Journal articles: 'Aut dedere aut judicare'

1

Caligiuri, Andrea. "Governing International Cooperation in Criminal Matters: The Role of the aut dedere aut judicare Principle." International Criminal Law Review 18, no. 2 (April 17, 2018): 244–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718123-01802005.

Full text

Abstract:

The aim of the study is to ascertain how the original Grotian formula ‘aut dedere aut punire’ has been implemented and evolved in international law. The first step is to classify the multilateral conventions that have accepted an aut dedere aut judicare clause. The goal is to bring out peculiarities of the different treaty texts, describing the relationship between the two options dedere and judicare, and the different obligations that arise for the contracting states. We will then examine the content of the two options, to define the legal boundaries within which the contracting states shall or may operate. At this point, we will focus on the legal nature of the aut dedere aut judicare principle that over time may have risen to the status of customary rule. The study will conclude with analysis of reactions to the breach of the aut dedere aut judicare clause by non-complying countries.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

2

van Elst, Richard. "Implementing Universal Jurisdiction Over Grave Breaches of the Geneva Conventions." Leiden Journal of International Law 13, no. 4 (December 2000): 815–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0922156500000480.

Full text

Abstract:

As the most serious war crimes (grave breaches) should not be left unpunished, the 1949 Geneva Conventions contain an unusually worded obligation to either prosecute such a suspected war criminal or to hand him over to another country to be tried there (aut judicare aut dedere in stead of aut dedere aut judicare). Fifty years on, less than one in six of the parties to the Conventions have established universal jurisdiction over grave breaches which is necessary to prosecute a suspect if he was to be found in their country. An assessment and classification of the Conventions, national laws, prosecutions and practical obstacles. But if, what God forbid, these Conventions should ever have to be applied, they must be obeyed.M.W. Mouton, Diplomatic Conference, Geneva 16 July 1949

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

3

Plachta, Michael. "Aut Dedere Aut Judicare: An Overview of Modes of Implementation and Approaches." Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law 6, no. 4 (December 1999): 331–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1023263x9900600402.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

4

Rabbat, Paul. "AUT DEDERE AUT JUDICARE: CONSTITUTIONAL PROHIBITIONS ON EXTRADITION AND THE STATUTE OF ROME." Revue québécoise de droit international 15, no. 1 (2002): 179. http://dx.doi.org/10.7202/1069417ar.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

5

Plachta, Michael. "Extradition and the Principle aut dedere aut judicare in the New Polish Legislation." European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice 6, no. 2 (1998): 94–105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157181798x00120.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

6

Hill, Robin E. "Airport violence and the legal principleAut Dedere Aut Judicare." Terrorism and Political Violence 1, no. 1 (January 1989): 79–106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09546558908427015.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

7

Nagy, Sarah L. "Political Offense Exceptions to United States Extradition Policy: Aut Dedere Aut Judicare (Either Extradite or Prosecute)." Indiana International & Comparative Law Review 1, no. 1 (January 1, 1991): 109–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.18060/17373.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

8

Moyo, Monica P. "Final Report on the Obligation to Extradite or Prosecute (Aut Dedere Aut Judicare) (Int’l L. Comm’n)." International Legal Materials 54, no. 4 (August 2015): 758–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.5305/intelegamate.54.4.0758.

Full text

Abstract:

At its sixty-sixth session in 2014, the International Law Commission completed its final report on the obligation to extradite or prosecute and submitted it to the United Nations General Assembly for consideration at its sixty-ninth session.1 The report concluded the Commission’s work on a topic the General Assembly had long considered important in states’ efforts to cooperate in the prevention of impunity for crimes of international concern.2 The Commission addressed the implementation of the obligation; gaps in the existing conventional regime; the priority between the obligation to prosecute and the obligation to extradite, and the scope of the obligation to prosecute; the relationship between the obligation with erga omnes obligations or jus cogens norms; the customary international law status of the obligation; and other matters of relevance from the general framework created in 2009 for the Commission’s consideration of the topic.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

9

Plachta, M. "The Lockerbie Case: the role of the Security Council in enforcing the principle aut dedere aut judicare." European Journal of International Law 12, no. 1 (February 1, 2001): 125–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ejil/12.1.125.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

10

Andenas, Mads, and Thomas Weatherall. "II. INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE: QUESTIONS RELATING TO THE OBLIGATION TO EXTRADITE OR PROSECUTE (BELGIUM v SENEGAL) JUDGMENT OF 20 JULY 2012." International and Comparative Law Quarterly 62, no. 3 (July 2013): 753–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020589313000250.

