نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 کارشناسی ارشد رشته حقوق بین الملل، گروه علوم انسانی، واحد تهران غرب، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران
2 استادیار حقوق بین الملل، عضو هیأت علمی دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
In referring the situation involving a Crime of Aggression by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP), the Court must at the outset, satisfy itself that the UNSC has determined an act of Aggression committed by the given State. Subsequently, the OTP must provide all information and documents to the UNSC. The OTP’s assurance that the crime is determined by the UNSC will not impair the independence of the Court. However, that recognition by the UNSC can be based solely on political considerations. The use of veto power also gives the Permanent Members of the UNSC the right to commit an act of Aggression while in full immunity. However, if the Pre-Trial Chamber seizes the matter, the UNSC may suspend it for twelve months and renew it several times when the UNSC is unwilling to consider the matter in the Court. This is in contradiction with the main goal of the Court, which is the punishment of the perpetrators of the most serious international crimes. The present article, while examining the necessary conditions, has analyzed the situation in which the act of Aggression is committed by a Permanent Member of the UNSC.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
)