International Criminal Court: Complementary Jurisdiction Essay

This essay provides a comprehensive analysis of the principle of complementary jurisdiction as exercised by the International Criminal Court (ICC). It begins by defining the concept and tracing its origins to the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), highlighting the shift from 'concurrent jurisdiction' to the 'complementary jurisdiction' model established by the Rome Statute. The essay focuses on Article 17 of the Rome Statute, which outlines the conditions under which the ICC can intervene, emphasizing the primary role of states in prosecuting international crimes. It explores the tensions that can arise between state parties and the ICC, using the Libyan cases (Gaddafi and Al Senussi) as examples. The essay critically discusses the jurisprudence, evaluating whether complementary jurisdiction upholds or challenges state sovereignty. The essay also examines the ICC's jurisdiction, including the four core international crimes (genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and crimes of aggression), and the conditions under which the ICC can initiate investigations, including referrals from states, the UN Security Council, or the Prosecutor's own initiative. The essay concludes by emphasizing the importance of cooperation between the ICC and domestic courts to ensure justice and maintain peace.

Complementary Jurisdiction
Title
Assignment Name:
Student Name:
Course Name and Number
Professor
Date
1

Complementary Jurisdiction
Title
Explain and Comment upon the principle of complementary jurisdiction as exercised by the
International Criminal Court.
2

Complementary Jurisdiction
Abstract
This essay will focus on the definition, interpretation and application of the principle of
complementary jurisdiction. It will focus on the relevant sections of the Statute of the ICC, in
particular Article 17. It will reflect on the responsibility of states to prosecute international
crimes that fall in the ambit of the jurisdiction of the ICC. It will outline and analyze the
situations where there are tensions between state parties and the ICC over the prosecution of
individuals. It will critically discuss the jurisprudence in the Libyan cases (Gaddafi and Al
Senussi). It will offer a view on whether complimentary jurisdiction sustains state
sovereignty in the area of international criminal prosecutions or challenges it.
3

Complementary Jurisdiction
The statutes that led to the formation of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former
Yugoslavia (ICTY)and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR)laid the
cornerstone forthe principle of complementary jurisdiction in the Rome Statue, which created
the International Criminal Court (ICC).1.Both these tribunals at – former Yugoslavia and
Rwanda were formed on ‘adhoc basis’ at the international level,for investigating and
conducting trial of those individuals who violated international humanitarian law including
genocide, war crimes and other crimes against humanity.2These tribunals provided a link
betweendomestic jurisdiction of the country andinternational jurisdiction of the Security
Council. 3It worked on the principle of “concurrent jurisdiction”,wherein both the domestic as
well as international jurisdiction overlapped in these matters. Further, since these matters
were gravely disturbing, one of its kind post the Second World War and were aimedtowards
bringing justice and restoration of peace in former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, the statutes –
ICTY and ICTR were given “primacy”over the domestic jurisdiction.For both these cases,
one single appellate tribunal was set up. These steps, though were taken in good spirits, gave
rise to confusion and controversy as the countries – former Yugoslavia and Rwanda felt that
with the primacy clause, the sovereignty of these countries was being questioned.4
Thus, in order to put aside such confusion in any future events, a new kind of system was
required in the international laws. This led to creation of Statute of the International Criminal
Court (ICC), which was presented before the General Assembly of United Nations (UN)
establishing the principle of “complementary jurisdiction”.
1 "The Complementarity Principle As A Factor Of Unification Of Physical Theories: Complementarity And
Conformity" (2).
2 Zeidy M, 2008. "The Principle Of Complementarity In International Criminal Law: Origins, Development And
Practice.Martinusnijhoff."164
3 Bantekas, I (2010) International Criminal Law (2010) 4 Oxford: Hart Publishing: 9
4 Amin Nouri, "The Principle Of Complementarity And Libya Challenge To The Admissibility Before The
International Criminal Court" [2013] SSRN Electronic Journal.
4