Full text

Abstract:

This case1 marks the first pronouncement by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the obligation to extradite or prosecute (aut dedere aut judicare) in international law. It is the second contentious case in which the ICJ has held the defendant country in breach of its obligations under a human rights convention. The ICJ both added to the corpus of norms it has formally recognized as peremptory norms (jus cogens) and also reinforced the principle that former heads of state are subject to universal jurisdiction for grave violations of international law.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

11

Abass, Ademola. "The International Criminal Court and Universal Jurisdiction." International Criminal Law Review 6, no. 3 (2006): 349–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157181206778553879.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThis article examines whether the International Criminal Court (ICC) can exercise universal jurisdiction. In particular, the author responds to the argument that the ICC can exercise universal jurisdiction on the basis of delegated criminal jurisdiction and the aut dedere aut judicare principle, and challenges the view that the trial of nationals of non-parties by the ICC neither creates obligations for such states nor contravenes the Monetary Gold principle. The author argues that although some Rome Statute crimes have universal character, this does not automatically entitle the ICC to exercise jurisdiction over non-party nationals outside such limited universal jurisdiction as may be conferred on the Court through the Security Council referral.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

12

Navarro, Marta Sosa. "A Hybrid Strategy to Prosecute the Waging of War." Spanish Yearbook of International Law Online 17, no. 1 (2013): 73–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/22116125-01701005.

Full text

Abstract:

The Kampala Conference held in 2010 to review the Rome Statute portrays a discouraging image regarding the fight against impunity for those responsible for the waging of war. Its outcome reflects the international community’s lack of willingness to take the necessary steps to hold accountable those responsible for the crime of aggression. Regardless of the existing agreement on its definition, the International Criminal Court’s jurisdiction has been postponed again, fostering the need to resort to alternative formulas to prosecute this crime. This paper aims to study the possibility of prosecuting aggression as a crime against humanity in so far as the illegal use of force amounts to “other inhuman acts of similar character (. . .)”, articulated in article 7.1.k of the Statute. It also searches for alternative procedures to prosecute these crimes, focusing on the emerging role of domestic jurisdiction through the consolidation of the aut dedere aut judicare clause.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

13

Steible, Bettina. "EU support to domestic prosecution of violations of International Humanitarian Law." UNIO – EU Law Journal 4, no. 1 (January 4, 2018): 51–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.21814/unio.4.1.6.

Full text

Abstract:

The Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 establish an obligation to ensure respect for International Humanitarian Law (IHL) at all times. This summary obligation is now understood as enshrining a mechanism of collective responsibility whereby all State parties commit to adopt all the necessary and reasonable measures to prevent and stop violations of IHL, but also to prosecute them when they amount to war crimes. This third dimension is comprised in articles 49/50/129/146 of Conventions, which impose an obligation on its State parties to extradite or prosecute (aut dedere aut judicare) alleged perpetrators of grave breaches, including on the basis of universal jurisdiction if needed. As the EU has manifested its interest in ensuring respect for IHL with the adoption of the Guidelines on promoting compliance with IHL, the objective of this article is to analyze whether and to what extent the EU has developed instruments facilitating domestic prosecution of alleged war criminals pursuant to the Geneva Conventions.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

14

Fernández-Sánchez, Pablo Antonio. "Universal Jurisdiction and Terrorism." Groningen Journal of International Law 6, no. 1 (August 31, 2018): 24. http://dx.doi.org/10.21827/5b51d5265a29d.

Full text

Abstract:

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.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

15

Bazov, Oleksandr. "Universal jurisdiction in the activities of international criminal courts." Legal Ukraine, no. 10 (November 27, 2020): 42–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.37749/2308-9636-2020-10(214)-5.

