A Research On The International Criminal Court’s Jurisdiction Over The Crime Or Aggression

The crime of aggression is a kind of international crime which seriously threatens international peace and security. Although there is a long history for the international community to condemn the war of aggression, no consensus has been reached on the definition and jurisdiction problem of the crime of aggression. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court stipulates the crime of aggression as one of the four crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. However, the Statute itself does not provide any provision on the definition and jurisdiction problem of the crime of aggression. For a long time, in the field of international law, the related problem of the crime of aggression has been an ongoing problem for the international community.The First Review Conference of the Rome Statute took place in2010in Kampala, the Ugandan capital, adopting an amendment to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. This amendment defines the crime of aggression and stipulates the conditions to exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression. It confirms that the United Nations Security Council has the right to judge the act of aggression and at the same time, it vests the International Criminal Court a certain right as well. This new regulation is of great significance in guaranteeing the independence of the International Criminal Court, meanwhile it is a new challenge for United Nations Security Council as it used belongs to the United Nations Security Council to consider whether there is an aggressive act or not. In addition, understandings regarding the amendments to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court states the Court’s attitude to the state’s jurisdiction over the crime of aggression, especially the state’s universal jurisdiction, that is:neither create right nor create obligation. These rules will influence the existing international politics and law and order. In view of this, this dissertation will do a research on the International Criminal Court’s jurisdiction over the crime of aggression by method of combining the historical investigation and comparative analysis. I hope this dissertation can serve as a minnow to catch a whale, to catch the international law academic’s attention for further discussion.This dissertation is divided into three chapters with the inclusion of an introduction and a brief conclusion.Chapter one investigates the establishment and development of the International Criminal Court’s jurisdiction over the crime of aggression. This chapter mainly includes three parts:the historical roots of the crime of aggression, the International Criminal Court’s definition of the crime of aggression and the related provisions of the International Criminal Court’s jurisdiction over the crime of aggression.Chapter two discusses the conflict and coordination of the International Criminal Court’s jurisdiction and the United Nations Security Council’s jurisdiction over the crime of aggression. This chapter principally consists of an analysis of the United Nations Security Council’s jurisdiction over the crime of aggression, the collision and harmonization between the International Criminal Court and the United Nations Security Council with the right to judge an aggressive act and lastly, a new development of relationship between the International Criminal Court and The United Nations Security Council.Chapter three studies the conflict and coordination of the International Criminal Court’s jurisdiction and state’s jurisdiction over the crime of aggression. In this chapter, I will discuss the national jurisdiction over the crime of aggression and whether a state has the universal jurisdiction over the crime of aggression. Then, it comes to the complementary principle of the International Criminal Court and a new development of relationship between the International Criminal Court and a state after the amendment. Through research and analysis, I drew some conclusions which are as follows: Firstly, the amendment to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court has specifically stipulated the definition, types and conditions for the exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression, which marks that a discussion about the crime of aggression that came to an end around a century in Kampala. Secondly, it cannot be denied that there are several conflicts that exist between the International Criminal Court and the United Nations Security Council, especially in the right to judge the act of aggression. However, to punish criminals and maintain international peace and security is their common goal. Considering that, the amendment finally coordinates their conflict in the right to judge the act of aggression is as follows:it affirms the United Nations Security Council’s right to judge the act of aggression and at the same time, it vests the International Criminal Court a certain right as well. In addition, the birth of the relationship protocol between the International Criminal Court and the United Nations Security Council helps to gradually form a deeply coexistence and mutual assistance relationship. In the end, the relationship between the International Criminal Court’s jurisdiction and a state’s jurisdiction over the crime of aggression is rather subtle. Facing the conflict in jurisdiction over the crime of aggression, on one hand, the Rome Statute to the International Criminal Court establishes the contemporary principle to confirm the priority of national jurisdiction; on the other hand, although the amendment does not encourage states to exercise universal jurisdiction over the crime of aggression, it is not equal to denying this right. Actually, it neither creates right nor obligation.