got in touch to point me to a provision in the statute that appears to anticipate the possibility a country holding onto the subject of an arrest warrant whilethat state argues that it can try the individual. The provision is Article 19(8):Pending a ruling by the Court, the Prosecutor may seek authority from the Court…(c) 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.As the diplomat pointed out, this provision is nonsensical if a state must turn over anyone subject to an arrest warrant immediately. None of this means that the Libyan authorities can ignore the court; the ICC judges should, as a legal matter, still have the last word on where he will be tried. But it does mean that they may be within their rights to hold onto Saif while they convince the judges.
Although the Rome Statute is not the picture of clarity on the issue, I do not believe that the UN diplomat is interpreting Article 19(8)(c) correctly. In my view, that provision envisions a situation in which a state challenges admissibility on the ground that it is investigating a suspect whom it does not yet have in custody. We don’t normally talk about a suspect “absconding” from custody; “escape,” maybe, but not abscond. Indeed, the two primary dictionary definitions of “abscond” are to “[l]eave hurriedly and secretly, typically to avoid detection or arrest,” and to “[f]ail to surrender oneself for custody at the appointed time.” Moreover, if Article 19(8)(c) is designed to address suspects already in custody, why would it mention “the relevant States,” in the plural? Doesn’t that envision the need for multilateral cooperation to apprehend a suspect whose whereabouts are unknown? I think the provision would refer to the “relevant State” if it was worried about a suspect escaping from custody.
Leia a matéria completa em: Does Libya Have to Surrender Saif to the ICC? (Answer: Yes)
sexta-feira, 4 de novembro de 2011
Chinese Journal of International Law (articles freely accessible)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Assinar:
Postagens (Atom)