Full text

Abstract:

The article presents an analysis of the principle of universal jurisdiction as an important legal institution of international criminal justice. Analyzed the main international legal norms and judicial practice in this area. The directions of further development of universal jurisdiction have been determined. Analyzed the Princeton Principlesof the universal jurisdiction. Investigated the work of the UN International Law Commission and the UN General Assembly on this issue. Proposals for the improvement of international and national legal acts are presented. Universal jurisdiction or the principle of universality in the fight against international crime is an important legal institution in the activities of both national and international criminal courts. As with any international offense, the obligation to stop international crimes such as aggression, genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimes of international terrorism take the form of an alternative to aut dedere aut judicare or aut prosegue by Hugo Grotius, and under which any State has an obligation to search for and prosecute international criminals for these heinous acts, regardless of the nationality of the perpetrators and their victims, as well as the place where the crime was committed, or to extradite international criminals to any State that requires their extradition for prosecution and punishment, or to an international criminal tribunal. Thus, a state is obliged to exercise universal criminal jurisdiction over international crimes and international criminals, or to extradite them to another state or to an international criminal court under conditions determined by international law and national law. Key words: universal jurisdiction, International criminal court, international crime, state sovereignty.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

16

Masło, Krzysztof. "Crimes against humanity in the works of the International Law Commission on the draft articles on the prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity." Polish Review of International and European Law 8, no. 2 (August 20, 2020): 9–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.21697/priel.2019.8.2.01.

Full text

Abstract:

Crimes against humanity, besides war crimes, belong to the most frequently committed and prosecuted crimes of international law. Recently, the International Law Commission adopted draft Articles on the prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity, bridging the gap in international criminal law and in international cooperation between states. When discussing the draft Articles on the prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity, the International Law Commission did not act in a vacuum. The issue of understanding crimes against humanity and the obligations of states related to the prevention and punishment of these crimes has appeared in the works of the Commission since the 1950s, primarily in connection with the development of the draft Code of crimes against the peace and security of mankind and the statute of the International Criminal Court. Based on its previous experiences, the International Law Commission focused on four issues to be covered by the draft Articles: 1) definition of crimes against humanity; 2) the obligation of states to criminalise such crimes in domestic law; 3) the obligation of states to cooperate in the investigation, prosecution and punishment of these offences; 4) the duty of aut dedere aut judicare fortified by the perpetrator’s stay in the territory of the state party. Considering the broad support for the definition of crimes against humanity adopted in the ICC Statute and its complementary character, the International Law Commission adopted the definition of art. 7 of the ICC Statute. The works of the International Law Commission are focused on the obligations of countries related to prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity, especially: the obligation to criminalise crimes against humanity and to establish jurisdiction over those crimes. The International Law Commission also formulated a series of obligations of states with a procedural character in the draft Articles, for example, obligation to conduct prompt and efficient criminal proceedings, the purpose of which is to explain all the circumstances of the crime and to punish the guilty person or persons.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

17

Osorio Montoya, Rodrigo Orlando. "La extradición y la cooperación internacional. Falta de justicia, legitimidad o incapacidad del Estado colombiano: su historia." IUSTA, no. 48 (February 28, 2018): 179–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.15332/s1900-0448.2018.0048.07.

Full text

Abstract:

La extradición es la figura jurídica judicial de mayor expresión en materia de cooperación internacional; siendo los casos más notorios los de terrorismo, narcotráfico, blanqueo de capitales, armas, trata de personas, organizaciones criminales y demás conductas punibles conexas a los anteriores, así como los delitos contenidos en el Estatuto de Roma. Esta figura cooperativa en algunos estamentos ha superado una serie de barreras de conveniencia política, económicas, jurídicas y sociales, convirtiéndose en una institución más viable y de mayor validez, pues ha pasado de ser una política de gobierno a ser una política estatal, además de ampliar su espectro de aplicabilidad, pasándose de la simple remisión de criminales a la reciprocidad de información, investigación, asistencia judicial, entre otros. Es así que los países se encuentran hoy con la obligación internacional de efectuar y ratificar tratados en donde se generen compromisos de asistencia mutua en materia de cooperación internacional, basados en el principio o denominada formula del latín: aut dedere aut judicare (extraditar o juzgar), emanado desde los convenios de Ginebra de 1949, con el propósito de que si el estamento está imposibilitado de juzgar al criminal o desea entregarlo a la nación requirente, este pueda ser procesado por el solicitante.Es de aclarar que esta norma se hizo a un lado durante décadas, tiene su reaparición legal en los artículos 8 y 9 del proyecto de código de crímenes contra la paz y la seguridad de la humanidad de 1996, en donde se trataba tímidamente este principio y el de jurisdicción universal. Lo anterior se retoma en 1998 al adoptarse el Estatuto de Roma de la Corte Penal Internacional.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

18

Marcinko, Marcin. "The Evolution of UN Anti-Terrorist Conventions towards the Universal Treaty-Based Model of Combating Terrorism." Groningen Journal of International Law 6, no. 1 (August 31, 2018): 59. http://dx.doi.org/10.21827/5b51d53791adf.