Complementary Jurisdiction
With the past experiences with ICTY and ICTR, the ICC was considered not to have primacy
over the domestic Courts of that country, but to complement the domestic Courts and
interfere in the matters only when the domestic jurisdiction was not clear, unavailable or
unable to achieve success in these grave matters. 5.Thus, according to the principle of
“complementary jurisdiction”, the ICC will be competent to investigate a matter and try the
responsible person(s) only in the case where there is no country to claim domestic jurisdiction
in the matter. 6The country and domestic Courts will play the pivotal rolein the matters.
However, if the domestic Courts are not able to investigate or adjudicate the matter or do not
play the required role or are not interested in the matter or appear to have badfaith, the ICC
may step in to make sure that the due process is followed for doing justice and restoring
peace. (Holmes,1999, p. 75)
The ICC, in effect, functions in those cases where those international criminals (who have
committed grave crimes against humanity, etc.)Cannot be properly investigated and tried in
domestic courts.7 The ICC acts as an authority, which complements the existingdomestic
Courts, following their jurisdictions, rules and procedures in the matters that require
international cooperation. 8It does not intend toexclude or override the jurisdiction of
domestic Courts. Therefore, the ICC can only investigate and adjudicate in those matters
which fall under the four core international crimes as envisaged in the Rome statute in those
situations where the signatory states are neither able nor unwilling to undertake the same on
5 Michael Broache, "Bringing Home Rome: Explaining The Domestication Of The Rome Statute Of The
International Criminal Court" [2015] SSRN Electronic Journal.
6 Markus Benzing, "The Complementarity Regime Of The International Criminal Court: International Criminal
Justice Between State Sovereignty And The Fight Against Impunity" (2003) 7(1) Max Planck Yearbook of
United Nations Law Online.
7 Suzanne Egan, "The Doctrinal Approach In International Human Rights Scholarship" [2017] SSRN Electronic
Journal.
8 Nicola Palmer, "The Place Of Consultation In The International Criminal Court's Approach To
Complementarity And Cooperation" [2016] SSRN Electronic Journal.
5

Complementary Jurisdiction
their own. 9Accordingly, the jurisdiction of the ICC will always remain complementary to
that of the domestic courts.
Further, the ICC has jurisdiction over those crimes only thatare committed within the territory
of the signatory or those crimes are committed by a national (individual) belonging to a
signatory state. 10The jurisdiction of the ICC does not extend to those countries which have
not signed the Rome Stature unless the UN Security Council appoints the ICC to investigate
and adjudicate matters which are beyond the territories of signatory states, but is an
international crime. 11This authorisation by the UN Security Council is an exception to the
rule of participating signatory states.
The principle of complementarity is implemented on a case-to-case basis since the ICC can
only exercise its jurisdiction in a specific situation and not all matters. (Hewett, 2006, p.
276).The ICCcannot prevent the domestic Courts or other competent bodies of that state to
investigate and take legal action against the perpetuators of crimes. The ICC and concerned
signatory states must work hand in hand to ensure that those international criminals are
punished and their atrocities are addressed properly so that justice prevails and peace can be
restored in the mind of general public of that state and other states as well. It is important the
concerned state and the ICC work in complete harmony and that no issues of sovereignty of
state crop up during the matter.12 For a thorough investigation and trial of the matter, both the
ICC and domestic13 Courts must integrate their synergies so that there are no loopholes
9 Neil Boister, "International Tribunals For Transnational Crimes: Towards A Transnational Criminal Court?"
(2012) 23(4) Criminal Law Forum.
10 Terje Einarsen, "New Frontiers Of International Criminal Law: Towards A Concept Of Universal Crimes"
(2013) 1(1) Bergen Journal of Criminal Law & Criminal Justice.
11 Adamantia Rachovitsa, "General Principles Of Public Order And Morality And The Domain Name System:
Whither Public International Law?" (2016) 63(1) Netherlands International Law Review.
12 Benvenuti, P (1999) Complementarity of the International Criminal Court to National Criminal Jurisdiction
in Flavia Lattanzi and William Schabas (eds), (2019) 1 Essays on the Rome Statute of the International
Criminal Court, vol I (Il Sirente 1999) 42 (2019).
13 Michael A. Newton, "The Quest For Constructive Complementarity" [2010] SSRN Electronic Journal.
6

Complementary Jurisdiction
remaining in the matter that can help the international criminal.(Olasolo and Rojo,
2011)Also, the ICC cannot prosecute that international criminal for same crimes or crimes
based on the same incident. E.g. if the state has already tried that accused in the matter of
genocide, then the ICC cannot subsequently try him again for genocide or any other crime
(say, war crime) based on the same incident14. The statute also prohibits further prosecution
of the accused by the ICC even if he has been tried by the domestic Court for an ordinary
crime.15 Thus, making ICC the court of last resort.
At present, the ICC can initiate investigation in a matter in the following manner:
i) If the signatory state refers its situation to the ICC;
ii) If the UN Security Council refers a situation of any of its signatory states to the
ICC; and
iii) If the Prosecutor commences an investigationon the basis ofpropriomotu (which
means, on his own impulse). In such cases, the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP)
investigates the present situation on a holistic basis and ascertains the crimes
committed by the perpetrators. It then subsequently, finds evidence to file charges
and initiate proceedings against those international criminals. For initiating these
proceedings, the Prosecutor must obtain authorization from the Pre-Trial
Chamber. 16
14 Marion Engin, "Research Diary: A Tool For Scaffolding" (2011) 10(3) International Journal of Qualitative
Methods.
15 Clare Frances Moran, "The Effect Of Domestic Law On The Rome Statute Of The International Criminal
Court" [2015] SSRN Electronic Journal.
16 Marion Engin, "Research Diary: A Tool For Scaffolding" (2011) 10(3) International Journal of Qualitative
Methods.
7

Complementary Jurisdiction
The principle of complementarity is envisaged in Articles 17 and 53 of the Rome Statute.The
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (is also known as the Rome Statute)17 is the
name of the treaty that established the ICC. This treaty was adopted at a conference in Rome
the year 1998 and it was enforced in the year 2002.It is pertinent to note that approximately
124 signatory states have adopted this statute and are party to the ICC18
This statute provides the details regarding establishment of the ICC, its legal status and
powers, jurisdiction, admissibility, definitions of crimes that it can deal with, principles of
criminal law which are followed, composition, structure and administrative powers of the
ICC, duties and powers of ICC in conducting an investigation and prosecuting the
perpetuator, details and functionings of Pre-Trial Chamber (PTC) and Trial Chamber
(TC),sentencing and penalties that can be imposed, procedures for appeal and revisions,
obligations of signatories, international cooperation and assistance amongst them,
enforcement of sentences and its review, financial regulations, expenses and voluntary
contributions.
19This statute envisaged four core international crimes that can be investigated and
adjudicated by the ICC, namely: crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes
and crimes of aggression. The status also specifies that these crimes are not bound by any
laws of limitation20.
17 Schabas, W, An Introduction To The International Criminal Court (2007).
18 "Report Of The Secretary-General Pursuant To Paragraph 2 Of Security Council Resolution 808 (1993),
Including The Statute Of The Tribunal" (1994) 5(2-3).
19 "United Nations: Rome Statute Of The International Criminal Court" (1998) 37(5).
20 Robert J. Alexander, "Reflections Of The Use Of Interviews As Primary Resources" (2012) 49(1) The Journal
of the Rutgers University Libraries.
8

Complementary Jurisdiction
This article encompasses the principle of complementary jurisdiction in the Rome Statute
under the heading – Issues of admissibility.21The article defines what falls under the
jurisdiction of the ICC.
Read with the Preamble and Article 1 of the statute, this Article emphasises that the ICC must
treat a case as inadmissible if:
(a) that particular case is under investigation or prosecution by a signatory state, under
whose jurisdiction the crimes were committed or the accused belongs to that signatory
state, unless that signatory state is ‘unwilling’ or ‘unable’ to conduct the investigation
or prosecution of the matter;
(b) that particular case has been investigated by the domestic authorities of that State and
the State decided not to prosecute the accused, unless that signatory state is
‘unwilling’ or ‘unable’ to genuinely prosecute the accused;
(c) that the accused has already been tried by the domestic Court for the crimes which
were the subject-matter of complaint before the ICC
(d) thatthe subject-matter does not require attention of the ICC due to insufficient gravity
of the crimes.
The Article 17 also provides explanation of the terms ‘unwillingness’ and ‘inability’ of the
signatory State. It states the following conditions as elements of unwillingness and inability:
i. that the proceedings conducted by the domestic Courts or any national decision
was undertaken for shielding the accused;
ii. that the proceedings have been unjustifiably delayed; and
21 Bergsmo, "The Jurisdictional Regime Of The International Criminal Court (Part II, Articles 11--19)" (1998)
6(4) European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice.
9

Complementary Jurisdiction
iii. thatthe proceedings were conducted independently or impartially by the domestic
Courts.
iv. The proceedings cannot be conducted due to complete or partial collapse or
unavailability the domestic judicial system;
v. The domestic authorities of that State are not able to find the accused or arrest
him;
vi. The domestic authorities of that State are not able to procure necessary evidence
orobtain testimony against the accused; and
vii. The domestic authorities of that State are unable to carry any its proceedings
against the accused. 22
A key issue covered under the Article 17 of the Rome Statue is that of “genuineness”. 23There
are divergent views and interpretations regarding the term – genuine mentioned in this article
that:
i) Whether the investigations and proceedings conducted by the domestic Courts
were genuine?To answer this question, it must be ascertained whether the
domestic Court followed due process and reached the decision impartially. The
clarity regarding these proceedings can only be received from the domestic
authorities and the state.
22 Varga, R, Challenges Of Domestic Prosecution Of War Crimes With Special Attention To Criminal Justice
Guarantees. Budapest (2014).
23 Zeidy, M, From Primacy To Complementarity And Backwards: (Re)-Visiting Rule 11 Bis Of The Ad Hoc
Tribunals, The International And Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 57, No. 2 (Apr., 2008), Pp. 403-415, (2008)
<(https://www.jstor.org/stable/20488212)>.
10

Complementary Jurisdiction
ii) Whether the decision of state to not to continue or conduct the investigations or
prosecution was genuine? It may appear ambiguous that the decision to not
continue the matter of such grave importance was closed without any influence on
the judgement of that signatory state. However, it is also possible that the new
government, which followed a dictator or a rebel regime, may not want to
continue the matter due to possibility of further disturbances in the state. This can
only be decided on a case-to-case basis.24
Thus, the concerns if the domestic trial is sham or genuine can only be understood after
proper investigation by an independent authority. Who will be the proper authority to conduct
such investigations? The ICC cannot supersede the authority of signatory states since it
would again reverse the principle of complementary jurisdiction and raise issues regarding
the sovereignty of that state.
Further, this article specifies the admissibility requirements of a particular case or situation
for the ICC. Here, the term “situation” is not defined clearly. 25As per the ICC jurisprudence,
a situation can include all sorts of crimes done by perpetrators in a specific territory of the
signatory state within a specific timeframe.26 However, at the situation phase, there is no
clarity regarding the individuals and their involvements in the international crimes since the
cases are not yet outlined. So, in order to assess the admissibility of a situation before the
ICC, the cases are properly examined and accordingly, the decision is taken to admit them.
Due to lack of predefined rules of examination, this issue remains a concern. e.g. in the
decision regarding Situation in the Republic of Kenya, the threshold of ‘reasonable basis to
24 Ambach, P (2015) Law and Practice of the International Criminal Court Oxford Scholarly Authorities on
International Law [OSAIL]
25 Andrei Khrennikov and Sergei Kozyrev, "Contextual Quantization And The Principle Of Complementarity Of
Probabilities" (2005) 12(03) Open Systems & Information Dynamics.
26 Arbour and Bergsmo, "Conspicuous Absence Of Jurisdictional Overreach" (1999) 1(1) International Law
FORUM du droit international.
11

Complementary Jurisdiction
proceed’ was added to the existing list of key evidentiary threshold,27 namely: ‘reasonable
grounds to believe’ which are required for issuing arrest warrants or summons to appear
before the ICC against the accused; ‘substantial grounds to believe’ for filing of charges to
initiate the proceedings, and ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ for guilty sentencing of the accused28
Another pertinent concern is the ambiguity of ‘gravity’ requirement to admit the matter
before the ICC for the crimes allegedly committed by the accused. The term ‘gravity’ is
ambiguous and can only be ascertained after a complete investigation. However, it might be
difficult to access such situations. e.g. in case of war crimes, it can be extremely difficult to
assess the real situation when the war in ongoing and the perpetuators are still in power in
that signatory state.
Further, the complementary jurisdiction of the ICC can also not be applied when the domestic
Courts or authorities are conducting investigations or prosecutions for that situation or case.
Also, if the signatory state decides not to pursue the investigation or prosecution in that
matter, even then the ICC cannot admit the matter. The reasons of these decisions may not be
clear and remain cause of concern. 29
After the concerns raised regarding concurrent jurisdiction for both the tribunals – ICTY and
ICTR, the principle of complementary jurisdiction enabled the ICC to exercise its jurisdiction
over the Libyan matters of Gaddafi and Al Senussi. Employing this principle, Libya
challenged both these cases of Gaddafi and AlSenussi’s against being tried by the ICC. The
Libyan government used this principle to retain the matters on its soil and try them before its
27 Anni Pues, "Discretion And The Gravity Of Situations At The International Criminal Court" (2017) 17(5)
International Criminal Law Review.
28 Thomas Weigend, "A Comprehensive View Of International Criminal Law And Procedure" (2018) 29(3)
Criminal Law Forum.
29 L. Carter, (2010) The Role of Ne Bis in Idem, 8 Santa Clara J. Int'l L. 165
12

Complementary Jurisdiction
domestic Court.30 However, in both the matters, the defendants, in order to avoid the death
penalty that is part of the Libyan judicial system and not the ICC, wished for the trial to be
admitted by the ICC and argued their trials would not be impartial or fair if held in Libya.31
It was in the year 2011 that the UN Security Council considered the government’s forcible
response against the demonstrators as crimes against humanity and referred the Libyan
situation to the ICC Prosecutor. After conducting investigation, the PTC issued arrest
warrants against Saif Gaddafi,son of Libyan leader Muamar Gaddafi, the “de facto” prime
minister of Libya and Al Senussi, the head of Libyan Military Intelligence and filed a case
before the ICC.
Following year, the Libyan government challenged the admissibility of the case before ICC
against Gaddafi on the ground that the domestic authorities were actively scrutinizing the acts
done by Gadaffi and will pursue the matter.
In response, the PTC clarified that the principle of complementarity provides preference to
domestic Courts, however, it questioned the Libyan government’s ability to provide burden
of proof regarding the admissibility test. Since the matter concerned Gaddafi, the new
government must confirm the steps it was taking to access and ascertain his guilt and
responsibility in the crimes.
By means of Article 17(1)(a), the ‘same-conduct’ test was carried out to ascertain whether an
investigation or prosecution of the same matter was on-going before the domestic Libyan
Court. The PTC affirmed that the domestic proceeding should cover the same situation. Due
to lack of specific evidence by Libya regarding all the charges mentioned in the arrest
30 "Statute Of The International Criminal Tribunal For Rwanda" (2008) 2(2).
31 Alicia Robinson, "Challenges To Justice At Home: The Domestic Prosecution Of Efrain Rios Montt" (2016)
16(1) International Criminal Law Review.
13

Complementary Jurisdiction
warrant, the PTC held that it was difficult to understand to the scope of domestic
investigation. While examining the second part of this Article, under the Inability Test, which
requires the assessment whether the concerned State is “unwilling or unable genuinely to
carry out the investigation or prosecution”, the PTC emphasised that this ability must be
examinedagainst the current judicial system and procedure in Libya. 32Since there was no
national judicial system in Libya, the matter was covered under the definition of
“unavailable” as per Article 17(3). Further, Libya could not obtain Gadaffi or his testimony,
and could not conduct any proceedings against him as per non-permitted absentia trials, since
he was under the custody of the Zintan militia. The PTC, thus held that the case is admissible
before the ICC.
In the year 2013, the Libyan Government challenged the admissibility of matter against
AlSenussi before the ICC. Unlike the Gaddafi case, in this matter, the PTC held that the Al
Senussi case is inadmissible before the ICC. The reason for the same were cited as the on-
going investigation and prosecution of Al Senussi in Libya for his crimes and custody of Al
Senussi with Libyan authorities. However, collapse of judicial system and lack of
representation, which were considered as concerns in the Gadaffi matter, were ignored here.33
Both these matter were also argued as appeals before the Appeals Chamber (AC), which did
not take a corrective approach, but upheld the decisions of PTC in both the matters.
The confusion of these conflicting decisions by the ICC were augmented by their lack of
independent enforcement since Gaddafi could never be tried in The Hague instead of Libya.
32 Jimmy Gurulé, "The International Criminal Court: Complementarity With National Criminal Jurisdiction"
(2012) 2001(33) Amicus Curiae.
33 F. Megret and M. Giles Samson, "Holding The Line On Complementarity In Libya: The Case For Tolerating
Flawed Domestic Trials" (2013) 11(3) Journal of International Criminal Justice.
14

Complementary Jurisdiction
In the year 2014, the ICC asked Libya to comply with the requirements laid down in Rome
statute to conduct the investigation and trial, and referred the matter to UN Security Council,
which asked Libya to cooperate with the ICC.
These two matters that were present before the ICC from same background (Libya) and at
almost same time, but resulted in conflicting decisions have led to questioning of the
authority and decision making of the ICC.34
The principle of complementarity was considered as the key breakthrough in drafting and
signing of the Rome Statute. With plethora of situations and cases before the ICC, the Article
17 has been interpreted and applied in different ways. The vagueness of the terms –
unwilling, unable, genuine and these admissibility tests have not yet been clarified by the
ICC. It is the need of the hour for ICC along with UN Security Council to ensure that there
are no other precedents like the Libyan matters, where conflicting opinions were given by the
ICC. The ICC must adopt a consistent approach and provide meaningful explanation of the
admissibility tests envisaged in the Article 17.
Further, international criminal lawmust evolve as per the contemporary experiences. The
Rome Statute must be relooked and revamped by the signatory states to ensure that it does
not lose its significance.35
Being a court of justice at the international level, it happens to be the duty of the institute to
implicate the right decision. This is because it is the court that is solely responsible for the
judging and analysing issues that are responsible or are necessary in handling different cases.
Therefore, being at the international level there consists of many clauses along with the acts
34 Erin Patrick, "Intent To Destroy: The Genocidal Impact Of Forced Migration In Darfur, Sudan" (2005) 18(4)
Journal of Refugee Studies.
35 L. Carter, (2013). The Future of the International Criminal Court: Complementarity as a Strength or a
Weakness?12 Wash. U. Global Stud. L. Rev. 451
15

Complementary Jurisdiction
that have to be followed. The authority that is comprised of the board of ICC is being taken
into consideration. This is just because there is no such body that would be acting under the
particular body if ICC. Therefore, the rights along with the responsibilities would also be
taken into account.36 When it comes to the application of authority and principles, ICC
considers itself as the major body that operates at an international level. The prime objective
of the body is to render justice at the level where all nations wiped be prevailing its impact.
Therefore, it could be deduced that there would be no such impact that would be standing
ageist the authorized body of ICC. It basically is the court of justice. It makes a survey of all
the crimes that had been recorded over and across a country. The main aspect that had been
noticed and is considered to be part of the study is the general impact over the people. Being
a recognized body or institution it has to make the right decision 37Not only that but also the
best possible decision. Therefore, it could be considered to be great responsibility of its own
kind. It would never be a matter that should be paid much attention that what the nations
think. Being a functional structure, it had to determine the right. It is the belief of the people
that ICC would be stating the accurate decisions that should be determining the position of an
individual. The sentence that is being given by ICC has to be taken or a serious note. This is
just because there would be no other authority acting or bothering the rights of the
organization. The statement organization is being given here just because it deals with many
cases of crime that it puts itself into a dilemmatic situation. The dilemma could be considered
as a risk from such courts that expertise in the delivering of right decisions and sentences.
This is because the nature of Dilemma solely bestows its characteristics in confusing a people
in taking right decision. This is basically the lack of proper decision making at proper
intervals of time. The dilemma that arouses is whether it would be performing the best level
36 Jimmy Gurulé, "The International Criminal Court: Complementarity With National Criminal Jurisdiction"
(2012) 2001(33) Amicus Curiae.
37 Markus Benzing, "The Complementarity Regime Of The International Criminal Court: International Criminal
Justice Between State Sovereignty And The Fight Against Impunity" (2003) 7(1) Max Planck Yearbook of
United Nations Law Online.
16

Complementary Jurisdiction
of work that had been asked for. The main determinant that had been recognized as the
course plan happens to be the foundation of the institution. Being laying its performances at
the overseas level, it is its duty to generate the right situation ever. For the implication of such
an act, there has to be a number of principles that had been followed as a part of the act only.
Thus, the decisions that would be passed by the organization would be taken seriously by
each and every nation around the globe. This will make a proper consideration if the justice.
The concept of such an act is actually considered as the baseline for all elements of
jurisdiction. Therefore, all the jurisdiction of criminal amenities would not be estimated. This
is because considering all the elements of the jurisdiction of criminal amenities can lead to an
improper subject line in judging the issues that took place.38
The main part of this kind of operation is to take an active part in determining the
methodology of the concept that would be prevailing as an effect and influence for all the
countries around the world. The determinants that would be referred to as a part of these
particular areas would rather be taken further as the option to be established in the long run.
Here the statement of long-run states the functional period of time under which the ICC
would be determining its sentence of justice. Therefore, this particular period of time would
be considered as important (Carter, 2010). The estimation would be prevailing in the justice
period under which ICC serving the period of justice. The time under which the terms of all
the invocation of justice would be justice would be restated would generally be provided in
the session. Not only that but also with be provided with much importance. Thus, the term
under which justice is being served is taken as the prime heed or the area of prime concern.
The period under which this particular body works is obviously being considered or is
referred to as the best period where it basically drives the support to other judicial bodies. All
other bodies that are minor in nature generally consider it as the parent body. Therefore, it
38 Henry Shue, "Review Of Jens David Ohlin And Larry May, Necessity In International Law" (2018) 13(2)
Criminal Law and Philosophy.
17

Complementary Jurisdiction
could easily be deduced that there is specific authorization that is consisted of the
organization. The authorization is basically performed under the body to generate or render
the right sentenced to the right person as mentioned earlier . 39This is just because ICC is a
representative at the international level. Therefore, it needs to execute its function is such a
way that it sets an example for all other judicial and jurisdiction bodies. This, as a result,
would help in boosting up the morale of all other firms that are keeping a relationship with
the judicial and legal aspects. One of the main determinants that had been learned from or
under this process is generally the lesson of active decision making. Decision making and
implementing it is a meaningful and in an exact way is generally being considered as the best
combination ever. The elements of decision making could actually be learned for here. In the
present scenario, ICC has to make a critical decision. Therefore, ICC has to give or deliver an
expect to view over the position who would be leading with all such critical decision. The
sentence of the jurisdiction that is presented in the terminal court of ICC is actually different
from all the other terms. This factor is only taken into effect or is subject as a matter of
concern only with the criminal case. These are basically the cases that had been represented
in terms of crime. There had been a different segment created for the implication of such
cases that would have a criminal sentiment. This generally induces human nature to focus on
such activities that would help in determining the decision of criminal judicial acts for the
time being.
ICC being a well-decorated organization should stick to all the function that had been
presented. The responsibility of such bodies would be counted if presented before media
sentiments. There would be a lot of peers that would be taking such determinants for the
making of basic comparison. The basic derivative of such work had been identified is the
implication of proper laws. If the laws are not being implicated in their rightful position, then
39 Thomas Weigend, "A Comprehensive View Of International Criminal Law And Procedure" (2018) 29(3)
Criminal Law Forum.
18

Complementary Jurisdiction
the entire function would be considered as an off. Therefore, laws are to be given the main
heed or area of attention. Laws are being termed as the major constituent for any
organization. This is just because laws would be affecting the entire session of the case that
had been presented in ICC (Einarsen, 2012). This, as a result, makes the laws more flexible
and apparent in nature. Not only apparent but also ICC is transparent in nurture. Here, in this
case, the word transparent suggests that laws that are being accepted by the ICC by the
international subordinates generally are the responsible representative to make the offer of all
the acts. Therefore, it could be said that the power actually lies in their hand. There happen to
be a number of cases that are being brought to the session of the jurisdiction. This generally
induces people to rely on ICC. Being an organization of such mega in structure and quite
effective in nature, it is the duty of ICC it pass the judgment is a precise manner. Moreover,
the act is mainly dealing with criminal injustices and criminal practices. Thus, the ICC has to
maintain a level of importance. It is naturally being termed or is being referred to as the body
of the public. This body can never perform or lay its performance on its own. This body
actually needs the commencement of the public in general. Therefore, the application of the
public here would be termed as the major heed of the concern. This is the organization that
deals with various cases that could keep in touch with the business world of today’s
generation. Therefore, it could also be complemented as the guard wall that makes no is taken
when the factor arouses as decision making and implementation over the public. The decision
would never be varying whether a person had really seemed crime or had the intention of
such criminal activities. Both the cases would be referred to like the same by the eyes of
justice. The cases or the obligations that had been presented are being represented as crimes
of war, genocides, and crime in humanity or against it, aggression crime and many more. The
concept is actually vast by the way it looks. Judicial of criminal offenses are often being
termed as an option that could be determined within a fraction of second (Fairlie, 2005).
19

Complementary Jurisdiction
However, to be precise there needs to be great general thinking that ICC needs to present in
front of the representative in general. This as an outcome makes the process much worthy of
trust thereby having zero tolerance of issue. If there happen to be an issue, it could be
eradicated.40
From the study, it had been identified that justice is for everyone. If a particular person wants
to seek justice, then he or she would be presented with the relevant justice that she or he had
been looking for. However, the process seems to be much easy by the way it looks but is
actually not. By analyzing the current scenario, it had been identified where there would be a
situation of argument if the justice is being arrived at the point of the prosecution. For the
presentation and the execution of the judgment, there would be both the sides that would be
representing each of the sides. Therefore, ICC has to pass the decision or the sentence to be
precise after making an analysis of both sides (Hewett, 2006). Form research it had been
estimated that in criminal cases or in the cases of fraudulent, mostly the side that had been the
victim of such activity wins the case. This could term as the efficient nature of ICC.
Therefore, ICC is part of international; councils and could easily depict its fruitful and
subjected nature. These are the two basic determinants that would be helping ICC in the
future period of time. Thus, ICC had been making an effort to make the process run in such a
manner that there would be no quarry left or the session would never be followed to a
situation of dilemma. Law and justice are basically equal for each and every individual
person. Therefore according to the consideration of this it has been generally analysed that
the person involved here could easily get justice if he or she wanted to. This is actually a
positive term for ICC thereby making relevant and efficient changes. This is because
Dilemma could lead to a huge problem in the near future. Dilemma often confuses the overall
correct actions that need to be taken in order to have a specific solution of the issues. As it is
40 Alicia Robinson, "Challenges To Justice At Home: The Domestic Prosecution Of Efrain Rios Montt" (2016)
16(1) International Criminal Law Review.
20

Complementary Jurisdiction
a part of international council, therefore subject nature cannot be a problematic figure for
such an organisation. As it is clearly mentioned before that there will be no differentiation in
receiving justice.
21

Complementary Jurisdiction
Bibliography
Ambach, P (2015) Law and Practice of the International Criminal Court Oxford Scholarly
Authorities on International Law [OSAIL].
Alexander, Robert J., "Reflections Of The Use Of Interviews As Primary Resources" (2012)
49(1) The Journal of the Rutgers University Libraries
Arbour and Bergsmo, "Conspicuous Absence Of Jurisdictional Overreach" (1999) 1(1)
International Law FORUM du droit international
Benzing, Markus, "The Complementarity Regime Of The International Criminal Court:
International Criminal Justice Between State Sovereignty And The Fight Against
Impunity" (2003) 7(1) Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law Online
Bergsmo, "The Jurisdictional Regime Of The International Criminal Court (Part II, Articles
11--19)" (1998) 6(4) European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice
Broache, Michael, "Bringing Home Rome: Explaining The Domestication Of The Rome
Statute Of The International Criminal Court" [2015] SSRN Electronic Journal
Carter, L. (2010) The Role of Ne Bis in Idem, 8 Santa Clara J. Int'l L. 165. Available at:
https://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/scujil/vol8/iss1/8
Carter, L. (2013). The Future of the International Criminal Court: Complementarity as a
Strength or a Weakness?12 Wash. U. Global Stud. L. Rev. 451
http://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_globalstudies/vol12/iss3/8
Gurulé, Jimmy, "The International Criminal Court: Complementarity With National Criminal
Jurisdiction" (2012) 2001(33) Amicus Curiae
22

Complementary Jurisdiction
Egan, Suzanne, "The Doctrinal Approach In International Human Rights Scholarship" [2017]
SSRN Electronic Journal
Boister, Neil, "International Tribunals For Transnational Crimes: Towards A Transnational
Criminal Court?" (2012) 23(4) Criminal Law Forum
Einarsen, Terje, "New Frontiers Of International Criminal Law: Towards A Concept Of
Universal Crimes" (2013) 1(1) Bergen Journal of Criminal Law & Criminal Justice
Engin, Marion, "Research Diary: A Tool For Scaffolding" (2011) 10(3) International Journal
of Qualitative Methods
Nouri, Amin, "The Principle Of Complementarity And Libya Challenge To The
Admissibility Before The International Criminal Court" [2013] SSRN Electronic
Journal
"The Complementarity Principle As A Factor Of Unification Of Physical Theories:
Complementarity And Conformity" (2)
Rachovitsa, Adamantia, "General Principles Of Public Order And Morality And The Domain
Name System: Whither Public International Law?" (2016) 63(1) Netherlands
International Law Review
Shue, Henry, "Review Of Jens David Ohlin And Larry May, Necessity In International Law"
(2018) 13(2) Criminal Law and Philosophy
Gurulé, Jimmy, "The International Criminal Court: Complementarity With National Criminal
Jurisdiction" (2012) 2001(33) Amicus Curiae
Megret, F. and M. Giles Samson, "Holding The Line On Complementarity In Libya: The
Case For Tolerating Flawed Domestic Trials" (2013) 11(3) Journal of International
Criminal Justice
23

Complementary Jurisdiction
Palmer, Nicola, "The Place Of Consultation In The International Criminal Court's Approach
To Complementarity And Cooperation" [2016] SSRN Electronic Journal
Moran, Clare Frances, "The Effect Of Domestic Law On The Rome Statute Of The
International Criminal Court" [2015] SSRN Electronic Journal
Newton, Michael A., "The Quest For Constructive Complementarity" [2010] SSRN
Electronic Journal
Rastan, Rod, "What Is A ‘Case’ For The Purpose Of The Rome Statute?" (2008) 19(3-4)
Criminal Law Forum
"United Nations: Rome Statute Of The International Criminal Court" (1998) 37(5)
Khrennikov, Andrei and Sergei Kozyrev, "Contextual Quantization And The Principle Of
Complementarity Of Probabilities" (2005) 12(03) Open Systems & Information
Dynamics
Pues, Anni, "Discretion And The Gravity Of Situations At The International Criminal Court"
(2017) 17(5) International Criminal Law Review
Saxum, E. J. (2010)The ICC versus Sudan: How Does the Darfur Case Impact the Principle
of Complementarity? In.: Eyes on the ICC, 2009-2010/1:3
Schabas, W, An Introduction To The International Criminal Court (2007)
"Statute Of The International Criminal Tribunal For Rwanda" (2008) 2(2)
"Report Of The Secretary-General Pursuant To Paragraph 2 Of Security Council Resolution
808 (1993), Including The Statute Of The Tribunal" (1994) 5(2-3)
Robinson, Alicia, "Challenges To Justice At Home: The Domestic Prosecution Of Efrain
Rios Montt" (2016) 16(1) International Criminal Law Review
24

Complementary Jurisdiction
Williams, S. and Schabas, W. (2010)Article 17 R Issues of Admissibility, in Commentary On
The Rome Statute Of The International Criminal Court: 610
Weigend, Thomas, "A Comprehensive View Of International Criminal Law And Procedure"
(2018) 29(3) Criminal Law Forum
Zeidy, M, From Primacy To Complementarity And Backwards: (Re)-Visiting Rule 11 Bis Of
The Ad Hoc Tribunals, The International And Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 57,
No. 2 (Apr., 2008), Pp. 403-415, (2008) <(https://www.jstor.org/stable/20488212)>
M, Zeidy, (2008) "The Principle Of Complementarity In International Criminal Law: Origins,
Development And Practice.Martinusnijhoff"164.
25