Full text

Abstract:

Adopted in Montreal in 2014, the Protocol to Amend the Convention on Offences and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft is the nineteenth international legal instrument in the acquis of the United Nations (‘UN’) and its related organisations devoted to prevention and suppression of terrorism. Considering the first of such instruments – the Tokyo Convention on Offences and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft (‘the Tokyo Convention’) – was adopted in 1963, it may be assumed that throughout the period of 55 years the UN has succeeded in solving the specific model of combating international terrorism. Although the existing and binding international conventions on suppression of terrorism do not form a uniform group and differ in terms of material scope of offences described therein, it is still possible to indicate one significant feature common to all conventions, and that is a set of legal measures and remedies available at the international level which guarantee an effective fight against terrorism. The above-mentioned set of regulatory measures – including, inter alia, jurisdictional clauses – constitutes a consistent collection of rules to be applied in cases of the majority of terrorist activities. The aforesaid model is based on the principle of aut dedere aut judicare supplemented with a rational control of extradition and jurisdictional issues. This model is also enriched with rules concerning other forms of co-operation such as mutual legal assistance, exchange of information and preventive measures. The rationale for the above-referred measures is to ensure that perpetrators of specific international terrorist offences shall be prosecuted regardless of their place of residence or motives that triggered such action. International anti-terrorist conventions adopted under auspices of the UN help to achieve this goal, confronting the internationalisation of terrorism with internationalisation of means and methods of combating this dangerous phenomenon.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

19

Clark, Roger S. "Aut Dedere Aut Judicare: The Duty to Extradite or Prosecute in International Law. By M. Cherif Bassiouni and Edward M. Wise. Dordrecht, Boston, London: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1995. Pp. ix, 318. Index. FI 175; $95; £72." American Journal of International Law 91, no. 1 (January 1997): 204–5. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2954168.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

20

Cirimwami, Ezéchiel Amani, and Stefaan Smis. "Le régime des obligations positives de prévenir et de poursuivre à défaut d’extrader ou de remise prévues dans le texte des projets d’articles sur les crimes contre l’humanité provisoirement adoptés par la Commission du droit international." Revue québécoise de droit international 30, no. 1 (September 26, 2018): 1–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.7202/1053756ar.

Full text

Abstract:

Cet article concerne le texte des projets d’articles sur les crimes contre l’humanité provisoirement adopté par la Commission du droit international à sa soixante-huitième session en 2016. Il n’est pas exclu que le texte adopté connaisse ultérieurement des modifications tenant compte de l’évolution des discussions au sein de la Commission du droit international. La version finale du texte des projets d’articles est très attendu par les internationalistes d’autant plus qu’en 2014, la Commission faisait déjà observer dans ce qui constitue un « Rapport final » sur le thème de l’obligation d’extrader ou de poursuivre (aut dedere aut judicare) que le régime conventionnel existant présentait d’importantes lacunes quant à l’obligation d’extrader ou de poursuivre qu’il pourrait être nécessaire de combler. Elle relevait notamment l’absence de conventions internationales comportant cette obligation à l’égard de la plupart des crimes contre l’humanité. Aussi, rappellera-t-elle avoir inscrit ce sujet à son programme de travail, dans le cadre duquel il était envisagé d’élaborer un nouvel instrument portant sur la prévention et la répression des crimes contre l’humanité dont l’un des éléments serait une obligation d’extrader ou de poursuivre les auteurs de ces crimes. Le texte tel qu’adopté pose clairement, d’une part, que les crimes contre l’humanité, qu’ils soient ou non commis en temps de conflit armé, sont des crimes au regard du droit international que les États s’engagent à prévenir et à punir. D’autre part, que les États doivent coopérer à cette fin notamment au moyen de l’obligation de poursuivre ou d’extrader ou de remise. Toutefois, il appert de l’analyse du texte adopté qu’il n’existe à charge des États ni obligation de juger les présumés auteurs, ni celle de les punir. L’obligation consiste en réalité pour l’État à soumettre l’affaire à ses autorités compétentes pour l’exercice de l’action pénale. Ceci ne veut pas dire non plus une obligation d’engager des poursuites dans la mesure où ces autorités gardent sur l’affaire, la maîtrise du déclenchement des poursuites. Elles sont aussi libres de classer celle-ci sans suite sans que cette décision contrevienne à l’obligation imposée à l’État dont elles relèvent, de poursuivre le suspect à défaut de l’extrader ou de le remettre à une juridiction internationale compétente.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

21

Van der Wilt, Harmen. "Expanding Criminal Responsibility in Transnational and International Organised Crime." Groningen Journal of International Law 4, no. 1 (July 15, 2016): 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.21827/59db69227860f.

Full text

Abstract:

In international criminal law theory, a conceptual divide is made between international crimes stricto sensu (genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, aggression) and transnational organised crime. This differentiation sustains the direct, respectively indirect enforcement mechanism: the so called ‘core crimes’ belong to the subject matter jurisdiction of international criminal tribunals and the International Criminal Court, whereas national jurisdictions aim to counter transnational crimes, by concluding ‘suppression conventions’ and seeking international cooperation on the basis of the aut dedere, aut judicare principle. Nevertheless, the division is questioned for being too rigid and simplistic, as the boundaries between the categories are increasingly blurred. On the one hand, political rebel groups and organised crime often unite to challenge the power monopoly of the state, while corrupt governments and private business conspire to exploit the local population (by pillage, deportation from their lands or pollution of the environment). On the other hand, there is an ongoing debate, triggered by the ICC Kenya Decision of March 2010, whether the commission of crimes against humanity is the ‘privilege’ of states and state-like groups, or whether the category should be expanded to cover larger organisations that are capable of committing such atrocities. In other words, there is a proliferation of state and non-state actors that engage in both ‘classic’ international crimes (war crimes, crimes against humanity) and transnational crime. These developments have fuelled the plea for supranational law enforcement in respect of transnational (organised) crime, exceeding the realm of inter-state cooperation on a horizontal basis. This essay will pay a modest contribution to this discussion by arguing that the quest for more effective law enforcement is bedeviled by the perplexity of fitting new patterns of crime and new perpetrators of international crimes into the classic mould of international criminal law. These two aspects are obviously intimately related and should not be considered in isolation. Any initiative to invigorate international criminal law enforcement - by for instance establishing new (international or regional) courts or by expanding the subject matter jurisdiction of existing courts – should therefore pay attention to both the elements of crimes and the modes of criminal liability.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

22

Orihuela Calatayud, Esperanza. "La obligación aut dedere aut iudicare y su cumplimiento en España." Revista Española de Derecho Internacional 68, no. 2 (June 1, 2016): 207–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.17103/redi.68.2.2016.1.07.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

23

Al jaff, Mohammed Rashid Hassan, and Awaz Asaf Mawlood. "The legal rooting of aut dedere principle in universal crimes." Journal of University of Human Development 7, no. 2 (May 3, 2021): 34. http://dx.doi.org/10.21928/juhd.v7n2y2021.pp34-47.

Full text

Abstract:

in this research we are going to elaborate the legal frame of the principle of prosecute and investigate core crimes as an obligation in international law .due to the fact that this principle is now the subject of the particular attention .as well as it was adopted as a rule in numerous treaties .and there is a crucial debate concerning the nature of this principle in international customary law . accordingly by elucidation and clarification of this principle and its definition we will examine its application in the Iraqi legal system as a pathway to universalism in criminalization process .thus we will clarify in the first part the principle and its source also the philosophical aspect in addition to the legal basis in bilateral conventions . the second part of the article will offers some controversial issue with respect to the customary nature of the principle .at least many suggestions are founded upon severla elements of this principle .

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

24

Baumer-Schuppli, Fabian. "The Proliferation of Definitions of Terrorism in International Law." Contemporary Challenges: The Global Crime, Justice and Security Journal 1 (September 14, 2020): 23–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.2218/ccj.v1.4941.

Full text

Abstract:

This paper analyses the proliferation of definitions of terrorism in international law and across national jurisdictions. On the one hand, this paper argues that terrorism legislation mainly pursues a symbolic function in international and criminal law by constructing the common enemy to the community of states. However, the fundamental disagreement on the nature of terrorism undermines this core function of terrorism legislation because violence becomes relativized by competing definitions of terrorism. On the other hand, this paper highlights how, in the presence of competing legal definitions of terrorism across states, the duty to prosecute or extradite (aut dedere aut iudicare) threatens the fundamental principle of foreseeability of criminal accountability (nullum crimen sine lege certa). As individuals are held accountable to multiple overlapping jurisdictions, self-determination struggles and legitimate acts in armed conflicts become increasingly criminalised. Therefore, the proliferation of definitions of terrorism in international law and across domestic jurisdictions has the effect of weakening collective action in international law and at the same time strengthening unilateral prosecution of terrorism.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

25

Nollkaemper, A. "Wither Aut Dedere? The Obligation to Extradite or Prosecute after the ICJ's Judgment in Belgium v Senegal." Journal of International Dispute Settlement 4, no. 3 (October 11, 2013): 501–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnlids/idt025.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

26

Duff, R. A. "Aut Dedere Aut Judicare." SSRN Electronic Journal, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2387719.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

27

Meité, Mamadou. "Regard cursif sur le rapport de la Commission de droit international relatif a l’obligation de poursuivre ou d’extrader (aut dedere aut judicare)." Revue des droits de l’homme, December 24, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.4000/revdh.1037.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

28

Benavides, Luis. "The Universal Jurisdiction Principle: Nature and Scope." Anuario Mexicano de Derecho Internacional 1, no. 1 (January 1, 2001). http://dx.doi.org/10.22201/iij.24487872e.2001.1.4.

Full text

Abstract:

La jurisdicción universal es una base excepcional para que un Estado juzgue a un criminal extranjero por ofensas no cometidas ni dentro de su territorio ni contra sus nacionales. Existe consenso respecto del carácter excepcional de este derecho, ya que pretende proteger los valores e intereses más fundamentales de la comunidad. Este derecho debe distinguirse del principio aut dedere aut judicare. Un factor relevante para determinar si una conducta está sujeta a la jurisdicción excepcional es la doble opinio juris respecto tanto de su status como crimen internacional, como de que está de hecho sujeta a jurisdicción universal. Parece claro que la piratería, la esclavitud, crímenes de guerra, crímenes contra la humanidad y el genocidio están sujetos a jurisdicción universal. Existe una creciente práctica de los Estados respecto del ejercicio de la jurisdicción universal, aunque se le critica con base en el ataque a la soberanía de otros Estados.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

29

Bagheri, Saeed. "Uluslararass Hukukta Suclularrn adesi ve Suclularr Kovuuturma YYkkmllllll [Extradition and the Obligation to Prosecute of Offenders in International Law (Aut Dedere Aut Judicare)]." SSRN Electronic Journal, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2719898.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

30

Labardini, Rodrigo. "México y la extradición de nacionales." Anuario Mexicano de Derecho Internacional 1, no. 2 (January 1, 2002). http://dx.doi.org/10.22201/iij.24487872e.2002.2.29.

Full text

Abstract:

Los argumentos en contra de la extradición defienden la visión de que los nacionales estarán en desventaja en tribunales extranjeros o que otros sistemas jurídicos no aseguran que exista un juicio justo. Los países del common law están más dispuestos a extraditar a sus nacionales, mientras que los países del civil law sólo admitirán la extradición de sus nacionales en circunstancias excepcionales. Desde 1995 la política mexicana ha sido profundamente revisada, y el principio de aut dedere aut judicare en el tratado en vigor ha favorecido el castigo de presuntos criminales aunque no sean extraditados. La Suprema Corte de Justicia de México ha fallado para resolver una contradicción entre tribunales de menor jerarquía respecto de la facultad del Ejecutivo de extraditar a nacionales mexicanos. La solución, que el autor explica, es que el Código Penal mexicano no impide al Ejecutivo extraditar nacionales, sino que se aplica el artículo 9.1 del tratado en vigor.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

31

Nollkaemper, Andre. "Wither Aut Dedere? The Obligation to Extradite or Prosecute after the ICJ's Judgment in Belgium v Senegal." SSRN Electronic Journal, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2323467.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

Journal articles on the topic 'Aut dedere aut judicare'

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles