Original Language Content (Desktop) - 2024-03-23

[Return to Main Page]
[Original] [Chinese] [English] [Hindi] [Spanish] [Portuguese]
[Desktop] [Mobile] [TXT Sharing]
[Original Inside RSS] [Chinese Inside RSS] [English Inside RSS] [Hindi Inside RSS] [Spanish Inside RSS] [Portuguese Inside RSS]
[Original Outside RSS] [Chinese Outside RSS] [English Outside RSS] [Hindi Outside RSS] [Spanish Outside RSS] [Portuguese Outside RSS]

#[Next]

Gaza: la hambruna es inminente (Nueva Democracia)


Imagen de cabecera: palestinos se reúnen en Gaza City para recibir ayuda. Fuente: Mahmoud Issa/Reuters
Toda la población de Gaza está enfrentando una alta inseguridad alimentaria. Fuente: IPC
Un niño palestino que sufre desnutrición aguda es tratado en Rafah, Gaza. Fuente: Reuters

#[Next]
[Previous Article]#[Next]

pc 21 marzo - Meloni in Egitto: i piani dell'imperialismo italiano e il ruolo di al Sisi al servizio dell'imperialismo (da Controinfo rossoperaia del 20/03) (proletari comunisti)


Il Mediterraneo, l’Africa e il Medioriente sono l’altro fronte di guerra acceso dalla contesa interimperialista, con le truppe militari dei governi imperialisti sul terreno a rafforzare l’asse del terrore, assieme al loro alleato sionista, contro i popoli arabi con al centro la Palestina.

Questo fronte di guerra è strategico per lo Stato imperialista italiano, ce lo stanno ripetendo fino alla nausea i governi e i cosiddetti “analisti” vicini all’apparato militare-industriale Italiano, e il governo Meloni/Crosetto/Tajani è proprio sull’interventismo imperialista italiano che punta molto, la Meloni lo ha gonfiato talmente tanto da spingere la stampa asservita a battezzarlo “piano Mattei”, a dargli così una veste apparentemente strategica per nascondere invece la realtà fatta di respingimenti appaltati ai governi reazionari, di profitti derivati dalla rapina delle risorse energetiche e dalle merci che transitano nell’area, di imposizione del tallone di ferro degli eserciti imperialisti per schiacciare le aspirazioni dei popoli e dominare il commercio mondiale che transita nel Mar Rosso.

La presidenza italiana nel G7 e le elezioni europee sono un passaggio ulteriore per tutti i governi e i partiti

dell’Europa per crescere come consenso e legittimare le loro politiche di repressione e oppressione, sia all’interno dei rispettivi Stati imperialisti, sia all’esterno contro i popoli.

In questo contesto domenica 17 Marzo si è tenuta la visita al Cairo del Presidente del Consiglio dei Ministri italiano, Meloni, insieme al Presidente della Commissione europea, von der Leyen, sempre disponibile quando deve sostenere le politiche razziste dei respingimenti antimmigrati in compagnia della capa del governo Italiano (nessuno può e deve dimenticare la strage dei migranti a Cutro, dove su quelle morti per responsabilità italiane ed europee le due aguzzine avevano rafforzato la loro unità). Della delegazione che puntava al rafforzamento del partenariato strategico Ue-Egitto ha fatto parte il Presidente della Repubblica di Cipro, attuale presidente di turno del Consiglio Ue, i Primi Ministri di Grecia e Austria.

Sono andati per firmare il nuovo patto Ue-Egitto, un piano da 7,4 miliardi di euro, tra prestiti e sovvenzioni.

Il Cairo dalla Ue è considerato "partner affidabile", un "pilastro della sicurezza del Mediterraneo", come si legge nella dichiarazione congiunta.

Inoltre l’aggettivo “storico” non poteva mancare neanche questa volta nel definire accordi politici, commerciali, militari,. Ogni passaggio politico del governo Meloni poggia su parole vuote che ammantano la sua politica imperialista, neocoloniale.

Questo del partenariato europeo era una delle gambe su cui poggia il rafforzamento imperialista del regime di al Sisi in Egitto, l’altra sono rapporti bilaterali Italia-Egitto che si concretizzano in nuovi Memorandum.

Con gli accordi con Libia, Tunisia e Albania, il governo Meloni persegue alla stessa maniera anche con l’Egitto la sua politica di impedire le partenze dei migranti in fuga da fame e guerre con i lager dove rinchiuderli, una politica rafforzata dal governo Meloni/Piantedosi di criminalizzazione/repressione delle ONG impegnate nei soccorsi in mare.

Al governo italiano, anche in vista delle elezioni europee, interessa soprattutto la questione migratoria. In Egitto sono presenti 9 milioni di migranti e 450 mila sono rifugiati e richiedenti asilo, di cui il 40% minori. Metà di questi (213mila) viene dal Sudan, un paese in guerra da ormai un anno con 7 milioni di sfollati. Il Sudan e l’evoluzione del conflitto a Gaza hanno fatto diventare centrale il dialogo con l’Egitto per gli imperialisti europei, anch’esso un Paese di migranti: 11.072 sono stati gli egiziani arrivati in Italia via mare nel 2023, prevalentemente dalla Libia. E proprio il rapporto stretto di al Sisi con il generale Khalifa Haftar che controlla la Cirenaica, la posizione che ha l’Egitto al confine con la Libia, il Sudan e la Striscia di Gaza che fanno di questo Stato un puntello dell’imperialismo nell’area Mediorientale. Per questo, e con la collaborazione dell’Agenzia europea Frontex, gli imperialisti vogliono irrobustire il controllo delle frontiere egiziane e rafforzare il pattugliamento marittimo per impedire le partenze dei migranti.

“La crisi di Gaza è in cima alle nostre preoccupazioni” ha detto la Meloni ma, siccome non ha fatto assolutamente nulla per fermare il genocidio dello Stato nazisionista israeliano contro Gaza e tutta la Palestina occupata e bombardata, le cosiddette “preoccupazioni” sue e dei governi sono solo per come impedire le partenze dei migranti e soffocare l’appoggio anche armato della resistenza del popolo dello Yemen, definito dalla stampa “ribelli Houthi”, che, in nome di quella solidarietà con il popolo palestinese, colpisce gli interessi dell’imperialismo che invece appoggia il terrorista n°1 dell’area, lo Stato nazisionista di Israele e attacca le merci degli imperialisti che passano nel Mar Rosso.

I regimi asserviti all’imperialismo diventano così un puntello indispensabile e su di loro i governi imperialisti riversano fiumi di denaro. In Italia questo lo chiamano pomposamente “piano Mattei” e il modello di cui va orgoglioso il governo italiano è quello siglato con la Tunisia di Saied nel settembre scorso, anch’esso, non a caso, battezzato da Meloni e von der Leyen.

L’incendio della guerra – o meglio - del genocidio in corso in Palestina da parte dello Stato occupante naziosionista di Israele, sostenuto dall’imperialismo occidentale con in testa gli USA e con il ruolo attivo, complice, dell’Italia del governo Meloni, è divampato nel Medioriente, per l’appoggio della resistenza dello Yemen alla resistenza palestinese e con l’afflusso di armi, militari, USA/UE nel Mar Rosso con l’obiettivo di spegnere la solidarietà politica e militare dei popoli alla causa palestinese e per un aperto sostegno al genocidio nazisionista.

Sostenere al-Sisi vuol dire innanzi tutto corrergli in aiuto per sostenere tutto l’apparato di dominio del golpista, dai militari alle banche, che hanno messo in ginocchio il popolo egiziano a cui ora si aggiungono le ondate migratorie da Gaza e dal Sudan, create dagli stessi imperialisti.

I respingimenti dei migranti saranno uno dei temi del G7 quindi è questione centrale per una lotta antimperialista.

L’iniziativa europea fa seguito al sostegno economico che l’Egitto si è assicurato dagli Emirati Arabi Uniti e dal Fondo monetario internazionale (Fmi). Tra la fine di febbraio e l’inizio di marzo Il Cairo ha ricevuto 10 miliardi di dollari erogati da un fondo emiratino. Un progetto che prevede un investimento iniziale di 35 miliardi di dollari e che consentirà di rimpinguare le casse dello Stato, su cui hanno gravato gli effetti della guerra nella Striscia di Gaza. Il 6 marzo scorso, l’Fmi ha annunciato di voler aumentare da 3 a 8 miliardi di dollari il valore del prestito che erogherà all’Egitto in cambio delle riforme economiche che, tradotto, significa scaricare con la repressione, con l’imposizione, tutta la politica di austerità del regime reazionario egiziano contro il suo stesso popolo.

Sulla situazione economica egiziana grava un debito che, secondo i dati della World Bank di settembre 2023, ammonta a 164,5 miliardi di dollari. Il tasso di inflazione annuale è salito al 36% a gennaio, senza possibilità di contrazione entro breve tempo – anche perché la Banca centrale ha deciso di rendere flessibile il tasso di cambio della sterlina egiziana (ormai scambiata a 50 per dollaro, contro i 30 medi del 2023).

Aiutare economicamente il golpista al Sisi significa, come contropartita, ottenere il suo coinvolgimento nella repressione dei migranti e, per l’imperialismo italiano, questo significa anche i profitti legati allo sfruttamento delle risorse energetiche, argomento strategico per i paesi imperialisti, che per questo si scannano e ci stanno trascinando nel macello mondiale.

In un’intervista concessa ad “Agenzia Nova”, un’analista Roberta ha detto che “in tale prospettiva – ha aggiunto – Roma non può prescindere dall’Egitto sia in ragione della posizione geografica del Paese nordafricano, sia per le sue infrastrutture, legate in particolare alla liquefazione del gas, presenti sul suo territorio. Ciò tanto più in ragione della possibilità, annunciata di recente, che dal 2025 l’Egitto possa aumentare di 4 miliardi di metri cubi annui le importazioni di gas naturale proveniente dal giacimento israeliano di Tamar attraverso un gasdotto offshore da Ashkelon a Al Arish”. L’Egitto, dice l’esperta, “mira a diventare un hub regionale di riferimento per il Gnl e la costruzione di un partenariato più stretto per l’Ue e soprattutto per l’Italia risponde dunque, senza alcun dubbio, a un’esigenza di interesse nazionale”. D’altro canto, “la stessa presenza del primo ministro greco potrebbe verosimilmente spiegarsi proprio con la volontà di mettere sul tavolo del negoziato prima di tutto le tematiche legate al settore dell’energia e dunque ai giacimenti offshore, alle infrastrutture, al Gnl e alle Zone economiche esclusive in tutta l’area del Mediterraneo orientale”

Quindi non ci sono solo i respingimenti antimmigrati in questo accordo tra Meloni e al Sisi, c’è anche l’approvvigionamento energetico: l’ENI ha messo le mani sul pozzo di gas naturale Nargis-1. ENI è attualmente il principale produttore in Egitto con una produzione di idrocarburi di circa 350mila barili al giorno. L’Egitto è diventato un hot spot per il gas dopo la scoperta del giacimento offshore di Zohr nel 2015. Attualmente ENI produce circa il 60% della produzione totale di gas del Paese nordafricano e gestisce anche l’impianto di esportazione di gas naturale liquefatto dal porto di Damietta da 5 milioni di tonnellate l’anno.

Per l’Italia imperialista rappresentata dal governo Meloni si è trattato di firmare un accordo con il golpista al Sisi proprio in coincidenza con l’udienza del processo per la morte di Giulio Regeni, il giovane ricercatore italiano, ucciso e torturato orribilmente dai servizi segreti egiziani di cui è capo al Sisi, e questa udienza iniziata il 18 marzo a Roma.

Niente può mettere in discussione le relazioni tra Italia ed Egitto, non contano né massacri né violazioni dei diritti umani, anzi, vengono rafforzati il business civile e, soprattutto, quello militare che è cresciuto vertiginosamente, con al centro, come sempre, la Fincantieri e la Leonardo.

Su questo il Presidente egiziano Al Sisi, alla presenza dell’AD di ENI, Claudio Descalzi, dichiarò che “l’assassinio è stato commesso per rovinare i rapporti con l’Italia” e “per danneggiare l’Egitto” e, rivolto a Descalzi, “Sa perché volevano danneggiare le relazioni fra Egitto ed Italia? Affinché non arrivassimo qui”. Ma non solo sono arrivati fin qui, sono andati anche avanti.

Negli ultimi cinque anni le industrie belliche italiane hanno esportato verso le forze armate di al Sisi, l’ex capo dell’esercito golpista egiziano, da poco rieletto trionfalmente per la terza volta, per il valore complessivo di due miliardi e 39 milioni di euro. Secondo lo Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (Sipri), infatti, per il 2024 sarebbero già in ballo 3 miliardi di dollari per l’acquisto di ventiquattro caccia Eurofighter Typhoon-2 da parte del Cairo.

La Leonardo dell’amministratore delegato Cingolani, ex ministro della transizione ecologica, azienda che ha nel suo libro-paga il ministro Crosetto, si sta sfregando le mani per l’ennesima volta.

Le industrie belliche italiane hanno esportato alle forze armate egiziane negli ultimi cinque anni armi per il valore complessivo di 2 miliardi e 39 milioni di euro.

Quindi, dietro la propaganda di questo governo, c’è la sostanza della politica imperialista italiana: profitti e respingimenti antimmigrati.

E contro di essa è necessaria la massima opposizione proletaria, di massa, antimperialista, solidale con la resistenza armata dei popoli.


[Previous Article]#[Next]

En el Día Internacional de la Poesía | Revolución Obrera (Revolucion Obrera)


En el Día Internacional de la Poesía 1

En el Día Internacional de la Poesía compartimos dos poemas de lucha, uno del poeta peruano Manuel Scorza y el otro del poeta chileno Pablo Neruda.


Epístola de los poetas que vendrán

Manuel Scorza

Tal vez mañana los poetas pregunten

por qué no celebramos la gracia de las muchachas;

tal vez mañana los poetas pregunten

por qué nuestros poemas

eran largas avenidas

por donde venía la ardiente cólera.

Yo respondo:

por todas partes oíamos el llanto,

por todas partes nos sitiaba un muro de olas negras.

¿Iba a ser la Poesía

una solitaria columna de rocío?

Tenía que ser un relámpago perpetuo.

Mientras alguien padezca,

la rosa no podrá ser bella;

mientras alguien mire el pan con envidia,

el trigo no podrá dormir;

mientras llueva sobre el pecho de los mendigos,

mi corazón no sonreirá.

Matad la tristeza, poetas.

Matemos a la tristeza con un palo.

No digáis el romance de los lirios.

Hay cosas más altas

que llorar amores perdidos:

el rumor de un pueblo que despierta

¡es más bello que el rocío!

El metal resplandeciente de su cólera

¡es más bello que la espuma!

Un Hombre Libre

¡es más puro que el diamante!

El poeta libertará el fuego

de su cárcel de ceniza.

El poeta encenderá la hoguera

donde se queme este mundo sombrío.

ODA AL HOMBRE SENCILLO

Pablo Neruda

Voy a contarte en secreto

quién soy yo,

así, en voz alta,

me dirás quién eres,

quiero saber quién eres,

cuánto ganas,

en qué taller trabajas,

en qué mina,

en qué farmacia,

tengo una obligación terrible

y es saberlo,

saberlo todo,

día y noche saber

cómo te llamas,

ése es mi oficio,

conocer una vida

no es bastante

ni conocer todas las vidas

es necesario,

verás,

hay que desentrañar,

rascar a fondo

y como en una tela

las líneas ocultaron,

con el color, la trama

del tejido,

yo borro los colores

y busco hasta encontrar

el tejido profundo,

así también encuentro

la unidad de los hombres,

y en el pan

busco

más allá de la forma:

me gusta el pan, lo muerdo,

y entonces

veo el trigo,

los trigales tempranos,

la verde forma de la primavera

las raíces, el agua,

por eso

más allá del pan,

veo la tierra,

la unidad de la tierra,

el agua,

el hombre,

y así todo lo pruebo

buscándote

en todo,

ando, nado, navego

hasta encontrarte,

y entonces te pregunto

cómo te llamas,

calle y número,

para que tú recibas

mis cartas,

para que yo te diga

quién soy y cuánto gano,

dónde vivo,

y cómo era mi padre.

Ves tú qué simple soy,

qué simple eres,

no se trata

de nada complicado,

yo trabajo contigo,

tú vives, vas y vienes

de un lado a otro,

es muy sencillo:

eres la vida,

eres tan transparente

como el agua,

y así soy yo,

mi obligación es ésa:

ser transparente,

cada día

me educo,

cada día me peino

pensando como piensas,

y ando

como tú andas,

como, como tú comes,

tengo en mis brazos a mi amor

como a tu novia tú,

y entonces

cuando esto está probado,

cuando somos iguales

escribo,

escribo con tu vida y con la mía,

con tu amor y los míos,

con todos tus dolores

y entonces

ya somos diferentes

porque, mi mano en tu hombro,

como viejos amigos

te digo en las orejas;

no sufras,

ya llega el día,

ven,

ven conmigo,

ven

con todos

los que a ti se parecen,

los más sencillos,

ven,

no sufras,

ven conmigo,

porque aunque no lo sepas,

eso yo sí lo sé:

yo sé hacia dónde vamos,

y es ésta la palabra:

no sufras

porque ganaremos,

ganaremos nosotros,

los más sencillos,

ganaremos,

aunque tú no lo creas,

ganaremos.


[Previous Article]#[Next]

Oaxaca sin agua ¿sequía o saqueo? (Periódico Mural)


Durante los últimos meses se vieron afectadas más de 4 mil 326 hectáreas de tierras por terribles incendios forestales provocados por el latifundio o surgidos como fenómeno de la temporada de estiaje. Además de esto, en diversas regiones de Oaxaca como los Valles Centrales, Mixteca y Costa, principalmente, se ha observado una crisis hídrica que amenaza a poblaciones enteras, y ahora también a hospitales y escuelas públicas.

El claro ejemplo es la situación del Hospital General “Dr. Aurelio Valdivieso”, en plena capital oaxaqueña, que el pasado 22 de febrero tuvo que suspender labores al quedarse sin agua. Evidentemente un nosocomio no puede funcionar sin brindar condiciones mínimas de salubridad para pacientes y personal médico, y para ello se hace indispensable el servicio de agua potable. Al respecto la Defensoría de Derechos Humanos del Pueblo de Oaxaca inició un cuaderno de antecedentes y dictó medidas cautelares donde pide “acciones integrales al Estado que eviten producir daños de difícil o imposible reparación en detrimento al derecho a la salud de la ciudadanía”.

Ahora, en la misma capital de la entidad, se habla de al menos 6 escuelas públicas que han debido suspender labores y retornar a las clases en línea ante el total desabasto de agua en sus instalaciones. Las más recientes han sido la Escuela Primaria Urbana Matutina “Carlos A. Carrillo”, ubicada en la Colonia Reforma, y la Escuela Primaria Matutina “Enrique Pestalozzi”, ubicada en el Centro de la Ciudad. Dejar a la niñez sin acceso al agua potable dentro de sus escuelas atenta también contra su derecho a la educación y la salud, entre otros contemplados dentro del interés superior de la niñez.

Hasta hace unas semanas el desabasto del agua potable estaba concentrado en las colonias populares generalmente ubicadas en la periferia y los cerros de la ciudad, nada nuevo. Desde hace décadas existen decenas de colonias y barrios denominados “asentamientos irregulares” donde el pueblo pobre no tiene acceso al agua potable ni otros servicios públicos; en la misma situación se encuentran cientos de escuelitas en esos mismos barrios. Los distintos gobiernos en turno han ignorado sistemáticamente esta situación, dejando la solución en manos de los pobladores que toda la vida han debido contratar pipas particulares que aprovechan la época de estiaje para especular con los precios del agua.

Pero ahora que la crisis hídrica ha llegado a la zona céntrica de la Ciudad y a las colonias “bien” como Reforma, San Felipe, etc. la situación se ha vuelto un escándalo; más aún cuando instituciones públicas visibles como el Hospital General y las escuelas antes mencionadas han debido suspender labores ante el desabasto del agua.

Paralelamente en Oaxaca, empresas refresqueras y cerveceras siguen laborando con normalidad, al igual que los grandes hoteles, restaurantes, centros de vicio e incluso balnearios que se preparan para la semana santa y el turismo bonito. A ninguno de estos les falta el agua para nada.

¿Estamos ante un fenómeno de sequía o saqueo? Usted responda.

Si durante la pandemia se decretó emergencia sanitaria y suspensión de labores de esas industrias y negocios, debería hacerse lo mismo en medio de esta crisis hídrica que es también crisis sanitaria, además de regular el precio del agua que venden los piperos organizados en mafias sindicales.

Garantizar el acceso universal al agua potable como derecho fundamental es una necesidad vital y no así las elecciones en puerta. El dinero que se gasta en campañas y candidatos debería invertirse en sistemas comunitarios de acopio y abasto de agua para el pueblo.


[Previous Article]#[Next]

Novo Ensino Médio é aprovado após acordo de parlamento com governo  - A Nova Democracia (A Nova Democracia)


Após um acordo com o governo, o Congresso Nacional aprovou hoje um projeto do Novo Ensino Médio. O projeto passou por algumas modificações, mas manteve o essencial do conteúdo foi criticado, por meses, em greves e protestos de professores e alunos por todo o País, como centenas de horas para as disciplinas optativas sem conteúdo científico e modelos prejudiciais à formação escolar completa.

Dentro do aprovado pela Câmara, está: 

  • Perda de horas de formação científica: no ensino regular, a divisão será de 2.400 horas para disciplinas obrigatórias e 600 horas para as disciplinas optativas. Em outras palavras, a perda de 600 horas em disciplinas tradicionais e essenciais no Ensino Médio para os “itinerários formativos”, compostos em sua maioria, sobretudo nas escolas públicas, de disciplinas sem conteúdo científico, como “pensamento computacional”, “projeto de vida” e aberrações similares. No ensino técnico, a divisão será de 2.100 horas para disciplinas obrigatórias, com possibilidade de 300 delas serem compatibilizadas entre formação geral básica e ensino técnico, além de 1.200 horas para o curso técnico escolhido. 
  • Guarda-chuva de disciplinas: fusão de diferentes disciplinas essenciais à formação do estudante em “grandes áreas”, tornadas obrigatórias. São elas: linguagens e suas tecnologias, que integra língua portuguesa e literatura; língua inglesa; artes (múltiplas linguagens e expressões); educação física; matemática e suas tecnologias; ciências da natureza e suas tecnologias, que reunirá disciplinas importantes como biologia, física e química em um único grande guarda-chuva; e ciências humanas e sociais aplicadas, que fará o mesmo com filosofia, geografia, história e sociologia. 
  • Itinerários formativos: no novo projeto, cada escola regular (não técnica) deve oferecer ao menos dois itinerários formativos. Essas disciplinas optativas devem contemplar ao menos uma das áreas acima, mas não há especificação clara do quanto que conteúdo ou ementa devem estar relacionados às áreas científicas, de forma que deixa em aberto o espaço para cursos anticientíficos como os que foram massivamente implementados nas escolas que adotaram a medida no último ano; nas escolas técnicas, há a opção da formação do curso de formação técnica e profissional; 
  • Formalização do Ensino à Distância: o projeto estabeleceu que os itinerários formativos podem ser ensinados à distância, enquanto a carga horária de formação geral básica pode ser ofertada de forma presencial e, excepcionalmente, de forma “mediada por tecnologia”. Ainda não há um regulamento que especifique como se dará a mediação. 

Extrema-direita comemora

Depois da aprovação, parlamentares da extrema-direita apressaram-se em celebrar o texto acordado entre o governo e o Congresso. O novo presidente da Comissão de Educação da Câmara, o notório reacionário Nikolas Ferreira (PL-MG), foi um dos que elogiou o projeto aprovado. Em nota publicada nas redes sociais, o deputado declarou, cinicamente, que vai manter alta a fiscalização pela aplicação da medida e às “demandas dos nossos alunos”.

O comentário é um escárnio descarado: a aprovação contrariou de forma direta os interesses dos alunos e professores que criticaram e condenaram o NEM em importantes mobilizações pelo País ao longo de todo o último ano. Em vez de uma reformulação no NEM, os professores e estudantes exigiam a revogação total da medida. 

Mudou, mas deixou igual

Na nova aprovação, todo o conteúdo criticado pelos estudantes no NEM se manteve. Em greves, ocupações estudantis e protestos, os profissionais da Educação e estudantes exigiam o fim dos “itinerários formativos” e o retorno da grade horária destinada às disciplinas regulares e condenavam a confusão generalizada causada pela fusão de múltiplas disciplinas científicas em leques amplos. O Ensino à Distância também era, via de regra, rechaçado nas manifestações. Entidades como a Executiva Nacional dos Estudantes de Pedagogia (ExNEPe), que coordenou campanhas e lutas contra o NEM, chegou a classificar a reforma como o “mais grave ataque à Educação pública dos últimos anos”. 

Denúncias posteriores à aplicação da medida também revelam como NEM favorece a precarização do trabalho docente, com os profissionais sujeitos à exploração cada vez maior, em jornadas exaustivas e um trabalho não relacionado com suas áreas de formação, a precarização do Ensino, sobretudo do público e gratuito, com a oferta de um ensino anticientífico e pragmatista (e não ensino técnico, como propagandeiam figuras como Nikolas Ferreira), consequentemente, a evasão escolar.

Luta deve ser retomada

Mesmo assim, o governo nunca de fato cogitou atender a exigência de revogar o NEM e optou pela conciliação com a medida. No mês passado, o ministro da Educação, Camilo Santana, afirmou que esperava aprovar a medida “ainda neste semestre, até porque para implementar as mudanças no Ensino Médio para 2025 precisam ser aprovadas neste semestre, porque precisa ter o tempo para que as redes se prepararem para mudanças. É fundamental a aprovação ainda neste semestre na Câmara e no Senado”. 

Dessa forma, o clima que pode se esperar é de retomada das lutas dos estudantes contra o NEM e os vindouros ataques à Educação promovidos pelos reacionários celerados e conciliadores de plantão.


[Previous Article]#[Next]

21 marzo - Solidarieta' ai compagni di Antudo colpiti dalla repressione di Stato - giù le mani da chi lotta contro i padroni e il governo della guerra imperialista (proletari comunisti)


LA QUESTURA DI PALERMO HA EMESSO TRE MISURE CAUTELARI RESTRITTIVE VERSO 3 COMPAGNI MILITANTI DI ANTUDO

“Una custodia cautelare in carcere e due obblighi di firma con accuse di atto terroristico e istigazione a delinquere per aver diffuso un video di un'iniziativa simbolica di protesta avvenuta alla sede della Leonardo SPA di Palermo nel novembre 2022 a tre militanti di Antudo. Oggi anche in Sicilia chi svela i piani criminali del governo italiano e delle sue fabbriche di morte viene represso e privato della sua libertà, mentre i responsabili dei massacri e del genocidio in atto a Gaza si riempiono le tasche con i grassi profitti dell'industria bellica. Libertà per chi lotta contro la guerra, Leonardo complice del genocidio!” (dal comunicato di Antudo).

MASSIMA SOLIDARIETÀ AI COMPAGNI COLPITI DALLA REPRESSIONE DI STATO
GIÙ LE MANI DA CHI LOTTA CONTRO LE FABBRICHE DI MORTE E DELLA GUERRA IMPERIALISTA.

Per il governo italiano, guidato dalla fascista Meloni, la Leonardo spa non si deve toccare. La Leonardo Spa, come si è denunciato con forza in questi mesi di manifestazioni, di protesta, a Palermo, davanti la fabbrica Leonardo con la presenza di centinaia di compagni, di militanti, di lavoratori, di studenti, produce sistemi d’arma che vengono usati e venduti in tutto il mondo per le guerre imperialiste e continua a fare profitti per miliardi su migliaia e migliaia di morti, feriti e immani distruzioni. E la Leonardo non si ferma, anzi compra altre aziende militari ad alta tecnologia e cerca anche nuovi alleati: “…l’altro risvolto, gli alleati che la Leonardo sta cercando, e in particolare l’alleanza con la Iveco Defence per espandere la propria presenza nell’industria degli armamenti terrestri”.

Continueremo a combattere contro Il governo italiano ogni giorno sempre più reazionario e guerrafondaio, pienamente al servizio degli interessi del Capitale, dei padroni assassini come la Leonardo Spa, pienamente complici oggi del massacro genocida del popolo palestinese messo in atto dallo Stato nazisionista di Israele, non sarà la repressione di questo Stato borghese a fermare la lotta giusta e immediata che serve, che deve essere necessariamente inserita nella prospettiva di lottare per rovesciare questo sistema sociale capitalista e imperialista che produce solo guerre, miseria, distruzione, repressione….

Libertà immediata per i compagni arrestati e sottoposti a misure cautelari.

Proletari comunisti - Slai Cobas per il sindacato di classe Palermo

[Previous Article]#[Next]

pc 21 marzo - Formazione operaia - l'azione nella classe e la posizione di classe nei movimenti - Lenin "Che fare?" (proletari comunisti)


Lenin dice che per sviluppare la coscienza politica del proletariato bisogna portare nella classe operaia la denuncia di ogni manifestazione di arbitrio e oppressione.

Ma naturalmente, si pone subito dopo il problema "Come farlo? Abbiamo forze sufficienti per farlo? Esiste un terreno per questo lavoro in tutte le altre classi? Non significherà questo o non porterà questo ad una rinuncia al punto di vista di classe?".

Domande ancora più giustificate se guardiamo ad oggi, alle condizioni di organizzazione, numeri e quadri dell'organizzazione comunista, e in particolare della nostra. Domande a cui la risposta facile che viene è No.

Ma la risposta di Lenin è invece altra. Parte dall'assunto che i comunisti sono innanzitutto "teorici... propagandisti, agitatori e organizzatori". E aggiunge: "ma si fa molto poco in questo senso. Troppo poco rispetto a quanto si fa per lo studio delle peculiarità della vita di fabbrica", anzi - diciamo noi - dell'attenzione che si presta alla vita e alle lotte degli altri settori di lavoratori. Lenin insiste che ci sono

compagni, comitati, ecc. che si sprofondano perfino nello studio specialistico delle lotte sindacali, mentre non fanno, o fanno in misura estremamente limitata, il lavoro che domanda Lenin per elevare effettivamente la coscienza degli operai e dei lavoratori in lotta.

Il loro impegno profuso nelle lotte sindacali dimentica che - come dice Lenin - "non è socialdemocratico chi di fatto dimentica che i comunisti appoggiano ogni moto rivoluzionario e che, per conseguenza, noi dobbiamo esporre, sottolineare dinanzi a tutto il popolo i compiti generali, senza nascondere neppure per un momento le nostre convinzioni socialiste", ed educare nel nostro lavoro nella fabbrica e nelle lotte proletarie gli operai e il proletariato in generale ad occuparsi di tutti i problemi generali e porsi all'avanguardia di tutte le lotte politiche democratiche che si sviluppano nella società, innanzitutto, nella fase iniziale, con prese di posizione.

Le forze per fare questo ci sono eccome. L'alternativa che ci suggeriscono invece gli economisti e la mentalità economista nelle fila dei comunisti è quella di "sviluppare una politica tradunionista". E su questo Lenin è tassativo: "La politica tradunionista della classe operaia è proprio la politica borghese della classe operaia".

Perfino negli altri settori e movimenti a cui noi ci rivolgiamo, l'azione dei comunisti non consiste tanto nel dirigere la lotta per i loro interessi immediati - ad esempio la lotta degli studenti - ma nel portare in essi la posizione dei comunisti, la posizione del partito della classe operaia; perchè solo così si realizza quello che dice Lenin: "Noi dobbiamo trasformare i militanti socialdemocratici in capi politici che sappiano dirigere tutte le manifestazioni di questa lotta" e siano in grado di dettare in questa lotta "un positivo programma di azione agli studenti in agitazione, ai rappresentanti degli zemstva insoddisfatti, ai membri delle sette religiose indignati, ai maestri colpiti nei loro interessi, ecc. ".

Questo è essere avanguardia rivoluzionaria ed espressione dell'avanguardia operaia che abbiamo chiamato a prendere posizione, e attraverso essa cominciare a reagire a tutte le forme di oppressione politica e sociale della borghesia, del suo Stato, del suo governo. 

Se questo è, quindi, il compito dei comunisti, permanente dei comunisti, se si comprende che questo è un compito da assolvere fin dall'inizio della nostra attività, si può comprendere bene l'attenzione che a questo punto Lenin pone sulle effettive forze che hai, e considera scontato il tipo di attività inevitabile da condurre all'inizio: "effettivamente avevamo pochissime forze. Allora era naturale e legittima la determinazione di buttarsi interamente nel lavoro tra gli operai e biasimare seriamente ogni allontanamento da esso, allora l'unico scopo era quello di rafforzarsi nella classe operaia". 

Anche qui, però, il problema è: con quale concezione, con quale prassi, con quale propaganda e agitazione ci si butta interamente tra gli operai e ci si rafforza nella classe operaia? Con la politica sindacale, tradunionista, con il suo sviluppo economista, o con la politica comunista, sia pure agli inizi del processo di radicamento e organizzazione per la costruzione del Partito? Con l'idea che nella classe operaia questo lavoro non si può fare, che viene dopo che abbiamo condotto l'attività sindacale e conseguentemente allo sviluppo di essa, o con la propaganda e agitazione, sia pure nelle condizioni molto difficili che ci sono oggi nelle fila della classe operaia?

Anche qui Lenin è molto preciso: "Il pubblico ideale per le denunce politiche è proprio la classe operaia, che ha bisogno prima di tutto e soprattutto di una conoscenza politica viva e completa e che è la più atta a trasformare queste conoscenze in lotta attiva, anche se questa non promette alcun "risultato tangibile".

D'altra parte questa è l'unica strada che ha la classe operaia per diventare punto di riferimento della lotta e dell'opposizione di tutti gli strati della società. Ed è questo il ruolo crescente che la classe operaia, prima con le sole avanguardie poi con la lotta attiva, può permettere a noi di "diventare una forza politica agli occhi degli altri". E per diventare questo "bisogna lavorare molto e con tenacia per elevare la nostra coscienza, il nostro spirito di iniziativa e la nostra energia". E - insiste Lenin - "non è sufficiente attaccare l'etichetta di avanguardia su una teoria e una pratica di retroguardia".


[Previous Article]#[Next]

Madrid: movilización de las masas logra evitar el desalojo del CPK La Bankarrota (Servir al pueblo)



[Previous Article]#[Next]

NRW: Schulministerin Feller fällt den Eltern in den Rücken (Dem Volke Dienen)


Die grün-schwarze Landesregierung von CDU und den Grünen hat den Eltern und Kindern in Nordrhein-Westfalen eine bessere Ganztagsversorgung an Grundschulen versprochen. Geplant war von Seiten der Landesregierung ein Gesetz, welches einen gesicherten Anspruch auf ganztägliche Betreuung in Schulen gewährleistet. Dieses Gesetz würde nicht nur Eltern und gerade Mütter entlasten und ihnen ermöglichen Lohnarbeit und Kindererziehung besser in Einklang zu bringen oder im stressigen Alltag etwas mehr Freizeit zu haben, sondern würde auch den Kindern eine bessere schulische und außerschulische Förderung garantieren. Und auch Allgemein würde das Gesetz einen positiven Beitrag zum sonst immer mehr überlasteten Schulsystem leisten.

Geplant war das Landesgesetz ursprünglich als notwendige Ergänzung und Komplement zum im Jahr 2021 beschlossenen Bundesgesetz, dass einen Rechtsanspruch auf eine Ganztagsbetreuung in Grundschulen formuliert. Implementiert würde das Gesetz ab dem Schuljahr 2026/27 mit der Einschulung der Erstklässler und würde dann schrittweise bis zum Jahr 2029/30 bis zur vierten Klasse eingeführt werden. Das Gesetz in NRW sollte dann regeln, wie die Ganztagsbetreeung durch wen umgesetzt werden soll, und welche inhaltlichen und betreuerischen Standards bei der Besetzung der Stellen berücksichtigt werden müssen.

Stattdessen bricht die Landesregierung ihr Versprechen gegenüber den Eltern und Kindern im Land und beschränkt sich lediglich auf sogenannte „Leitlinien“, die nichts anderes als den Rechtsanspruch des Bundesgesetzes reproduzieren und den Status-Quo wiederkäuen.  Ein Ganztagsplatz wird acht Stunden pro Schultag umfassen. Wie das umgesetzt wird und wer für die Betreuung verantwortlich sein wird, soll laut Landesschulministerin Dorothee Feller vor Ort entschieden werden.

In der Praxis heißt das; Kommunen und Schulen werden allein gelassen und müssen sich darum sorgen im deutschen Bürokratiedschungel  entweder in Kooperation mit externen Trägern der Jugendhilfe oder aus eigener Kraft und staatlicher Finanzierung ein Ganztagsangebot über acht Stunden anzubieten. Da sowieso schon im Bildungs- und Sozialbereich ein großer Personalmangel besteht und die Schulen untereinander um Fördergelder und Personal konkurrieren wird das – gerade in Zeiten von einer Krisenpolitik, die am Sozialhaushalt kürzt wo es geht – zu einem pädagogisch-organisatorischen Flickenteppich führen. Verschiedene Träger der Jugendhilfe werden qualitativ schwankende Angebote anbieten und das mit unterqualifizierten Personal, weil die Mindestqualifikation nicht gesetzlich geregelt wurde. Das Endergebnis ist, dass die Ganztagsbetreuung eher einer Kinderaufbewahrung ähnelt, wie es in zahlreichen Kitas der Fall ist und keine pädagogisch reichhaltige Förderung sein wird. Dazu kommt, dass es auch keine Regelungen gibt wie groß die zu betreuenden Gruppen mindestens und maximal sein dürfen, was dazu führen sollte, dass nicht jedes Kind, das einen Anspruch auf einen Ganztagsplatz hat, auch einen bekommen wird, weil unklar ist, ob das Land es innerhalb von zwei Jahren schafft den Bedarf für alle Grundschulkinder decken zu können.

Die Frage warum die Landesregierung es nicht geschafft hat nach drei Jahren ein Gesetz zu verabschieden dürfte finanzieller Natur sein. Das sehen auch die anderen Fraktionen im Parlament so. In den letzten Tagen gingen über tausend Schüler in NRW auf die Straße, um für mehr Lehrer, eine bessere Bildung und Teilhabe zu demonstrieren. Dort hörte man öfter die Parole „Für die Rüstung sind sie fix, für die Bildung tun sie nix!“ und das stimmt genau. Für die Aufrüstung des deutschen Imperialismus und die Entwicklung der deutschen Monopole ist Geld da. Für Gesundheit, Soziales und Bildung machen sie nichts.  Die Kinder werden von der Kita bis zum Ende ihrer Schullaufbahn von Aufbewahrung zu Aufbewahrung weitergereicht und die Eltern werden im Stich gelassen. Ausbaden werden das wieder größtenteils die Mütter, die aufgrund der patriarchalen Unterdrückung dazu verdonnert werden das Mehr an Kinderbetreuung zu leisten, welches der bürgerliche Staat an sie weitergibt. Ein weiterer guter Grund wegen dem die Schüler, Eltern und Lehrer zusammen auf die Straße gehen sollten.


[Previous Article]#[Next]

More reports from the 8th of March – The Red Herald (Red Herald)


We publish here further reports of actions for the 8th of March.

In Lyon, France, the People’s Women’s Committee (CFP) mobilized widely under revolutionary slogans. First, on the 7th of March, the CFP organized a meeting at the university, where it presented its work, as well as the work of the People’s Committee for Mutual Aid and Solidarity, and where a speech on the women’s place in the resistance was held by Palestinian women. In this speech it was highlighted that the enemy is imperialism, not men.

On the 8th of March a combative and anti-imperialist contingent took part to the demonstration organized by Fosse aux Lyons and CFP. This contingent expressed their support to the heroic Palestinian national resistance and especially the women of Gaza. The protesters carried a banner with the slogans “Support for our sisters in Gaza who fight against imperialism and patriarchy! Palestine will win!” and shouted slogans in support of armed struggle, against Zionism and imperialism. Several speeches took a stance against US imperialism and Zionism, and also French imperialism and its treatment of the Mahorese women was condemned. Nouvelle Epoque reports that the contingent was well received among the masses.

On the 16th of March peasant women from Zona da Mata Sul in Pernambuco, Brazil held a plenary session celebrating the 8th of March. The panel was attended by women representatives of the League of Poor Peasants of the Northeast (LCP-NE), a representative of the Committee for the Defense of the Agrarian Revolution (CDRA) of the José Ricardo Revolutionary Area and a teacher from the Elizabete Teixeira People’s School. During the event, a daycare service was organized in order to allow peasant mothers to take part. Following the Internationale, the principles of the People’s Women’s Movement were presented and there was reading and discussion about the origin of the 8th of March, a part of the MFP bulletin. At the end, it was discussed and defined how women could increase their participation in the struggle to recover water sources and land from the old Frei Caneca plantation. In this way, the plenary session led the formation of an agitation and propaganda committee to recover water sources and organize a daycare service so that women can actively participate in recovering the land. The session ended with the Anthem of the Revolutionary Fighters and many slogans from the warriors of the southern forest of Pernambuco.

As we reported earlier, a massive and combative demonstration took place on the 8th of March in Medellin, Colombia. The struggle of the women who took part has been criminalized by members of the ruling classes, with posters published accusing some of the women of vandalism, as well as intimidation and detention carried out by the police against women for such reasons as wearing green or purple scarves. Now women’s organizations are denouncing that the old State is quick to repress the protest of women but don’t punish the murderers and rapists of women. Posters have been put up and slogans have been painted by revolutionary women condemning the criminalization of protest.

In Innsbruck, Austria multiple activities were organized by the Innsbruck Women’s Network and Democratic Women’s Organizations. The last of these activities was an event on the 17th of March in Wörgl. The opening speech of the event was held by the Purple-Red Collective, taking an anti-imperialist and class-based stance on the International women’s day. After the speech and discussion cultural program followed. Zen Erbane Group and Umuda Tohum Music Group played Turkish and Kurdish folk songs, and after these DJ Kandesha took the stage with techno music influenced by Middle-Eastern folk culture. The event concluded in internationalist slogans.

PDF Content:



The text of the Rome Statute reproduced herein was originally circulated as document A/CONF.183/9 of 17 J uly 1 998 and corrected by procès-verbaux of 10 November 1998, 12 July 1999, 30 November 1999, 8 May 2000, 17 January 2001 and 16 January 2002. The amendments to article 8 reproduce the text contained in depositary notification C.N.651.2010 Treaties-6, while the amendments regarding articles 8 bis, 15 bis and 15 ter replicate the text contained in depositary notification C.N.651.2010 Treaties-8; both depositary communications are dated 29 November 2010. The table of contents is not part of the text of the Rome Statute adopted by the United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court on 17 July 1998. It has been included in this publication for ease of reference. Done at Rome on 17 July 1998, in force on 1 July 2002, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2187, No. 38544, Depositary: Secretary-General of the United Nations, http://treaties.un.org .Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPublished by the International Criminal Court ISBN No. 92-9227-232-2 ICC-PIOS-LT-03-002/15_Eng Copyright © International Criminal Court 2011 All rights reserved International Criminal Court | Po Box 19519 | 2500 CM | The Hague | The Netherlands | www.icc-cpi.int
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Table of Contents PREAMBLE 1 PART 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COURT 2 Article 1 The Court 2 Article 2 Relationship of the Court with the United Nations 2 Article 3 Seat of the Court 2 Article 4 Legal status and powers of the Court 2 PART 2. JURISDICTION, ADMISSIBILITY AND APPLICABLE LAW 3 Article 5 Crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court 3 Article 6 Genocide 3 Article 7 Crimes against humanity 3 Article 8 War crimes 4 Article 8 bis Crime of aggression 7 Article 9 Elements of Crimes 8 Article 10 8 Article 11 Jurisdiction ratione temporis 8 Article 12 Preconditions to the exercise of jurisdiction 8 Article 13 Exercise of jurisdiction 9 Article 14 Referral of a situation by a State Party 9 Article 15 Prosecutor 9 Article 15 bis Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (State referral, proprio motu ) 9 Article 15 ter Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (Security Council referral) 10 Article 16 Deferral of investigation or prosecution 10 Article 17 Issues of admissibility 10 Article 18 Preliminary rulings regarding admissibility 11 Article 19 Challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court or the admissibility of a case 12 Article 20 Ne bis in idem 1 3 Article 21 Applicable law 13 PART 3. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW 14 Article 22 Nullum crimen sine lege 14 Article 23 Nulla poena sine lege 14 Article 24 Non-retroactivity ratione personae 14 Article 25 Individual criminal responsibility 14 Article 26 Exclusion of jurisdiction over persons under eighteen 15 Article 27 Irrelevance of official capacity 15 Article 28 Responsibility of commanders and other superiors 15 Article 29 Non-applicability of statute of limitations 15 Article 30 Mental element 15 Article 31 Grounds for excluding criminal responsibility 16 Article 32 Mistake of fact or mistake of law 16 Article 33 Superior orders and prescription of law 16 PART 4. COMPOSITION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE COURT 17 Article 34 Organs of the Court 17 Article 35 Service of judges 17 Article 36 Qualifications, nomination and election of judges 17 Article 37 Judicial vacancies 19 Article 38 The Presidency 19 Article 39 Chambers 19 Article 40 Independence of the judges 20
Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 41 Excusing and disqualification of judges 20 Article 42 The Office of the Prosecutor 20 Article 44 Staff 21 Article 45 Solemn undertaking 21 Article 46 Removal from office 22 Article 47 Disciplinary measures 22 Article 48 Privileges and immunities 22 Article 49 Salaries, allowances and expenses 23 Article 50 Official and working languages 23 Article 51 Rules of Procedure and Evidence 23 Article 52 Regulations of the Court 23 PART 5. INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION 24 Article 53 Initiation of an investigation 24 Article 54 Duties and powers of the Prosecutor with respect to investigations 24 Article 55 Rights of persons during an investigation 25 Article 56 Role of the Pre-Trial Chamber in relation to a unique investigative opportunity 25 Article 57 Functions and powers of the Pre-Trial Chamber 26 Article 58 Issuance by the Pre-Trial Chamber of a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear 27 Article 59 Arrest proceedings in the custodial State 28 Article 60 Initial proceedings before the Court 28 Article 61 Confirmation of the charges before trial 28 PART 6. THE TRIAL 31 Article 62 Place of trial 31 Article 63 Trial in the presence of the accused 31 Article 64 Functions and powers of the Trial Chamber 31 Article 65 Proceedings on an admission of guilt 32 Article 66 Presumption of innocence 32 Article 67 Rights of the accused 33 Article 68 Protection of the victims and witnesses and their participation in the proceedings 33 Article 69 Evidence 34 Article 70 Offences against the administration of justice 34 Article 71 Sanctions for misconduct before the Court 35 Article 72 Protection of national security information 35 Article 73 Third-party information or documents 36 Article 74 Requirements for the decision 36 Article 75 Reparations to victims 36 Article 76 Sentencing 37 PART 7. PENALTIES 38 Article 77 Applicable penalties 38 Article 78 Determination of the sentence 38 Article 79 Trust Fund 38 Article 80 Non-prejudice to national application of penalties and national laws 38 PART 8. APPEAL AND REVISION 39 Article 81 Appeal against decision of acquittal or conviction or against sentence 39 Article 82 Appeal against other decisions 39 Article 83 Proceedings on appeal 40 Article 84 Revision of conviction or sentence 40 Article 85 Compensation to an arrested or convicted person 41
Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 9. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AND JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE 42 Article 86 General obligation to cooperate 42 Article 87 Requests for cooperation: general provisions 42 Article 88 Availability of procedures under national law 42 Article 89 Surrender of persons to the Court 42 Article 90 Competing requests 43 Article 91 Contents of request for arrest and surrender 44 Article 92 Provisional arrest 45 Article 93 Other forms of cooperation 45 Article 94 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of ongoing investigation or prosecution 47 Article 95 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of an admissibility challenge 47 Article 96 Contents of request for other forms of assistance under article 93 47 Article 97 Consultations 48 Article 98 Cooperation with respect to waiver of immunity and consent to surrender 48 Article 99 Execution of requests under articles 93 and 96 48 Article 100 Costs 49 Article 101 Rule of speciality 49 Article 102 Use of terms 49 PART 10. ENFORCEMENT 50 Article 103 Role of States in enforcement of sentences of imprisonment 50 Article 104 Change in designation of State of enforcement 50 Article 105 Enforcement of the sentence 50 Article 106 Supervision of enforcement of sentences and conditions of imprisonment 50 Article 107 Transfer of the person upon completion of sentence 51 Article 108 Limitation on the prosecution or punishment of other offences 51 Article 109 Enforcement of fines and forfeiture measures 51 Article 110 Review by the Court concerning reduction of sentence 51 Article 111 Escape 52 PART 11. ASSEMBLY OF STATES PARTIES 53 Article 112 Assembly of States Parties 53 PART 12. FINANCING 54 Article 113 Financial Regulations 54 Article 114 Payment of expenses 54 Article 115 Funds of the Court and of the Assembly of States Parties 54 Article 116 Voluntary contributions 54 Article 117 Assessment of contributions 54 Article 118 Annual audit 54 PART 13. FINAL CLAUSES 55 Article 119 Settlement of disputes 55 Article 120 Reservations 55 Article 121 Amendments 55 Article 122 Amendments to provisions of an institutional nature 55 Article 123 Review of the Statute 56 Article 124 Transitional Provision 56 Article 125 Signature, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession 56 Article 126 Entry into force 56 Article 127 Withdrawal 56 Article 128 Authentic texts 57
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
1 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPREAMBLE The States Parties to this Statute, Conscious that all peoples are united by common bonds, their cultures pieced together in a shared heritage, and concerned that this delicate mosaic may be shattered at any time, Mindful that during this century millions of children, women and men have been victims of unimaginable atrocities that deeply shock the conscience of humanity, Recognizing that such grave crimes threaten the peace, security and well-being of the world, Affirming that the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole must not go unpunished and that their effective prosecution must be ensured by taking measures at the national level and by enhancing international cooperation, Determined to put an end to impunity for the perpetrators of these crimes and thus to contribute to the prevention of such crimes, Recalling that it is the duty of every State to exercise its criminal jurisdiction over those responsible for international crimes, Reaffirming the Purposes and Principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and in particular that all States shall refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations, Emphasizing in this connection that nothing in this Statute shall be taken as authorizing any State Party to intervene in an armed conflict or in the internal affairs of any State, Determined to these ends and for the sake of present and future generations, to establish an independent permanent International Criminal Court in relationship with the United Nations system, with jurisdiction over the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole, Emphasizing that the International Criminal Court established under this Statute shall be complementary to national criminal jurisdictions, Resolved to guarantee lasting respect for and the enforcement of international justice, Have agreed as follows:
2 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COURT Article 1 The Court An International Criminal Court ("the Court") is hereby established. It shall be a permanent institution and shall have the power to exercise its jurisdiction over persons for the most serious crimes of international concern, as referred to in this Statute, and shall be complementary to national criminal jurisdictions. The jurisdiction and functioning of the Court shall be governed by the provisions of this Statute. Article 2 Relationship of the Court with the United Nations The Court shall be brought into relationship with the United Nations through an agreement to be approved by the Assembly of States Parties to this Statute and thereafter concluded by the President of the Court on its behalf. Article 3 Seat of the Court 1. The seat of the Court shall be established at The Hague in the Netherlands ("the host State"). 2. The Court shall enter into a headquarters agreement with the host State, to be approved by the Assembly of States Parties and thereafter concluded by the President of the Court on its behalf. 3. The Court may sit elsewhere, whenever it considers it desirable, as provided in this Statute. Article 4 Legal status and powers of the Court 1. The Court shall have international legal personality. It shall also have such legal capacity as may be necessary for the exercise of its functions and the fulfilment of its purposes. 2. The Court may exercise its functions and powers, as provided in this Statute, on the territory of any State Party and, by special agreement, on the territory of any other State.
3 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 2. JURISDICTION, ADMISSIBILITY AND APPLICABLE LAW Article 51 Crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court The jurisdiction of the Court shall be limited to the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole. The Court has jurisdiction in accordance with this Statute with respect to the following crimes: (a) The crime of genocide; (b) Crimes against humanity; (c) War crimes; (d) The crime of aggression. Article 6 Genocide For the purpose of this Statute, "genocide" means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. Article 7 Crimes against humanity 1. For the purpose of this Statute, "crime against humanity" means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack: (a) Murder; (b) Extermination; (c) Enslavement; (d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population; (e) Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law; (f) Torture; (g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity; (h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; (i) Enforced disappearance of persons; (j) The crime of apartheid; (k) Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health. 1 Paragraph 2 of article 5 (“The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression once a provision is adopted in accordance with articles 121 and 123 defining the crime and setting out the conditions under which the Court shall exercise jurisdiction with respect to this crime. Such a provision shall be consistent with the relevant provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.”) was deleted in accordance with RC/Res.6, annex I, of 11 June 2010.
4 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. For the purpose of paragraph 1: (a) "Attack directed against any civilian population" means a course of conduct involving the multiple commission of acts referred to in paragraph 1 against any civilian population, pursuant to or in furtherance of a State or organizational policy to commit such attack; (b) "Extermination" includes the intentional infliction of conditions of life, inter alia the deprivation of access to food and medicine, calculated to bring about the destruction of part of a population; (c) "Enslavement" means the exercise of any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership over a person and includes the exercise of such power in the course of trafficking in persons, in particular women and children; (d) "Deportation or forcible transfer of population" means forced displacement of the persons concerned by expulsion or other coercive acts from the area in which they are lawfully present, without grounds permitted under international law; (e) "Torture" means the intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, upon a person in the custody or under the control of the accused; except that torture shall not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions; (f) "Forced pregnancy" means the unlawful confinement of a woman forcibly made pregnant, with the intent of affecting the ethnic composition of any population or carrying out other grave violations of international law. This definition shall not in any way be interpreted as affecting national laws relating to pregnancy; (g) "Persecution" means the intentional and severe deprivation of fundamental rights contrary to international law by reason of the identity of the group or collectivity; (h) "The crime of apartheid" means inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime; (i) "Enforced disappearance of persons" means the arrest, detention or abduction of persons by, or with the authorization, support or acquiescence of, a State or a political organization, followed by a refusal to acknowledge that deprivation of freedom or to give information on the fate or whereabouts of those persons, with the intention of removing them from the protection of the law for a prolonged period of time. 3. For the purpose of this Statute, it is understood that the term "gender" refers to the two sexes, male and female, within the context of society. The term "gender" does not indicate any meaning different from the above. Article 82 War crimes 1. The Court shall have jurisdiction in respect of war crimes in particular when committed as part of a plan or policy or as part of a large-scale commission of such crimes. 2. For the purpose of this Statute, "war crimes" means: (a) Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention: (i) Wilful killing; (ii) Torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments; (iii) Wilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health; (iv) Extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly; (v) Compelling a prisoner of war or other protected person to serve in the forces of a hostile Power; (vi) Wilfully depriving a prisoner of war or other protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial; 2 Paragraphs 2 (e) (xiii) to 2 (e) (xv) were amended by resolution RC/Res.5 of 11 June 2010 (adding paragraphs 2 (e) (xiii) to 2 (e) (xv)).
5 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(vii) Unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement; (viii) Taking of hostages. (b) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts: (i) Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities; (ii) Intentionally directing attacks against civilian objects, that is, objects which are not military objectives; (iii) Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict; (iv) Intentionally launching an attack in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated; (v) Attacking or bombarding, by whatever means, towns, villages, dwellings or buildings which are undefended and which are not military objectives; (vi) Killing or wounding a combatant who, having laid down his arms or having no longer means of defence, has surrendered at discretion; (vii) Making improper use of a flag of truce, of the flag or of the military insignia and uniform of the enemy or of the United Nations, as well as of the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions, resulting in death or serious personal injury; (viii) The transfer, directly or indirectly, by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies, or the deportation or transfer of all or parts of the population of the occupied territory within or outside this territory; (ix) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military objectives; (x) Subjecting persons who are in the power of an adverse party to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons; (xi) Killing or wounding treacherously individuals belonging to the hostile nation or army; (xii) Declaring that no quarter will be given; (xiii) Destroying or seizing the enemy's property unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war; (xiv) Declaring abolished, suspended or inadmissible in a court of law the rights and actions of the nationals of the hostile party; (xv) Compelling the nationals of the hostile party to take part in the operations of war directed against their own country, even if they were in the belligerent's service before the commencement of the war; (xvi) Pillaging a town or place, even when taken by assault; (xvii) Employing poison or poisoned weapons; (xviii) Employing asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and all analogous liquids, materials or devices;
6 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(xix) Employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions; (xx) Employing weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare which are of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering or which are inherently indiscriminate in violation of the international law of armed conflict, provided that such weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare are the subject of a comprehensive prohibition and are included in an annex to this Statute, by an amendment in accordance with the relevant provisions set forth in articles 121 and 123; (xxi) Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (xxii) Committing rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, as defined in article 7, paragraph 2 (f), enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence also constituting a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions; (xxiii) Utilizing the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas or military forces immune from military operations; (xxiv) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings, material, medical units and transport, and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions in conformity with international law; (xxv) Intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions; (xxvi) Conscripting or enlisting children under the age of fifteen years into the national armed forces or using them to participate actively in hostilities. (c) In the case of an armed conflict not of an international character, serious violations of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts committed against persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention or any other cause: (i) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; (ii) Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (iii) Taking of hostages; (iv) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgement pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all judicial guarantees which are generally recognized as indispensable. (d) Paragraph 2 (c) applies to armed conflicts not of an international character and thus does not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence or other acts of a similar nature. (e) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in armed conflicts not of an international character, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts: (i) Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities; (ii) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings, material, medical units and transport, and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions in conformity with international law; (iii) Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict; (iv) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military objectives; (v) Pillaging a town or place, even when taken by assault;
7 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(vi) Committing rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, as defined in article 7, paragraph 2 (f), enforced sterilization, and any other form of sexual violence also constituting a serious violation of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions; (vii) Conscripting or enlisting children under the age of fifteen years into armed forces or groups or using them to participate actively in hostilities; (viii) Ordering the displacement of the civilian population for reasons related to the conflict, unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand; (ix) Killing or wounding treacherously a combatant adversary; (x) Declaring that no quarter will be given; (xi) Subjecting persons who are in the power of another party to the conflict to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons; (xii) Destroying or seizing the property of an adversary unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of the conflict; (xiii) Employing poison or poisoned weapons; (xiv) Employing asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and all analogous liquids, materials or devices; (xv) Employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions. (f) Paragraph 2 (e) applies to armed conflicts not of an international character and thus does not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence or other acts of a similar nature. It applies to armed conflicts that take place in the territory of a State when there is protracted armed conflict between governmental authorities and organized armed groups or between such groups. 3. Nothing in paragraph 2 (c) and (e) shall affect the responsibility of a Government to maintain or re- establish law and order in the State or to defend the unity and territorial integrity of the State, by all legitimate means. Article 8 bis3 Crime of aggression 1. For the purpose of this Statute, “crime of aggression” means the planning, preparation, initiation or execution, by a person in a position effectively to exercise control over or to direct the political or military action of a State, of an act of aggression which, by its character, gravity and scale, constitutes a manifest violation of the Charter of the United Nations. 2. For the purpose of paragraph 1, “act of aggression” means the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations. Any of the following acts, regardless of a declaration of war, shall, in accordance with United Nations General Assembly resolution 3314 (XXIX) of 14 December 1974, qualify as an act of aggression: (a) The invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another State, or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such invasion or attack, or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State or part thereof; (b) Bombardment by the armed forces of a State against the territory of another State or the use of any weapons by a State against the territory of another State; (c) The blockade of the ports or coasts of a State by the armed forces of another State; (d) An attack by the armed forces of a State on the land, sea or air forces, or marine and air fleets of another State; 3 Inserted by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010.
8 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(e) The use of armed forces of one State which are within the territory of another State with the agreement of the receiving State, in contravention of the conditions provided for in the agreement or any extension of their presence in such territory beyond the termination of the agreement; (f) The action of a State in allowing its territory, which it has placed at the disposal of another State, to be used by that other State for perpetrating an act of aggression against a third State; (g) The sending by or on behalf of a State of armed bands, groups, irregulars or mercenaries, which carry out acts of armed force against another State of such gravity as to amount to the acts listed above, or its substantial involvement therein. Article 94 Elements of Crimes 1. Elements of Crimes shall assist the Court in the interpretation and application of articles 6, 7, 8 and 8 bis. They shall be adopted by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 2. Amendments to the Elements of Crimes may be proposed by: (a) Any State Party; (b) The judges acting by an absolute majority; (c) The Prosecutor. Such amendments shall be adopted by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 3. The Elements of Crimes and amendments thereto shall be consistent with this Statute. Article 10 Nothing in this Part shall be interpreted as limiting or prejudicing in any way existing or developing rules of international law for purposes other than this Statute. Article 11 Jurisdiction ratione temporis 1. The Court has jurisdiction only with respect to crimes committed after the entry into force of this Statute. 2. If a State becomes a Party to this Statute after its entry into force, the Court may exercise its jurisdiction only with respect to crimes committed after the entry into force of this Statute for that State, unless that State has made a declaration under article 12, paragraph 3. Article 12 Preconditions to the exercise of jurisdiction 1. A State which becomes a Party to this Statute thereby accepts the jurisdiction of the Court with respect to the crimes referred to in article 5. 2. In the case of article 13, paragraph (a) or (c), the Court may exercise its jurisdiction if one or more of the following States are Parties to this Statute or have accepted the jurisdiction of the Court in accordance with paragraph 3: (a) The State on the territory of which the conduct in question occurred or, if the crime was committed on board a vessel or aircraft, the State of registration of that vessel or aircraft; (b) The State of which the person accused of the crime is a national. 3. If the acceptance of a State which is not a Party to this Statute is required under paragraph 2, that State may, by declaration lodged with the Registrar, accept the exercise of jurisdiction by the Court with respect to the crime in question. The accepting State shall cooperate with the Court without any delay or exception in accordance with Part 9. 4 As amended by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010 (inserting the reference to article 8 bis).
9 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 13 Exercise of jurisdiction The Court may exercise its jurisdiction with respect to a crime referred to in article 5 in accordance with the provisions of this Statute if: (a) A situation in which one or more of such crimes appears to have been committed is referred to the Prosecutor by a State Party in accordance with article 14; (b) A situation in which one or more of such crimes appears to have been committed is referred to the Prosecutor by the Security Council acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations; or (c) The Prosecutor has initiated an investigation in respect of such a crime in accordance with article 15. Article 14 Referral of a situation by a State Party 1. A State Party may refer to the Prosecutor a situation in which one or more crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court appear to have been committed requesting the Prosecutor to investigate the situation for the purpose of determining whether one or more specific persons should be charged with the commission of such crimes. 2. As far as possible, a referral shall specify the relevant circumstances and be accompanied by such supporting documentation as is available to the State referring the situation. Article 15 Prosecutor 1. The Prosecutor may initiate investigations proprio motu on the basis of information on crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. 2. The Prosecutor shall analyse the seriousness of the information received. For this purpose, he or she may seek additional information from States, organs of the United Nations, intergovernmental or non- governmental organizations, or other reliable sources that he or she deems appropriate, and may receive written or oral testimony at the seat of the Court. 3. If the Prosecutor concludes that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation, he or she shall submit to the Pre-Trial Chamber a request for authorization of an investigation, together with any supporting material collected. Victims may make representations to the Pre-Trial Chamber, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. If the Pre-Trial Chamber, upon examination of the request and the supporting material, considers that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation, and that the case appears to fall within the jurisdiction of the Court, it shall authorize the commencement of the investigation, without prejudice to subsequent determinations by the Court with regard to the jurisdiction and admissibility of a case. 5. The refusal of the Pre-Trial Chamber to authorize the investigation shall not preclude the presentation of a subsequent request by the Prosecutor based on new facts or evidence regarding the same situation. 6. If, after the preliminary examination referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, the Prosecutor concludes that the information provided does not constitute a reasonable basis for an investigation, he or she shall inform those who provided the information. This shall not preclude the Prosecutor from considering further information submitted to him or her regarding the same situation in the light of new facts or evidence. Article 15 bis5 Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (State referral, proprio motu ) 1. The Court may exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with article 13, paragraphs (a) and (c), subject to the provisions of this article. 2. The Court may exercise jurisdiction only with respect to crimes of aggression committed one year after the ratification or acceptance of the amendments by thirty States Parties. 3. The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with this article, subject to a decision to be taken after 1 January 2017 by the same majority of States Parties as is required for the adoption of an amendment to the Statute. 5 Inserted by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010.
10 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court4. The Court may, in accordance with article 12, exercise jurisdiction over a crime of aggression, arising from an act of aggression committed by a State Party, unless that State Party has previously declared that it does not accept such jurisdiction by lodging a declaration with the Registrar. The withdrawal of such a declaration may be effected at any time and shall be considered by the State Party within three years. 5. In respect of a State that is not a party to this Statute, the Court shall not exercise its jurisdiction over the crime of aggression when committed by that State’s nationals or on its territory. 6. Where the Prosecutor concludes that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation in respect of a crime of aggression, he or she shall first ascertain whether the Security Council has made a determination of an act of aggression committed by the State concerned. The Prosecutor shall notify the Secretary-General of the United Nations of the situation before the Court, including any relevant information and documents. 7. Where the Security Council has made such a determination, the Prosecutor may proceed with the investigation in respect of a crime of aggression. 8. Where no such determination is made within six months after the date of notification, the Prosecutor may proceed with the investigation in respect of a crime of aggression, provided that the Pre-Trial Division has authorized the commencement of the investigation in respect of a crime of aggression in accordance with the procedure contained in article 15, and the Security Council has not decided otherwise in accordance with article16. 9. A determination of an act of aggression by an organ outside the Court shall be without prejudice to the Court’s own findings under this Statute. 10. This article is without prejudice to the provisions relating to the exercise of jurisdiction with respect to other crimes referred to in article 5. Article 15 ter6 Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (Security Council referral) 1. The Court may exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with article 13, paragraph (b), subject to the provisions of this article. 2. The Court may exercise jurisdiction only with respect to crimes of aggression committed one year after the ratification or acceptance of the amendments by thirty States Parties. 3. The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with this article, subject to a decision to be taken after 1 January 2017 by the same majority of States Parties as is required for the adoption of an amendment to the Statute. 4. A determination of an act of aggression by an organ outside the Court shall be without prejudice to the Court’s own findings under this Statute. 5. This article is without prejudice to the provisions relating to the exercise of jurisdiction with respect to other crimes referred to in article 5. Article 16 Deferral of investigation or prosecution No investigation or prosecution may be commenced or proceeded with under this Statute for a period of 12 months after the Security Council, in a resolution adopted under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, has requested the Court to that effect; that request may be renewed by the Council under the same conditions. Article 17 Issues of admissibility 1. Having regard to paragraph 10 of the Preamble and article 1, the Court shall determine that a case is inadmissible where: (a) The case is being investigated or prosecuted by a State which has jurisdiction over it, unless the State is unwilling or unable genuinely to carry out the investigation or prosecution; 6 Inserted by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010.
11 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) The case has been investigated by a State which has jurisdiction over it and the State has decided not to prosecute the person concerned, unless the decision resulted from the unwillingness or inability of the State genuinely to prosecute; (c) The person concerned has already been tried for conduct which is the subject of the complaint, and a trial by the Court is not permitted under article 20, paragraph 3; (d) The case is not of sufficient gravity to justify further action by the Court. 2. In order to determine unwillingness in a particular case, the Court shall consider, having regard to the principles of due process recognized by international law, whether one or more of the following exist, as applicable: (a) The proceedings were or are being undertaken or the national decision was made for the purpose of shielding the person concerned from criminal responsibility for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court referred to in article 5; (b) There has been an unjustified delay in the proceedings which in the circumstances is inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice; (c) The proceedings were not or are not being conducted independently or impartially, and they were or are being conducted in a manner which, in the circumstances, is inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice. 3. In order to determine inability in a particular case, the Court shall consider whether, due to a total or substantial collapse or unavailability of its national judicial system, the State is unable to obtain the accused or the necessary evidence and testimony or otherwise unable to carry out its proceedings. Article 18 Preliminary rulings regarding admissibility 1. When a situation has been referred to the Court pursuant to article 13 (a) and the Prosecutor has determined that there would be a reasonable basis to commence an investigation, or the Prosecutor initiates an investigation pursuant to articles 13 (c) and 15, the Prosecutor shall notify all States Parties and those States which, taking into account the information available, would normally exercise jurisdiction over the crimes concerned. The Prosecutor may notify such States on a confidential basis and, where the Prosecutor believes it necessary to protect persons, prevent destruction of evidence or prevent the absconding of persons, may limit the scope of the information provided to States. 2. Within one month of receipt of that notification, a State may inform the Court that it is investigating or has investigated its nationals or others within its jurisdiction with respect to criminal acts which may constitute crimes referred to in article 5 and which relate to the information provided in the notification to States. At the request of that State, the Prosecutor shall defer to the State's investigation of those persons unless the Pre-Trial Chamber, on the application of the Prosecutor, decides to authorize the investigation. 3. The Prosecutor's deferral to a State's investigation shall be open to review by the Prosecutor six months after the date of deferral or at any time when there has been a significant change of circumstances based on the State's unwillingness or inability genuinely to carry out the investigation. 4. The State concerned or the Prosecutor may appeal to the Appeals Chamber against a ruling of the Pre-Trial Chamber, in accordance with article 82. The appeal may be heard on an expedited basis. 5. When the Prosecutor has deferred an investigation in accordance with paragraph 2, the Prosecutor may request that the State concerned periodically inform the Prosecutor of the progress of its investigations and any subsequent prosecutions. States Parties shall respond to such requests without undue delay. 6. Pending a ruling by the Pre-Trial Chamber, or at any time when the Prosecutor has deferred an investigation under this article, the Prosecutor may, on an exceptional basis, seek authority from the Pre-Trial Chamber to pursue necessary investigative steps for the purpose of preserving evidence where there is a unique opportunity to obtain important evidence or there is a significant risk that such evidence may not be subsequently available. 7. A State which has challenged a ruling of the Pre-Trial Chamber under this article may challenge the admissibility of a case under article 19 on the grounds of additional significant facts or significant change of circumstances.
12 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 19 Challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court or the admissibility of a case 1. The Court shall satisfy itself that it has jurisdiction in any case brought before it. The Court may, on its own motion, determine the admissibility of a case in accordance with article 17. 2. Challenges to the admissibility of a case on the grounds referred to in article 17 or challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court may be made by: (a) An accused or a person for whom a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear has been issued under article 58; (b) A State which has jurisdiction over a case, on the ground that it is investigating or prosecuting the case or has investigated or prosecuted; or (c) A State from which acceptance of jurisdiction is required under article 12. 3. The Prosecutor may seek a ruling from the Court regarding a question of jurisdiction or admissibility. In proceedings with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility, those who have referred the situation under article 13, as well as victims, may also submit observations to the Court. 4. The admissibility of a case or the jurisdiction of the Court may be challenged only once by any person or State referred to in paragraph 2. The challenge shall take place prior to or at the commencement of the trial. In exceptional circumstances, the Court may grant leave for a challenge to be brought more than once or at a time later than the commencement of the trial. Challenges to the admissibility of a case, at the commencement of a trial, or subsequently with the leave of the Court, may be based only on article 17, paragraph 1 (c). 5. A State referred to in paragraph 2 (b) and (c) shall make a challenge at the earliest opportunity. 6. Prior to the confirmation of the charges, challenges to the admissibility of a case or challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court shall be referred to the Pre-Trial Chamber. After confirmation of the charges, they shall be referred to the Trial Chamber. Decisions with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility may be appealed to the Appeals Chamber in accordance with article 82. 7. If a challenge is made by a State referred to in paragraph 2 (b) or (c), the Prosecutor shall suspend the investigation until such time as the Court makes a determination in accordance with article 17. 8. Pending a ruling by the Court, the Prosecutor may seek authority from the Court: (a) To pursue necessary investigative steps of the kind referred to in article 18, paragraph 6; (b) To take a statement or testimony from a witness or complete the collection and examination of evidence which had begun prior to the making of the challenge; and (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. 9. The making of a challenge shall not affect the validity of any act performed by the Prosecutor or any order or warrant issued by the Court prior to the making of the challenge. 10. If the Court has decided that a case is inadmissible under article 17, the Prosecutor may submit a request for a review of the decision when he or she is fully satisfied that new facts have arisen which negate the basis on which the case had previously been found inadmissible under article 17. 11. If the Prosecutor, having regard to the matters referred to in article 17, defers an investigation, the Prosecutor may request that the relevant State make available to the Prosecutor information on the proceedings. That information shall, at the request of the State concerned, be confidential. If the Prosecutor thereafter decides to proceed with an investigation, he or she shall notify the State to which deferral of the proceedings has taken place.
13 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 207 Ne bis in idem 1. Except as provided in this Statute, no person shall be tried before the Court with respect to conduct which formed the basis of crimes for which the person has been convicted or acquitted by the Court. 2. No person shall be tried by another court for a crime referred to in article 5 for which that person has already been convicted or acquitted by the Court. 3. No person who has been tried by another court for conduct also proscribed under article 6, 7, 8 or 8 bis shall be tried by the Court with respect to the same conduct unless the proceedings in the other court: (a) Were for the purpose of shielding the person concerned from criminal responsibility for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court; or (b) Otherwise were not conducted independently or impartially in accordance with the norms of due process recognized by international law and were conducted in a manner which, in the circumstances, was inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice. Article 21 Applicable law 1. The Court shall apply: (a) In the first place, this Statute, Elements of Crimes and its Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (b) In the second place, where appropriate, applicable treaties and the principles and rules of international law, including the established principles of the international law of armed conflict; (c) Failing that, general principles of law derived by the Court from national laws of legal systems of the world including, as appropriate, the national laws of States that would normally exercise jurisdiction over the crime, provided that those principles are not inconsistent with this Statute and with international law and internationally recognized norms and standards. 2. The Court may apply principles and rules of law as interpreted in its previous decisions. 3. The application and interpretation of law pursuant to this article must be consistent with internationally recognized human rights, and be without any adverse distinction founded on grounds such as gender as defined in article 7, paragraph 3, age, race, colour, language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, wealth, birth or other status. 7 As amended by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010 (inserting the reference to article 8 bis).
14 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 3. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW Article 22 Nullum crimen sine lege 1. A person shall not be criminally responsible under this Statute unless the conduct in question constitutes, at the time it takes place, a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court. 2. The definition of a crime shall be strictly construed and shall not be extended by analogy. In case of ambiguity, the definition shall be interpreted in favour of the person being investigated, prosecuted or convicted. 3. This article shall not affect the characterization of any conduct as criminal under international law independently of this Statute. Article 23 Nulla poena sine leg e A person convicted by the Court may be punished only in accordance with this Statute. Article 24 Non-retroactivity ratione personae 1. No person shall be criminally responsible under this Statute for conduct prior to the entry into force of the Statute. 2. In the event of a change in the law applicable to a given case prior to a final judgement, the law more favourable to the person being investigated, prosecuted or convicted shall apply. Article 258 Individual criminal responsibility 1. The Court shall have jurisdiction over natural persons pursuant to this Statute. 2. A person who commits a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court shall be individually responsible and liable for punishment in accordance with this Statute. 3. In accordance with this Statute, a person shall be criminally responsible and liable for punishment for a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court if that person: (a) Commits such a crime, whether as an individual, jointly with another or through another person, regardless of whether that other person is criminally responsible; (b) Orders, solicits or induces the commission of such a crime which in fact occurs or is attempted; (c) For the purpose of facilitating the commission of such a crime, aids, abets or otherwise assists in its commission or its attempted commission, including providing the means for its commission; (d) In any other way contributes to the commission or attempted commission of such a crime by a group of persons acting with a common purpose. Such contribution shall be intentional and shall either: (i) Be made with the aim of furthering the criminal activity or criminal purpose of the group, where such activity or purpose involves the commission of a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; or (ii) Be made in the knowledge of the intention of the group to commit the crime; (e) In respect of the crime of genocide, directly and publicly incites others to commit genocide; (f) Attempts to commit such a crime by taking action that commences its execution by means of a substantial step, but the crime does not occur because of circumstances independent of the person's intentions. However, a person who abandons the effort to commit the crime or otherwise prevents the completion of the crime shall not be liable for punishment under this Statute for the attempt to commit that crime if that person completely and voluntarily gave up the criminal purpose. 8 As amended by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010 (adding paragraph 3 bis).
15 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3 bis. In respect of the crime of aggression, the provisions of this article shall apply only to persons in a position effectively to exercise control over or to direct the political or military action of a State. 4. No provision in this Statute relating to individual criminal responsibility shall affect the responsibility of States under international law. Article 26 Exclusion of jurisdiction over persons under eighteen The Court shall have no jurisdiction over any person who was under the age of 18 at the time of the alleged commission of a crime. Article 27 Irrelevance of official capacity 1. This Statute shall apply equally to all persons without any distinction based on official capacity. In particular, official capacity as a Head of State or Government, a member of a Government or parliament, an elected representative or a government official shall in no case exempt a person from criminal responsibility under this Statute, nor shall it, in and of itself, constitute a ground for reduction of sentence. 2. Immunities or special procedural rules which may attach to the official capacity of a person, whether under national or international law, shall not bar the Court from exercising its jurisdiction over such a person. Article 28 Responsibility of commanders and other superiors In addition to other grounds of criminal responsibility under this Statute for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court: (a) A military commander or person effectively acting as a military commander shall be criminally responsible for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court committed by forces under his or her effective command and control, or effective authority and control as the case may be, as a result of his or her failure to exercise control properly over such forces, where: (i) That military commander or person either knew or, owing to the circumstances at the time, should have known that the forces were committing or about to commit such crimes; and (ii) That military commander or person failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power to prevent or repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecution. (b) With respect to superior and subordinate relationships not described in paragraph (a), a superior shall be criminally responsible for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court committed by subordinates under his or her effective authority and control, as a result of his or her failure to exercise control properly over such subordinates, where: (i) The superior either knew, or consciously disregarded information which clearly indicated, that the subordinates were committing or about to commit such crimes; (ii) The crimes concerned activities that were within the effective responsibility and control of the superior; and (iii) The superior failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power to prevent or repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecution. Article 29 Non-applicability of statute of limitations The crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court shall not be subject to any statute of limitations. Article 30 Mental element 1. Unless otherwise provided, a person shall be criminally responsible and liable for punishment for a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court only if the material elements are committed with intent and knowledge. 2. For the purposes of this article, a person has intent where: (a) In relation to conduct, that person means to engage in the conduct;
16 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) In relation to a consequence, that person means to cause that consequence or is aware that it will occur in the ordinary course of events. 3. For the purposes of this article, "knowledge" means awareness that a circumstance exists or a consequence will occur in the ordinary course of events. "Know" and "knowingly" shall be construed accordingly. Article 31 Grounds for excluding criminal responsibility 1. In addition to other grounds for excluding criminal responsibility provided for in this Statute, a person shall not be criminally responsible if, at the time of that person's conduct: (a) The person suffers from a mental disease or defect that destroys that person's capacity to appreciate the unlawfulness or nature of his or her conduct, or capacity to control his or her conduct to conform to the requirements of law; (b) The person is in a state of intoxication that destroys that person's capacity to appreciate the unlawfulness or nature of his or her conduct, or capacity to control his or her conduct to conform to the requirements of law, unless the person has become voluntarily intoxicated under such circumstances that the person knew, or disregarded the risk, that, as a result of the intoxication, he or she was likely to engage in conduct constituting a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; (c) The person acts reasonably to defend himself or herself or another person or, in the case of war crimes, property which is essential for the survival of the person or another person or property which is essential for accomplishing a military mission, against an imminent and unlawful use of force in a manner proportionate to the degree of danger to the person or the other person or property protected. The fact that the person was involved in a defensive operation conducted by forces shall not in itself constitute a ground for excluding criminal responsibility under this subparagraph; (d) The conduct which is alleged to constitute a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been caused by duress resulting from a threat of imminent death or of continuing or imminent serious bodily harm against that person or another person, and the person acts necessarily and reasonably to avoid this threat, provided that the person does not intend to cause a greater harm than the one sought to be avoided. Such a threat may either be: (i) Made by other persons; or (ii) Constituted by other circumstances beyond that person's control. 2. The Court shall determine the applicability of the grounds for excluding criminal responsibility provided for in this Statute to the case before it. 3. At trial, the Court may consider a ground for excluding criminal responsibility other than those referred to in paragraph 1 where such a ground is derived from applicable law as set forth in article 21. The procedures relating to the consideration of such a ground shall be provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 32 Mistake of fact or mistake of law 1. A mistake of fact shall be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility only if it negates the mental element required by the crime. 2. A mistake of law as to whether a particular type of conduct is a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court shall not be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility. A mistake of law may, however, be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility if it negates the mental element required by such a crime, or as provided for in article 33. Article 33 Superior orders and prescription of law 1. The fact that a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been committed by a person pursuant to an order of a Government or of a superior, whether military or civilian, shall not relieve that person of criminal responsibility unless: (a) The person was under a legal obligation to obey orders of the Government or the superior in question; (b) The person did not know that the order was unlawful; and (c) The order was not manifestly unlawful. 2. For the purposes of this article, orders to commit genocide or crimes against humanity are manifestly unlawful.
17 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 4. COMPOSITION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE COURT Article 34 Organs of the Court The Court shall be composed of the following organs: (a) The Presidency; (b) An Appeals Division, a Trial Division and a Pre-Trial Division; (c) The Office of the Prosecutor; (d) The Registry. Article 35 Service of judges 1. All judges shall be elected as full-time members of the Court and shall be available to serve on that basis from the commencement of their terms of office. 2. The judges composing the Presidency shall serve on a full-time basis as soon as they are elected. 3. The Presidency may, on the basis of the workload of the Court and in consultation with its members, decide from time to time to what extent the remaining judges shall be required to serve on a full-time basis. Any such arrangement shall be without prejudice to the provisions of article 40. 4. The financial arrangements for judges not required to serve on a full-time basis shall be made in accordance with article 49. Article 36 Qualifications, nomination and election of judges 1. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2, there shall be 18 judges of the Court. 2. (a) The Presidency, acting on behalf of the Court, may propose an increase in the number of judges specified in paragraph 1, indicating the reasons why this is considered necessary and appropriate The Registrar shall promptly circulate any such proposal to all States Parties. (b) Any such proposal shall then be considered at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties to be convened in accordance with article 112. The proposal shall be considered adopted if approved at the meeting by a vote of two thirds of the members of the Assembly of States Parties and shall enter into force at such time as decided by the Assembly of States Parties. (c) (i) Once a proposal for an increase in the number of judges has been adopted under subparagraph (b), the election of the additional judges shall take place at the next session of the Assembly of States Parties in accordance with paragraphs 3 to 8, and article 37, paragraph 2; (ii) Once a proposal for an increase in the number of judges has been adopted and brought into effect under subparagraphs (b) and (c) (i), it shall be open to the Presidency at any time thereafter, if the workload of the Court justifies it, to propose a reduction in the number of judges, provided that the number of judges shall not be reduced below that specified in paragraph 1. The proposal shall be dealt with in accordance with the procedure laid down in subparagraphs (a) and (b). In the event that the proposal is adopted, the number of judges shall be progressively decreased as the terms of office of serving judges expire, until the necessary number has been reached. 3. (a) The judges shall be chosen from among persons of high moral character, impartiality and integrity who possess the qualifications required in their respective States for appointment to the highest judicial offices. (b) Every candidate for election to the Court shall: (i) Have established competence in criminal law and procedure, and the necessary relevant experience, whether as judge, prosecutor, advocate or in other similar capacity, in criminal proceedings; or (ii) Have established competence in relevant areas of international law such as international humanitarian law and the law of human rights, and extensive experience in a professional legal capacity which is of relevance to the judicial work of the Court;
18 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(c) Every candidate for election to the Court shall have an excellent knowledge of and be fluent in at least one of the working languages of the Court. 4. (a) Nominations of candidates for election to the Court may be made by any State Party to this Statute, and shall be made either: (i) By the procedure for the nomination of candidates for appointment to the highest judicial offices in the State in question; or (ii) By the procedure provided for the nomination of candidates for the International Court of Justice in the Statute of that Court. Nominations shall be accompanied by a statement in the necessary detail specifying how the candidate fulfils the requirements of paragraph 3. (b) Each State Party may put forward one candidate for any given election who need not necessarily be a national of that State Party but shall in any case be a national of a State Party. (c) The Assembly of States Parties may decide to establish, if appropriate, an Advisory Committee on nominations. In that event, the Committee's composition and mandate shall be established by the Assembly of States Parties. 5. For the purposes of the election, there shall be two lists of candidates: List A containing the names of candidates with the qualifications specified in paragraph 3 (b) (i); and List B containing the names of candidates with the qualifications specified in paragraph 3 (b) (ii). A candidate with sufficient qualifications for both lists may choose on which list to appear. At the first election to the Court, at least nine judges shall be elected from list A and at least five judges from list B. Subsequent elections shall be so organized as to maintain the equivalent proportion on the Court of judges qualified on the two lists. 6. (a) The judges shall be elected by secret ballot at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties convened for that purpose under article 112. Subject to paragraph 7, the persons elected to the Court shall be the 18 candidates who obtain the highest number of votes and a two-thirds majority of the States Parties present and voting. (b) In the event that a sufficient number of judges is not elected on the first ballot, successive ballots shall be held in accordance with the procedures laid down in subparagraph (a) until the remaining places have been filled. 7. No two judges may be nationals of the same State. A person who, for the purposes of membership of the Court, could be regarded as a national of more than one State shall be deemed to be a national of the State in which that person ordinarily exercises civil and political rights. 8. (a) The States Parties shall, in the selection of judges, take into account the need, within the membership of the Court, for: (i) The representation of the principal legal systems of the world; (ii) Equitable geographical representation; and (iii) A fair representation of female and male judges. (b) States Parties shall also take into account the need to include judges with legal expertise on specific issues, including, but not limited to, violence against women or children. 9. (a) Subject to subparagraph (b), judges shall hold office for a term of nine years and, subject to subparagraph (c) and to article 37, paragraph 2, shall not be eligible for re-election. (b) At the first election, one third of the judges elected shall be selected by lot to serve for a term of three years; one third of the judges elected shall be selected by lot to serve for a term of six years; and the remainder shall serve for a term of nine years. (c) A judge who is selected to serve for a term of three years under subparagraph (b) shall be eligible for re-election for a full term. 10. Notwithstanding paragraph 9, a judge assigned to a Trial or Appeals Chamber in accordance with article 39 shall continue in office to complete any trial or appeal the hearing of which has already commenced before that Chamber.
19 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 37 Judicial vacancies 1. In the event of a vacancy, an election shall be held in accordance with article 36 to fill the vacancy. 2. A judge elected to fill a vacancy shall serve for the remainder of the predecessor's term and, if that period is three years or less, shall be eligible for re-election for a full term under article 36. Article 38 The Presidency 1. The President and the First and Second Vice-Presidents shall be elected by an absolute majority of the judges. They shall each serve for a term of three years or until the end of their respective terms of office as judges, whichever expires earlier. They shall be eligible for re-election once. 2. The First Vice-President shall act in place of the President in the event that the President is unavailable or disqualified. The Second Vice-President shall act in place of the President in the event that both the President and the First Vice-President are unavailable or disqualified. 3. The President, together with the First and Second Vice-Presidents, shall constitute the Presidency, which shall be responsible for: (a) The proper administration of the Court, with the exception of the Office of the Prosecutor; and (b) The other functions conferred upon it in accordance with this Statute. 4. In discharging its responsibility under paragraph 3 (a), the Presidency shall coordinate with and seek the concurrence of the Prosecutor on all matters of mutual concern. Article 39 Chambers 1. As soon as possible after the election of the judges, the Court shall organize itself into the divisions specified in article 34, paragraph (b). The Appeals Division shall be composed of the President and four other judges, the Trial Division of not less than six judges and the Pre-Trial Division of not less than six judges. The assignment of judges to divisions shall be based on the nature of the functions to be performed by each division and the qualifications and experience of the judges elected to the Court, in such a way that each division shall contain an appropriate combination of expertise in criminal law and procedure and in international law. The Trial and Pre-Trial Divisions shall be composed predominantly of judges with criminal trial experience. 2. (a) The judicial functions of the Court shall be carried out in each division by Chambers. (b) (i) The Appeals Chamber shall be composed of all the judges of the Appeals Division; (ii) The functions of the Trial Chamber shall be carried out by three judges of the Trial Division; (iii) The functions of the Pre-Trial Chamber shall be carried out either by three judges of the Pre- Trial Division or by a single judge of that division in accordance with this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (c) Nothing in this paragraph shall preclude the simultaneous constitution of more than one Trial Chamber or Pre-Trial Chamber when the efficient management of the Court's workload so requires. 3. (a) Judges assigned to the Trial and Pre-Trial Divisions shall serve in those divisions for a period of three years, and thereafter until the completion of any case the hearing of which has already commenced in the division concerned. (b) Judges assigned to the Appeals Division shall serve in that division for their entire term of office. 4. Judges assigned to the Appeals Division shall serve only in that division. Nothing in this article shall, however, preclude the temporary attachment of judges from the Trial Division to the Pre-Trial Division or vice versa, if the Presidency considers that the efficient management of the Court's workload so requires, provided that under no circumstances shall a judge who has participated in the pre-trial phase of a case be eligible to sit on the Trial Chamber hearing that case.
20 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 40 Independence of the judges 1. The judges shall be independent in the performance of their functions. 2. Judges shall not engage in any activity which is likely to interfere with their judicial functions or to affect confidence in their independence. 3. Judges required to serve on a full-time basis at the seat of the Court shall not engage in any other occupation of a professional nature. 4. Any question regarding the application of paragraphs 2 and 3 shall be decided by an absolute majority of the judges. Where any such question concerns an individual judge, that judge shall not take part in the decision. Article 41 Excusing and disqualification of judges 1. The Presidency may, at the request of a judge, excuse that judge from the exercise of a function under this Statute, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 2. (a) A judge shall not participate in any case in which his or her impartiality might reasonably be doubted onany ground. A judge shall be disqualified from a case in accordance with this paragraph if, inter alia, that judge has previously been involved in any capacity in that case beforethe Court or in a related criminal case at the national level involving the person being investigated or prosecuted. A judge shall also be disqualified on such other grounds as may be provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. (b) The Prosecutor or the person being investigated or prosecuted may request the disqualification of a judge under this paragraph. (c) Any question as to the disqualification of a judge shall be decided by an absolute majority of the judges. The challenged judge shall be entitled to present his or her comments on the matter, but shall not take part in the decision. Article 42 The Office of the Prosecutor 1. The Office of the Prosecutor shall act independently as a separate organ of the Court. It shall be responsible for receiving referrals and any substantiated information on crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court, for examining them and for conducting investigations and prosecutions before the Court. A member of the Office shall not seek or act on instructions from any external source. 2. The Office shall be headed by the Prosecutor. The Prosecutor shall have full authority over the management and administration of the Office, including the staff, facilities and other resources thereof. The Prosecutor shall be assisted by one or more Deputy Prosecutors, who shall be entitled to carry out any of the acts required of the Prosecutor under this Statute. The Prosecutor and the Deputy Prosecutors shall be of different nationalities. They shall serve on a full-time basis. 3. The Prosecutor and the Deputy Prosecutors shall be persons of high moral character, be highly competent in and have extensive practical experience in the prosecution or trial of criminal cases. They shall have an excellent knowledge of and be fluent in at least one of the working languages of the Court. 4. The Prosecutor shall be elected by secret ballot by an absolute majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. The Deputy Prosecutors shall be elected in the same way from a list of candidates provided by the Prosecutor. The Prosecutor shall nominate three candidates for each position of Deputy Prosecutor to be filled. Unless a shorter term is decided upon at the time of their election, the Prosecutor and the Deputy Prosecutors shall hold office for a term of nine years and shall not be eligible for re-election. 5. Neither the Prosecutor nor a Deputy Prosecutor shall engage in any activity which is likely to interfere with his or her prosecutorial functions or to affect confidence in his or her independence. They shall not engage in any other occupation of a professional nature. 6. The Presidency may excuse the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor, at his or her request, from acting in a particular case.
21 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court7. Neither the Prosecutor nor a Deputy Prosecutor shall participate in any matter in which their impartiality might reasonably be doubted on any ground. They shall be disqualified from a case in accordance with this paragraph if, inter alia , they have previously been involved in any capacity in that case before the Court or in a related criminal case at the national level involving the person being investigated or prosecuted. 8. Any question as to the disqualification of the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor shall be decided by the Appeals Chamber. (a) The person being investigated or prosecuted may at any time request the disqualification of the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor on the grounds set out in this article; (b) The Prosecutor or the Deputy Prosecutor, as appropriate, shall be entitled to present his or her comments on the matter; 9. The Prosecutor shall appoint advisers with legal expertise on specific issues, including, but not limited to, sexual and gender violence and violence against children. Article 43 The Registry 1. The Registry shall be responsible for the non-judicial aspects of the administration and servicing of the Court, without prejudice to the functions and powers of the Prosecutor in accordance with article 42. 2. The Registry shall be headed by the Registrar, who shall be the principal administrative officer of the Court. The Registrar shall exercise his or her functions under the authority of the President of the Court. 3. The Registrar and the Deputy Registrar shall be persons of high moral character, be highly competent and have an excellent knowledge of and be fluent in at least one of the working languages of the Court. 4. The judges shall elect the Registrar by an absolute majority by secret ballot, taking into account any recommendation by the Assembly of States Parties. If the need arises and upon the recommendation of the Registrar, the judges shall elect, in the same manner, a Deputy Registrar. 5. The Registrar shall hold office for a term of five years, shall be eligible for re-election once and shall serve on a full-time basis. The Deputy Registrar shall hold office for a term of five years or such shorter term as may be decided upon by an absolute majority of the judges, and may be elected on the basis that the Deputy Registrar shall be called upon to serve as required. 6. The Registrar shall set up a Victims and Witnesses Unit within the Registry. This Unit shall provide, in consultation with the Office of the Prosecutor, protective measures and security arrangements, counseling and other appropriate assistance for witnesses, victims who appear before the Court, and others who are at risk on account of testimony given by such witnesses. The Unit shall include staff with expertise in trauma, including trauma related to crimes of sexual violence. Article 44 Staff 1. The Prosecutor and the Registrar shall appoint such qualified staff as may be required to their respective offices. In the case of the Prosecutor, this shall include the appointment of investigators. 2. In the employment of staff, the Prosecutor and the Registrar shall ensure the highest standards of efficiency, competency and integrity, and shall have regard, mutatis mutandis , to the criteria set forth in article 36, paragraph 8. 3. The Registrar, with the agreement of the Presidency and the Prosecutor, shall propose Staff Regulations which include the terms and conditions upon which the staff of the Court shall be appointed, remunerated and dismissed. The Staff Regulations shall be approved by the Assembly of States Parties. 4. The Court may, in exceptional circumstances, employ the expertise of gratis personnel offered by States Parties, intergovernmental organizations or non-governmental organizations to assist with the work of any of the organs of the Court. The Prosecutor may accept any such offer on behalf of the Office of the Prosecutor. Such gratis personnel shall be employed in accordance with guidelines to be established by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 45 Solemn undertaking Before taking up their respective duties under this Statute, the judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors, the Registrar and the Deputy Registrar shall each make a solemn undertaking in open court to exercise his or her respective functions impartially and conscientiously.
22 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 46 Removal from office 1. A judge, the Prosecutor, a Deputy Prosecutor, the Registrar or the Deputy Registrar shall be removed from office if a decision to this effect is made in accordance with paragraph 2, in cases where that person: (a) Is found to have committed serious misconduct or a serious breach of his or her duties under this Statute, as provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; or (b) Is unable to exercise the functions required by this Statute. 2. A decision as to the removal from office of a judge, the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor under paragraph 1 shall be made by the Assembly of States Parties, by secret ballot: (a) In the case of a judge, by a two-thirds majority of the States Parties upon a recommendation adopted by a two-thirds majority of the other judges; (b) In the case of the Prosecutor, by an absolute majority of the States Parties; (c) In the case of a Deputy Prosecutor, by an absolute majority of the States Parties upon the recommendation of the Prosecutor. 3. A decision as to the removal from office of the Registrar or Deputy Registrar shall be made by an absolute majority of the judges. 4. A judge, Prosecutor, Deputy Prosecutor, Registrar or Deputy Registrar whose conduct or ability to exercise the functions of the office as required by this Statute is challenged under this article shall have full opportunity to present and receive evidence and to make submissions in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The person in question shall not otherwise participate in the consideration of the matter. Article 47 Disciplinary measures A judge, Prosecutor, Deputy Prosecutor, Registrar or Deputy Registrar who has committed misconduct of a less serious nature than that set out in article 46, paragraph 1, shall be subject to disciplinary measures, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 48 Privileges and immunities 1. The Court shall enjoy in the territory of each State Party such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the fulfilment of its purposes. 2. The judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors and the Registrar shall, when engaged on or with respect to the business of the Court, enjoy the same privileges and immunities as are accorded to heads of diplomatic missions and shall, after the expiry of their terms of office, continue to be accorded immunity from legal process of every kind in respect of words spoken or written and acts performed by them in their official capacity. 3. The Deputy Registrar, the staff of the Office of the Prosecutor and the staff of the Registry shall enjoy the privileges and immunities and facilities necessary for the performance of their functions, in accordance with the agreement on the privileges and immunities of the Court. 4. Counsel, experts, witnesses or any other person required to be present at the seat of the Court shall be accorded such treatment as is necessary for the proper functioning of the Court, in accordance with the agreement on the privileges and immunities of the Court. 5. The privileges and immunities of: (a) A judge or the Prosecutor may be waived by an absolute majority of the judges; (b) The Registrar may be waived by the Presidency; (c) The Deputy Prosecutors and staff of the Office of the Prosecutor may be waived by the Prosecutor; (d) The Deputy Registrar and staff of the Registry may be waived by the Registrar.
23 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 49 Salaries, allowances and expenses The judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors, the Registrar and the Deputy Registrar shall receive such salaries, allowances and expenses as may be decided upon by the Assembly of States Parties. These salaries and allowances shall not be reduced during their terms of office. Article 50 Official and working languages 1. The official languages of the Court shall be Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish. The judgements of the Court, as well as other decisions resolving fundamental issues before the Court, shall be published in the official languages. The Presidency shall, in accordance with the criteria established by the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, determine which decisions may be considered as resolving fundamental issues for the purposes of this paragraph. 2. The working languages of the Court shall be English and French. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence shall determine the cases in which other official languages may be used as working languages. 3. At the request of any party to a proceeding or a State allowed to intervene in a proceeding, the Court shall authorize a language other than English or French to be used by such a party or State, provided that the Court considers such authorization to be adequately justified. Article 51 Rules of Procedure and Evidence 1. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence shall enter into force upon adoption by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 2. Amendments to the Rules of Procedure and Evidence may be proposed by: (a) Any State Party; (b) The judges acting by an absolute majority; or (c) The Prosecutor. Such amendments shall enter into force upon adoption by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 3. After the adoption of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, in urgent cases where the Rules do not provide for a specific situation before the Court, the judges may, by a two-thirds majority, draw up provisional Rules to be applied until adopted, amended or rejected at the next ordinary or special session of the Assembly of States Parties. 4. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence, amendments thereto and any provisional Rule shall be consistent with this Statute. Amendments to the Rules of Procedure and Evidence as well as provisional Rules shall not be applied retroactively to the detriment of the person who is being investigated or prosecuted or who has been convicted. 5. In the event of conflict between the Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, the Statute shall prevail. Article 52 Regulations of the Court 1. The judges shall, in accordance with this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, adopt, by an absolute majority, the Regulations of the Court necessary for its routine functioning. 2. The Prosecutor and the Registrar shall be consulted in the elaboration of the Regulations and any amendments thereto. 3. The Regulations and any amendments thereto shall take effect upon adoption unless otherwise decided by the judges. Immediately upon adoption, they shall be circulated to States Parties for comments. If within six months there are no objections from a majority of States Parties, they shall remain in force.
24 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 5. INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION Article 53 Initiation of an investigation 1. The Prosecutor shall, having evaluated the information made available to him or her, initiate an investigation unless he or she determines that there is no reasonable basis to proceed under this Statute. In deciding whether to initiate an investigation, the Prosecutor shall consider whether: (a) The information available to the Prosecutor provides a reasonable basis to believe that a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been or is being committed; (b) The case is or would be admissible under article 17; and (c) Taking into account the gravity of the crime and the interests of victims, there are nonetheless substantial reasons to believe that an investigation would not serve the interests of justice. If the Prosecutor determines that there is no reasonable basis to proceed and his or her determination is based solely on subparagraph (c) above, he or she shall inform the Pre-Trial Chamber. 2. If, upon investigation, the Prosecutor concludes that there is not a sufficient basis for a prosecution because: (a) There is not a sufficient legal or factual basis to seek a warrant or summons under article 58; (b) The case is inadmissible under article 17; or (c) A prosecution is not in the interests of justice, taking into account all the circumstances, including the gravity of the crime, the interests of victims and the age or infirmity of the alleged perpetrator, and his or her role in the alleged crime; the Prosecutor shall inform the Pre-Trial Chamber and the State making a referral under article 14 or the Security Council in a case under article 13, paragraph (b), of his or her conclusion and the reasons for the conclusion. 3. (a) At the request of the State making a referral under article 14 or the Security Council under article 13, paragraph (b), the Pre-Trial Chamber may review a decision of the Prosecutor under paragraph 1 or 2 not to proceed and mayrequest the Prosecutor to reconsider that decision. (b) In addition, the Pre-Trial Chamber may, on its own initiative, review a decision of the Prosecutor not to proceed if it is based solely on paragraph 1 (c) or 2 (c). In such a case, the decision of the Prosecutor shall be effective only if confirmed by the Pre-Trial Chamber. 4. The Prosecutor may, at any time, reconsider a decision whether to initiate an investigation or prosecution based on new facts or information. Article 54 Duties and powers of the Prosecutor with respect to investigations 1. The Prosecutor shall: (a) In order to establish the truth, extend the investigation to cover all facts and evidence relevant to an assessment of whether there is criminal responsibility under this Statute, and, in doing so, investigate incriminating and exonerating circumstances equally; (b) Take appropriate measures to ensure the effective investigation and prosecution of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court, and in doing so, respect the interests and personal circumstances of victims and witnesses, including age, gender as defined in article 7, paragraph 3, and health, and take into account the nature of the crime, in particular where it involves sexual violence, gender violence or violence against children; and (c) Fully respect the rights of persons arising under this Statute. 2. The Prosecutor may conduct investigations on the territory of a State: (a) In accordance with the provisions of Part 9; or (b) As authorized by the Pre-Trial Chamber under article 57, paragraph 3 (d).
25 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3. The Prosecutor may: (a) Collect and examine evidence; (b) Request the presence of and question persons being investigated, victims and witnesses; (c) Seek the cooperation of any State or intergovernmental organization or arrangement in accordance with its respective competence and/or mandate; (d) Enter into such arrangements or agreements, not inconsistent with this Statute, as may be necessary to facilitate the cooperation of a State, intergovernmental organization or person; (e) Agree not to disclose, at any stage of the proceedings, documents or information that the Prosecutor obtains on the condition of confidentiality and solely for the purpose of generating new evidence, unless the provider of the information consents; and (f) Take necessary measures, or request that necessary measures be taken, to ensure the confidentiality of information, the protection of any person or the preservation of evidence. Article 55 Rights of persons during an investigation 1. In respect of an investigation under this Statute, a person: (a) Shall not be compelled to incriminate himself or herself or to confess guilt; (b) Shall not be subjected to any form of coercion, duress or threat, to torture or to any other form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; (c) Shall, if questioned in a language other than a language the person fully understands and speaks, have, free of any cost, the assistance of a competent interpreter and such translations as are necessary to meet the requirements of fairness; and (d) Shall not be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention, and shall not be deprived of his or her liberty except on such grounds and in accordance with such procedures as are established in this Statute. 2. Where there are grounds to believe that a person has committed a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court and that person is about to be questioned either by the Prosecutor, or by national authorities pursuant to a request made under Part 9, that person shall also have the following rights of which he or she shall be informed prior to being questioned: (a) To be informed, prior to being questioned, that there are grounds to believe that he or she has committed a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; (b) To remain silent, without such silence being a consideration in the determination of guilt or innocence; (c) To have legal assistance of the person's choosing, or, if the person does not have legal assistance, to have legal assistance assigned to him or her, in any case where the interests of justice so require, and without payment by the person in any such case if the person does not have sufficient means to pay for it; and (d) To be questioned in the presence of counsel unless the person has voluntarily waived his or her right to counsel. Article 56 Role of the Pre-Trial Chamber in relation to a unique investigative opportunity 1. (a) Where the Prosecutor considers an investigation to present a unique opportunity to take testimony or a statement from a witness or to examine, collect or test evidence, which may not be available subsequently for the purposes of a trial, the Prosecutor shall so inform the Pre-Trial Chamber. (b) In that case, the Pre-Trial Chamber may, upon request of the Prosecutor, take such measures as may be necessary to ensure the efficiency and integrity of the proceedings and, in particular, to protect the rights of the defence. (c) Unless the Pre-Trial Chamber orders otherwise, the Prosecutor shall provide the relevant information to the person who has been arrested or appeared in response to a summons in connection with the investigation referred to in subparagraph (a), in order that he or she may be heard on the matter.
26 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The measures referred to in paragraph 1 (b) may include: (a) Making recommendations or orders regarding procedures to be followed; (b) Directing that a record be made of the proceedings; (c) Appointing an expert to assist; (d) Authorizing counsel for a person who has been arrested, or appeared before the Court in response to a summons, to participate, or where there has not yet been such an arrest or appearance or counsel has not been designated, appointing another counsel to attend and represent the interests of the defence; (e) Naming one of its members or, if necessary, another available judge of the Pre-Trial or Trial Division to observe and make recommendations or orders regarding the collection and preservation of evidence and the questioning of persons; (f) Taking such other action as may be necessary to collect or preserve evidence. 3. (a) Where the Prosecutor has not sought measures pursuant to this article but the Pre-Trial Chamberconsiders that such measures are required to preserve evidence that it deems would be essential for the defence at trial, it shall consult with the Prosecutor as to whether there is good reason for the Prosecutor's failure to request the measures. If upon consultation, the Pre-Trial Chamber concludes that the Prosecutor's failure to request such measures is unjustified, the Pre-Trial Chamber may take such measures on its own initiative. (b) A decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber to act on its own initiative under this paragraph may be appealedby the Prosecutor. The appeal shall be heard on an expedited basis. 4. The admissibility of evidence preserved or collected for trial pursuant to this article, or the record thereof, shall be governed at trial by article 69, and given such weight as determined by the Trial Chamber. Article 57 Functions and powers of the Pre-Trial Chamber 1. Unless otherwise provided in this Statute, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall exercise its functions in accordance with the provisions of this article. 2. (a) Orders or rulings of the Pre-Trial Chamber issued under articles 15, 18, 19, 54, paragraph 2, 61, paragraph 7, and 72 must be concurred in by a majority of its judges. (b) In all other cases, a single judge of the Pre-Trial Chamber may exercise the functions provided for in this Statute, unless otherwise provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence or by a majority of the Pre-Trial Chamber. 3. In addition to its other functions under this Statute, the Pre-Trial Chamber may: (a) At the request of the Prosecutor, issue such orders and warrants as may be required for the purposes of an investigation; (b) Upon the request of a person who has been arrested or has appeared pursuant to a summons under article 58, issue such orders, including measures such as those described in article 56, or seek such cooperation pursuant to Part 9 as may be necessary to assist the person in the preparation of his or her defence; (c) Where necessary, provide for the protection and privacy of victims and witnesses, the preservation of evidence, the protection of persons who have been arrested or appeared in response to a summons, and the protection of national security information; (d) Authorize the Prosecutor to take specific investigative steps within the territory of a State Party without having secured the cooperation of that State under Part 9 if, whenever possible having regard to the views of the State concerned, the Pre-Trial Chamber has determined in that case that the State is clearly unable to execute a request for cooperation due to the unavailability of any authority or any component of its judicial system competent to execute the request for cooperation under Part 9; (e) Where a warrant of arrest or a summons has been issued under article 58, and having due regard to the strength of the evidence and the rights of the parties concerned, as provided for in this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, seek the cooperation of States pursuant to article 93, paragraph 1 (k), to take protective measures for the purpose of forfeiture, in particular for the ultimate benefit of victims.
27 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 58 Issuance by the Pre-Trial Chamber of a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear 1. At any time after the initiation of an investigation, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall, on the application of the Prosecutor, issue a warrant of arrest of a person if, having examined the application and the evidence or other information submitted by the Prosecutor, it is satisfied that: (a) There are reasonable grounds to believe that the person has committed a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; and (b) The arrest of the person appears necessary: (i) To ensure the person's appearance at trial; (ii) To ensure that the person does not obstruct or endanger the investigation or the court proceedings; or (iii) Where applicable, to prevent the person from continuing with the commission of that crime or a related crime which is within the jurisdiction of the Court and which arises out of the same circumstances. 2. The application of the Prosecutor shall contain: (a) The name of the person and any other relevant identifying information; (b) A specific reference to the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court which the person is alleged to have committed; (c) A concise statement of the facts which are alleged to constitute those crimes; (d) A summary of the evidence and any other information which establish reasonable grounds to believe that the person committed those crimes; and (e) The reason why the Prosecutor believes that the arrest of the person is necessary. 3. The warrant of arrest shall contain: (a) The name of the person and any other relevant identifying information; (b) A specific reference to the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court for which the person's arrest is sought; and (c) A concise statement of the facts which are alleged to constitute those crimes. 4. The warrant of arrest shall remain in effect until otherwise ordered by the Court. 5. On the basis of the warrant of arrest, the Court may request the provisional arrest or the arrest and surrender of the person under Part 9. 6. The Prosecutor may request the Pre-Trial Chamber to amend the warrant of arrest by modifying or adding to the crimes specified therein. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall so amend the warrant if it is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the person committed the modified or additional crimes. 7. As an alternative to seeking a warrant of arrest, the Prosecutor may submit an application requesting that the Pre-Trial Chamber issue a summons for the person to appear. If the Pre-Trial Chamber is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the person committed the crime alleged and that a summons is sufficient to ensure the person's appearance, it shall issue the summons, with or without conditions restricting liberty (other than detention) if provided for by national law, for the person to appear. The summons shall contain: (a) The name of the person and any other relevant identifying information; (b) The specified date on which the person is to appear; (c) A specific reference to the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court which the person is alleged to have committed; and (d) A concise statement of the facts which are alleged to constitute the crime. The summons shall be served on the person.
28 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 59 Arrest proceedings in the custodial State 1. A State Party which has received a request for provisional arrest or for arrest and surrender shall immediately take steps to arrest the person in question in accordance with its laws and the provisions of Part 9. 2. A person arrested shall be brought promptly before the competent judicial authority in the custodial State which shall determine, in accordance with the law of that State, that: (a) The warrant applies to that person; (b) The person has been arrested in accordance with the proper process; and (c) The person's rights have been respected. 3. The person arrested shall have the right to apply to the competent authority in the custodial State for interim release pending surrender. 4. In reaching a decision on any such application, the competent authority in the custodial State shall consider whether, given the gravity of the alleged crimes, there are urgent and exceptional circumstances to justify interim release and whether necessary safeguards exist to ensure that the custodial State can fulfil its duty to surrender the person to the Court. It shall not be open to the competent authority of the custodial State to consider whether the warrant of arrest was properly issued in accordance with article 58, paragraph 1 (a) and (b). 5. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall be notified of any request for interim release and shall make recommendations to the competent authority in the custodial State. The competent authority in the custodial State shall give full consideration to such recommendations, including any recommendations on measures to prevent the escape of the person, before rendering its decision. 6. If the person is granted interim release, the Pre-Trial Chamber may request periodic reports on the status of the interim release. 7. Once ordered to be surrendered by the custodial State, the person shall be delivered to the Court as soon as possible. Article 60 Initial proceedings before the Court 1. Upon the surrender of the person to the Court, or the person's appearance before the Court voluntarily or pursuant to a summons, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall satisfy itself that the person has been informed of the crimes which he or she is alleged to have committed, and of his or her rights under this Statute, including the right to apply for interim release pending trial. 2. A person subject to a warrant of arrest may apply for interim release pending trial. If the Pre-Trial Chamber is satisfied that the conditions set forth in article 58, paragraph 1, are met, the person shall continue to be detained. If it is not so satisfied, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall release the person, with or without conditions. 3. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall periodically review its ruling on the release or detention of the person, and may do so at any time on the request of the Prosecutor or the person. Upon such review, it may modify its ruling as to detention, release or conditions of release, if it is satisfied that changed circumstances so require. 4. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall ensure that a person is not detained for an unreasonable period prior to trial due to inexcusable delay by the Prosecutor. If such delay occurs, the Court shall consider releasing the person, with or without conditions. 5. If necessary, the Pre-Trial Chamber may issue a warrant of arrest to secure the presence of a person who has been released. Article 61 Confirmation of the charges before trial 1. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2, within a reasonable time after the person's surrender or voluntary appearance before the Court, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall hold a hearing to confirm the charges on which the Prosecutor intends to seek trial. The hearing shall be held in the presence of the Prosecutor and the person charged, as well as his or her counsel.
29 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The Pre-Trial Chamber may, upon request of the Prosecutor or on its own motion, hold a hearing in the absence of the person charged to confirm the charges on which the Prosecutor intends to seek trial when the person has: (a) Waived his or her right to be present; or (b) Fled or cannot be found and all reasonable steps have been taken to secure his or her appearance before the Court and to inform the person of the charges and that a hearing to confirm those charges will be held. In that case, the person shall be represented by counsel where the Pre-Trial Chamber determines that it is in the interests of justice. 3. Within a reasonable time before the hearing, the person shall: (a) Be provided with a copy of the document containing the charges on which the Prosecutor intends to bring the person to trial; and (b) Be informed of the evidence on which the Prosecutor intends to rely at the hearing. The Pre-Trial Chamber may issue orders regarding the disclosure of information for the purposes of the hearing. 4. Before the hearing, the Prosecutor may continue the investigation and may amend or withdraw any charges. The person shall be given reasonable notice before the hearing of any amendment to or withdrawal of charges. In case of a withdrawal of charges, the Prosecutor shall notify the Pre-Trial Chamber of the reasons for the withdrawal. 5. At the hearing, the Prosecutor shall support each charge with sufficient evidence to establish substantial grounds to believe that the person committed the crime charged. The Prosecutor may rely on documentary or summary evidence and need not call the witnesses expected to testify at the trial. 6. At the hearing, the person may: (a) Object to the charges; (b) Challenge the evidence presented by the Prosecutor; and (c) Present evidence. 7. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall, on the basis of the hearing, determine whether there is sufficient evidence to establish substantial grounds to believe that the person committed each of the crimes charged. Based on its determination, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall: (a) Confirm those charges in relation to which it has determined that there is sufficient evidence, and commit the person to a Trial Chamber for trial on the charges as confirmed; (b) Decline to confirm those charges in relation to which it has determined that there is insufficient evidence; (c) Adjourn the hearing and request the Prosecutor to consider: (i) Providing further evidence or conducting further investigation with respect to a particular charge; or (ii) Amending a charge because the evidence submitted appears to establish a different crime within the jurisdiction of the Court. 8. Where the Pre-Trial Chamber declines to confirm a charge, the Prosecutor shall not be precluded from subsequently requesting its confirmation if the request is supported by additional evidence. 9. After the charges are confirmed and before the trial has begun, the Prosecutor may, with the permission of the Pre-Trial Chamber and after notice to the accused, amend the charges. If the Prosecutor seeks to add additional charges or to substitute more serious charges, a hearing under this article to confirm those charges must be held. After commencement of the trial, the Prosecutor may, with the permission of the Trial Chamber, withdraw the charges. 10. Any warrant previously issued shall cease to have effect with respect to any charges which have not been confirmed by the Pre-Trial Chamber or which have been withdrawn by the Prosecutor.
30 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court11. Once the charges have been confirmed in accordance with this article, the Presidency shall constitute a Trial Chamber which, subject to paragraph 9 and to article 64, paragraph 4, shall be responsible for the conduct of subsequent proceedings and may exercise any function of the Pre-Trial Chamber that is relevant and capable of application in those proceedings.
31 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 6. THE TRIAL Article 62 Place of trial Unless otherwise decided, the place of the trial shall be the seat of the Court. Article 63 Trial in the presence of the accused 1. The accused shall be present during the trial. 2. If the accused, being present before the Court, continues to disrupt the trial, the Trial Chamber may remove the accused and shall make provision for him or her to observe the trial and instruct counsel from outside the courtroom, through the use of communications technology, if required. Such measures shall be taken only in exceptional circumstances after other reasonable alternatives have proved inadequate, and only for such duration as is strictly required. Article 64 Functions and powers of the Trial Chamber 1. The functions and powers of the Trial Chamber set out in this article shall be exercised in accordance with this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 2. The Trial Chamber shall ensure that a trial is fair and expeditious and is conducted with full respect for the rights of the accused and due regard for the protection of victims and witnesses. 3. Upon assignment of a case for trial in accordance with this Statute, the Trial Chamber assigned to deal with the case shall: (a) Confer with the parties and adopt such procedures as are necessary to facilitate the fair and expeditious conduct of the proceedings; (b) Determine the language or languages to be used at trial; and (c) Subject to any other relevant provisions of this Statute, provide for disclosure of documents or information not previously disclosed, sufficiently in advance of the commencement of the trial to enable adequate preparation for trial. 4. The Trial Chamber may, if necessary for its effective and fair functioning, refer preliminary issues to the Pre- Trial Chamber or, if necessary, to another available judge of the Pre-Trial Division. 5. Upon notice to the parties, the Trial Chamber may, as appropriate, direct that there be joinder or severance in respect of charges against more than one accused. 6. In performing its functions prior to trial or during the course of a trial, the Trial Chamber may, as necessary: (a) Exercise any functions of the Pre-Trial Chamber referred to in article 61, paragraph 11; (b) Require the attendance and testimony of witnesses and production of documents and other evidence by obtaining, if necessary, the assistance of States as provided in this Statute; (c) Provide for the protection of confidential information; (d) Order the production of evidence in addition to that already collected prior to the trial or presented during the trial by the parties; (e) Provide for the protection of the accused, witnesses and victims; and (f) Rule on any other relevant matters. 7. The trial shall be held in public. The Trial Chamber may, however, determine that special circumstances require that certain proceedings be in closed session for the purposes set forth in article 68, or to protect confidential or sensitive information to be given in evidence. 8. (a) At the commencement of the trial, the Trial Chamber shall have read to the accused the charges previously confirmed by the Pre-Trial Chamber. The Trial Chamber shall satisfy itself that the accused understands the nature of the charges. It shall afford him or her the opportunity to make an admission of guilt in accordance with article 65 or to plead not guilty.
32 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) At the trial, the presiding judge may give directions for the conduct of proceedings, including to ensure that they are conducted in a fair and impartial manner. Subject to any directions of the presiding judge, the parties may submit evidence in accordance with the provisions of this Statute. 9. The Trial Chamber shall have, inter alia , the power on application of a party or on its own motion to: (a) Rule on the admissibility or relevance of evidence; and (b) Take all necessary steps to maintain order in the course of a hearing. 10. The Trial Chamber shall ensure that a complete record of the trial, which accurately reflects the proceedings, is made and that it is maintained and preserved by the Registrar. Article 65 Proceedings on an admission of guilt 1. Where the accused makes an admission of guilt pursuant to article 64, paragraph 8 (a), the Trial Chamber shall determine whether: (a) The accused understands the nature and consequences of the admission of guilt; (b) The admission is voluntarily made by the accused after sufficient consultation with defence counsel; and (c) The admission of guilt is supported by the facts of the case that are contained in: (i) The charges brought by the Prosecutor and admitted by the accused; (ii) Any materials presented by the Prosecutor which supplement the charges and which the accused accepts; and (iii) Any other evidence, such as the testimony of witnesses, presented by the Prosecutor or the accused. 2. Where the Trial Chamber is satisfied that the matters referred to in paragraph 1 are established, it shall consider the admission of guilt, together with any additional evidence presented, as establishing all the essential facts that are required to prove the crime to which the admission of guilt relates, and may convict the accused of that crime. 3. Where the Trial Chamber is not satisfied that the matters referred to in paragraph 1 are established, it shall consider the admission of guilt as not having been made, in which case it shall order that the trial be continued under the ordinary trial procedures provided by this Statute and may remit the case to another Trial Chamber. 4. Where the Trial Chamber is of the opinion that a more complete presentation of the facts of the case is required in the interests of justice, in particular the interests of the victims, the Trial Chamber may: (a) Request the Prosecutor to present additional evidence, including the testimony of witnesses; or (b) Order that the trial be continued under the ordinary trial procedures provided by this Statute, in which case it shall consider the admission of guilt as not having been made and may remit the case to another Trial Chamber. 5. Any discussions between the Prosecutor and the defence regarding modification of the charges, the admission of guilt or the penalty to be imposed shall not be binding on the Court. Article 66 Presumption of innocence 1. Everyone shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty before the Court in accordance with the applicable law. 2. The onus is on the Prosecutor to prove the guilt of the accused. 3. In order to convict the accused, the Court must be convinced of the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
33 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 67 Rights of the accused 1. In the determination of any charge, the accused shall be entitled to a public hearing, having regard to the provisions of this Statute, to a fair hearing conducted impartially, and to the following minimum guarantees, in full equality: (a) To be informed promptly and in detail of the nature, cause and content of the charge, in a language which the accused fully understands and speaks; (b) To have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of the defence and to communicate freely with counsel of the accused's choosing in confidence; (c) To be tried without undue delay; (d) Subject to article 63, paragraph 2, to be present at the trial, to conduct the defence in person or through legal assistance of the accused's choosing, to be informed, if the accused does not have legal assistance, of this right and to have legal assistance assigned by the Court in any case where the interests of justice so require, and without payment if the accused lacks sufficient means to pay for it; (e) To examine, or have examined, the witnesses against him or her and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his or her behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him or her. The accused shall also be entitled to raise defences and to present other evidence admissible under this Statute; (f) To have, free of any cost, the assistance of a competent interpreter and such translations as are necessary to meet the requirements of fairness, if any of the proceedings of or documents presented to the Court are not in a language which the accused fully understands and speaks; (g) Not to be compelled to testify or to confess guilt and to remain silent, without such silence being a consideration in the determination of guilt or innocence; (h) To make an unsworn oral or written statement in his or her defence; and (i) Not to have imposed on him or her any reversal of the burden of proof or any onus of rebuttal. 2. In addition to any other disclosure provided for in this Statute, the Prosecutor shall, as soon as practicable, disclose to the defence evidence in the Prosecutor's possession or control which he or she believes shows or tends to show the innocence of the accused, or to mitigate the guilt of the accused, or which may affect the credibility of prosecution evidence. In case of doubt as to the application of this paragraph, the Court shall decide. Article 68 Protection of the victims and witnesses and their participation in the proceedings 1. The Court shall take appropriate measures to protect the safety, physical and psychological well-being, dignity and privacy of victims and witnesses. In so doing, the Court shall have regard to all relevant factors, including age, gender as defined in article 7, paragraph 3, and health, and the nature of the crime, in particular, but not limited to, where the crime involves sexual or gender violence or violence against children. The Prosecutor shall take such measures particularly during the investigation and prosecution of such crimes. These measures shall not be prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial. 2. As an exception to the principle of public hearings provided for in article 67, the Chambers of the Court may, to protect victims and witnesses or an accused, conduct any part of the proceedings in camera or allow the presentation of evidence by electronic or other special means. In particular, such measures shall be implemented in the case of a victim of sexual violence or a child who is a victim or a witness, unless otherwise ordered by the Court, having regard to all the circumstances, particularly the views of the victim or witness. 3. Where the personal interests of the victims are affected, the Court shall permit their views and concerns to be presented and considered at stages of the proceedings determined to be appropriate by the Court and in a manner which is not prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial. Such views and concerns may be presented by the legal representatives of the victims where the Court considers it appropriate, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. The Victims and Witnesses Unit may advise the Prosecutor and the Court on appropriate protective measures, security arrangements, counselling and assistance as referred to in article 43, paragraph 6.
34 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court5. Where the disclosure of evidence or information pursuant to this Statute may lead to the grave endangerment of the security of a witness or his or her family, the Prosecutor may, for the purposes of any proceedings conducted prior to the commencement of the trial, withhold such evidence or information and instead submit a summary thereof. Such measures shall be exercised in a manner which is not prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial. 6. A State may make an application for necessary measures to be taken in respect of the protection of its servants or agents and the protection of confidential or sensitive information. Article 69 Evidence 1. Before testifying, each witness shall, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, give an undertaking as to the truthfulness of the evidence to be given by that witness. 2. The testimony of a witness at trial shall be given in person, except to the extent provided by the measures set forth in article 68 or in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The Court may also permit the giving of viva voce (oral) or recorded testimony of a witness by means of video or audio technology, as well as the introduction of documents or written transcripts, subject to this Statute and in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. These measures shall not be prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused. 3. The parties may submit evidence relevant to the case, in accordance with article 64. The Court shall have the authority to request the submission of all evidence that it considers necessary for the determination of the truth. 4. The Court may rule on the relevance or admissibility of any evidence, taking into account, inter alia , the probative value of the evidence and any prejudice that such evidence may cause to a fair trial or to a fair evaluation of the testimony of a witness, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 5. The Court shall respect and observe privileges on confidentiality as provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 6. The Court shall not require proof of facts of common knowledge but may take judicial notice of them. 7. Evidence obtained by means of a violation of this Statute or internationally recognized human rights shall not be admissible if: (a) The violation casts substantial doubt on the reliability of the evidence; or (b) The admission of the evidence would be antithetical to and would seriously damage the integrity of the proceedings. 8. When deciding on the relevance or admissibility of evidence collected by a State, the Court shall not rule on the application of the State's national law. Article 70 Offences against the administration of justice 1. The Court shall have jurisdiction over the following offences against its administration of justice when committed intentionally: (a) Giving false testimony when under an obligation pursuant to article 69, paragraph 1, to tell the truth; (b) Presenting evidence that the party knows is false or forged; (c) Corruptly influencing a witness, obstructing or interfering with the attendance or testimony of a witness, retaliating against a witness for giving testimony or destroying, tampering with or interfering with the collection of evidence; (d) Impeding, intimidating or corruptly influencing an official of the Court for the purpose of forcing or persuading the official not to perform, or to perform improperly, his or her duties; (e) Retaliating against an official of the Court on account of duties performed by that or another official; (f) Soliciting or accepting a bribe as an official of the Court in connection with his or her official duties. 2. The principles and procedures governing the Court's exercise of jurisdiction over offences under this article shall be those provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The conditions for providing international cooperation to the Court with respect to its proceedings under this article shall be governed by the domestic laws of the requested State.
35 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3. In the event of conviction, the Court may impose a term of imprisonment not exceeding five years, or a fine in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, or both. 4. (a) Each State Party shall extend its criminal laws penalizing offences against the integrity of its own investigative or judicial process to offences against the administration of justice referred to in this article, committed on its territory, or by one of its nationals; (b) Upon request by the Court, whenever it deems it proper, the State Party shall submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution. Those authorities shall treat such cases with diligence and devote sufficient resources to enable them to be conducted effectively. Article 71 Sanctions for misconduct before the Court 1. The Court may sanction persons present before it who commit misconduct, including disruption of its proceedings or deliberate refusal to comply with its directions, by administrative measures other than imprisonment, such as temporary or permanent removal from the courtroom, a fine or other similar measures provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 2. The procedures governing the imposition of the measures set forth in paragraph 1 shall be those provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 72 Protection of national security information 1. This article applies in any case where the disclosure of the information or documents of a State would, in the opinion of that State, prejudice its national security interests. Such cases include those falling within the scope of article 56, paragraphs 2 and 3, article 61, paragraph 3, article 64, paragraph 3, article 67, paragraph 2, article 68, paragraph 6, article 87, paragraph 6 and article 93, as well as cases arising at any other stage of the proceedings where such disclosure may be at issue. 2. This article shall also apply when a person who has been requested to give information or evidence has refused to do so or has referred the matter to the State on the ground that disclosure would prejudice the national security interests of a State and the State concerned confirms that it is of the opinion that disclosure would prejudice its national security interests. 3. Nothing in this article shall prejudice the requirements of confidentiality applicable under article 54, paragraph 3 (e) and (f), or the application of article 73. 4. If a State learns that information or documents of the State are being, or are likely to be, disclosed at any stage of the proceedings, and it is of the opinion that disclosure would prejudice its national security interests, that State shall have the right to intervene in order to obtain resolution of the issue in accordance with this article. 5. If, in the opinion of a State, disclosure of information would prejudice its national security interests, all reasonable steps will be taken by the State, acting in conjunction with the Prosecutor, the defence or the Pre-Trial Chamber or Trial Chamber, as the case may be, to seek to resolve the matter by cooperative means. Such steps may include: (a) Modification or clarification of the request; (b) A determination by the Court regarding the relevance of the information or evidence sought, or a determination as to whether the evidence, though relevant, could be or has been obtained from a source other than the requested State; (c) Obtaining the information or evidence from a different source or in a different form; or (d) Agreement on conditions under which the assistance could be provided including, among other things, providing summaries or redactions, limitations on disclosure, use of in camera or ex parte proceedings, or other protective measures permissible under the Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 6. Once all reasonable steps have been taken to resolve the matter through cooperative means, and if the State considers that there are no means or conditions under which the information or documents could be provided or disclosed without prejudice to its national security interests, it shall so notify the Prosecutor or the Court of the specific reasons for its decision, unless a specific description of the reasons would itself necessarily result in such prejudice to the State's national security interests.
36 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court7. Thereafter, if the Court determines that the evidence is relevant and necessary for the establishment of the guilt or innocence of the accused, the Court may undertake the following actions: (a) Where disclosure of the information or document is sought pursuant to a request for cooperation under Part 9 or the circumstances described in paragraph 2, and the State has invoked the ground for refusal referred to in article 93, paragraph 4: (i) The Court may, before making any conclusion referred to in subparagraph 7 (a) (ii), request further consultations for the purpose of considering the State's representations, which may include, as appropriate, hearings in camera and ex parte ; (ii) If the Court concludes that, by invoking the ground for refusal under article 93, paragraph 4, in the circumstances of the case, the requested State is not acting in accordance with its obligations under this Statute, the Court may refer the matter in accordance with article 87, paragraph 7, specifying the reasons for its conclusion; and (iii) The Court may make such inference in the trial of the accused as to the existence or non- existence of a fact, as may be appropriate in the circumstances; or (b) In all other circumstances: (i) Order disclosure; or (ii) To the extent it does not order disclosure, make such inference in the trial of the accused as to the existence or non-existence of a fact, as may be appropriate in the circumstances. Article 73 Third-party information or documents If a State Party is requested by the Court to provide a document or information in its custody, possession or control, which was disclosed to it in confidence by a State, intergovernmental organization or international organization, it shall seek the consent of the originator to disclose that document or information. If the originator is a State Party, it shall either consent to disclosure of the information or document or undertake to resolve the issue of disclosure with the Court, subject to the provisions of article 72. If the originator is not a State Party and refuses to consent to disclosure, the requested State shall inform the Court that it is unable to provide the document or information because of a pre-existing obligation of confidentiality to the originator. Article 74 Requirements for the decision 1. All the judges of the Trial Chamber shall be present at each stage of the trial and throughout their deliberations. The Presidency may, on a case-by-case basis, designate, as available, one or more alternate judges to be present at each stage of the trial and to replace a member of the Trial Chamber if that member is unable to continue attending. 2. The Trial Chamber's decision shall be based on its evaluation of the evidence and the entire proceedings. The decision shall not exceed the facts and circumstances described in the charges and any amendments to the charges. The Court may base its decision only on evidence submitted and discussed before it at the trial. 3. The judges shall attempt to achieve unanimity in their decision, failing which the decision shall be taken by a majority of the judges. 4. The deliberations of the Trial Chamber shall remain secret. 5. The decision shall be in writing and shall contain a full and reasoned statement of the Trial Chamber's findings on the evidence and conclusions. The Trial Chamber shall issue one decision. When there is no unanimity, the Trial Chamber's decision shall contain the views of the majority and the minority. The decision or a summary thereof shall be delivered in open court. Article 75 Reparations to victims 1. The Court shall establish principles relating to reparations to, or in respect of, victims, including restitution, compensation and rehabilitation. On this basis, in its decision the Court may, either upon request or on its own motion in exceptional circumstances, determine the scope and extent of any damage, loss and injury to, or in respect of, victims and will state the principles on which it is acting.
37 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The Court may make an order directly against a convicted person specifying appropriate reparations to, or in respect of, victims, including restitution, compensation and rehabilitation. Where appropriate, the Court may order that the award for reparations be made through the Trust Fund provided for in article 79. 3. Before making an order under this article, the Court may invite and shall take account of representations from or on behalf of the convicted person, victims, other interested persons or interested States. 4. In exercising its power under this article, the Court may, after a person is convicted of a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court, determine whether, in order to give effect to an order which it may make under this article, it is necessary to seek measures under article 93, paragraph 1. 5. A State Party shall give effect to a decision under this article as if the provisions of article 109 were applicable to this article. 6. Nothing in this article shall be interpreted as prejudicing the rights of victims under national or international law. Article 76 Sentencing 1. In the event of a conviction, the Trial Chamber shall consider the appropriate sentence to be imposed and shall take into account the evidence presented and submissions made during the trial that are relevant to the sentence. 2. Except where article 65 applies and before the completion of the trial, the Trial Chamber may on its own motion and shall, at the request of the Prosecutor or the accused, hold a further hearing to hear any additional evidence or submissions relevant to the sentence, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 3. Where paragraph 2 applies, any representations under article 75 shall be heard during the further hearing referred to in paragraph 2 and, if necessary, during any additional hearing. 4. The sentence shall be pronounced in public and, wherever possible, in the presence of the accused.
38 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 7. PENALTIES Article 77 Applicable penalties 1. Subject to article 110, the Court may impose one of the following penalties on a person convicted of a crime referred to in article 5 of this Statute: (a) Imprisonment for a specified number of years, which may not exceed a maximum of 30 years; or (b) A term of life imprisonment when justified by the extreme gravity of the crime and the individual circumstances of the convicted person. 2. In addition to imprisonment, the Court may order: (a) A fine under the criteria provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (b) A forfeiture of proceeds, property and assets derived directly or indirectly from that crime, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties. Article 78 Determination of the sentence 1. In determining the sentence, the Court shall, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, take into account such factors as the gravity of the crime and the individual circumstances of the convicted person. 2. In imposing a sentence of imprisonment, the Court shall deduct the time, if any, previously spent in detention in accordance with an order of the Court. The Court may deduct any time otherwise spent in detention in connection with conduct underlying the crime. 3. When a person has been convicted of more than one crime, the Court shall pronounce a sentence for each crime and a joint sentence specifying the total period of imprisonment. This period shall be no less than the highest individual sentence pronounced and shall not exceed 30 years imprisonment or a sentence of life imprisonment in conformity with article 77, paragraph 1 (b). Article 79 Trust Fund 1. A Trust Fund shall be established by decision of the Assembly of States Parties for the benefit of victims of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court, and of the families of such victims. 2. The Court may order money and other property collected through fines or forfeiture to be transferred, by order of the Court, to the Trust Fund. 3. The Trust Fund shall be managed according to criteria to be determined by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 80 Non-prejudice to national application of penalties and national laws Nothing in this Part affects the application by States of penalties prescribed by their national law, nor the law of States which do not provide for penalties prescribed in this Part.
39 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 8. APPEAL AND REVISION Article 81 Appeal against decision of acquittal or conviction or against sentence 1. A decision under article 74 may be appealed in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence as follows: (a) The Prosecutor may make an appeal on any of the following grounds: (i) Procedural error, (ii) Error of fact, or (iii) Error of law; (b) The convicted person, or the Prosecutor on that person's behalf, may make an appeal on any of the following grounds: (i) Procedural error, (ii) Error of fact, (iii) Error of law, or (iv) Any other ground that affects the fairness or reliability of the proceedings or decision. 2. (a) A sentence may be appealed, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, by the Prosecutor or the convicted person on the ground of disproportion between the crime and the sentence; (b) If on an appeal against sentence the Court considers that there are grounds on which the conviction might be set aside, wholly or in part, it may invite the Prosecutor and the convicted person to submit grounds under article 81, paragraph 1 (a) or (b), and may render a decision on conviction in accordance with article 83; (c) The same procedure applies when the Court, on an appeal against conviction only, considers that there are grounds to reduce the sentence under paragraph 2 (a). 3. (a) Unless the Trial Chamber orders otherwise, a convicted person shall remain in custody pending an appeal; (b) When a convicted person's time in custody exceeds the sentence of imprisonment imposed, that person shall be released, except that if the Prosecutor is also appealing, the release may be subject to the conditions under subparagraph (c) below; (c) In case of an acquittal, the accused shall be released immediately, subject to the following: (i) Under exceptional circumstances, and having regard, inter alia , to the concrete risk of flight, the seriousness of the offence charged and the probability of success on appeal, the Trial Chamber, at the request of the Prosecutor, may maintain the detention of the person pending appeal; (ii) A decision by the Trial Chamber under subparagraph (c) (i) may be appealed in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 3 (a) and (b), execution of the decision or sentence shall be suspended during the period allowed for appeal and for the duration of the appeal proceedings. Article 82 Appeal against other decisions 1. Either party may appeal any of the following decisions in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence: (a) A decision with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility; (b) A decision granting or denying release of the person being investigated or prosecuted; (c) A decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber to act on its own initiative under article 56, paragraph 3; (d) A decision that involves an issue that would significantly affect the fair and expeditious conduct of the proceedings or the outcome of the trial, and for which, in the opinion of the Pre-Trial or Trial Chamber, an immediate resolution by the Appeals Chamber may materially advance the proceedings.
40 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. A decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber under article 57, paragraph 3 (d), may be appealed against by the State concerned or by the Prosecutor, with the leave of the Pre-Trial Chamber. The appeal shall be heard on an expedited basis. 3. An appeal shall not of itself have suspensive effect unless the Appeals Chamber so orders, upon request, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. A legal representative of the victims, the convicted person or a bona fide owner of property adversely affected by an order under article 75 may appeal against the order for reparations, as provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 83 Proceedings on appeal 1. For the purposes of proceedings under article 81 and this article, the Appeals Chamber shall have all the powers of the Trial Chamber. 2. If the Appeals Chamber finds that the proceedings appealed from were unfair in a way that affected the reliability of the decision or sentence, or that the decision or sentence appealed from was materially affected by error of fact or law or procedural error, it may: (a) Reverse or amend the decision or sentence; or (b) Order a new trial before a different Trial Chamber. For these purposes, the Appeals Chamber may remand a factual issue to the original Trial Chamber for it to determine the issue and to report back accordingly, or may itself call evidence to determine the issue. When the decision or sentence has been appealed only by the person convicted, or the Prosecutor on that person's behalf, it cannot be amended to his or her detriment. 3. If in an appeal against sentence the Appeals Chamber finds that the sentence is disproportionate to the crime, it may vary the sentence in accordance with Part 7. 4. The judgement of the Appeals Chamber shall be taken by a majority of the judges and shall be delivered in open court. The judgement shall state the reasons on which it is based. When there is no unanimity, the judgement of the Appeals Chamber shall contain the views of the majority and the minority, but a judge may deliver a separate or dissenting opinion on a question of law. 5. The Appeals Chamber may deliver its judgement in the absence of the person acquitted or convicted. Article 84 Revision of conviction or sentence 1. The convicted person or, after death, spouses, children, parents or one person alive at the time of the accused's death who has been given express written instructions from the accused to bring such a claim, or the Prosecutor on the person's behalf, may apply to the Appeals Chamber to revise the final judgement of conviction or sentence on the grounds that: (a) New evidence has been discovered that: (i) Was not available at the time of trial, and such unavailability was not wholly or partially attributable to the party making application; and (ii) Is sufficiently important that had it been proved at trial it would have been likely to have resulted in a different verdict; (b) It has been newly discovered that decisive evidence, taken into account at trial and upon which the conviction depends, was false, forged or falsified; (c) One or more of the judges who participated in conviction or confirmation of the charges has committed, in that case, an act of serious misconduct or serious breach of duty of sufficient gravity to justify the removal of that judge or those judges from office under article 46. 2. The Appeals Chamber shall reject the application if it considers it to be unfounded. If it determines that the application is meritorious, it may, as appropriate: (a) Reconvene the original Trial Chamber; (b) Constitute a new Trial Chamber; or
41 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(c) Retain jurisdiction over the matter, with a view to, after hearing the parties in the manner set forth in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, arriving at a determination on whether the judgement should be revised. Article 85 Compensation to an arrested or convicted person 1. Anyone who has been the victim of unlawful arrest or detention shall have an enforceable right to compensation. 2. When a person has by a final decision been convicted of a criminal offence, and when subsequently his or her conviction has been reversed on the ground that a new or newly discovered fact shows conclusively that there has been a miscarriage of justice, the person who has suffered punishment as a result of such conviction shall be compensated according to law, unless it is proved that the non-disclosure of the unknown fact in time is wholly or partly attributable to him or her. 3. In exceptional circumstances, where the Court finds conclusive facts showing that there has been a grave and manifest miscarriage of justice, it may in its discretion award compensation, according to the criteria provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, to a person who has been released from detention following a final decision of acquittal or a termination of the proceedings for that reason.
42 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 9. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AND JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE Article 86 General obligation to cooperate States Parties shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Statute, cooperate fully with the Court in its investigation and prosecution of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. Article 87 Requests for cooperation: general provisions 1. (a) The Court shall have the authority to make requests to States Parties for cooperation. The requestsshall be transmitted through the diplomatic channel or any other appropriate channel as may be designated by each State Party upon ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Subsequent changes to the designation shall be made by each State Party in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. (b) When appropriate, without prejudice to the provisions of subparagraph (a), requests may also be transmitted through the International Criminal Police Organization or any appropriate regional organization. 2. Requests for cooperation and any documents supporting the request shall either be in or be accompanied by a translation into an official language of the requested State or one of the working languages of the Court, in accordance with the choice made by that State upon ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Subsequent changes to this choice shall be made in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 3. The requested State shall keep confidential a request for cooperation and any documents supporting the request, except to the extent that the disclosure is necessary for execution of the request. 4. In relation to any request for assistance presented under this Part, the Court may take such measures, including measures related to the protection of information, as may be necessary to ensure the safety or physical or psychological well-being of any victims, potential witnesses and their families. The Court may request that any information that is made available under this Part shall be provided and handled in a manner that protects the safety and physical or psychological well-being of any victims, potential witnesses and their families. 5. (a) The Court may invite any State not party to this Statute to provide assistance under this Part on the basis of an ad hoc arrangement, an agreement with such State or any other appropriate basis. (b) Where a State not party to this Statute, which has entered into an ad hoc arrangement or an agreement with the Court, fails to cooperate with requests pursuant to any such arrangement or agreement, the Court may so inform the Assembly of States Parties or, where the Security Council referred the matter to the Court, the Security Council. 6. The Court may ask any intergovernmental organization to provide information or documents. The Court may also ask for other forms of cooperation and assistance which may be agreed upon with such an organization and which are in accordance with its competence or mandate. 7. Where a State Party fails to comply with a request to cooperate by the Court contrary to the provisions of this Statute, thereby preventing the Court from exercising its functions and powers under this Statute, the Court may make a finding to that effect and refer the matter to the Assembly of States Parties or, where the Security Council referred the matter to the Court, to the Security Council. Article 88 Availability of procedures under national law States Parties shall ensure that there are procedures available under their national law for all of the forms of cooperation which are specified under this Part. Article 89 Surrender of persons to the Court 1. The Court may transmit a request for the arrest and surrender of a person, together with the material supporting the request outlined in article 91, to any State on the territory of which that person may be found and shall request the cooperation of that State in the arrest and surrender of such a person. States Parties shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Part and the procedure under their national law, comply with requests for arrest and surrender.
43 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. Where the person sought for surrender brings a challenge before a national court on the basis of the principle of ne bis in idem as provided in article 20, the requested State shall immediately consult with the Court to determine if there has been a relevant ruling on admissibility. If the case is admissible, the requested State shall proceed with the execution of the request. If an admissibility ruling is pending, the requested State may postpone the execution of the request for surrender of the person until the Court makes a determination on admissibility. 3. (a) A State Party shall authorize, in accordance with its national procedural law, transportation through its territory of a person being surrendered to the Court by another State, except where transit through that State would impede or delay the surrender. (b) A request by the Court for transit shall be transmitted in accordance with article 87. The request for transit shall contain: (i) A description of the person being transported; (ii) A brief statement of the facts of the case and their legal characterization; and (iii) The warrant for arrest and surrender; (c) A person being transported shall be detained in custody during the period of transit; (d) No authorization is required if the person is transported by air and no landing is scheduled on the territory of the transit State; (e) If an unscheduled landing occurs on the territory of the transit State, that State may require a request for transit from the Court as provided for in subparagraph (b). The transit State shall detain the person being transported until the request for transit is received and the transit is effected, provided that detention for purposes of this subparagraph may not be extended beyond 96 hours from the unscheduled landing unless the request is received within that time. 4. If the person sought is being proceeded against or is serving a sentence in the requested State for a crime different from that for which surrender to the Court is sought, the requested State, after making its decision to grant the request, shall consult with the Court. Article 90 Competing requests 1. A State Party which receives a request from the Court for the surrender of a person under article 89 shall, if it also receives a request from any other State for the extradition of the same person for the same conduct which forms the basis of the crime for which the Court seeks the person's surrender, notify the Court and the requesting State of that fact. 2. Where the requesting State is a State Party, the requested State shall give priority to the request from the Court if: (a) The Court has, pursuant to article 18 or 19, made a determination that the case in respect of which surrender is sought is admissible and that determination takes into account the investigation or prosecution conducted by the requesting State in respect of its request for extradition; or (b) The Court makes the determination described in subparagraph (a) pursuant to the requested State's notification under paragraph 1. 3. Where a determination under paragraph 2 (a) has not been made, the requested State may, at its discretion, pending the determination of the Court under paragraph 2 (b), proceed to deal with the request for extradition from the requesting State but shall not extradite the person until the Court has determined that the case is inadmissible. The Court's determination shall be made on an expedited basis. 4. If the requesting State is a State not Party to this Statute the requested State, if it is not under an international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State, shall give priority to the request for surrender from the Court, if the Court has determined that the case is admissible. 5. Where a case under paragraph 4 has not been determined to be admissible by the Court, the requested State may, at its discretion, proceed to deal with the request for extradition from the requesting State. 6. In cases where paragraph 4 applies except that the requested State is under an existing international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State not Party to this Statute, the requested State shall determine whether to surrender the person to the Court or extradite the person to the requesting State. In making its decision, the requested State shall consider all the relevant factors, including but not limited to:
44 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(a) The respective dates of the requests; (b) The interests of the requesting State including, where relevant, whether the crime was committed in its territory and the nationality of the victims and of the person sought; and (c) The possibility of subsequent surrender between the Court and the requesting State. 7. Where a State Party which receives a request from the Court for the surrender of a person also receives a request from any State for the extradition of the same person for conduct other than that which constitutes the crime for which the Court seeks the person's surrender: (a) The requested State shall, if it is not under an existing international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State, give priority to the request from the Court; (b) The requested State shall, if it is under an existing international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State, determine whether to surrender the person to the Court or to extradite the person to the requesting State. In making its decision, the requested State shall consider all the relevant factors, including but not limited to those set out in paragraph 6, but shall give special consideration to the relative nature and gravity of the conduct in question. 8. Where pursuant to a notification under this article, the Court has determined a case to be inadmissible, and subsequently extradition to the requesting State is refused, the requested State shall notify the Court of this decision. Article 91 Contents of request for arrest and surrender 1. A request for arrest and surrender shall be made in writing. In urgent cases, a request may be made by any medium capable of delivering a written record, provided that the request shall be confirmed through the channel provided for in article 87, paragraph 1 (a). 2. In the case of a request for the arrest and surrender of a person for whom a warrant of arrest has been issued by the Pre-Trial Chamber under article 58, the request shall contain or be supported by: (a) Information describing the person sought, sufficient to identify the person, and information as to that person's probable location; (b) A copy of the warrant of arrest; and (c) Such documents, statements or information as may be necessary to meet the requirements for the surrender process in the requested State, except that those requirements should not be more burdensome than those applicable to requests for extradition pursuant to treaties or arrangements between the requested State and other States and should, if possible, be less burdensome, taking into account the distinct nature of the Court. 3. In the case of a request for the arrest and surrender of a person already convicted, the request shall contain or be supported by: (a) A copy of any warrant of arrest for that person; (b) A copy of the judgement of conviction; (c) Information to demonstrate that the person sought is the one referred to in the judgement of conviction; and (d) If the person sought has been sentenced, a copy of the sentence imposed and, in the case of a sentence for imprisonment, a statement of any time already served and the time remaining to be served. 4. Upon the request of the Court, a State Party shall consult with the Court, either generally or with respect to a specific matter, regarding any requirements under its national law that may apply under paragraph 2 (c). During the consultations, the State Party shall advise the Court of the specific requirements of its national law.
45 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 92 Provisional arrest 1. In urgent cases, the Court may request the provisional arrest of the person sought, pending presentation of the request for surrender and the documents supporting the request as specified in article 91. 2. The request for provisional arrest shall be made by any medium capable of delivering a written record and shall contain: (a) Information describing the person sought, sufficient to identify the person, and information as to that person's probable location; (b) A concise statement of the crimes for which the person's arrest is sought and of the facts which are alleged to constitute those crimes, including, where possible, the date and location of the crime; (c) A statement of the existence of a warrant of arrest or a judgement of conviction against the person sought; and (d) A statement that a request for surrender of the person sought will follow. 3. A person who is provisionally arrested may be released from custody if the requested State has not received the request for surrender and the documents supporting the request as specified in article 91 within the time limits specified in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. However, the person may consent to surrender before the expiration of this period if permitted by the law of the requested State. In such a case, the requested State shall proceed to surrender the person to the Court as soon as possible. 4. The fact that the person sought has been released from custody pursuant to paragraph 3 shall not prejudice the subsequent arrest and surrender of that person if the request for surrender and the documents supporting the request are delivered at a later date. Article 93 Other forms of cooperation 1. States Parties shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Part and under procedures of national law, comply with requests by the Court to provide the following assistance in relation to investigations or prosecutions: (a) The identification and whereabouts of persons or the location of items; (b) The taking of evidence, including testimony under oath, and the production of evidence, including expert opinions and reports necessary to the Court; (c) The questioning of any person being investigated or prosecuted; (d) The service of documents, including judicial documents; (e) Facilitating the voluntary appearance of persons as witnesses or experts before the Court; (f) The temporary transfer of persons as provided in paragraph 7; (g) The examination of places or sites, including the exhumation and examination of grave sites; (h) The execution of searches and seizures; (i) The provision of records and documents, including official records and documents; (j) The protection of victims and witnesses and the preservation of evidence; (k) The identification, tracing and freezing or seizure of proceeds, property and assets and instrumentalities of crimes for the purpose of eventual forfeiture, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties; and (l) Any other type of assistance which is not prohibited by the law of the requested State, with a view to facilitating the investigation and prosecution of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. 2. The Court shall have the authority to provide an assurance to a witness or an expert appearing before the Court that he or she will not be prosecuted, detained or subjected to any restriction of personal freedom by the Court in respect of any act or omission that preceded the departure of that person from the requested State.
46 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3. Where execution of a particular measure of assistance detailed in a request presented under paragraph 1, is prohibited in the requested State on the basis of an existing fundamental legal principle of general application, the requested State shall promptly consult with the Court to try to resolve the matter. In the consultations, consideration should be given to whether the assistance can be rendered in another manner or subject to conditions. If after consultations the matter cannot be resolved, the Court shall modify the request as necessary. 4. In accordance with article 72, a State Party may deny a request for assistance, in whole or in part, only if the request concerns the production of any documents or disclosure of evidence which relates to its national security. 5. Before denying a request for assistance under paragraph 1 (l), the requested State shall consider whether the assistance can be provided subject to specified conditions, or whether the assistance can be provided at a later date or in an alternative manner, provided that if the Court or the Prosecutor accepts the assistance subject to conditions, the Court or the Prosecutor shall abide by them. 6. If a request for assistance is denied, the requested State Party shall promptly inform the Court or the Prosecutor of the reasons for such denial. 7. (a) The Court may request the temporary transfer of a person in custody for purposes of identification or for obtaining testimony or other assistance. The person may be transferred if the following conditions are fulfilled: (i) The person freely gives his or her informed consent to the transfer; and (ii) The requested State agrees to the transfer, subject to such conditions as that State and the Court may agree. (b) The person being transferred shall remain in custody. When the purposes of the transfer have been fulfilled, the Court shall return the person without delay to the requested State. 8. (a) The Court shall ensure the confidentiality of documents and information, except as required for the investigation and proceedings described in the request. (b) The requested State may, when necessary, transmit documents or information to the Prosecutor on a confidential basis. The Prosecutor may then use them solely for the purpose of generating new evidence. (c) The requested State may, on its own motion or at the request of the Prosecutor, subsequently consent to the disclosure of such documents or information. They may then be used as evidence pursuant to the provisions of Parts 5 and 6 and in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 9. (a) (i) In the event that a State Party receives competing requests, other than for surrender or extradition, from the Court and from another State pursuant to an international obligation, the State Party shall endeavour, in consultation with the Court and the other State, to meet both requests, if necessary by postponing or attaching conditions to one or the other request. (ii) Failing that, competing requests shall be resolved in accordance with the principles established in article 90. (b) Where, however, the request from the Court concerns information, property or persons which are subject to the control of a third State or an international organization by virtue of an international agreement, the requested States shall so inform the Court and the Court shall direct its request to the third State or international organization. 10. (a) The Court may, upon request, cooperate with and provide assistance to a State Party conducting an investigation into or trial in respect of conduct which constitutes a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court or which constitutes a serious crime under the national law of the requesting State. (b) (i) The assistance provided under subparagraph (a) shall include, inter alia : a. The transmission of statements, documents or other types of evidence obtained in the course of an investigation or a trial conducted by the Court; and b. The questioning of any person detained by order of the Court;
47 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(ii) In the case of assistance under subparagraph (b) (i) a: a. If the documents or other types of evidence have been obtained with the assistance of a State, such transmission shall require the consent of that State; b. If the statements, documents or other types of evidence have been provided by a witness or expert, such transmission shall be subject to the provisions of article 68. (c) The Court may, under the conditions set out in this paragraph, grant a request for assistance under this paragraph from a State which is not a Party to this Statute. Article 94 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of ongoing investigation or prosecution 1. If the immediate execution of a request would interfere with an ongoing investigation or prosecution of a case different from that to which the request relates, the requested State may postpone the execution of the request for a period of time agreed upon with the Court. However, the postponement shall be no longer than is necessary to complete the relevant investigation or prosecution in the requested State. Before making a decision to postpone, the requested State should consider whether the assistance may be immediately provided subject to certain conditions. 2. If a decision to postpone is taken pursuant to paragraph 1, the Prosecutor may, however, seek measures to preserve evidence, pursuant to article 93, paragraph 1 (j). Article 95 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of an admissibility challenge Where there is an admissibility challenge under consideration by the Court pursuant to article 18 or 19, the requested State may postpone the execution of a request under this Part pending a determination by the Court, unless the Court has specifically ordered that the Prosecutor may pursue the collection of such evidence pursuant to article 18 or 19. Article 96 Contents of request for other forms of assistance under article 93 1. A request for other forms of assistance referred to in article 93 shall be made in writing. In urgent cases, a request may be made by any medium capable of delivering a written record, provided that the request shall be confirmed through the channel provided for in article 87, paragraph 1 (a). 2. The request shall, as applicable, contain or be supported by the following: (a) A concise statement of the purpose of the request and the assistance sought, including the legal basis and the grounds for the request; (b) As much detailed information as possible about the location or identification of any person or place that must be found or identified in order for the assistance sought to be provided; (c) A concise statement of the essential facts underlying the request; (d) The reasons for and details of any procedure or requirement to be followed; (e) Such information as may be required under the law of the requested State in order to execute the request; and (f) Any other information relevant in order for the assistance sought to be provided. 3. Upon the request of the Court, a State Party shall consult with the Court, either generally or with respect to a specific matter, regarding any requirements under its national law that may apply under paragraph 2 (e). During the consultations, the State Party shall advise the Court of the specific requirements of its national law. 4. The provisions of this article shall, where applicable, also apply in respect of a request for assistance made to the Court.
48 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 97 Consultations Where a State Party receives a request under this Part in relation to which it identifies problems which may impede or prevent the execution of the request, that State shall consult with the Court without delay in order to resolve the matter. Such problems may include, inter alia : (a) Insufficient information to execute the request; (b) In the case of a request for surrender, the fact that despite best efforts, the person sought cannot be located or that the investigation conducted has determined that the person in the requested State is clearly not the person named in the warrant; or (c) The fact that execution of the request in its current form would require the requested State to breach a pre-existing treaty obligation undertaken with respect to another State. Article 98 Cooperation with respect to waiver of immunity and consent to surrender 1. The Court may not proceed with a request for surrender or assistance which would require the requested State to act inconsistently with its obligations under international law with respect to the State or diplomatic immunity of a person or property of a third State, unless the Court can first obtain the cooperation of that third State for the waiver of the immunity. 2. The Court may not proceed with a request for surrender which would require the requested State to act inconsistently with its obligations under international agreements pursuant to which the consent of a sending State is required to surrender a person of that State to the Court, unless the Court can first obtain the cooperation of the sending State for the giving of consent for the surrender. Article 99 Execution of requests under articles 93 and 96 1. Requests for assistance shall be executed in accordance with the relevant procedure under the law of the requested State and, unless prohibited by such law, in the manner specified in the request, including following any procedure outlined therein or permitting persons specified in the request to be present at and assist in the execution process. 2. In the case of an urgent request, the documents or evidence produced in response shall, at the request of the Court, be sent urgently. 3. Replies from the requested State shall be transmitted in their original language and form. 4. Without prejudice to other articles in this Part, where it is necessary for the successful execution of a request which can be executed without any compulsory measures, including specifically the interview of or taking evidence from a person on a voluntary basis, including doing so without the presence of the authorities of the requested State Party if it is essential for the request to be executed, and the examination without modification of a public site or other public place, the Prosecutor may execute such request directly on the territory of a State as follows: (a) When the State Party requested is a State on the territory of which the crime is alleged to have been committed, and there has been a determination of admissibility pursuant to article 18 or 19, the Prosecutor may directly execute such request following all possible consultations with the requested State Party; (b) In other cases, the Prosecutor may execute such request following consultations with the requested State Party and subject to any reasonable conditions or concerns raised by that State Party. Where the requested State Party identifies problems with the execution of a request pursuant to this subparagraph it shall, without delay, consult with the Court to resolve the matter. 5. Provisions allowing a person heard or examined by the Court under article 72 to invoke restrictions designed to prevent disclosure of confidential information connected with national security shall also apply to the execution of requests for assistance under this article.
49 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 100 Costs 1. The ordinary costs for execution of requests in the territory of the requested State shall be borne by that State, except for the following, which shall be borne by the Court: (a) Costs associated with the travel and security of witnesses and experts or the transfer under article 93 of persons in custody; (b) Costs of translation, interpretation and transcription; (c) Travel and subsistence costs of the judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors, the Registrar, the Deputy Registrar and staff of any organ of the Court; (d) Costs of any expert opinion or report requested by the Court; (e) Costs associated with the transport of a person being surrendered to the Court by a custodial State; and (f) Following consultations, any extraordinary costs that may result from the execution of a request. 2. The provisions of paragraph 1 shall, as appropriate, apply to requests from States Parties to the Court. In that case, the Court shall bear the ordinary costs of execution. Article 101 Rule of speciality 1. A person surrendered to the Court under this Statute shall not be proceeded against, punished or detained for any conduct committed prior to surrender, other than the conduct or course of conduct which forms the basis of the crimes for which that person has been surrendered. 2. The Court may request a waiver of the requirements of paragraph 1 from the State which surrendered the person to the Court and, if necessary, the Court shall provide additional information in accordance with article 91. States Parties shall have the authority to provide a waiver to the Court and should endeavour to do so. Article 102 Use of terms For the purposes of this Statute: (a) "surrender" means the delivering up of a person by a State to the Court, pursuant to this Statute. (b) "extradition" means the delivering up of a person by one State to another as provided by treaty, convention or national legislation.
50 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 10. ENFORCEMENT Article 103 Role of States in enforcement of sentences of imprisonment 1. (a) A sentence of imprisonment shall be served in a State designated by the Court from a list of States which have indicated to the Court their willingness to accept sentenced persons. (b) At the time of declaring its willingness to accept sentenced persons, a State may attach conditions to its acceptance as agreed by the Court and in accordance with this Part. (c) A State designated in a particular case shall promptly inform the Court whether it accepts the Court's designation. 2. (a) The State of enforcement shall notify the Court of any circumstances, including the exercise of any conditions agreed under paragraph 1, which could materially affect the terms or extent of the imprisonment. The Court shall be given at least 45 days' notice of any such known or foreseeable circumstances. During this period, the State of enforcement shall take no action that might prejudice its obligations under article 110. (b) Where the Court cannot agree to the circumstances referred to in subparagraph (a), it shall notify the State of enforcement and proceed in accordance with article 104, paragraph 1. 3. In exercising its discretion to make a designation under paragraph 1, the Court shall take into account the following: (a) The principle that States Parties should share the responsibility for enforcing sentences of imprisonment, in accordance with principles of equitable distribution, as provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (b) The application of widely accepted international treaty standards governing the treatment of prisoners; (c) The views of the sentenced person; (d) The nationality of the sentenced person; (e) Such other factors regarding the circumstances of the crime or the person sentenced, or the effective enforcement of the sentence, as may be appropriate in designating the State of enforcement. 4. If no State is designated under paragraph 1, the sentence of imprisonment shall be served in a prison facility made available by the host State, in accordance with the conditions set out in the headquarters agreement referred to in article 3, paragraph 2. In such a case, the costs arising out of the enforcement of a sentence of imprisonment shall be borne by the Court. Article 104 Change in designation of State of enforcement 1. The Court may, at any time, decide to transfer a sentenced person to a prison of another State. 2. A sentenced person may, at any time, apply to the Court to be transferred from the State of enforcement. Article 105 Enforcement of the sentence 1. Subject to conditions which a State may have specified in accordance with article 103, paragraph 1 (b), the sentence of imprisonment shall be binding on the States Parties, which shall in no case modify it. 2. The Court alone shall have the right to decide any application for appeal and revision. The State of enforcement shall not impede the making of any such application by a sentenced person. Article 106 Supervision of enforcement of sentences and conditions of imprisonment 1. The enforcement of a sentence of imprisonment shall be subject to the supervision of the Court and shall be consistent with widely accepted international treaty standards governing treatment of prisoners.
51 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The conditions of imprisonment shall be governed by the law of the State of enforcement and shall be consistent with widely accepted international treaty standards governing treatment of prisoners; in no case shall such conditions be more or less favourable than those available to prisoners convicted of similar offences in the State of enforcement. 3. Communications between a sentenced person and the Court shall be unimpeded and confidential. Article 107 Transfer of the person upon completion of sentence 1. Following completion of the sentence, a person who is not a national of the State of enforcement may, in accordance with the law of the State of enforcement, be transferred to a State which is obliged to receive him or her, or to another State which agrees to receive him or her, taking into account any wishes of the person to be transferred to that State, unless the State of enforcement authorizes the person to remain in its territory. 2. If no State bears the costs arising out of transferring the person to another State pursuant to paragraph 1, such costs shall be borne by the Court. 3. Subject to the provisions of article 108, the State of enforcement may also, in accordance with its national law, extradite or otherwise surrender the person to a State which has requested the extradition or surrender of the person for purposes of trial or enforcement of a sentence. Article 108 Limitation on the prosecution or punishment of other offences 1. A sentenced person in the custody of the State of enforcement shall not be subject to prosecution or punishment or to extradition to a third State for any conduct engaged in prior to that person's delivery to the State of enforcement, unless such prosecution, punishment or extradition has been approved by the Court at the request of the State of enforcement. 2. The Court shall decide the matter after having heard the views of the sentenced person. 3. Paragraph 1 shall cease to apply if the sentenced person remains voluntarily for more than 30 days in the territory of the State of enforcement after having served the full sentence imposed by the Court, or returns to the territory of that State after having left it. Article 109 Enforcement of fines and forfeiture measures 1. States Parties shall give effect to fines or forfeitures ordered by the Court under Part 7, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties, and in accordance with the procedure of their national law. 2. If a State Party is unable to give effect to an order for forfeiture, it shall take measures to recover the value of the proceeds, property or assets ordered by the Court to be forfeited, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties. 3. Property, or the proceeds of the sale of real property or, where appropriate, the sale of other property, which is obtained by a State Party as a result of its enforcement of a judgement of the Court shall be transferred to the Court. Article 110 Review by the Court concerning reduction of sentence 1. The State of enforcement shall not release the person before expiry of the sentence pronounced by the Court. 2. The Court alone shall have the right to decide any reduction of sentence, and shall rule on the matter after having heard the person. 3. When the person has served two thirds of the sentence, or 25 years in the case of life imprisonment, the Court shall review the sentence to determine whether it should be reduced. Such a review shall not be conducted before that time. 4. In its review under paragraph 3, the Court may reduce the sentence if it finds that one or more of the following factors are present: (a) The early and continuing willingness of the person to cooperate with the Court in its investigations and prosecutions;
52 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) The voluntary assistance of the person in enabling the enforcement of the judgements and orders of the Court in other cases, and in particular providing assistance in locating assets subject to orders of fine, forfeiture or reparation which may be used for the benefit of victims; or (c) Other factors establishing a clear and significant change of circumstances sufficient to justify the reduction of sentence, as provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 5. If the Court determines in its initial review under paragraph 3 that it is not appropriate to reduce the sentence, it shall thereafter review the question of reduction of sentence at such intervals and applying such criteria as provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 111 Escape If a convicted person escapes from custody and flees the State of enforcement, that State may, after consultation with the Court, request the person's surrender from the State in which the person is located pursuant to existing bilateral or multilateral arrangements, or may request that the Court seek the person's surrender, in accordance with Part 9. It may direct that the person be delivered to the State in which he or she was serving the sentence or to another State designated by the Court.
53 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 11. ASSEMBLY OF STATES PARTIES Article 112 Assembly of States Parties 1. An Assembly of States Parties to this Statute is hereby established. Each State Party shall have one representative in the Assembly who may be accompanied by alternates and advisers. Other States which have signed this Statute or the Final Act may be observers in the Assembly. 2. The Assembly shall: (a) Consider and adopt, as appropriate, recommendations of the Preparatory Commission; (b) Provide management oversight to the Presidency, the Prosecutor and the Registrar regarding the administration of the Court; (c) Consider the reports and activities of the Bureau established under paragraph 3 and take appropriate action in regard thereto; (d) Consider and decide the budget for the Court; (e) Decide whether to alter, in accordance with article 36, the number of judges; (f) Consider pursuant to article 87, paragraphs 5 and 7, any question relating to non-cooperation; (g) Perform any other function consistent with this Statute or the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 3. (a) The Assembly shall have a Bureau consisting of a President, two Vice-Presidents and 18 members elected by the Assembly for three-year terms. (b) The Bureau shall have a representative character, taking into account, in particular, equitable geographical distribution and the adequate representation of the principal legal systems of the world. (c) The Bureau shall meet as often as necessary, but at least once a year. It shall assist the Assembly in the discharge of its responsibilities. 4. The Assembly may establish such subsidiary bodies as may be necessary, including an independent oversight mechanism for inspection, evaluation and investigation of the Court, in order to enhance its efficiency and economy. 5. The President of the Court, the Prosecutor and the Registrar or their representatives may participate, as appropriate, in meetings of the Assembly and of the Bureau. 6. The Assembly shall meet at the seat of the Court or at the Headquarters of the United Nations once a year and, when circumstances so require, hold special sessions. Except as otherwise specified in this Statute, special sessions shall be convened by the Bureau on its own initiative or at the request of one third of the States Parties. 7. Each State Party shall have one vote. Every effort shall be made to reach decisions by consensus in the Assembly and in the Bureau. If consensus cannot be reached, except as otherwise provided in the Statute: (a) Decisions on matters of substance must be approved by a two-thirds majority of those present and voting provided that an absolute majority of States Parties constitutes the quorum for voting; (b) Decisions on matters of procedure shall be taken by a simple majority of States Parties present and voting. 8. A State Party which is in arrears in the payment of its financial contributions towards the costs of the Court shall have no vote in the Assembly and in the Bureau if the amount of its arrears equals or exceeds the amount of the contributions due from it for the preceding two full years. The Assembly may, nevertheless, permit such a State Party to vote in the Assembly and in the Bureau if it is satisfied that the failure to pay is due to conditions beyond the control of the State Party. 9. The Assembly shall adopt its own rules of procedure. 10. The official and working languages of the Assembly shall be those of the General Assembly of the United Nations.
54 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 12. FINANCING Article 113 Financial Regulations Except as otherwise specifically provided, all financial matters related to the Court and the meetings of the Assembly of States Parties, including its Bureau and subsidiary bodies, shall be governed by this Statute and the Financial Regulations and Rules adopted by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 114 Payment of expenses Expenses of the Court and the Assembly of States Parties, including its Bureau and subsidiary bodies, shall be paid from the funds of the Court. Article 115 Funds of the Court and of the Assembly of States Parties The expenses of the Court and the Assembly of States Parties, including its Bureau and subsidiary bodies, as provided for in the budget decided by the Assembly of States Parties, shall be provided by the following sources: (a) Assessed contributions made by States Parties; (b) Funds provided by the United Nations, subject to the approval of the General Assembly, in particular in relation to the expenses incurred due to referrals by the Security Council. Article 116 Voluntary contributions Without prejudice to article 115, the Court may receive and utilize, as additional funds, voluntary contributions from Governments, international organizations, individuals, corporations and other entities, in accordance with relevant criteria adopted by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 117 Assessment of contributions The contributions of States Parties shall be assessed in accordance with an agreed scale of assessment, based on the scale adopted by the United Nations for its regular budget and adjusted in accordance with the principles on which that scale is based. Article 118 Annual audit The records, books and accounts of the Court, including its annual financial statements, shall be audited annually by an independent auditor.
55 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 13. FINAL CLAUSES Article 119 Settlement of disputes 1. Any dispute concerning the judicial functions of the Court shall be settled by the decision of the Court. 2. Any other dispute between two or more States Parties relating to the interpretation or application of this Statute which is not settled through negotiations within three months of their commencement shall be referred to the Assembly of States Parties. The Assembly may itself seek to settle the dispute or may make recommendations on further means of settlement of the dispute, including referral to the International Court of Justice in conformity with the Statute of that Court. Article 120 Reservations No reservations may be made to this Statute. Article 121 Amendments 1. After the expiry of seven years from the entry into force of this Statute, any State Party may propose amendments thereto. The text of any proposed amendment shall be submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall promptly circulate it to all States Parties. 2. No sooner than three months from the date of notification, the Assembly of States Parties, at its next meeting, shall, by a majority of those present and voting, decide whether to take up the proposal. The Assembly may deal with the proposal directly or convene a Review Conference if the issue involved so warrants. 3. The adoption of an amendment at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties or at a Review Conference on which consensus cannot be reached shall require a two-thirds majority of States Parties. 4. Except as provided in paragraph 5, an amendment shall enter into force for all States Parties one year after instruments of ratification or acceptance have been deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations by seven-eighths of them. 5. Any amendment to articles 5, 6, 7 and 8 of this Statute shall enter into force for those States Parties which have accepted the amendment one year after the deposit of their instruments of ratification or acceptance. In respect of a State Party which has not accepted the amendment, the Court shall not exercise its jurisdiction regarding a crime covered by the amendment when committed by that State Party's nationals or on its territory. 6. If an amendment has been accepted by seven-eighths of States Parties in accordance with paragraph 4, any State Party which has not accepted the amendment may withdraw from this Statute with immediate effect, notwithstanding article 127, paragraph 1, but subject to article 127, paragraph 2, by giving notice no later than one year after the entry into force of such amendment. 7. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall circulate to all States Parties any amendment adopted at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties or at a Review Conference. Article 122 Amendments to provisions of an institutional nature 1. Amendments to provisions of this Statute which are of an exclusively institutional nature, namely, article 35, article 36, paragraphs 8 and 9, article 37, article 38, article 39, paragraphs 1 (first two sentences), 2 and 4, article 42, paragraphs 4 to 9, article 43, paragraphs 2 and 3, and articles 44, 46, 47 and 49, may be proposed at any time, notwithstanding article 121, paragraph 1, by any State Party. The text of any proposed amendment shall be submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations or such other person designated by the Assembly of States Parties who shall promptly circulate it to all States Parties and to others participating in the Assembly. 2. Amendments under this article on which consensus cannot be reached shall be adopted by the Assembly of States Parties or by a Review Conference, by a two-thirds majority of States Parties. Such amendments shall enter into force for all States Parties six months after their adoption by the Assembly or, as the case may be, by the Conference.
56 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 123 Review of the Statute 1. Seven years after the entry into force of this Statute the Secretary-General of the United Nations shall convene a Review Conference to consider any amendments to this Statute. Such review may include, but is not limited to, the list of crimes contained in article 5. The Conference shall be open to those participating in the Assembly of States Parties and on the same conditions. 2. At any time thereafter, at the request of a State Party and for the purposes set out in paragraph 1, the Secretary-General of the United Nations shall, upon approval by a majority of States Parties, convene a Review Conference. 3. The provisions of article 121, paragraphs 3 to 7, shall apply to the adoption and entry into force of any amendment to the Statute considered at a Review Conference. Article 124 Transitional Provision Notwithstanding article 12, paragraphs 1 and 2, a State, on becoming a party to this Statute, may declare that, for a period of seven years after the entry into force of this Statute for the State concerned, it does not accept the jurisdiction of the Court with respect to the category of crimes referred to in article 8 when a crime is alleged to have been committed by its nationals or on its territory. A declaration under this article may be withdrawn at any time. The provisions of this article shall be reviewed at the Review Conference convened in accordance with article 123, paragraph 1. Article 125 Signature, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession 1. This Statute shall be open for signature by all States in Rome, at the headquarters of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, on 17 July 1998. Thereafter, it shall remain open for signature in Rome at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Italy until 17 October 1998. After that date, the Statute shall remain open for signature in New Y ork, at United Nations Headquarters, until 31 December 2000. 2. This Statute is subject to ratification, acceptance or approval by signatory States. Instruments of ratification, acceptance or approval shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. 3. This Statute shall be open to accession by all States. Instruments of accession shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Article 126 Entry into force 1. This Statute shall enter into force on the first day of the month after the 60th day following the date of the deposit of the 60th instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. 2. For each State ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to this Statute after the deposit of the 60th instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, the Statute shall enter into force on the first day of the month after the 60th day following the deposit by such State of its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Article 127 Withdrawal 1. A State Party may, by written notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, withdraw from this Statute. The withdrawal shall take effect one year after the date of receipt of the notification, unless the notification specifies a later date. 2. A State shall not be discharged, by reason of its withdrawal, from the obligations arising from this Statute while it was a Party to the Statute, including any financial obligations which may have accrued. Its withdrawal shall not affect any cooperation with the Court in connection with criminal investigations and proceedings in relation to which the withdrawing State had a duty to cooperate and which were commenced prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective, nor shall it prejudice in any way the continued consideration of any matter which was already under consideration by the Court prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective.
57 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 128 Authentic texts The original of this Statute, of which the Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish texts are equally authentic, shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall send certified copies thereof to all States. In W Itness W hereof , the undersigned, being duly authorized thereto by their respective Governments, have signed this Statute. Done at Rome, this 17th day of July 1998.
58 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court

[Previous Article]#[Next]

AND: Weekly editorial – Appeasement only feeds coupism – The Red Herald (Red Herald)


We publish an unofficial translation of the Weekly Editorial of A Nova Democracia.

When Luiz Inácio chooses the policy of appeasement to deal with the military crisis, he is allowing all favorable conditions to be reestablished for the military High Command to return to the offensive later on.

While investigations prove that a considerable part of the High Command of the Armed Forces and senior officials, even in minority, mobilized to consummate the military coup, president Luiz Inácio reiterated his guidance: not to promote acts or events condemning the 60th anniversary of the coup of 1964.

To prove the error of this government policy, it would be enough to mention how the reactionary sectors of the ruling classes received it. Representing the military right, the ultra-reactionary Hamilton Mourão had no doubts: “He’s right, that’s the past,” he said, referring to the military coup and the fascist military regime.

Estadão [newspaper], used to criticizing Luiz Inácio, was quick to defend him: “Lula acts correctly” by refusing to talk about the 1964 coup in its 60 years, in line with “an imperative of governability in a context of wounds waiting to heal” and “it is also a way of honoring the current military command, also architect of pacification”, he stated in the editorial “Lula’s accommodation with the military” (March 17). Speaking of wounds, it is simply pathetic that Estadão, which has already advocated for the government to reopen the Special Commission on Political Deaths and Disappearances (CEMDP), something that Luiz Inácio refuses to do, capitulates by echoing this government’s cowardly complicity.

Only the reactionary ideologues – committed above all to the continued exploitation of the people and the Nation – and the opportunists, whose mentality has been emasculated by decades of subservience and conciliation with the enemies of the popular masses, believe that appeasement will lead to the stabilization of the country.

It is not true that remembering 1964 is inappropriate. The episodes of the serious military crisis of 2022 and the 1964 coup are not wounds waiting to heal: on the other hand they are open, infected wounds, and therefore cannot heal without first undergoing painful removal of the rotted. All appeasers forget that, behind the “green chickens” prosecuted and condemned on January 8, was the High Command of the Armed Forces, especially the Army, which since 2016 began to intervene directly in national political life and state institutions, through psychological warfare operations, such as blackmail, threats and coercion against their leaders. They forget that it was this same High Command that, through speeches of the senior officers, mobilized and incited this reactionary anti-communist public opinion in its base instincts and that had started to agitate the slogan of “Military Intervention”, before Bolsonaro had the relevance he gained. They ignore that, long before Bolsonaro, it was the High Command, through active generals – the then commander of the Army, General Villas Bôas and the former military commander of the South, General Mourão –, which put institutional rupture on the agenda in the event of of “serious institutional crisis” and “social chaos” and placed the Armed Forces to act daily as a reactionary political force contrary to democratic freedoms in parliamentary, judicial and electoral discussions – which is already an intervention, as the Armed Forces impose themselves through weapons, even though their tanks only paraded along the Esplanada dos Ministérios as passing through for training in the interior of Goiás.

Even before Bolsonaro, the High Command changed the results of the elections (2018) by taking away Luiz Inácio from the race, through blackmail during a habeas corpus vote on that candidate in the Supreme Court.

As we see: long before Bolsonaro took the presidency – and independently of him – the latent wound of the coup was again manifesting itself acutely, especially because it had not been properly treated since 1988, when the previous appeasement with the gorillas and transition with the Amnesty military regime of General and Unrestricted Amnesty, led in which there was no punishment, no change in the high military officials, nor in the training curriculums, nor in the doctrine of the Armed Forces, which they followed, all these years, glorifying the 1964 coup as a legitimate movement and even as “democratic revolution”, and when it was removed from the front of management of the old State, it took back the belief that the Armed Forces were the Moderating Power and guarantors of the “Democratic State of Law” – and, therefore, also guarantors of its restriction or even suspension, as Bolsonaro shamelessly tried to do.

It is also stupid to believe, as the Estadão editorial suggests, that “the current military command” is “an architect of pacification” and, therefore, trustworthy. The pacification that these gentlemen propose is due to the fact that they find themselves in a situation of great demoralization, due to their identification with all the evil seeds of Bolsonaro’s genocidal military government of which they were part. But it doesn’t hurt to remember that the current commander of the Army, General Tomás Ribeiro Paiva, and the former commander Freire Gomes, both seen as noble democratic figures, although they did not agree with the institutional rupture at that time and publicly declared themselves as, were in the High Command throughout this period in which the Armed Forces resumed their military intervention, now through institutional channels. They, too, are irreducible in the belief that it is the role of the Armed Forces to be moderators: their difference from the Bolsonarists is that, for the former, the Armed Forces must moderate in order to prevent their division, which historical experience proves that in the face of the eminence of such a situation, their cohesion is assured by taking a position on the extreme right, or even more so, if they have the order or agreement of Uncle Sam to do so. In the current case, it was mainly this last determinant that prevailed: the Yankees vetoed and the rupture did not took place.

When Luiz Inácio chooses the policy of appeasement to deal with the military crisis, he is allowing all favorable conditions to be reestablished for the military High Command to return to the offensive later on. When the masses rise up in defense of their rights, which is inevitable, the gorillas, as the Moderating Power they believe in, will rise again threatening the Country with military intervention to save the Nation from “disintegration”. Because they were not seriously confronted when they were demoralized and weakened, the gorillas will find favorable ground for a new coup escalation.

Appeasement with the military leadership only feeds the coup!

For genuine, progressive and revolutionary democrats, as well as the popular masses in struggle, there is no other path left than to forcefully raise the campaign to denounce the 60 years of the ignominious coup of 1964 and the coup, whether in the form of institutional rupture or in the form of “Moderating Power”. Compromises with fascists and coup plotters are not acceptable – which would only lead us to coup and fascism.

PDF Content:



The text of the Rome Statute reproduced herein was originally circulated as document A/CONF.183/9 of 17 J uly 1 998 and corrected by procès-verbaux of 10 November 1998, 12 July 1999, 30 November 1999, 8 May 2000, 17 January 2001 and 16 January 2002. The amendments to article 8 reproduce the text contained in depositary notification C.N.651.2010 Treaties-6, while the amendments regarding articles 8 bis, 15 bis and 15 ter replicate the text contained in depositary notification C.N.651.2010 Treaties-8; both depositary communications are dated 29 November 2010. The table of contents is not part of the text of the Rome Statute adopted by the United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court on 17 July 1998. It has been included in this publication for ease of reference. Done at Rome on 17 July 1998, in force on 1 July 2002, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2187, No. 38544, Depositary: Secretary-General of the United Nations, http://treaties.un.org .Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPublished by the International Criminal Court ISBN No. 92-9227-232-2 ICC-PIOS-LT-03-002/15_Eng Copyright © International Criminal Court 2011 All rights reserved International Criminal Court | Po Box 19519 | 2500 CM | The Hague | The Netherlands | www.icc-cpi.int
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Table of Contents PREAMBLE 1 PART 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COURT 2 Article 1 The Court 2 Article 2 Relationship of the Court with the United Nations 2 Article 3 Seat of the Court 2 Article 4 Legal status and powers of the Court 2 PART 2. JURISDICTION, ADMISSIBILITY AND APPLICABLE LAW 3 Article 5 Crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court 3 Article 6 Genocide 3 Article 7 Crimes against humanity 3 Article 8 War crimes 4 Article 8 bis Crime of aggression 7 Article 9 Elements of Crimes 8 Article 10 8 Article 11 Jurisdiction ratione temporis 8 Article 12 Preconditions to the exercise of jurisdiction 8 Article 13 Exercise of jurisdiction 9 Article 14 Referral of a situation by a State Party 9 Article 15 Prosecutor 9 Article 15 bis Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (State referral, proprio motu ) 9 Article 15 ter Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (Security Council referral) 10 Article 16 Deferral of investigation or prosecution 10 Article 17 Issues of admissibility 10 Article 18 Preliminary rulings regarding admissibility 11 Article 19 Challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court or the admissibility of a case 12 Article 20 Ne bis in idem 1 3 Article 21 Applicable law 13 PART 3. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW 14 Article 22 Nullum crimen sine lege 14 Article 23 Nulla poena sine lege 14 Article 24 Non-retroactivity ratione personae 14 Article 25 Individual criminal responsibility 14 Article 26 Exclusion of jurisdiction over persons under eighteen 15 Article 27 Irrelevance of official capacity 15 Article 28 Responsibility of commanders and other superiors 15 Article 29 Non-applicability of statute of limitations 15 Article 30 Mental element 15 Article 31 Grounds for excluding criminal responsibility 16 Article 32 Mistake of fact or mistake of law 16 Article 33 Superior orders and prescription of law 16 PART 4. COMPOSITION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE COURT 17 Article 34 Organs of the Court 17 Article 35 Service of judges 17 Article 36 Qualifications, nomination and election of judges 17 Article 37 Judicial vacancies 19 Article 38 The Presidency 19 Article 39 Chambers 19 Article 40 Independence of the judges 20
Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 41 Excusing and disqualification of judges 20 Article 42 The Office of the Prosecutor 20 Article 44 Staff 21 Article 45 Solemn undertaking 21 Article 46 Removal from office 22 Article 47 Disciplinary measures 22 Article 48 Privileges and immunities 22 Article 49 Salaries, allowances and expenses 23 Article 50 Official and working languages 23 Article 51 Rules of Procedure and Evidence 23 Article 52 Regulations of the Court 23 PART 5. INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION 24 Article 53 Initiation of an investigation 24 Article 54 Duties and powers of the Prosecutor with respect to investigations 24 Article 55 Rights of persons during an investigation 25 Article 56 Role of the Pre-Trial Chamber in relation to a unique investigative opportunity 25 Article 57 Functions and powers of the Pre-Trial Chamber 26 Article 58 Issuance by the Pre-Trial Chamber of a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear 27 Article 59 Arrest proceedings in the custodial State 28 Article 60 Initial proceedings before the Court 28 Article 61 Confirmation of the charges before trial 28 PART 6. THE TRIAL 31 Article 62 Place of trial 31 Article 63 Trial in the presence of the accused 31 Article 64 Functions and powers of the Trial Chamber 31 Article 65 Proceedings on an admission of guilt 32 Article 66 Presumption of innocence 32 Article 67 Rights of the accused 33 Article 68 Protection of the victims and witnesses and their participation in the proceedings 33 Article 69 Evidence 34 Article 70 Offences against the administration of justice 34 Article 71 Sanctions for misconduct before the Court 35 Article 72 Protection of national security information 35 Article 73 Third-party information or documents 36 Article 74 Requirements for the decision 36 Article 75 Reparations to victims 36 Article 76 Sentencing 37 PART 7. PENALTIES 38 Article 77 Applicable penalties 38 Article 78 Determination of the sentence 38 Article 79 Trust Fund 38 Article 80 Non-prejudice to national application of penalties and national laws 38 PART 8. APPEAL AND REVISION 39 Article 81 Appeal against decision of acquittal or conviction or against sentence 39 Article 82 Appeal against other decisions 39 Article 83 Proceedings on appeal 40 Article 84 Revision of conviction or sentence 40 Article 85 Compensation to an arrested or convicted person 41
Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 9. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AND JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE 42 Article 86 General obligation to cooperate 42 Article 87 Requests for cooperation: general provisions 42 Article 88 Availability of procedures under national law 42 Article 89 Surrender of persons to the Court 42 Article 90 Competing requests 43 Article 91 Contents of request for arrest and surrender 44 Article 92 Provisional arrest 45 Article 93 Other forms of cooperation 45 Article 94 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of ongoing investigation or prosecution 47 Article 95 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of an admissibility challenge 47 Article 96 Contents of request for other forms of assistance under article 93 47 Article 97 Consultations 48 Article 98 Cooperation with respect to waiver of immunity and consent to surrender 48 Article 99 Execution of requests under articles 93 and 96 48 Article 100 Costs 49 Article 101 Rule of speciality 49 Article 102 Use of terms 49 PART 10. ENFORCEMENT 50 Article 103 Role of States in enforcement of sentences of imprisonment 50 Article 104 Change in designation of State of enforcement 50 Article 105 Enforcement of the sentence 50 Article 106 Supervision of enforcement of sentences and conditions of imprisonment 50 Article 107 Transfer of the person upon completion of sentence 51 Article 108 Limitation on the prosecution or punishment of other offences 51 Article 109 Enforcement of fines and forfeiture measures 51 Article 110 Review by the Court concerning reduction of sentence 51 Article 111 Escape 52 PART 11. ASSEMBLY OF STATES PARTIES 53 Article 112 Assembly of States Parties 53 PART 12. FINANCING 54 Article 113 Financial Regulations 54 Article 114 Payment of expenses 54 Article 115 Funds of the Court and of the Assembly of States Parties 54 Article 116 Voluntary contributions 54 Article 117 Assessment of contributions 54 Article 118 Annual audit 54 PART 13. FINAL CLAUSES 55 Article 119 Settlement of disputes 55 Article 120 Reservations 55 Article 121 Amendments 55 Article 122 Amendments to provisions of an institutional nature 55 Article 123 Review of the Statute 56 Article 124 Transitional Provision 56 Article 125 Signature, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession 56 Article 126 Entry into force 56 Article 127 Withdrawal 56 Article 128 Authentic texts 57
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
1 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPREAMBLE The States Parties to this Statute, Conscious that all peoples are united by common bonds, their cultures pieced together in a shared heritage, and concerned that this delicate mosaic may be shattered at any time, Mindful that during this century millions of children, women and men have been victims of unimaginable atrocities that deeply shock the conscience of humanity, Recognizing that such grave crimes threaten the peace, security and well-being of the world, Affirming that the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole must not go unpunished and that their effective prosecution must be ensured by taking measures at the national level and by enhancing international cooperation, Determined to put an end to impunity for the perpetrators of these crimes and thus to contribute to the prevention of such crimes, Recalling that it is the duty of every State to exercise its criminal jurisdiction over those responsible for international crimes, Reaffirming the Purposes and Principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and in particular that all States shall refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations, Emphasizing in this connection that nothing in this Statute shall be taken as authorizing any State Party to intervene in an armed conflict or in the internal affairs of any State, Determined to these ends and for the sake of present and future generations, to establish an independent permanent International Criminal Court in relationship with the United Nations system, with jurisdiction over the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole, Emphasizing that the International Criminal Court established under this Statute shall be complementary to national criminal jurisdictions, Resolved to guarantee lasting respect for and the enforcement of international justice, Have agreed as follows:
2 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COURT Article 1 The Court An International Criminal Court ("the Court") is hereby established. It shall be a permanent institution and shall have the power to exercise its jurisdiction over persons for the most serious crimes of international concern, as referred to in this Statute, and shall be complementary to national criminal jurisdictions. The jurisdiction and functioning of the Court shall be governed by the provisions of this Statute. Article 2 Relationship of the Court with the United Nations The Court shall be brought into relationship with the United Nations through an agreement to be approved by the Assembly of States Parties to this Statute and thereafter concluded by the President of the Court on its behalf. Article 3 Seat of the Court 1. The seat of the Court shall be established at The Hague in the Netherlands ("the host State"). 2. The Court shall enter into a headquarters agreement with the host State, to be approved by the Assembly of States Parties and thereafter concluded by the President of the Court on its behalf. 3. The Court may sit elsewhere, whenever it considers it desirable, as provided in this Statute. Article 4 Legal status and powers of the Court 1. The Court shall have international legal personality. It shall also have such legal capacity as may be necessary for the exercise of its functions and the fulfilment of its purposes. 2. The Court may exercise its functions and powers, as provided in this Statute, on the territory of any State Party and, by special agreement, on the territory of any other State.
3 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 2. JURISDICTION, ADMISSIBILITY AND APPLICABLE LAW Article 51 Crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court The jurisdiction of the Court shall be limited to the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole. The Court has jurisdiction in accordance with this Statute with respect to the following crimes: (a) The crime of genocide; (b) Crimes against humanity; (c) War crimes; (d) The crime of aggression. Article 6 Genocide For the purpose of this Statute, "genocide" means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. Article 7 Crimes against humanity 1. For the purpose of this Statute, "crime against humanity" means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack: (a) Murder; (b) Extermination; (c) Enslavement; (d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population; (e) Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law; (f) Torture; (g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity; (h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; (i) Enforced disappearance of persons; (j) The crime of apartheid; (k) Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health. 1 Paragraph 2 of article 5 (“The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression once a provision is adopted in accordance with articles 121 and 123 defining the crime and setting out the conditions under which the Court shall exercise jurisdiction with respect to this crime. Such a provision shall be consistent with the relevant provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.”) was deleted in accordance with RC/Res.6, annex I, of 11 June 2010.
4 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. For the purpose of paragraph 1: (a) "Attack directed against any civilian population" means a course of conduct involving the multiple commission of acts referred to in paragraph 1 against any civilian population, pursuant to or in furtherance of a State or organizational policy to commit such attack; (b) "Extermination" includes the intentional infliction of conditions of life, inter alia the deprivation of access to food and medicine, calculated to bring about the destruction of part of a population; (c) "Enslavement" means the exercise of any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership over a person and includes the exercise of such power in the course of trafficking in persons, in particular women and children; (d) "Deportation or forcible transfer of population" means forced displacement of the persons concerned by expulsion or other coercive acts from the area in which they are lawfully present, without grounds permitted under international law; (e) "Torture" means the intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, upon a person in the custody or under the control of the accused; except that torture shall not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions; (f) "Forced pregnancy" means the unlawful confinement of a woman forcibly made pregnant, with the intent of affecting the ethnic composition of any population or carrying out other grave violations of international law. This definition shall not in any way be interpreted as affecting national laws relating to pregnancy; (g) "Persecution" means the intentional and severe deprivation of fundamental rights contrary to international law by reason of the identity of the group or collectivity; (h) "The crime of apartheid" means inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime; (i) "Enforced disappearance of persons" means the arrest, detention or abduction of persons by, or with the authorization, support or acquiescence of, a State or a political organization, followed by a refusal to acknowledge that deprivation of freedom or to give information on the fate or whereabouts of those persons, with the intention of removing them from the protection of the law for a prolonged period of time. 3. For the purpose of this Statute, it is understood that the term "gender" refers to the two sexes, male and female, within the context of society. The term "gender" does not indicate any meaning different from the above. Article 82 War crimes 1. The Court shall have jurisdiction in respect of war crimes in particular when committed as part of a plan or policy or as part of a large-scale commission of such crimes. 2. For the purpose of this Statute, "war crimes" means: (a) Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention: (i) Wilful killing; (ii) Torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments; (iii) Wilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health; (iv) Extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly; (v) Compelling a prisoner of war or other protected person to serve in the forces of a hostile Power; (vi) Wilfully depriving a prisoner of war or other protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial; 2 Paragraphs 2 (e) (xiii) to 2 (e) (xv) were amended by resolution RC/Res.5 of 11 June 2010 (adding paragraphs 2 (e) (xiii) to 2 (e) (xv)).
5 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(vii) Unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement; (viii) Taking of hostages. (b) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts: (i) Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities; (ii) Intentionally directing attacks against civilian objects, that is, objects which are not military objectives; (iii) Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict; (iv) Intentionally launching an attack in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated; (v) Attacking or bombarding, by whatever means, towns, villages, dwellings or buildings which are undefended and which are not military objectives; (vi) Killing or wounding a combatant who, having laid down his arms or having no longer means of defence, has surrendered at discretion; (vii) Making improper use of a flag of truce, of the flag or of the military insignia and uniform of the enemy or of the United Nations, as well as of the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions, resulting in death or serious personal injury; (viii) The transfer, directly or indirectly, by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies, or the deportation or transfer of all or parts of the population of the occupied territory within or outside this territory; (ix) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military objectives; (x) Subjecting persons who are in the power of an adverse party to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons; (xi) Killing or wounding treacherously individuals belonging to the hostile nation or army; (xii) Declaring that no quarter will be given; (xiii) Destroying or seizing the enemy's property unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war; (xiv) Declaring abolished, suspended or inadmissible in a court of law the rights and actions of the nationals of the hostile party; (xv) Compelling the nationals of the hostile party to take part in the operations of war directed against their own country, even if they were in the belligerent's service before the commencement of the war; (xvi) Pillaging a town or place, even when taken by assault; (xvii) Employing poison or poisoned weapons; (xviii) Employing asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and all analogous liquids, materials or devices;
6 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(xix) Employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions; (xx) Employing weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare which are of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering or which are inherently indiscriminate in violation of the international law of armed conflict, provided that such weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare are the subject of a comprehensive prohibition and are included in an annex to this Statute, by an amendment in accordance with the relevant provisions set forth in articles 121 and 123; (xxi) Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (xxii) Committing rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, as defined in article 7, paragraph 2 (f), enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence also constituting a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions; (xxiii) Utilizing the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas or military forces immune from military operations; (xxiv) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings, material, medical units and transport, and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions in conformity with international law; (xxv) Intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions; (xxvi) Conscripting or enlisting children under the age of fifteen years into the national armed forces or using them to participate actively in hostilities. (c) In the case of an armed conflict not of an international character, serious violations of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts committed against persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention or any other cause: (i) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; (ii) Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (iii) Taking of hostages; (iv) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgement pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all judicial guarantees which are generally recognized as indispensable. (d) Paragraph 2 (c) applies to armed conflicts not of an international character and thus does not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence or other acts of a similar nature. (e) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in armed conflicts not of an international character, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts: (i) Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities; (ii) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings, material, medical units and transport, and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions in conformity with international law; (iii) Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict; (iv) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military objectives; (v) Pillaging a town or place, even when taken by assault;
7 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(vi) Committing rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, as defined in article 7, paragraph 2 (f), enforced sterilization, and any other form of sexual violence also constituting a serious violation of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions; (vii) Conscripting or enlisting children under the age of fifteen years into armed forces or groups or using them to participate actively in hostilities; (viii) Ordering the displacement of the civilian population for reasons related to the conflict, unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand; (ix) Killing or wounding treacherously a combatant adversary; (x) Declaring that no quarter will be given; (xi) Subjecting persons who are in the power of another party to the conflict to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons; (xii) Destroying or seizing the property of an adversary unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of the conflict; (xiii) Employing poison or poisoned weapons; (xiv) Employing asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and all analogous liquids, materials or devices; (xv) Employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions. (f) Paragraph 2 (e) applies to armed conflicts not of an international character and thus does not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence or other acts of a similar nature. It applies to armed conflicts that take place in the territory of a State when there is protracted armed conflict between governmental authorities and organized armed groups or between such groups. 3. Nothing in paragraph 2 (c) and (e) shall affect the responsibility of a Government to maintain or re- establish law and order in the State or to defend the unity and territorial integrity of the State, by all legitimate means. Article 8 bis3 Crime of aggression 1. For the purpose of this Statute, “crime of aggression” means the planning, preparation, initiation or execution, by a person in a position effectively to exercise control over or to direct the political or military action of a State, of an act of aggression which, by its character, gravity and scale, constitutes a manifest violation of the Charter of the United Nations. 2. For the purpose of paragraph 1, “act of aggression” means the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations. Any of the following acts, regardless of a declaration of war, shall, in accordance with United Nations General Assembly resolution 3314 (XXIX) of 14 December 1974, qualify as an act of aggression: (a) The invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another State, or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such invasion or attack, or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State or part thereof; (b) Bombardment by the armed forces of a State against the territory of another State or the use of any weapons by a State against the territory of another State; (c) The blockade of the ports or coasts of a State by the armed forces of another State; (d) An attack by the armed forces of a State on the land, sea or air forces, or marine and air fleets of another State; 3 Inserted by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010.
8 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(e) The use of armed forces of one State which are within the territory of another State with the agreement of the receiving State, in contravention of the conditions provided for in the agreement or any extension of their presence in such territory beyond the termination of the agreement; (f) The action of a State in allowing its territory, which it has placed at the disposal of another State, to be used by that other State for perpetrating an act of aggression against a third State; (g) The sending by or on behalf of a State of armed bands, groups, irregulars or mercenaries, which carry out acts of armed force against another State of such gravity as to amount to the acts listed above, or its substantial involvement therein. Article 94 Elements of Crimes 1. Elements of Crimes shall assist the Court in the interpretation and application of articles 6, 7, 8 and 8 bis. They shall be adopted by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 2. Amendments to the Elements of Crimes may be proposed by: (a) Any State Party; (b) The judges acting by an absolute majority; (c) The Prosecutor. Such amendments shall be adopted by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 3. The Elements of Crimes and amendments thereto shall be consistent with this Statute. Article 10 Nothing in this Part shall be interpreted as limiting or prejudicing in any way existing or developing rules of international law for purposes other than this Statute. Article 11 Jurisdiction ratione temporis 1. The Court has jurisdiction only with respect to crimes committed after the entry into force of this Statute. 2. If a State becomes a Party to this Statute after its entry into force, the Court may exercise its jurisdiction only with respect to crimes committed after the entry into force of this Statute for that State, unless that State has made a declaration under article 12, paragraph 3. Article 12 Preconditions to the exercise of jurisdiction 1. A State which becomes a Party to this Statute thereby accepts the jurisdiction of the Court with respect to the crimes referred to in article 5. 2. In the case of article 13, paragraph (a) or (c), the Court may exercise its jurisdiction if one or more of the following States are Parties to this Statute or have accepted the jurisdiction of the Court in accordance with paragraph 3: (a) The State on the territory of which the conduct in question occurred or, if the crime was committed on board a vessel or aircraft, the State of registration of that vessel or aircraft; (b) The State of which the person accused of the crime is a national. 3. If the acceptance of a State which is not a Party to this Statute is required under paragraph 2, that State may, by declaration lodged with the Registrar, accept the exercise of jurisdiction by the Court with respect to the crime in question. The accepting State shall cooperate with the Court without any delay or exception in accordance with Part 9. 4 As amended by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010 (inserting the reference to article 8 bis).
9 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 13 Exercise of jurisdiction The Court may exercise its jurisdiction with respect to a crime referred to in article 5 in accordance with the provisions of this Statute if: (a) A situation in which one or more of such crimes appears to have been committed is referred to the Prosecutor by a State Party in accordance with article 14; (b) A situation in which one or more of such crimes appears to have been committed is referred to the Prosecutor by the Security Council acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations; or (c) The Prosecutor has initiated an investigation in respect of such a crime in accordance with article 15. Article 14 Referral of a situation by a State Party 1. A State Party may refer to the Prosecutor a situation in which one or more crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court appear to have been committed requesting the Prosecutor to investigate the situation for the purpose of determining whether one or more specific persons should be charged with the commission of such crimes. 2. As far as possible, a referral shall specify the relevant circumstances and be accompanied by such supporting documentation as is available to the State referring the situation. Article 15 Prosecutor 1. The Prosecutor may initiate investigations proprio motu on the basis of information on crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. 2. The Prosecutor shall analyse the seriousness of the information received. For this purpose, he or she may seek additional information from States, organs of the United Nations, intergovernmental or non- governmental organizations, or other reliable sources that he or she deems appropriate, and may receive written or oral testimony at the seat of the Court. 3. If the Prosecutor concludes that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation, he or she shall submit to the Pre-Trial Chamber a request for authorization of an investigation, together with any supporting material collected. Victims may make representations to the Pre-Trial Chamber, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. If the Pre-Trial Chamber, upon examination of the request and the supporting material, considers that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation, and that the case appears to fall within the jurisdiction of the Court, it shall authorize the commencement of the investigation, without prejudice to subsequent determinations by the Court with regard to the jurisdiction and admissibility of a case. 5. The refusal of the Pre-Trial Chamber to authorize the investigation shall not preclude the presentation of a subsequent request by the Prosecutor based on new facts or evidence regarding the same situation. 6. If, after the preliminary examination referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, the Prosecutor concludes that the information provided does not constitute a reasonable basis for an investigation, he or she shall inform those who provided the information. This shall not preclude the Prosecutor from considering further information submitted to him or her regarding the same situation in the light of new facts or evidence. Article 15 bis5 Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (State referral, proprio motu ) 1. The Court may exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with article 13, paragraphs (a) and (c), subject to the provisions of this article. 2. The Court may exercise jurisdiction only with respect to crimes of aggression committed one year after the ratification or acceptance of the amendments by thirty States Parties. 3. The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with this article, subject to a decision to be taken after 1 January 2017 by the same majority of States Parties as is required for the adoption of an amendment to the Statute. 5 Inserted by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010.
10 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court4. The Court may, in accordance with article 12, exercise jurisdiction over a crime of aggression, arising from an act of aggression committed by a State Party, unless that State Party has previously declared that it does not accept such jurisdiction by lodging a declaration with the Registrar. The withdrawal of such a declaration may be effected at any time and shall be considered by the State Party within three years. 5. In respect of a State that is not a party to this Statute, the Court shall not exercise its jurisdiction over the crime of aggression when committed by that State’s nationals or on its territory. 6. Where the Prosecutor concludes that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation in respect of a crime of aggression, he or she shall first ascertain whether the Security Council has made a determination of an act of aggression committed by the State concerned. The Prosecutor shall notify the Secretary-General of the United Nations of the situation before the Court, including any relevant information and documents. 7. Where the Security Council has made such a determination, the Prosecutor may proceed with the investigation in respect of a crime of aggression. 8. Where no such determination is made within six months after the date of notification, the Prosecutor may proceed with the investigation in respect of a crime of aggression, provided that the Pre-Trial Division has authorized the commencement of the investigation in respect of a crime of aggression in accordance with the procedure contained in article 15, and the Security Council has not decided otherwise in accordance with article16. 9. A determination of an act of aggression by an organ outside the Court shall be without prejudice to the Court’s own findings under this Statute. 10. This article is without prejudice to the provisions relating to the exercise of jurisdiction with respect to other crimes referred to in article 5. Article 15 ter6 Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (Security Council referral) 1. The Court may exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with article 13, paragraph (b), subject to the provisions of this article. 2. The Court may exercise jurisdiction only with respect to crimes of aggression committed one year after the ratification or acceptance of the amendments by thirty States Parties. 3. The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with this article, subject to a decision to be taken after 1 January 2017 by the same majority of States Parties as is required for the adoption of an amendment to the Statute. 4. A determination of an act of aggression by an organ outside the Court shall be without prejudice to the Court’s own findings under this Statute. 5. This article is without prejudice to the provisions relating to the exercise of jurisdiction with respect to other crimes referred to in article 5. Article 16 Deferral of investigation or prosecution No investigation or prosecution may be commenced or proceeded with under this Statute for a period of 12 months after the Security Council, in a resolution adopted under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, has requested the Court to that effect; that request may be renewed by the Council under the same conditions. Article 17 Issues of admissibility 1. Having regard to paragraph 10 of the Preamble and article 1, the Court shall determine that a case is inadmissible where: (a) The case is being investigated or prosecuted by a State which has jurisdiction over it, unless the State is unwilling or unable genuinely to carry out the investigation or prosecution; 6 Inserted by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010.
11 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) The case has been investigated by a State which has jurisdiction over it and the State has decided not to prosecute the person concerned, unless the decision resulted from the unwillingness or inability of the State genuinely to prosecute; (c) The person concerned has already been tried for conduct which is the subject of the complaint, and a trial by the Court is not permitted under article 20, paragraph 3; (d) The case is not of sufficient gravity to justify further action by the Court. 2. In order to determine unwillingness in a particular case, the Court shall consider, having regard to the principles of due process recognized by international law, whether one or more of the following exist, as applicable: (a) The proceedings were or are being undertaken or the national decision was made for the purpose of shielding the person concerned from criminal responsibility for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court referred to in article 5; (b) There has been an unjustified delay in the proceedings which in the circumstances is inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice; (c) The proceedings were not or are not being conducted independently or impartially, and they were or are being conducted in a manner which, in the circumstances, is inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice. 3. In order to determine inability in a particular case, the Court shall consider whether, due to a total or substantial collapse or unavailability of its national judicial system, the State is unable to obtain the accused or the necessary evidence and testimony or otherwise unable to carry out its proceedings. Article 18 Preliminary rulings regarding admissibility 1. When a situation has been referred to the Court pursuant to article 13 (a) and the Prosecutor has determined that there would be a reasonable basis to commence an investigation, or the Prosecutor initiates an investigation pursuant to articles 13 (c) and 15, the Prosecutor shall notify all States Parties and those States which, taking into account the information available, would normally exercise jurisdiction over the crimes concerned. The Prosecutor may notify such States on a confidential basis and, where the Prosecutor believes it necessary to protect persons, prevent destruction of evidence or prevent the absconding of persons, may limit the scope of the information provided to States. 2. Within one month of receipt of that notification, a State may inform the Court that it is investigating or has investigated its nationals or others within its jurisdiction with respect to criminal acts which may constitute crimes referred to in article 5 and which relate to the information provided in the notification to States. At the request of that State, the Prosecutor shall defer to the State's investigation of those persons unless the Pre-Trial Chamber, on the application of the Prosecutor, decides to authorize the investigation. 3. The Prosecutor's deferral to a State's investigation shall be open to review by the Prosecutor six months after the date of deferral or at any time when there has been a significant change of circumstances based on the State's unwillingness or inability genuinely to carry out the investigation. 4. The State concerned or the Prosecutor may appeal to the Appeals Chamber against a ruling of the Pre-Trial Chamber, in accordance with article 82. The appeal may be heard on an expedited basis. 5. When the Prosecutor has deferred an investigation in accordance with paragraph 2, the Prosecutor may request that the State concerned periodically inform the Prosecutor of the progress of its investigations and any subsequent prosecutions. States Parties shall respond to such requests without undue delay. 6. Pending a ruling by the Pre-Trial Chamber, or at any time when the Prosecutor has deferred an investigation under this article, the Prosecutor may, on an exceptional basis, seek authority from the Pre-Trial Chamber to pursue necessary investigative steps for the purpose of preserving evidence where there is a unique opportunity to obtain important evidence or there is a significant risk that such evidence may not be subsequently available. 7. A State which has challenged a ruling of the Pre-Trial Chamber under this article may challenge the admissibility of a case under article 19 on the grounds of additional significant facts or significant change of circumstances.
12 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 19 Challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court or the admissibility of a case 1. The Court shall satisfy itself that it has jurisdiction in any case brought before it. The Court may, on its own motion, determine the admissibility of a case in accordance with article 17. 2. Challenges to the admissibility of a case on the grounds referred to in article 17 or challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court may be made by: (a) An accused or a person for whom a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear has been issued under article 58; (b) A State which has jurisdiction over a case, on the ground that it is investigating or prosecuting the case or has investigated or prosecuted; or (c) A State from which acceptance of jurisdiction is required under article 12. 3. The Prosecutor may seek a ruling from the Court regarding a question of jurisdiction or admissibility. In proceedings with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility, those who have referred the situation under article 13, as well as victims, may also submit observations to the Court. 4. The admissibility of a case or the jurisdiction of the Court may be challenged only once by any person or State referred to in paragraph 2. The challenge shall take place prior to or at the commencement of the trial. In exceptional circumstances, the Court may grant leave for a challenge to be brought more than once or at a time later than the commencement of the trial. Challenges to the admissibility of a case, at the commencement of a trial, or subsequently with the leave of the Court, may be based only on article 17, paragraph 1 (c). 5. A State referred to in paragraph 2 (b) and (c) shall make a challenge at the earliest opportunity. 6. Prior to the confirmation of the charges, challenges to the admissibility of a case or challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court shall be referred to the Pre-Trial Chamber. After confirmation of the charges, they shall be referred to the Trial Chamber. Decisions with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility may be appealed to the Appeals Chamber in accordance with article 82. 7. If a challenge is made by a State referred to in paragraph 2 (b) or (c), the Prosecutor shall suspend the investigation until such time as the Court makes a determination in accordance with article 17. 8. Pending a ruling by the Court, the Prosecutor may seek authority from the Court: (a) To pursue necessary investigative steps of the kind referred to in article 18, paragraph 6; (b) To take a statement or testimony from a witness or complete the collection and examination of evidence which had begun prior to the making of the challenge; and (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. 9. The making of a challenge shall not affect the validity of any act performed by the Prosecutor or any order or warrant issued by the Court prior to the making of the challenge. 10. If the Court has decided that a case is inadmissible under article 17, the Prosecutor may submit a request for a review of the decision when he or she is fully satisfied that new facts have arisen which negate the basis on which the case had previously been found inadmissible under article 17. 11. If the Prosecutor, having regard to the matters referred to in article 17, defers an investigation, the Prosecutor may request that the relevant State make available to the Prosecutor information on the proceedings. That information shall, at the request of the State concerned, be confidential. If the Prosecutor thereafter decides to proceed with an investigation, he or she shall notify the State to which deferral of the proceedings has taken place.
13 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 207 Ne bis in idem 1. Except as provided in this Statute, no person shall be tried before the Court with respect to conduct which formed the basis of crimes for which the person has been convicted or acquitted by the Court. 2. No person shall be tried by another court for a crime referred to in article 5 for which that person has already been convicted or acquitted by the Court. 3. No person who has been tried by another court for conduct also proscribed under article 6, 7, 8 or 8 bis shall be tried by the Court with respect to the same conduct unless the proceedings in the other court: (a) Were for the purpose of shielding the person concerned from criminal responsibility for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court; or (b) Otherwise were not conducted independently or impartially in accordance with the norms of due process recognized by international law and were conducted in a manner which, in the circumstances, was inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice. Article 21 Applicable law 1. The Court shall apply: (a) In the first place, this Statute, Elements of Crimes and its Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (b) In the second place, where appropriate, applicable treaties and the principles and rules of international law, including the established principles of the international law of armed conflict; (c) Failing that, general principles of law derived by the Court from national laws of legal systems of the world including, as appropriate, the national laws of States that would normally exercise jurisdiction over the crime, provided that those principles are not inconsistent with this Statute and with international law and internationally recognized norms and standards. 2. The Court may apply principles and rules of law as interpreted in its previous decisions. 3. The application and interpretation of law pursuant to this article must be consistent with internationally recognized human rights, and be without any adverse distinction founded on grounds such as gender as defined in article 7, paragraph 3, age, race, colour, language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, wealth, birth or other status. 7 As amended by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010 (inserting the reference to article 8 bis).
14 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 3. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW Article 22 Nullum crimen sine lege 1. A person shall not be criminally responsible under this Statute unless the conduct in question constitutes, at the time it takes place, a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court. 2. The definition of a crime shall be strictly construed and shall not be extended by analogy. In case of ambiguity, the definition shall be interpreted in favour of the person being investigated, prosecuted or convicted. 3. This article shall not affect the characterization of any conduct as criminal under international law independently of this Statute. Article 23 Nulla poena sine leg e A person convicted by the Court may be punished only in accordance with this Statute. Article 24 Non-retroactivity ratione personae 1. No person shall be criminally responsible under this Statute for conduct prior to the entry into force of the Statute. 2. In the event of a change in the law applicable to a given case prior to a final judgement, the law more favourable to the person being investigated, prosecuted or convicted shall apply. Article 258 Individual criminal responsibility 1. The Court shall have jurisdiction over natural persons pursuant to this Statute. 2. A person who commits a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court shall be individually responsible and liable for punishment in accordance with this Statute. 3. In accordance with this Statute, a person shall be criminally responsible and liable for punishment for a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court if that person: (a) Commits such a crime, whether as an individual, jointly with another or through another person, regardless of whether that other person is criminally responsible; (b) Orders, solicits or induces the commission of such a crime which in fact occurs or is attempted; (c) For the purpose of facilitating the commission of such a crime, aids, abets or otherwise assists in its commission or its attempted commission, including providing the means for its commission; (d) In any other way contributes to the commission or attempted commission of such a crime by a group of persons acting with a common purpose. Such contribution shall be intentional and shall either: (i) Be made with the aim of furthering the criminal activity or criminal purpose of the group, where such activity or purpose involves the commission of a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; or (ii) Be made in the knowledge of the intention of the group to commit the crime; (e) In respect of the crime of genocide, directly and publicly incites others to commit genocide; (f) Attempts to commit such a crime by taking action that commences its execution by means of a substantial step, but the crime does not occur because of circumstances independent of the person's intentions. However, a person who abandons the effort to commit the crime or otherwise prevents the completion of the crime shall not be liable for punishment under this Statute for the attempt to commit that crime if that person completely and voluntarily gave up the criminal purpose. 8 As amended by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010 (adding paragraph 3 bis).
15 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3 bis. In respect of the crime of aggression, the provisions of this article shall apply only to persons in a position effectively to exercise control over or to direct the political or military action of a State. 4. No provision in this Statute relating to individual criminal responsibility shall affect the responsibility of States under international law. Article 26 Exclusion of jurisdiction over persons under eighteen The Court shall have no jurisdiction over any person who was under the age of 18 at the time of the alleged commission of a crime. Article 27 Irrelevance of official capacity 1. This Statute shall apply equally to all persons without any distinction based on official capacity. In particular, official capacity as a Head of State or Government, a member of a Government or parliament, an elected representative or a government official shall in no case exempt a person from criminal responsibility under this Statute, nor shall it, in and of itself, constitute a ground for reduction of sentence. 2. Immunities or special procedural rules which may attach to the official capacity of a person, whether under national or international law, shall not bar the Court from exercising its jurisdiction over such a person. Article 28 Responsibility of commanders and other superiors In addition to other grounds of criminal responsibility under this Statute for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court: (a) A military commander or person effectively acting as a military commander shall be criminally responsible for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court committed by forces under his or her effective command and control, or effective authority and control as the case may be, as a result of his or her failure to exercise control properly over such forces, where: (i) That military commander or person either knew or, owing to the circumstances at the time, should have known that the forces were committing or about to commit such crimes; and (ii) That military commander or person failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power to prevent or repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecution. (b) With respect to superior and subordinate relationships not described in paragraph (a), a superior shall be criminally responsible for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court committed by subordinates under his or her effective authority and control, as a result of his or her failure to exercise control properly over such subordinates, where: (i) The superior either knew, or consciously disregarded information which clearly indicated, that the subordinates were committing or about to commit such crimes; (ii) The crimes concerned activities that were within the effective responsibility and control of the superior; and (iii) The superior failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power to prevent or repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecution. Article 29 Non-applicability of statute of limitations The crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court shall not be subject to any statute of limitations. Article 30 Mental element 1. Unless otherwise provided, a person shall be criminally responsible and liable for punishment for a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court only if the material elements are committed with intent and knowledge. 2. For the purposes of this article, a person has intent where: (a) In relation to conduct, that person means to engage in the conduct;
16 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) In relation to a consequence, that person means to cause that consequence or is aware that it will occur in the ordinary course of events. 3. For the purposes of this article, "knowledge" means awareness that a circumstance exists or a consequence will occur in the ordinary course of events. "Know" and "knowingly" shall be construed accordingly. Article 31 Grounds for excluding criminal responsibility 1. In addition to other grounds for excluding criminal responsibility provided for in this Statute, a person shall not be criminally responsible if, at the time of that person's conduct: (a) The person suffers from a mental disease or defect that destroys that person's capacity to appreciate the unlawfulness or nature of his or her conduct, or capacity to control his or her conduct to conform to the requirements of law; (b) The person is in a state of intoxication that destroys that person's capacity to appreciate the unlawfulness or nature of his or her conduct, or capacity to control his or her conduct to conform to the requirements of law, unless the person has become voluntarily intoxicated under such circumstances that the person knew, or disregarded the risk, that, as a result of the intoxication, he or she was likely to engage in conduct constituting a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; (c) The person acts reasonably to defend himself or herself or another person or, in the case of war crimes, property which is essential for the survival of the person or another person or property which is essential for accomplishing a military mission, against an imminent and unlawful use of force in a manner proportionate to the degree of danger to the person or the other person or property protected. The fact that the person was involved in a defensive operation conducted by forces shall not in itself constitute a ground for excluding criminal responsibility under this subparagraph; (d) The conduct which is alleged to constitute a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been caused by duress resulting from a threat of imminent death or of continuing or imminent serious bodily harm against that person or another person, and the person acts necessarily and reasonably to avoid this threat, provided that the person does not intend to cause a greater harm than the one sought to be avoided. Such a threat may either be: (i) Made by other persons; or (ii) Constituted by other circumstances beyond that person's control. 2. The Court shall determine the applicability of the grounds for excluding criminal responsibility provided for in this Statute to the case before it. 3. At trial, the Court may consider a ground for excluding criminal responsibility other than those referred to in paragraph 1 where such a ground is derived from applicable law as set forth in article 21. The procedures relating to the consideration of such a ground shall be provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 32 Mistake of fact or mistake of law 1. A mistake of fact shall be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility only if it negates the mental element required by the crime. 2. A mistake of law as to whether a particular type of conduct is a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court shall not be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility. A mistake of law may, however, be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility if it negates the mental element required by such a crime, or as provided for in article 33. Article 33 Superior orders and prescription of law 1. The fact that a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been committed by a person pursuant to an order of a Government or of a superior, whether military or civilian, shall not relieve that person of criminal responsibility unless: (a) The person was under a legal obligation to obey orders of the Government or the superior in question; (b) The person did not know that the order was unlawful; and (c) The order was not manifestly unlawful. 2. For the purposes of this article, orders to commit genocide or crimes against humanity are manifestly unlawful.
17 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 4. COMPOSITION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE COURT Article 34 Organs of the Court The Court shall be composed of the following organs: (a) The Presidency; (b) An Appeals Division, a Trial Division and a Pre-Trial Division; (c) The Office of the Prosecutor; (d) The Registry. Article 35 Service of judges 1. All judges shall be elected as full-time members of the Court and shall be available to serve on that basis from the commencement of their terms of office. 2. The judges composing the Presidency shall serve on a full-time basis as soon as they are elected. 3. The Presidency may, on the basis of the workload of the Court and in consultation with its members, decide from time to time to what extent the remaining judges shall be required to serve on a full-time basis. Any such arrangement shall be without prejudice to the provisions of article 40. 4. The financial arrangements for judges not required to serve on a full-time basis shall be made in accordance with article 49. Article 36 Qualifications, nomination and election of judges 1. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2, there shall be 18 judges of the Court. 2. (a) The Presidency, acting on behalf of the Court, may propose an increase in the number of judges specified in paragraph 1, indicating the reasons why this is considered necessary and appropriate The Registrar shall promptly circulate any such proposal to all States Parties. (b) Any such proposal shall then be considered at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties to be convened in accordance with article 112. The proposal shall be considered adopted if approved at the meeting by a vote of two thirds of the members of the Assembly of States Parties and shall enter into force at such time as decided by the Assembly of States Parties. (c) (i) Once a proposal for an increase in the number of judges has been adopted under subparagraph (b), the election of the additional judges shall take place at the next session of the Assembly of States Parties in accordance with paragraphs 3 to 8, and article 37, paragraph 2; (ii) Once a proposal for an increase in the number of judges has been adopted and brought into effect under subparagraphs (b) and (c) (i), it shall be open to the Presidency at any time thereafter, if the workload of the Court justifies it, to propose a reduction in the number of judges, provided that the number of judges shall not be reduced below that specified in paragraph 1. The proposal shall be dealt with in accordance with the procedure laid down in subparagraphs (a) and (b). In the event that the proposal is adopted, the number of judges shall be progressively decreased as the terms of office of serving judges expire, until the necessary number has been reached. 3. (a) The judges shall be chosen from among persons of high moral character, impartiality and integrity who possess the qualifications required in their respective States for appointment to the highest judicial offices. (b) Every candidate for election to the Court shall: (i) Have established competence in criminal law and procedure, and the necessary relevant experience, whether as judge, prosecutor, advocate or in other similar capacity, in criminal proceedings; or (ii) Have established competence in relevant areas of international law such as international humanitarian law and the law of human rights, and extensive experience in a professional legal capacity which is of relevance to the judicial work of the Court;
18 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(c) Every candidate for election to the Court shall have an excellent knowledge of and be fluent in at least one of the working languages of the Court. 4. (a) Nominations of candidates for election to the Court may be made by any State Party to this Statute, and shall be made either: (i) By the procedure for the nomination of candidates for appointment to the highest judicial offices in the State in question; or (ii) By the procedure provided for the nomination of candidates for the International Court of Justice in the Statute of that Court. Nominations shall be accompanied by a statement in the necessary detail specifying how the candidate fulfils the requirements of paragraph 3. (b) Each State Party may put forward one candidate for any given election who need not necessarily be a national of that State Party but shall in any case be a national of a State Party. (c) The Assembly of States Parties may decide to establish, if appropriate, an Advisory Committee on nominations. In that event, the Committee's composition and mandate shall be established by the Assembly of States Parties. 5. For the purposes of the election, there shall be two lists of candidates: List A containing the names of candidates with the qualifications specified in paragraph 3 (b) (i); and List B containing the names of candidates with the qualifications specified in paragraph 3 (b) (ii). A candidate with sufficient qualifications for both lists may choose on which list to appear. At the first election to the Court, at least nine judges shall be elected from list A and at least five judges from list B. Subsequent elections shall be so organized as to maintain the equivalent proportion on the Court of judges qualified on the two lists. 6. (a) The judges shall be elected by secret ballot at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties convened for that purpose under article 112. Subject to paragraph 7, the persons elected to the Court shall be the 18 candidates who obtain the highest number of votes and a two-thirds majority of the States Parties present and voting. (b) In the event that a sufficient number of judges is not elected on the first ballot, successive ballots shall be held in accordance with the procedures laid down in subparagraph (a) until the remaining places have been filled. 7. No two judges may be nationals of the same State. A person who, for the purposes of membership of the Court, could be regarded as a national of more than one State shall be deemed to be a national of the State in which that person ordinarily exercises civil and political rights. 8. (a) The States Parties shall, in the selection of judges, take into account the need, within the membership of the Court, for: (i) The representation of the principal legal systems of the world; (ii) Equitable geographical representation; and (iii) A fair representation of female and male judges. (b) States Parties shall also take into account the need to include judges with legal expertise on specific issues, including, but not limited to, violence against women or children. 9. (a) Subject to subparagraph (b), judges shall hold office for a term of nine years and, subject to subparagraph (c) and to article 37, paragraph 2, shall not be eligible for re-election. (b) At the first election, one third of the judges elected shall be selected by lot to serve for a term of three years; one third of the judges elected shall be selected by lot to serve for a term of six years; and the remainder shall serve for a term of nine years. (c) A judge who is selected to serve for a term of three years under subparagraph (b) shall be eligible for re-election for a full term. 10. Notwithstanding paragraph 9, a judge assigned to a Trial or Appeals Chamber in accordance with article 39 shall continue in office to complete any trial or appeal the hearing of which has already commenced before that Chamber.
19 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 37 Judicial vacancies 1. In the event of a vacancy, an election shall be held in accordance with article 36 to fill the vacancy. 2. A judge elected to fill a vacancy shall serve for the remainder of the predecessor's term and, if that period is three years or less, shall be eligible for re-election for a full term under article 36. Article 38 The Presidency 1. The President and the First and Second Vice-Presidents shall be elected by an absolute majority of the judges. They shall each serve for a term of three years or until the end of their respective terms of office as judges, whichever expires earlier. They shall be eligible for re-election once. 2. The First Vice-President shall act in place of the President in the event that the President is unavailable or disqualified. The Second Vice-President shall act in place of the President in the event that both the President and the First Vice-President are unavailable or disqualified. 3. The President, together with the First and Second Vice-Presidents, shall constitute the Presidency, which shall be responsible for: (a) The proper administration of the Court, with the exception of the Office of the Prosecutor; and (b) The other functions conferred upon it in accordance with this Statute. 4. In discharging its responsibility under paragraph 3 (a), the Presidency shall coordinate with and seek the concurrence of the Prosecutor on all matters of mutual concern. Article 39 Chambers 1. As soon as possible after the election of the judges, the Court shall organize itself into the divisions specified in article 34, paragraph (b). The Appeals Division shall be composed of the President and four other judges, the Trial Division of not less than six judges and the Pre-Trial Division of not less than six judges. The assignment of judges to divisions shall be based on the nature of the functions to be performed by each division and the qualifications and experience of the judges elected to the Court, in such a way that each division shall contain an appropriate combination of expertise in criminal law and procedure and in international law. The Trial and Pre-Trial Divisions shall be composed predominantly of judges with criminal trial experience. 2. (a) The judicial functions of the Court shall be carried out in each division by Chambers. (b) (i) The Appeals Chamber shall be composed of all the judges of the Appeals Division; (ii) The functions of the Trial Chamber shall be carried out by three judges of the Trial Division; (iii) The functions of the Pre-Trial Chamber shall be carried out either by three judges of the Pre- Trial Division or by a single judge of that division in accordance with this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (c) Nothing in this paragraph shall preclude the simultaneous constitution of more than one Trial Chamber or Pre-Trial Chamber when the efficient management of the Court's workload so requires. 3. (a) Judges assigned to the Trial and Pre-Trial Divisions shall serve in those divisions for a period of three years, and thereafter until the completion of any case the hearing of which has already commenced in the division concerned. (b) Judges assigned to the Appeals Division shall serve in that division for their entire term of office. 4. Judges assigned to the Appeals Division shall serve only in that division. Nothing in this article shall, however, preclude the temporary attachment of judges from the Trial Division to the Pre-Trial Division or vice versa, if the Presidency considers that the efficient management of the Court's workload so requires, provided that under no circumstances shall a judge who has participated in the pre-trial phase of a case be eligible to sit on the Trial Chamber hearing that case.
20 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 40 Independence of the judges 1. The judges shall be independent in the performance of their functions. 2. Judges shall not engage in any activity which is likely to interfere with their judicial functions or to affect confidence in their independence. 3. Judges required to serve on a full-time basis at the seat of the Court shall not engage in any other occupation of a professional nature. 4. Any question regarding the application of paragraphs 2 and 3 shall be decided by an absolute majority of the judges. Where any such question concerns an individual judge, that judge shall not take part in the decision. Article 41 Excusing and disqualification of judges 1. The Presidency may, at the request of a judge, excuse that judge from the exercise of a function under this Statute, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 2. (a) A judge shall not participate in any case in which his or her impartiality might reasonably be doubted onany ground. A judge shall be disqualified from a case in accordance with this paragraph if, inter alia, that judge has previously been involved in any capacity in that case beforethe Court or in a related criminal case at the national level involving the person being investigated or prosecuted. A judge shall also be disqualified on such other grounds as may be provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. (b) The Prosecutor or the person being investigated or prosecuted may request the disqualification of a judge under this paragraph. (c) Any question as to the disqualification of a judge shall be decided by an absolute majority of the judges. The challenged judge shall be entitled to present his or her comments on the matter, but shall not take part in the decision. Article 42 The Office of the Prosecutor 1. The Office of the Prosecutor shall act independently as a separate organ of the Court. It shall be responsible for receiving referrals and any substantiated information on crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court, for examining them and for conducting investigations and prosecutions before the Court. A member of the Office shall not seek or act on instructions from any external source. 2. The Office shall be headed by the Prosecutor. The Prosecutor shall have full authority over the management and administration of the Office, including the staff, facilities and other resources thereof. The Prosecutor shall be assisted by one or more Deputy Prosecutors, who shall be entitled to carry out any of the acts required of the Prosecutor under this Statute. The Prosecutor and the Deputy Prosecutors shall be of different nationalities. They shall serve on a full-time basis. 3. The Prosecutor and the Deputy Prosecutors shall be persons of high moral character, be highly competent in and have extensive practical experience in the prosecution or trial of criminal cases. They shall have an excellent knowledge of and be fluent in at least one of the working languages of the Court. 4. The Prosecutor shall be elected by secret ballot by an absolute majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. The Deputy Prosecutors shall be elected in the same way from a list of candidates provided by the Prosecutor. The Prosecutor shall nominate three candidates for each position of Deputy Prosecutor to be filled. Unless a shorter term is decided upon at the time of their election, the Prosecutor and the Deputy Prosecutors shall hold office for a term of nine years and shall not be eligible for re-election. 5. Neither the Prosecutor nor a Deputy Prosecutor shall engage in any activity which is likely to interfere with his or her prosecutorial functions or to affect confidence in his or her independence. They shall not engage in any other occupation of a professional nature. 6. The Presidency may excuse the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor, at his or her request, from acting in a particular case.
21 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court7. Neither the Prosecutor nor a Deputy Prosecutor shall participate in any matter in which their impartiality might reasonably be doubted on any ground. They shall be disqualified from a case in accordance with this paragraph if, inter alia , they have previously been involved in any capacity in that case before the Court or in a related criminal case at the national level involving the person being investigated or prosecuted. 8. Any question as to the disqualification of the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor shall be decided by the Appeals Chamber. (a) The person being investigated or prosecuted may at any time request the disqualification of the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor on the grounds set out in this article; (b) The Prosecutor or the Deputy Prosecutor, as appropriate, shall be entitled to present his or her comments on the matter; 9. The Prosecutor shall appoint advisers with legal expertise on specific issues, including, but not limited to, sexual and gender violence and violence against children. Article 43 The Registry 1. The Registry shall be responsible for the non-judicial aspects of the administration and servicing of the Court, without prejudice to the functions and powers of the Prosecutor in accordance with article 42. 2. The Registry shall be headed by the Registrar, who shall be the principal administrative officer of the Court. The Registrar shall exercise his or her functions under the authority of the President of the Court. 3. The Registrar and the Deputy Registrar shall be persons of high moral character, be highly competent and have an excellent knowledge of and be fluent in at least one of the working languages of the Court. 4. The judges shall elect the Registrar by an absolute majority by secret ballot, taking into account any recommendation by the Assembly of States Parties. If the need arises and upon the recommendation of the Registrar, the judges shall elect, in the same manner, a Deputy Registrar. 5. The Registrar shall hold office for a term of five years, shall be eligible for re-election once and shall serve on a full-time basis. The Deputy Registrar shall hold office for a term of five years or such shorter term as may be decided upon by an absolute majority of the judges, and may be elected on the basis that the Deputy Registrar shall be called upon to serve as required. 6. The Registrar shall set up a Victims and Witnesses Unit within the Registry. This Unit shall provide, in consultation with the Office of the Prosecutor, protective measures and security arrangements, counseling and other appropriate assistance for witnesses, victims who appear before the Court, and others who are at risk on account of testimony given by such witnesses. The Unit shall include staff with expertise in trauma, including trauma related to crimes of sexual violence. Article 44 Staff 1. The Prosecutor and the Registrar shall appoint such qualified staff as may be required to their respective offices. In the case of the Prosecutor, this shall include the appointment of investigators. 2. In the employment of staff, the Prosecutor and the Registrar shall ensure the highest standards of efficiency, competency and integrity, and shall have regard, mutatis mutandis , to the criteria set forth in article 36, paragraph 8. 3. The Registrar, with the agreement of the Presidency and the Prosecutor, shall propose Staff Regulations which include the terms and conditions upon which the staff of the Court shall be appointed, remunerated and dismissed. The Staff Regulations shall be approved by the Assembly of States Parties. 4. The Court may, in exceptional circumstances, employ the expertise of gratis personnel offered by States Parties, intergovernmental organizations or non-governmental organizations to assist with the work of any of the organs of the Court. The Prosecutor may accept any such offer on behalf of the Office of the Prosecutor. Such gratis personnel shall be employed in accordance with guidelines to be established by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 45 Solemn undertaking Before taking up their respective duties under this Statute, the judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors, the Registrar and the Deputy Registrar shall each make a solemn undertaking in open court to exercise his or her respective functions impartially and conscientiously.
22 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 46 Removal from office 1. A judge, the Prosecutor, a Deputy Prosecutor, the Registrar or the Deputy Registrar shall be removed from office if a decision to this effect is made in accordance with paragraph 2, in cases where that person: (a) Is found to have committed serious misconduct or a serious breach of his or her duties under this Statute, as provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; or (b) Is unable to exercise the functions required by this Statute. 2. A decision as to the removal from office of a judge, the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor under paragraph 1 shall be made by the Assembly of States Parties, by secret ballot: (a) In the case of a judge, by a two-thirds majority of the States Parties upon a recommendation adopted by a two-thirds majority of the other judges; (b) In the case of the Prosecutor, by an absolute majority of the States Parties; (c) In the case of a Deputy Prosecutor, by an absolute majority of the States Parties upon the recommendation of the Prosecutor. 3. A decision as to the removal from office of the Registrar or Deputy Registrar shall be made by an absolute majority of the judges. 4. A judge, Prosecutor, Deputy Prosecutor, Registrar or Deputy Registrar whose conduct or ability to exercise the functions of the office as required by this Statute is challenged under this article shall have full opportunity to present and receive evidence and to make submissions in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The person in question shall not otherwise participate in the consideration of the matter. Article 47 Disciplinary measures A judge, Prosecutor, Deputy Prosecutor, Registrar or Deputy Registrar who has committed misconduct of a less serious nature than that set out in article 46, paragraph 1, shall be subject to disciplinary measures, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 48 Privileges and immunities 1. The Court shall enjoy in the territory of each State Party such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the fulfilment of its purposes. 2. The judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors and the Registrar shall, when engaged on or with respect to the business of the Court, enjoy the same privileges and immunities as are accorded to heads of diplomatic missions and shall, after the expiry of their terms of office, continue to be accorded immunity from legal process of every kind in respect of words spoken or written and acts performed by them in their official capacity. 3. The Deputy Registrar, the staff of the Office of the Prosecutor and the staff of the Registry shall enjoy the privileges and immunities and facilities necessary for the performance of their functions, in accordance with the agreement on the privileges and immunities of the Court. 4. Counsel, experts, witnesses or any other person required to be present at the seat of the Court shall be accorded such treatment as is necessary for the proper functioning of the Court, in accordance with the agreement on the privileges and immunities of the Court. 5. The privileges and immunities of: (a) A judge or the Prosecutor may be waived by an absolute majority of the judges; (b) The Registrar may be waived by the Presidency; (c) The Deputy Prosecutors and staff of the Office of the Prosecutor may be waived by the Prosecutor; (d) The Deputy Registrar and staff of the Registry may be waived by the Registrar.
23 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 49 Salaries, allowances and expenses The judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors, the Registrar and the Deputy Registrar shall receive such salaries, allowances and expenses as may be decided upon by the Assembly of States Parties. These salaries and allowances shall not be reduced during their terms of office. Article 50 Official and working languages 1. The official languages of the Court shall be Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish. The judgements of the Court, as well as other decisions resolving fundamental issues before the Court, shall be published in the official languages. The Presidency shall, in accordance with the criteria established by the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, determine which decisions may be considered as resolving fundamental issues for the purposes of this paragraph. 2. The working languages of the Court shall be English and French. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence shall determine the cases in which other official languages may be used as working languages. 3. At the request of any party to a proceeding or a State allowed to intervene in a proceeding, the Court shall authorize a language other than English or French to be used by such a party or State, provided that the Court considers such authorization to be adequately justified. Article 51 Rules of Procedure and Evidence 1. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence shall enter into force upon adoption by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 2. Amendments to the Rules of Procedure and Evidence may be proposed by: (a) Any State Party; (b) The judges acting by an absolute majority; or (c) The Prosecutor. Such amendments shall enter into force upon adoption by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 3. After the adoption of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, in urgent cases where the Rules do not provide for a specific situation before the Court, the judges may, by a two-thirds majority, draw up provisional Rules to be applied until adopted, amended or rejected at the next ordinary or special session of the Assembly of States Parties. 4. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence, amendments thereto and any provisional Rule shall be consistent with this Statute. Amendments to the Rules of Procedure and Evidence as well as provisional Rules shall not be applied retroactively to the detriment of the person who is being investigated or prosecuted or who has been convicted. 5. In the event of conflict between the Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, the Statute shall prevail. Article 52 Regulations of the Court 1. The judges shall, in accordance with this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, adopt, by an absolute majority, the Regulations of the Court necessary for its routine functioning. 2. The Prosecutor and the Registrar shall be consulted in the elaboration of the Regulations and any amendments thereto. 3. The Regulations and any amendments thereto shall take effect upon adoption unless otherwise decided by the judges. Immediately upon adoption, they shall be circulated to States Parties for comments. If within six months there are no objections from a majority of States Parties, they shall remain in force.
24 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 5. INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION Article 53 Initiation of an investigation 1. The Prosecutor shall, having evaluated the information made available to him or her, initiate an investigation unless he or she determines that there is no reasonable basis to proceed under this Statute. In deciding whether to initiate an investigation, the Prosecutor shall consider whether: (a) The information available to the Prosecutor provides a reasonable basis to believe that a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been or is being committed; (b) The case is or would be admissible under article 17; and (c) Taking into account the gravity of the crime and the interests of victims, there are nonetheless substantial reasons to believe that an investigation would not serve the interests of justice. If the Prosecutor determines that there is no reasonable basis to proceed and his or her determination is based solely on subparagraph (c) above, he or she shall inform the Pre-Trial Chamber. 2. If, upon investigation, the Prosecutor concludes that there is not a sufficient basis for a prosecution because: (a) There is not a sufficient legal or factual basis to seek a warrant or summons under article 58; (b) The case is inadmissible under article 17; or (c) A prosecution is not in the interests of justice, taking into account all the circumstances, including the gravity of the crime, the interests of victims and the age or infirmity of the alleged perpetrator, and his or her role in the alleged crime; the Prosecutor shall inform the Pre-Trial Chamber and the State making a referral under article 14 or the Security Council in a case under article 13, paragraph (b), of his or her conclusion and the reasons for the conclusion. 3. (a) At the request of the State making a referral under article 14 or the Security Council under article 13, paragraph (b), the Pre-Trial Chamber may review a decision of the Prosecutor under paragraph 1 or 2 not to proceed and mayrequest the Prosecutor to reconsider that decision. (b) In addition, the Pre-Trial Chamber may, on its own initiative, review a decision of the Prosecutor not to proceed if it is based solely on paragraph 1 (c) or 2 (c). In such a case, the decision of the Prosecutor shall be effective only if confirmed by the Pre-Trial Chamber. 4. The Prosecutor may, at any time, reconsider a decision whether to initiate an investigation or prosecution based on new facts or information. Article 54 Duties and powers of the Prosecutor with respect to investigations 1. The Prosecutor shall: (a) In order to establish the truth, extend the investigation to cover all facts and evidence relevant to an assessment of whether there is criminal responsibility under this Statute, and, in doing so, investigate incriminating and exonerating circumstances equally; (b) Take appropriate measures to ensure the effective investigation and prosecution of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court, and in doing so, respect the interests and personal circumstances of victims and witnesses, including age, gender as defined in article 7, paragraph 3, and health, and take into account the nature of the crime, in particular where it involves sexual violence, gender violence or violence against children; and (c) Fully respect the rights of persons arising under this Statute. 2. The Prosecutor may conduct investigations on the territory of a State: (a) In accordance with the provisions of Part 9; or (b) As authorized by the Pre-Trial Chamber under article 57, paragraph 3 (d).
25 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3. The Prosecutor may: (a) Collect and examine evidence; (b) Request the presence of and question persons being investigated, victims and witnesses; (c) Seek the cooperation of any State or intergovernmental organization or arrangement in accordance with its respective competence and/or mandate; (d) Enter into such arrangements or agreements, not inconsistent with this Statute, as may be necessary to facilitate the cooperation of a State, intergovernmental organization or person; (e) Agree not to disclose, at any stage of the proceedings, documents or information that the Prosecutor obtains on the condition of confidentiality and solely for the purpose of generating new evidence, unless the provider of the information consents; and (f) Take necessary measures, or request that necessary measures be taken, to ensure the confidentiality of information, the protection of any person or the preservation of evidence. Article 55 Rights of persons during an investigation 1. In respect of an investigation under this Statute, a person: (a) Shall not be compelled to incriminate himself or herself or to confess guilt; (b) Shall not be subjected to any form of coercion, duress or threat, to torture or to any other form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; (c) Shall, if questioned in a language other than a language the person fully understands and speaks, have, free of any cost, the assistance of a competent interpreter and such translations as are necessary to meet the requirements of fairness; and (d) Shall not be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention, and shall not be deprived of his or her liberty except on such grounds and in accordance with such procedures as are established in this Statute. 2. Where there are grounds to believe that a person has committed a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court and that person is about to be questioned either by the Prosecutor, or by national authorities pursuant to a request made under Part 9, that person shall also have the following rights of which he or she shall be informed prior to being questioned: (a) To be informed, prior to being questioned, that there are grounds to believe that he or she has committed a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; (b) To remain silent, without such silence being a consideration in the determination of guilt or innocence; (c) To have legal assistance of the person's choosing, or, if the person does not have legal assistance, to have legal assistance assigned to him or her, in any case where the interests of justice so require, and without payment by the person in any such case if the person does not have sufficient means to pay for it; and (d) To be questioned in the presence of counsel unless the person has voluntarily waived his or her right to counsel. Article 56 Role of the Pre-Trial Chamber in relation to a unique investigative opportunity 1. (a) Where the Prosecutor considers an investigation to present a unique opportunity to take testimony or a statement from a witness or to examine, collect or test evidence, which may not be available subsequently for the purposes of a trial, the Prosecutor shall so inform the Pre-Trial Chamber. (b) In that case, the Pre-Trial Chamber may, upon request of the Prosecutor, take such measures as may be necessary to ensure the efficiency and integrity of the proceedings and, in particular, to protect the rights of the defence. (c) Unless the Pre-Trial Chamber orders otherwise, the Prosecutor shall provide the relevant information to the person who has been arrested or appeared in response to a summons in connection with the investigation referred to in subparagraph (a), in order that he or she may be heard on the matter.
26 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The measures referred to in paragraph 1 (b) may include: (a) Making recommendations or orders regarding procedures to be followed; (b) Directing that a record be made of the proceedings; (c) Appointing an expert to assist; (d) Authorizing counsel for a person who has been arrested, or appeared before the Court in response to a summons, to participate, or where there has not yet been such an arrest or appearance or counsel has not been designated, appointing another counsel to attend and represent the interests of the defence; (e) Naming one of its members or, if necessary, another available judge of the Pre-Trial or Trial Division to observe and make recommendations or orders regarding the collection and preservation of evidence and the questioning of persons; (f) Taking such other action as may be necessary to collect or preserve evidence. 3. (a) Where the Prosecutor has not sought measures pursuant to this article but the Pre-Trial Chamberconsiders that such measures are required to preserve evidence that it deems would be essential for the defence at trial, it shall consult with the Prosecutor as to whether there is good reason for the Prosecutor's failure to request the measures. If upon consultation, the Pre-Trial Chamber concludes that the Prosecutor's failure to request such measures is unjustified, the Pre-Trial Chamber may take such measures on its own initiative. (b) A decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber to act on its own initiative under this paragraph may be appealedby the Prosecutor. The appeal shall be heard on an expedited basis. 4. The admissibility of evidence preserved or collected for trial pursuant to this article, or the record thereof, shall be governed at trial by article 69, and given such weight as determined by the Trial Chamber. Article 57 Functions and powers of the Pre-Trial Chamber 1. Unless otherwise provided in this Statute, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall exercise its functions in accordance with the provisions of this article. 2. (a) Orders or rulings of the Pre-Trial Chamber issued under articles 15, 18, 19, 54, paragraph 2, 61, paragraph 7, and 72 must be concurred in by a majority of its judges. (b) In all other cases, a single judge of the Pre-Trial Chamber may exercise the functions provided for in this Statute, unless otherwise provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence or by a majority of the Pre-Trial Chamber. 3. In addition to its other functions under this Statute, the Pre-Trial Chamber may: (a) At the request of the Prosecutor, issue such orders and warrants as may be required for the purposes of an investigation; (b) Upon the request of a person who has been arrested or has appeared pursuant to a summons under article 58, issue such orders, including measures such as those described in article 56, or seek such cooperation pursuant to Part 9 as may be necessary to assist the person in the preparation of his or her defence; (c) Where necessary, provide for the protection and privacy of victims and witnesses, the preservation of evidence, the protection of persons who have been arrested or appeared in response to a summons, and the protection of national security information; (d) Authorize the Prosecutor to take specific investigative steps within the territory of a State Party without having secured the cooperation of that State under Part 9 if, whenever possible having regard to the views of the State concerned, the Pre-Trial Chamber has determined in that case that the State is clearly unable to execute a request for cooperation due to the unavailability of any authority or any component of its judicial system competent to execute the request for cooperation under Part 9; (e) Where a warrant of arrest or a summons has been issued under article 58, and having due regard to the strength of the evidence and the rights of the parties concerned, as provided for in this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, seek the cooperation of States pursuant to article 93, paragraph 1 (k), to take protective measures for the purpose of forfeiture, in particular for the ultimate benefit of victims.
27 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 58 Issuance by the Pre-Trial Chamber of a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear 1. At any time after the initiation of an investigation, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall, on the application of the Prosecutor, issue a warrant of arrest of a person if, having examined the application and the evidence or other information submitted by the Prosecutor, it is satisfied that: (a) There are reasonable grounds to believe that the person has committed a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; and (b) The arrest of the person appears necessary: (i) To ensure the person's appearance at trial; (ii) To ensure that the person does not obstruct or endanger the investigation or the court proceedings; or (iii) Where applicable, to prevent the person from continuing with the commission of that crime or a related crime which is within the jurisdiction of the Court and which arises out of the same circumstances. 2. The application of the Prosecutor shall contain: (a) The name of the person and any other relevant identifying information; (b) A specific reference to the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court which the person is alleged to have committed; (c) A concise statement of the facts which are alleged to constitute those crimes; (d) A summary of the evidence and any other information which establish reasonable grounds to believe that the person committed those crimes; and (e) The reason why the Prosecutor believes that the arrest of the person is necessary. 3. The warrant of arrest shall contain: (a) The name of the person and any other relevant identifying information; (b) A specific reference to the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court for which the person's arrest is sought; and (c) A concise statement of the facts which are alleged to constitute those crimes. 4. The warrant of arrest shall remain in effect until otherwise ordered by the Court. 5. On the basis of the warrant of arrest, the Court may request the provisional arrest or the arrest and surrender of the person under Part 9. 6. The Prosecutor may request the Pre-Trial Chamber to amend the warrant of arrest by modifying or adding to the crimes specified therein. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall so amend the warrant if it is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the person committed the modified or additional crimes. 7. As an alternative to seeking a warrant of arrest, the Prosecutor may submit an application requesting that the Pre-Trial Chamber issue a summons for the person to appear. If the Pre-Trial Chamber is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the person committed the crime alleged and that a summons is sufficient to ensure the person's appearance, it shall issue the summons, with or without conditions restricting liberty (other than detention) if provided for by national law, for the person to appear. The summons shall contain: (a) The name of the person and any other relevant identifying information; (b) The specified date on which the person is to appear; (c) A specific reference to the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court which the person is alleged to have committed; and (d) A concise statement of the facts which are alleged to constitute the crime. The summons shall be served on the person.
28 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 59 Arrest proceedings in the custodial State 1. A State Party which has received a request for provisional arrest or for arrest and surrender shall immediately take steps to arrest the person in question in accordance with its laws and the provisions of Part 9. 2. A person arrested shall be brought promptly before the competent judicial authority in the custodial State which shall determine, in accordance with the law of that State, that: (a) The warrant applies to that person; (b) The person has been arrested in accordance with the proper process; and (c) The person's rights have been respected. 3. The person arrested shall have the right to apply to the competent authority in the custodial State for interim release pending surrender. 4. In reaching a decision on any such application, the competent authority in the custodial State shall consider whether, given the gravity of the alleged crimes, there are urgent and exceptional circumstances to justify interim release and whether necessary safeguards exist to ensure that the custodial State can fulfil its duty to surrender the person to the Court. It shall not be open to the competent authority of the custodial State to consider whether the warrant of arrest was properly issued in accordance with article 58, paragraph 1 (a) and (b). 5. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall be notified of any request for interim release and shall make recommendations to the competent authority in the custodial State. The competent authority in the custodial State shall give full consideration to such recommendations, including any recommendations on measures to prevent the escape of the person, before rendering its decision. 6. If the person is granted interim release, the Pre-Trial Chamber may request periodic reports on the status of the interim release. 7. Once ordered to be surrendered by the custodial State, the person shall be delivered to the Court as soon as possible. Article 60 Initial proceedings before the Court 1. Upon the surrender of the person to the Court, or the person's appearance before the Court voluntarily or pursuant to a summons, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall satisfy itself that the person has been informed of the crimes which he or she is alleged to have committed, and of his or her rights under this Statute, including the right to apply for interim release pending trial. 2. A person subject to a warrant of arrest may apply for interim release pending trial. If the Pre-Trial Chamber is satisfied that the conditions set forth in article 58, paragraph 1, are met, the person shall continue to be detained. If it is not so satisfied, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall release the person, with or without conditions. 3. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall periodically review its ruling on the release or detention of the person, and may do so at any time on the request of the Prosecutor or the person. Upon such review, it may modify its ruling as to detention, release or conditions of release, if it is satisfied that changed circumstances so require. 4. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall ensure that a person is not detained for an unreasonable period prior to trial due to inexcusable delay by the Prosecutor. If such delay occurs, the Court shall consider releasing the person, with or without conditions. 5. If necessary, the Pre-Trial Chamber may issue a warrant of arrest to secure the presence of a person who has been released. Article 61 Confirmation of the charges before trial 1. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2, within a reasonable time after the person's surrender or voluntary appearance before the Court, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall hold a hearing to confirm the charges on which the Prosecutor intends to seek trial. The hearing shall be held in the presence of the Prosecutor and the person charged, as well as his or her counsel.
29 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The Pre-Trial Chamber may, upon request of the Prosecutor or on its own motion, hold a hearing in the absence of the person charged to confirm the charges on which the Prosecutor intends to seek trial when the person has: (a) Waived his or her right to be present; or (b) Fled or cannot be found and all reasonable steps have been taken to secure his or her appearance before the Court and to inform the person of the charges and that a hearing to confirm those charges will be held. In that case, the person shall be represented by counsel where the Pre-Trial Chamber determines that it is in the interests of justice. 3. Within a reasonable time before the hearing, the person shall: (a) Be provided with a copy of the document containing the charges on which the Prosecutor intends to bring the person to trial; and (b) Be informed of the evidence on which the Prosecutor intends to rely at the hearing. The Pre-Trial Chamber may issue orders regarding the disclosure of information for the purposes of the hearing. 4. Before the hearing, the Prosecutor may continue the investigation and may amend or withdraw any charges. The person shall be given reasonable notice before the hearing of any amendment to or withdrawal of charges. In case of a withdrawal of charges, the Prosecutor shall notify the Pre-Trial Chamber of the reasons for the withdrawal. 5. At the hearing, the Prosecutor shall support each charge with sufficient evidence to establish substantial grounds to believe that the person committed the crime charged. The Prosecutor may rely on documentary or summary evidence and need not call the witnesses expected to testify at the trial. 6. At the hearing, the person may: (a) Object to the charges; (b) Challenge the evidence presented by the Prosecutor; and (c) Present evidence. 7. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall, on the basis of the hearing, determine whether there is sufficient evidence to establish substantial grounds to believe that the person committed each of the crimes charged. Based on its determination, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall: (a) Confirm those charges in relation to which it has determined that there is sufficient evidence, and commit the person to a Trial Chamber for trial on the charges as confirmed; (b) Decline to confirm those charges in relation to which it has determined that there is insufficient evidence; (c) Adjourn the hearing and request the Prosecutor to consider: (i) Providing further evidence or conducting further investigation with respect to a particular charge; or (ii) Amending a charge because the evidence submitted appears to establish a different crime within the jurisdiction of the Court. 8. Where the Pre-Trial Chamber declines to confirm a charge, the Prosecutor shall not be precluded from subsequently requesting its confirmation if the request is supported by additional evidence. 9. After the charges are confirmed and before the trial has begun, the Prosecutor may, with the permission of the Pre-Trial Chamber and after notice to the accused, amend the charges. If the Prosecutor seeks to add additional charges or to substitute more serious charges, a hearing under this article to confirm those charges must be held. After commencement of the trial, the Prosecutor may, with the permission of the Trial Chamber, withdraw the charges. 10. Any warrant previously issued shall cease to have effect with respect to any charges which have not been confirmed by the Pre-Trial Chamber or which have been withdrawn by the Prosecutor.
30 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court11. Once the charges have been confirmed in accordance with this article, the Presidency shall constitute a Trial Chamber which, subject to paragraph 9 and to article 64, paragraph 4, shall be responsible for the conduct of subsequent proceedings and may exercise any function of the Pre-Trial Chamber that is relevant and capable of application in those proceedings.
31 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 6. THE TRIAL Article 62 Place of trial Unless otherwise decided, the place of the trial shall be the seat of the Court. Article 63 Trial in the presence of the accused 1. The accused shall be present during the trial. 2. If the accused, being present before the Court, continues to disrupt the trial, the Trial Chamber may remove the accused and shall make provision for him or her to observe the trial and instruct counsel from outside the courtroom, through the use of communications technology, if required. Such measures shall be taken only in exceptional circumstances after other reasonable alternatives have proved inadequate, and only for such duration as is strictly required. Article 64 Functions and powers of the Trial Chamber 1. The functions and powers of the Trial Chamber set out in this article shall be exercised in accordance with this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 2. The Trial Chamber shall ensure that a trial is fair and expeditious and is conducted with full respect for the rights of the accused and due regard for the protection of victims and witnesses. 3. Upon assignment of a case for trial in accordance with this Statute, the Trial Chamber assigned to deal with the case shall: (a) Confer with the parties and adopt such procedures as are necessary to facilitate the fair and expeditious conduct of the proceedings; (b) Determine the language or languages to be used at trial; and (c) Subject to any other relevant provisions of this Statute, provide for disclosure of documents or information not previously disclosed, sufficiently in advance of the commencement of the trial to enable adequate preparation for trial. 4. The Trial Chamber may, if necessary for its effective and fair functioning, refer preliminary issues to the Pre- Trial Chamber or, if necessary, to another available judge of the Pre-Trial Division. 5. Upon notice to the parties, the Trial Chamber may, as appropriate, direct that there be joinder or severance in respect of charges against more than one accused. 6. In performing its functions prior to trial or during the course of a trial, the Trial Chamber may, as necessary: (a) Exercise any functions of the Pre-Trial Chamber referred to in article 61, paragraph 11; (b) Require the attendance and testimony of witnesses and production of documents and other evidence by obtaining, if necessary, the assistance of States as provided in this Statute; (c) Provide for the protection of confidential information; (d) Order the production of evidence in addition to that already collected prior to the trial or presented during the trial by the parties; (e) Provide for the protection of the accused, witnesses and victims; and (f) Rule on any other relevant matters. 7. The trial shall be held in public. The Trial Chamber may, however, determine that special circumstances require that certain proceedings be in closed session for the purposes set forth in article 68, or to protect confidential or sensitive information to be given in evidence. 8. (a) At the commencement of the trial, the Trial Chamber shall have read to the accused the charges previously confirmed by the Pre-Trial Chamber. The Trial Chamber shall satisfy itself that the accused understands the nature of the charges. It shall afford him or her the opportunity to make an admission of guilt in accordance with article 65 or to plead not guilty.
32 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) At the trial, the presiding judge may give directions for the conduct of proceedings, including to ensure that they are conducted in a fair and impartial manner. Subject to any directions of the presiding judge, the parties may submit evidence in accordance with the provisions of this Statute. 9. The Trial Chamber shall have, inter alia , the power on application of a party or on its own motion to: (a) Rule on the admissibility or relevance of evidence; and (b) Take all necessary steps to maintain order in the course of a hearing. 10. The Trial Chamber shall ensure that a complete record of the trial, which accurately reflects the proceedings, is made and that it is maintained and preserved by the Registrar. Article 65 Proceedings on an admission of guilt 1. Where the accused makes an admission of guilt pursuant to article 64, paragraph 8 (a), the Trial Chamber shall determine whether: (a) The accused understands the nature and consequences of the admission of guilt; (b) The admission is voluntarily made by the accused after sufficient consultation with defence counsel; and (c) The admission of guilt is supported by the facts of the case that are contained in: (i) The charges brought by the Prosecutor and admitted by the accused; (ii) Any materials presented by the Prosecutor which supplement the charges and which the accused accepts; and (iii) Any other evidence, such as the testimony of witnesses, presented by the Prosecutor or the accused. 2. Where the Trial Chamber is satisfied that the matters referred to in paragraph 1 are established, it shall consider the admission of guilt, together with any additional evidence presented, as establishing all the essential facts that are required to prove the crime to which the admission of guilt relates, and may convict the accused of that crime. 3. Where the Trial Chamber is not satisfied that the matters referred to in paragraph 1 are established, it shall consider the admission of guilt as not having been made, in which case it shall order that the trial be continued under the ordinary trial procedures provided by this Statute and may remit the case to another Trial Chamber. 4. Where the Trial Chamber is of the opinion that a more complete presentation of the facts of the case is required in the interests of justice, in particular the interests of the victims, the Trial Chamber may: (a) Request the Prosecutor to present additional evidence, including the testimony of witnesses; or (b) Order that the trial be continued under the ordinary trial procedures provided by this Statute, in which case it shall consider the admission of guilt as not having been made and may remit the case to another Trial Chamber. 5. Any discussions between the Prosecutor and the defence regarding modification of the charges, the admission of guilt or the penalty to be imposed shall not be binding on the Court. Article 66 Presumption of innocence 1. Everyone shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty before the Court in accordance with the applicable law. 2. The onus is on the Prosecutor to prove the guilt of the accused. 3. In order to convict the accused, the Court must be convinced of the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
33 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 67 Rights of the accused 1. In the determination of any charge, the accused shall be entitled to a public hearing, having regard to the provisions of this Statute, to a fair hearing conducted impartially, and to the following minimum guarantees, in full equality: (a) To be informed promptly and in detail of the nature, cause and content of the charge, in a language which the accused fully understands and speaks; (b) To have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of the defence and to communicate freely with counsel of the accused's choosing in confidence; (c) To be tried without undue delay; (d) Subject to article 63, paragraph 2, to be present at the trial, to conduct the defence in person or through legal assistance of the accused's choosing, to be informed, if the accused does not have legal assistance, of this right and to have legal assistance assigned by the Court in any case where the interests of justice so require, and without payment if the accused lacks sufficient means to pay for it; (e) To examine, or have examined, the witnesses against him or her and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his or her behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him or her. The accused shall also be entitled to raise defences and to present other evidence admissible under this Statute; (f) To have, free of any cost, the assistance of a competent interpreter and such translations as are necessary to meet the requirements of fairness, if any of the proceedings of or documents presented to the Court are not in a language which the accused fully understands and speaks; (g) Not to be compelled to testify or to confess guilt and to remain silent, without such silence being a consideration in the determination of guilt or innocence; (h) To make an unsworn oral or written statement in his or her defence; and (i) Not to have imposed on him or her any reversal of the burden of proof or any onus of rebuttal. 2. In addition to any other disclosure provided for in this Statute, the Prosecutor shall, as soon as practicable, disclose to the defence evidence in the Prosecutor's possession or control which he or she believes shows or tends to show the innocence of the accused, or to mitigate the guilt of the accused, or which may affect the credibility of prosecution evidence. In case of doubt as to the application of this paragraph, the Court shall decide. Article 68 Protection of the victims and witnesses and their participation in the proceedings 1. The Court shall take appropriate measures to protect the safety, physical and psychological well-being, dignity and privacy of victims and witnesses. In so doing, the Court shall have regard to all relevant factors, including age, gender as defined in article 7, paragraph 3, and health, and the nature of the crime, in particular, but not limited to, where the crime involves sexual or gender violence or violence against children. The Prosecutor shall take such measures particularly during the investigation and prosecution of such crimes. These measures shall not be prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial. 2. As an exception to the principle of public hearings provided for in article 67, the Chambers of the Court may, to protect victims and witnesses or an accused, conduct any part of the proceedings in camera or allow the presentation of evidence by electronic or other special means. In particular, such measures shall be implemented in the case of a victim of sexual violence or a child who is a victim or a witness, unless otherwise ordered by the Court, having regard to all the circumstances, particularly the views of the victim or witness. 3. Where the personal interests of the victims are affected, the Court shall permit their views and concerns to be presented and considered at stages of the proceedings determined to be appropriate by the Court and in a manner which is not prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial. Such views and concerns may be presented by the legal representatives of the victims where the Court considers it appropriate, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. The Victims and Witnesses Unit may advise the Prosecutor and the Court on appropriate protective measures, security arrangements, counselling and assistance as referred to in article 43, paragraph 6.
34 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court5. Where the disclosure of evidence or information pursuant to this Statute may lead to the grave endangerment of the security of a witness or his or her family, the Prosecutor may, for the purposes of any proceedings conducted prior to the commencement of the trial, withhold such evidence or information and instead submit a summary thereof. Such measures shall be exercised in a manner which is not prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial. 6. A State may make an application for necessary measures to be taken in respect of the protection of its servants or agents and the protection of confidential or sensitive information. Article 69 Evidence 1. Before testifying, each witness shall, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, give an undertaking as to the truthfulness of the evidence to be given by that witness. 2. The testimony of a witness at trial shall be given in person, except to the extent provided by the measures set forth in article 68 or in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The Court may also permit the giving of viva voce (oral) or recorded testimony of a witness by means of video or audio technology, as well as the introduction of documents or written transcripts, subject to this Statute and in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. These measures shall not be prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused. 3. The parties may submit evidence relevant to the case, in accordance with article 64. The Court shall have the authority to request the submission of all evidence that it considers necessary for the determination of the truth. 4. The Court may rule on the relevance or admissibility of any evidence, taking into account, inter alia , the probative value of the evidence and any prejudice that such evidence may cause to a fair trial or to a fair evaluation of the testimony of a witness, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 5. The Court shall respect and observe privileges on confidentiality as provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 6. The Court shall not require proof of facts of common knowledge but may take judicial notice of them. 7. Evidence obtained by means of a violation of this Statute or internationally recognized human rights shall not be admissible if: (a) The violation casts substantial doubt on the reliability of the evidence; or (b) The admission of the evidence would be antithetical to and would seriously damage the integrity of the proceedings. 8. When deciding on the relevance or admissibility of evidence collected by a State, the Court shall not rule on the application of the State's national law. Article 70 Offences against the administration of justice 1. The Court shall have jurisdiction over the following offences against its administration of justice when committed intentionally: (a) Giving false testimony when under an obligation pursuant to article 69, paragraph 1, to tell the truth; (b) Presenting evidence that the party knows is false or forged; (c) Corruptly influencing a witness, obstructing or interfering with the attendance or testimony of a witness, retaliating against a witness for giving testimony or destroying, tampering with or interfering with the collection of evidence; (d) Impeding, intimidating or corruptly influencing an official of the Court for the purpose of forcing or persuading the official not to perform, or to perform improperly, his or her duties; (e) Retaliating against an official of the Court on account of duties performed by that or another official; (f) Soliciting or accepting a bribe as an official of the Court in connection with his or her official duties. 2. The principles and procedures governing the Court's exercise of jurisdiction over offences under this article shall be those provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The conditions for providing international cooperation to the Court with respect to its proceedings under this article shall be governed by the domestic laws of the requested State.
35 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3. In the event of conviction, the Court may impose a term of imprisonment not exceeding five years, or a fine in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, or both. 4. (a) Each State Party shall extend its criminal laws penalizing offences against the integrity of its own investigative or judicial process to offences against the administration of justice referred to in this article, committed on its territory, or by one of its nationals; (b) Upon request by the Court, whenever it deems it proper, the State Party shall submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution. Those authorities shall treat such cases with diligence and devote sufficient resources to enable them to be conducted effectively. Article 71 Sanctions for misconduct before the Court 1. The Court may sanction persons present before it who commit misconduct, including disruption of its proceedings or deliberate refusal to comply with its directions, by administrative measures other than imprisonment, such as temporary or permanent removal from the courtroom, a fine or other similar measures provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 2. The procedures governing the imposition of the measures set forth in paragraph 1 shall be those provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 72 Protection of national security information 1. This article applies in any case where the disclosure of the information or documents of a State would, in the opinion of that State, prejudice its national security interests. Such cases include those falling within the scope of article 56, paragraphs 2 and 3, article 61, paragraph 3, article 64, paragraph 3, article 67, paragraph 2, article 68, paragraph 6, article 87, paragraph 6 and article 93, as well as cases arising at any other stage of the proceedings where such disclosure may be at issue. 2. This article shall also apply when a person who has been requested to give information or evidence has refused to do so or has referred the matter to the State on the ground that disclosure would prejudice the national security interests of a State and the State concerned confirms that it is of the opinion that disclosure would prejudice its national security interests. 3. Nothing in this article shall prejudice the requirements of confidentiality applicable under article 54, paragraph 3 (e) and (f), or the application of article 73. 4. If a State learns that information or documents of the State are being, or are likely to be, disclosed at any stage of the proceedings, and it is of the opinion that disclosure would prejudice its national security interests, that State shall have the right to intervene in order to obtain resolution of the issue in accordance with this article. 5. If, in the opinion of a State, disclosure of information would prejudice its national security interests, all reasonable steps will be taken by the State, acting in conjunction with the Prosecutor, the defence or the Pre-Trial Chamber or Trial Chamber, as the case may be, to seek to resolve the matter by cooperative means. Such steps may include: (a) Modification or clarification of the request; (b) A determination by the Court regarding the relevance of the information or evidence sought, or a determination as to whether the evidence, though relevant, could be or has been obtained from a source other than the requested State; (c) Obtaining the information or evidence from a different source or in a different form; or (d) Agreement on conditions under which the assistance could be provided including, among other things, providing summaries or redactions, limitations on disclosure, use of in camera or ex parte proceedings, or other protective measures permissible under the Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 6. Once all reasonable steps have been taken to resolve the matter through cooperative means, and if the State considers that there are no means or conditions under which the information or documents could be provided or disclosed without prejudice to its national security interests, it shall so notify the Prosecutor or the Court of the specific reasons for its decision, unless a specific description of the reasons would itself necessarily result in such prejudice to the State's national security interests.
36 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court7. Thereafter, if the Court determines that the evidence is relevant and necessary for the establishment of the guilt or innocence of the accused, the Court may undertake the following actions: (a) Where disclosure of the information or document is sought pursuant to a request for cooperation under Part 9 or the circumstances described in paragraph 2, and the State has invoked the ground for refusal referred to in article 93, paragraph 4: (i) The Court may, before making any conclusion referred to in subparagraph 7 (a) (ii), request further consultations for the purpose of considering the State's representations, which may include, as appropriate, hearings in camera and ex parte ; (ii) If the Court concludes that, by invoking the ground for refusal under article 93, paragraph 4, in the circumstances of the case, the requested State is not acting in accordance with its obligations under this Statute, the Court may refer the matter in accordance with article 87, paragraph 7, specifying the reasons for its conclusion; and (iii) The Court may make such inference in the trial of the accused as to the existence or non- existence of a fact, as may be appropriate in the circumstances; or (b) In all other circumstances: (i) Order disclosure; or (ii) To the extent it does not order disclosure, make such inference in the trial of the accused as to the existence or non-existence of a fact, as may be appropriate in the circumstances. Article 73 Third-party information or documents If a State Party is requested by the Court to provide a document or information in its custody, possession or control, which was disclosed to it in confidence by a State, intergovernmental organization or international organization, it shall seek the consent of the originator to disclose that document or information. If the originator is a State Party, it shall either consent to disclosure of the information or document or undertake to resolve the issue of disclosure with the Court, subject to the provisions of article 72. If the originator is not a State Party and refuses to consent to disclosure, the requested State shall inform the Court that it is unable to provide the document or information because of a pre-existing obligation of confidentiality to the originator. Article 74 Requirements for the decision 1. All the judges of the Trial Chamber shall be present at each stage of the trial and throughout their deliberations. The Presidency may, on a case-by-case basis, designate, as available, one or more alternate judges to be present at each stage of the trial and to replace a member of the Trial Chamber if that member is unable to continue attending. 2. The Trial Chamber's decision shall be based on its evaluation of the evidence and the entire proceedings. The decision shall not exceed the facts and circumstances described in the charges and any amendments to the charges. The Court may base its decision only on evidence submitted and discussed before it at the trial. 3. The judges shall attempt to achieve unanimity in their decision, failing which the decision shall be taken by a majority of the judges. 4. The deliberations of the Trial Chamber shall remain secret. 5. The decision shall be in writing and shall contain a full and reasoned statement of the Trial Chamber's findings on the evidence and conclusions. The Trial Chamber shall issue one decision. When there is no unanimity, the Trial Chamber's decision shall contain the views of the majority and the minority. The decision or a summary thereof shall be delivered in open court. Article 75 Reparations to victims 1. The Court shall establish principles relating to reparations to, or in respect of, victims, including restitution, compensation and rehabilitation. On this basis, in its decision the Court may, either upon request or on its own motion in exceptional circumstances, determine the scope and extent of any damage, loss and injury to, or in respect of, victims and will state the principles on which it is acting.
37 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The Court may make an order directly against a convicted person specifying appropriate reparations to, or in respect of, victims, including restitution, compensation and rehabilitation. Where appropriate, the Court may order that the award for reparations be made through the Trust Fund provided for in article 79. 3. Before making an order under this article, the Court may invite and shall take account of representations from or on behalf of the convicted person, victims, other interested persons or interested States. 4. In exercising its power under this article, the Court may, after a person is convicted of a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court, determine whether, in order to give effect to an order which it may make under this article, it is necessary to seek measures under article 93, paragraph 1. 5. A State Party shall give effect to a decision under this article as if the provisions of article 109 were applicable to this article. 6. Nothing in this article shall be interpreted as prejudicing the rights of victims under national or international law. Article 76 Sentencing 1. In the event of a conviction, the Trial Chamber shall consider the appropriate sentence to be imposed and shall take into account the evidence presented and submissions made during the trial that are relevant to the sentence. 2. Except where article 65 applies and before the completion of the trial, the Trial Chamber may on its own motion and shall, at the request of the Prosecutor or the accused, hold a further hearing to hear any additional evidence or submissions relevant to the sentence, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 3. Where paragraph 2 applies, any representations under article 75 shall be heard during the further hearing referred to in paragraph 2 and, if necessary, during any additional hearing. 4. The sentence shall be pronounced in public and, wherever possible, in the presence of the accused.
38 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 7. PENALTIES Article 77 Applicable penalties 1. Subject to article 110, the Court may impose one of the following penalties on a person convicted of a crime referred to in article 5 of this Statute: (a) Imprisonment for a specified number of years, which may not exceed a maximum of 30 years; or (b) A term of life imprisonment when justified by the extreme gravity of the crime and the individual circumstances of the convicted person. 2. In addition to imprisonment, the Court may order: (a) A fine under the criteria provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (b) A forfeiture of proceeds, property and assets derived directly or indirectly from that crime, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties. Article 78 Determination of the sentence 1. In determining the sentence, the Court shall, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, take into account such factors as the gravity of the crime and the individual circumstances of the convicted person. 2. In imposing a sentence of imprisonment, the Court shall deduct the time, if any, previously spent in detention in accordance with an order of the Court. The Court may deduct any time otherwise spent in detention in connection with conduct underlying the crime. 3. When a person has been convicted of more than one crime, the Court shall pronounce a sentence for each crime and a joint sentence specifying the total period of imprisonment. This period shall be no less than the highest individual sentence pronounced and shall not exceed 30 years imprisonment or a sentence of life imprisonment in conformity with article 77, paragraph 1 (b). Article 79 Trust Fund 1. A Trust Fund shall be established by decision of the Assembly of States Parties for the benefit of victims of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court, and of the families of such victims. 2. The Court may order money and other property collected through fines or forfeiture to be transferred, by order of the Court, to the Trust Fund. 3. The Trust Fund shall be managed according to criteria to be determined by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 80 Non-prejudice to national application of penalties and national laws Nothing in this Part affects the application by States of penalties prescribed by their national law, nor the law of States which do not provide for penalties prescribed in this Part.
39 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 8. APPEAL AND REVISION Article 81 Appeal against decision of acquittal or conviction or against sentence 1. A decision under article 74 may be appealed in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence as follows: (a) The Prosecutor may make an appeal on any of the following grounds: (i) Procedural error, (ii) Error of fact, or (iii) Error of law; (b) The convicted person, or the Prosecutor on that person's behalf, may make an appeal on any of the following grounds: (i) Procedural error, (ii) Error of fact, (iii) Error of law, or (iv) Any other ground that affects the fairness or reliability of the proceedings or decision. 2. (a) A sentence may be appealed, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, by the Prosecutor or the convicted person on the ground of disproportion between the crime and the sentence; (b) If on an appeal against sentence the Court considers that there are grounds on which the conviction might be set aside, wholly or in part, it may invite the Prosecutor and the convicted person to submit grounds under article 81, paragraph 1 (a) or (b), and may render a decision on conviction in accordance with article 83; (c) The same procedure applies when the Court, on an appeal against conviction only, considers that there are grounds to reduce the sentence under paragraph 2 (a). 3. (a) Unless the Trial Chamber orders otherwise, a convicted person shall remain in custody pending an appeal; (b) When a convicted person's time in custody exceeds the sentence of imprisonment imposed, that person shall be released, except that if the Prosecutor is also appealing, the release may be subject to the conditions under subparagraph (c) below; (c) In case of an acquittal, the accused shall be released immediately, subject to the following: (i) Under exceptional circumstances, and having regard, inter alia , to the concrete risk of flight, the seriousness of the offence charged and the probability of success on appeal, the Trial Chamber, at the request of the Prosecutor, may maintain the detention of the person pending appeal; (ii) A decision by the Trial Chamber under subparagraph (c) (i) may be appealed in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 3 (a) and (b), execution of the decision or sentence shall be suspended during the period allowed for appeal and for the duration of the appeal proceedings. Article 82 Appeal against other decisions 1. Either party may appeal any of the following decisions in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence: (a) A decision with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility; (b) A decision granting or denying release of the person being investigated or prosecuted; (c) A decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber to act on its own initiative under article 56, paragraph 3; (d) A decision that involves an issue that would significantly affect the fair and expeditious conduct of the proceedings or the outcome of the trial, and for which, in the opinion of the Pre-Trial or Trial Chamber, an immediate resolution by the Appeals Chamber may materially advance the proceedings.
40 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. A decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber under article 57, paragraph 3 (d), may be appealed against by the State concerned or by the Prosecutor, with the leave of the Pre-Trial Chamber. The appeal shall be heard on an expedited basis. 3. An appeal shall not of itself have suspensive effect unless the Appeals Chamber so orders, upon request, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. A legal representative of the victims, the convicted person or a bona fide owner of property adversely affected by an order under article 75 may appeal against the order for reparations, as provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 83 Proceedings on appeal 1. For the purposes of proceedings under article 81 and this article, the Appeals Chamber shall have all the powers of the Trial Chamber. 2. If the Appeals Chamber finds that the proceedings appealed from were unfair in a way that affected the reliability of the decision or sentence, or that the decision or sentence appealed from was materially affected by error of fact or law or procedural error, it may: (a) Reverse or amend the decision or sentence; or (b) Order a new trial before a different Trial Chamber. For these purposes, the Appeals Chamber may remand a factual issue to the original Trial Chamber for it to determine the issue and to report back accordingly, or may itself call evidence to determine the issue. When the decision or sentence has been appealed only by the person convicted, or the Prosecutor on that person's behalf, it cannot be amended to his or her detriment. 3. If in an appeal against sentence the Appeals Chamber finds that the sentence is disproportionate to the crime, it may vary the sentence in accordance with Part 7. 4. The judgement of the Appeals Chamber shall be taken by a majority of the judges and shall be delivered in open court. The judgement shall state the reasons on which it is based. When there is no unanimity, the judgement of the Appeals Chamber shall contain the views of the majority and the minority, but a judge may deliver a separate or dissenting opinion on a question of law. 5. The Appeals Chamber may deliver its judgement in the absence of the person acquitted or convicted. Article 84 Revision of conviction or sentence 1. The convicted person or, after death, spouses, children, parents or one person alive at the time of the accused's death who has been given express written instructions from the accused to bring such a claim, or the Prosecutor on the person's behalf, may apply to the Appeals Chamber to revise the final judgement of conviction or sentence on the grounds that: (a) New evidence has been discovered that: (i) Was not available at the time of trial, and such unavailability was not wholly or partially attributable to the party making application; and (ii) Is sufficiently important that had it been proved at trial it would have been likely to have resulted in a different verdict; (b) It has been newly discovered that decisive evidence, taken into account at trial and upon which the conviction depends, was false, forged or falsified; (c) One or more of the judges who participated in conviction or confirmation of the charges has committed, in that case, an act of serious misconduct or serious breach of duty of sufficient gravity to justify the removal of that judge or those judges from office under article 46. 2. The Appeals Chamber shall reject the application if it considers it to be unfounded. If it determines that the application is meritorious, it may, as appropriate: (a) Reconvene the original Trial Chamber; (b) Constitute a new Trial Chamber; or
41 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(c) Retain jurisdiction over the matter, with a view to, after hearing the parties in the manner set forth in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, arriving at a determination on whether the judgement should be revised. Article 85 Compensation to an arrested or convicted person 1. Anyone who has been the victim of unlawful arrest or detention shall have an enforceable right to compensation. 2. When a person has by a final decision been convicted of a criminal offence, and when subsequently his or her conviction has been reversed on the ground that a new or newly discovered fact shows conclusively that there has been a miscarriage of justice, the person who has suffered punishment as a result of such conviction shall be compensated according to law, unless it is proved that the non-disclosure of the unknown fact in time is wholly or partly attributable to him or her. 3. In exceptional circumstances, where the Court finds conclusive facts showing that there has been a grave and manifest miscarriage of justice, it may in its discretion award compensation, according to the criteria provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, to a person who has been released from detention following a final decision of acquittal or a termination of the proceedings for that reason.
42 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 9. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AND JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE Article 86 General obligation to cooperate States Parties shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Statute, cooperate fully with the Court in its investigation and prosecution of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. Article 87 Requests for cooperation: general provisions 1. (a) The Court shall have the authority to make requests to States Parties for cooperation. The requestsshall be transmitted through the diplomatic channel or any other appropriate channel as may be designated by each State Party upon ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Subsequent changes to the designation shall be made by each State Party in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. (b) When appropriate, without prejudice to the provisions of subparagraph (a), requests may also be transmitted through the International Criminal Police Organization or any appropriate regional organization. 2. Requests for cooperation and any documents supporting the request shall either be in or be accompanied by a translation into an official language of the requested State or one of the working languages of the Court, in accordance with the choice made by that State upon ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Subsequent changes to this choice shall be made in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 3. The requested State shall keep confidential a request for cooperation and any documents supporting the request, except to the extent that the disclosure is necessary for execution of the request. 4. In relation to any request for assistance presented under this Part, the Court may take such measures, including measures related to the protection of information, as may be necessary to ensure the safety or physical or psychological well-being of any victims, potential witnesses and their families. The Court may request that any information that is made available under this Part shall be provided and handled in a manner that protects the safety and physical or psychological well-being of any victims, potential witnesses and their families. 5. (a) The Court may invite any State not party to this Statute to provide assistance under this Part on the basis of an ad hoc arrangement, an agreement with such State or any other appropriate basis. (b) Where a State not party to this Statute, which has entered into an ad hoc arrangement or an agreement with the Court, fails to cooperate with requests pursuant to any such arrangement or agreement, the Court may so inform the Assembly of States Parties or, where the Security Council referred the matter to the Court, the Security Council. 6. The Court may ask any intergovernmental organization to provide information or documents. The Court may also ask for other forms of cooperation and assistance which may be agreed upon with such an organization and which are in accordance with its competence or mandate. 7. Where a State Party fails to comply with a request to cooperate by the Court contrary to the provisions of this Statute, thereby preventing the Court from exercising its functions and powers under this Statute, the Court may make a finding to that effect and refer the matter to the Assembly of States Parties or, where the Security Council referred the matter to the Court, to the Security Council. Article 88 Availability of procedures under national law States Parties shall ensure that there are procedures available under their national law for all of the forms of cooperation which are specified under this Part. Article 89 Surrender of persons to the Court 1. The Court may transmit a request for the arrest and surrender of a person, together with the material supporting the request outlined in article 91, to any State on the territory of which that person may be found and shall request the cooperation of that State in the arrest and surrender of such a person. States Parties shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Part and the procedure under their national law, comply with requests for arrest and surrender.
43 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. Where the person sought for surrender brings a challenge before a national court on the basis of the principle of ne bis in idem as provided in article 20, the requested State shall immediately consult with the Court to determine if there has been a relevant ruling on admissibility. If the case is admissible, the requested State shall proceed with the execution of the request. If an admissibility ruling is pending, the requested State may postpone the execution of the request for surrender of the person until the Court makes a determination on admissibility. 3. (a) A State Party shall authorize, in accordance with its national procedural law, transportation through its territory of a person being surrendered to the Court by another State, except where transit through that State would impede or delay the surrender. (b) A request by the Court for transit shall be transmitted in accordance with article 87. The request for transit shall contain: (i) A description of the person being transported; (ii) A brief statement of the facts of the case and their legal characterization; and (iii) The warrant for arrest and surrender; (c) A person being transported shall be detained in custody during the period of transit; (d) No authorization is required if the person is transported by air and no landing is scheduled on the territory of the transit State; (e) If an unscheduled landing occurs on the territory of the transit State, that State may require a request for transit from the Court as provided for in subparagraph (b). The transit State shall detain the person being transported until the request for transit is received and the transit is effected, provided that detention for purposes of this subparagraph may not be extended beyond 96 hours from the unscheduled landing unless the request is received within that time. 4. If the person sought is being proceeded against or is serving a sentence in the requested State for a crime different from that for which surrender to the Court is sought, the requested State, after making its decision to grant the request, shall consult with the Court. Article 90 Competing requests 1. A State Party which receives a request from the Court for the surrender of a person under article 89 shall, if it also receives a request from any other State for the extradition of the same person for the same conduct which forms the basis of the crime for which the Court seeks the person's surrender, notify the Court and the requesting State of that fact. 2. Where the requesting State is a State Party, the requested State shall give priority to the request from the Court if: (a) The Court has, pursuant to article 18 or 19, made a determination that the case in respect of which surrender is sought is admissible and that determination takes into account the investigation or prosecution conducted by the requesting State in respect of its request for extradition; or (b) The Court makes the determination described in subparagraph (a) pursuant to the requested State's notification under paragraph 1. 3. Where a determination under paragraph 2 (a) has not been made, the requested State may, at its discretion, pending the determination of the Court under paragraph 2 (b), proceed to deal with the request for extradition from the requesting State but shall not extradite the person until the Court has determined that the case is inadmissible. The Court's determination shall be made on an expedited basis. 4. If the requesting State is a State not Party to this Statute the requested State, if it is not under an international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State, shall give priority to the request for surrender from the Court, if the Court has determined that the case is admissible. 5. Where a case under paragraph 4 has not been determined to be admissible by the Court, the requested State may, at its discretion, proceed to deal with the request for extradition from the requesting State. 6. In cases where paragraph 4 applies except that the requested State is under an existing international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State not Party to this Statute, the requested State shall determine whether to surrender the person to the Court or extradite the person to the requesting State. In making its decision, the requested State shall consider all the relevant factors, including but not limited to:
44 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(a) The respective dates of the requests; (b) The interests of the requesting State including, where relevant, whether the crime was committed in its territory and the nationality of the victims and of the person sought; and (c) The possibility of subsequent surrender between the Court and the requesting State. 7. Where a State Party which receives a request from the Court for the surrender of a person also receives a request from any State for the extradition of the same person for conduct other than that which constitutes the crime for which the Court seeks the person's surrender: (a) The requested State shall, if it is not under an existing international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State, give priority to the request from the Court; (b) The requested State shall, if it is under an existing international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State, determine whether to surrender the person to the Court or to extradite the person to the requesting State. In making its decision, the requested State shall consider all the relevant factors, including but not limited to those set out in paragraph 6, but shall give special consideration to the relative nature and gravity of the conduct in question. 8. Where pursuant to a notification under this article, the Court has determined a case to be inadmissible, and subsequently extradition to the requesting State is refused, the requested State shall notify the Court of this decision. Article 91 Contents of request for arrest and surrender 1. A request for arrest and surrender shall be made in writing. In urgent cases, a request may be made by any medium capable of delivering a written record, provided that the request shall be confirmed through the channel provided for in article 87, paragraph 1 (a). 2. In the case of a request for the arrest and surrender of a person for whom a warrant of arrest has been issued by the Pre-Trial Chamber under article 58, the request shall contain or be supported by: (a) Information describing the person sought, sufficient to identify the person, and information as to that person's probable location; (b) A copy of the warrant of arrest; and (c) Such documents, statements or information as may be necessary to meet the requirements for the surrender process in the requested State, except that those requirements should not be more burdensome than those applicable to requests for extradition pursuant to treaties or arrangements between the requested State and other States and should, if possible, be less burdensome, taking into account the distinct nature of the Court. 3. In the case of a request for the arrest and surrender of a person already convicted, the request shall contain or be supported by: (a) A copy of any warrant of arrest for that person; (b) A copy of the judgement of conviction; (c) Information to demonstrate that the person sought is the one referred to in the judgement of conviction; and (d) If the person sought has been sentenced, a copy of the sentence imposed and, in the case of a sentence for imprisonment, a statement of any time already served and the time remaining to be served. 4. Upon the request of the Court, a State Party shall consult with the Court, either generally or with respect to a specific matter, regarding any requirements under its national law that may apply under paragraph 2 (c). During the consultations, the State Party shall advise the Court of the specific requirements of its national law.
45 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 92 Provisional arrest 1. In urgent cases, the Court may request the provisional arrest of the person sought, pending presentation of the request for surrender and the documents supporting the request as specified in article 91. 2. The request for provisional arrest shall be made by any medium capable of delivering a written record and shall contain: (a) Information describing the person sought, sufficient to identify the person, and information as to that person's probable location; (b) A concise statement of the crimes for which the person's arrest is sought and of the facts which are alleged to constitute those crimes, including, where possible, the date and location of the crime; (c) A statement of the existence of a warrant of arrest or a judgement of conviction against the person sought; and (d) A statement that a request for surrender of the person sought will follow. 3. A person who is provisionally arrested may be released from custody if the requested State has not received the request for surrender and the documents supporting the request as specified in article 91 within the time limits specified in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. However, the person may consent to surrender before the expiration of this period if permitted by the law of the requested State. In such a case, the requested State shall proceed to surrender the person to the Court as soon as possible. 4. The fact that the person sought has been released from custody pursuant to paragraph 3 shall not prejudice the subsequent arrest and surrender of that person if the request for surrender and the documents supporting the request are delivered at a later date. Article 93 Other forms of cooperation 1. States Parties shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Part and under procedures of national law, comply with requests by the Court to provide the following assistance in relation to investigations or prosecutions: (a) The identification and whereabouts of persons or the location of items; (b) The taking of evidence, including testimony under oath, and the production of evidence, including expert opinions and reports necessary to the Court; (c) The questioning of any person being investigated or prosecuted; (d) The service of documents, including judicial documents; (e) Facilitating the voluntary appearance of persons as witnesses or experts before the Court; (f) The temporary transfer of persons as provided in paragraph 7; (g) The examination of places or sites, including the exhumation and examination of grave sites; (h) The execution of searches and seizures; (i) The provision of records and documents, including official records and documents; (j) The protection of victims and witnesses and the preservation of evidence; (k) The identification, tracing and freezing or seizure of proceeds, property and assets and instrumentalities of crimes for the purpose of eventual forfeiture, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties; and (l) Any other type of assistance which is not prohibited by the law of the requested State, with a view to facilitating the investigation and prosecution of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. 2. The Court shall have the authority to provide an assurance to a witness or an expert appearing before the Court that he or she will not be prosecuted, detained or subjected to any restriction of personal freedom by the Court in respect of any act or omission that preceded the departure of that person from the requested State.
46 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3. Where execution of a particular measure of assistance detailed in a request presented under paragraph 1, is prohibited in the requested State on the basis of an existing fundamental legal principle of general application, the requested State shall promptly consult with the Court to try to resolve the matter. In the consultations, consideration should be given to whether the assistance can be rendered in another manner or subject to conditions. If after consultations the matter cannot be resolved, the Court shall modify the request as necessary. 4. In accordance with article 72, a State Party may deny a request for assistance, in whole or in part, only if the request concerns the production of any documents or disclosure of evidence which relates to its national security. 5. Before denying a request for assistance under paragraph 1 (l), the requested State shall consider whether the assistance can be provided subject to specified conditions, or whether the assistance can be provided at a later date or in an alternative manner, provided that if the Court or the Prosecutor accepts the assistance subject to conditions, the Court or the Prosecutor shall abide by them. 6. If a request for assistance is denied, the requested State Party shall promptly inform the Court or the Prosecutor of the reasons for such denial. 7. (a) The Court may request the temporary transfer of a person in custody for purposes of identification or for obtaining testimony or other assistance. The person may be transferred if the following conditions are fulfilled: (i) The person freely gives his or her informed consent to the transfer; and (ii) The requested State agrees to the transfer, subject to such conditions as that State and the Court may agree. (b) The person being transferred shall remain in custody. When the purposes of the transfer have been fulfilled, the Court shall return the person without delay to the requested State. 8. (a) The Court shall ensure the confidentiality of documents and information, except as required for the investigation and proceedings described in the request. (b) The requested State may, when necessary, transmit documents or information to the Prosecutor on a confidential basis. The Prosecutor may then use them solely for the purpose of generating new evidence. (c) The requested State may, on its own motion or at the request of the Prosecutor, subsequently consent to the disclosure of such documents or information. They may then be used as evidence pursuant to the provisions of Parts 5 and 6 and in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 9. (a) (i) In the event that a State Party receives competing requests, other than for surrender or extradition, from the Court and from another State pursuant to an international obligation, the State Party shall endeavour, in consultation with the Court and the other State, to meet both requests, if necessary by postponing or attaching conditions to one or the other request. (ii) Failing that, competing requests shall be resolved in accordance with the principles established in article 90. (b) Where, however, the request from the Court concerns information, property or persons which are subject to the control of a third State or an international organization by virtue of an international agreement, the requested States shall so inform the Court and the Court shall direct its request to the third State or international organization. 10. (a) The Court may, upon request, cooperate with and provide assistance to a State Party conducting an investigation into or trial in respect of conduct which constitutes a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court or which constitutes a serious crime under the national law of the requesting State. (b) (i) The assistance provided under subparagraph (a) shall include, inter alia : a. The transmission of statements, documents or other types of evidence obtained in the course of an investigation or a trial conducted by the Court; and b. The questioning of any person detained by order of the Court;
47 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(ii) In the case of assistance under subparagraph (b) (i) a: a. If the documents or other types of evidence have been obtained with the assistance of a State, such transmission shall require the consent of that State; b. If the statements, documents or other types of evidence have been provided by a witness or expert, such transmission shall be subject to the provisions of article 68. (c) The Court may, under the conditions set out in this paragraph, grant a request for assistance under this paragraph from a State which is not a Party to this Statute. Article 94 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of ongoing investigation or prosecution 1. If the immediate execution of a request would interfere with an ongoing investigation or prosecution of a case different from that to which the request relates, the requested State may postpone the execution of the request for a period of time agreed upon with the Court. However, the postponement shall be no longer than is necessary to complete the relevant investigation or prosecution in the requested State. Before making a decision to postpone, the requested State should consider whether the assistance may be immediately provided subject to certain conditions. 2. If a decision to postpone is taken pursuant to paragraph 1, the Prosecutor may, however, seek measures to preserve evidence, pursuant to article 93, paragraph 1 (j). Article 95 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of an admissibility challenge Where there is an admissibility challenge under consideration by the Court pursuant to article 18 or 19, the requested State may postpone the execution of a request under this Part pending a determination by the Court, unless the Court has specifically ordered that the Prosecutor may pursue the collection of such evidence pursuant to article 18 or 19. Article 96 Contents of request for other forms of assistance under article 93 1. A request for other forms of assistance referred to in article 93 shall be made in writing. In urgent cases, a request may be made by any medium capable of delivering a written record, provided that the request shall be confirmed through the channel provided for in article 87, paragraph 1 (a). 2. The request shall, as applicable, contain or be supported by the following: (a) A concise statement of the purpose of the request and the assistance sought, including the legal basis and the grounds for the request; (b) As much detailed information as possible about the location or identification of any person or place that must be found or identified in order for the assistance sought to be provided; (c) A concise statement of the essential facts underlying the request; (d) The reasons for and details of any procedure or requirement to be followed; (e) Such information as may be required under the law of the requested State in order to execute the request; and (f) Any other information relevant in order for the assistance sought to be provided. 3. Upon the request of the Court, a State Party shall consult with the Court, either generally or with respect to a specific matter, regarding any requirements under its national law that may apply under paragraph 2 (e). During the consultations, the State Party shall advise the Court of the specific requirements of its national law. 4. The provisions of this article shall, where applicable, also apply in respect of a request for assistance made to the Court.
48 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 97 Consultations Where a State Party receives a request under this Part in relation to which it identifies problems which may impede or prevent the execution of the request, that State shall consult with the Court without delay in order to resolve the matter. Such problems may include, inter alia : (a) Insufficient information to execute the request; (b) In the case of a request for surrender, the fact that despite best efforts, the person sought cannot be located or that the investigation conducted has determined that the person in the requested State is clearly not the person named in the warrant; or (c) The fact that execution of the request in its current form would require the requested State to breach a pre-existing treaty obligation undertaken with respect to another State. Article 98 Cooperation with respect to waiver of immunity and consent to surrender 1. The Court may not proceed with a request for surrender or assistance which would require the requested State to act inconsistently with its obligations under international law with respect to the State or diplomatic immunity of a person or property of a third State, unless the Court can first obtain the cooperation of that third State for the waiver of the immunity. 2. The Court may not proceed with a request for surrender which would require the requested State to act inconsistently with its obligations under international agreements pursuant to which the consent of a sending State is required to surrender a person of that State to the Court, unless the Court can first obtain the cooperation of the sending State for the giving of consent for the surrender. Article 99 Execution of requests under articles 93 and 96 1. Requests for assistance shall be executed in accordance with the relevant procedure under the law of the requested State and, unless prohibited by such law, in the manner specified in the request, including following any procedure outlined therein or permitting persons specified in the request to be present at and assist in the execution process. 2. In the case of an urgent request, the documents or evidence produced in response shall, at the request of the Court, be sent urgently. 3. Replies from the requested State shall be transmitted in their original language and form. 4. Without prejudice to other articles in this Part, where it is necessary for the successful execution of a request which can be executed without any compulsory measures, including specifically the interview of or taking evidence from a person on a voluntary basis, including doing so without the presence of the authorities of the requested State Party if it is essential for the request to be executed, and the examination without modification of a public site or other public place, the Prosecutor may execute such request directly on the territory of a State as follows: (a) When the State Party requested is a State on the territory of which the crime is alleged to have been committed, and there has been a determination of admissibility pursuant to article 18 or 19, the Prosecutor may directly execute such request following all possible consultations with the requested State Party; (b) In other cases, the Prosecutor may execute such request following consultations with the requested State Party and subject to any reasonable conditions or concerns raised by that State Party. Where the requested State Party identifies problems with the execution of a request pursuant to this subparagraph it shall, without delay, consult with the Court to resolve the matter. 5. Provisions allowing a person heard or examined by the Court under article 72 to invoke restrictions designed to prevent disclosure of confidential information connected with national security shall also apply to the execution of requests for assistance under this article.
49 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 100 Costs 1. The ordinary costs for execution of requests in the territory of the requested State shall be borne by that State, except for the following, which shall be borne by the Court: (a) Costs associated with the travel and security of witnesses and experts or the transfer under article 93 of persons in custody; (b) Costs of translation, interpretation and transcription; (c) Travel and subsistence costs of the judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors, the Registrar, the Deputy Registrar and staff of any organ of the Court; (d) Costs of any expert opinion or report requested by the Court; (e) Costs associated with the transport of a person being surrendered to the Court by a custodial State; and (f) Following consultations, any extraordinary costs that may result from the execution of a request. 2. The provisions of paragraph 1 shall, as appropriate, apply to requests from States Parties to the Court. In that case, the Court shall bear the ordinary costs of execution. Article 101 Rule of speciality 1. A person surrendered to the Court under this Statute shall not be proceeded against, punished or detained for any conduct committed prior to surrender, other than the conduct or course of conduct which forms the basis of the crimes for which that person has been surrendered. 2. The Court may request a waiver of the requirements of paragraph 1 from the State which surrendered the person to the Court and, if necessary, the Court shall provide additional information in accordance with article 91. States Parties shall have the authority to provide a waiver to the Court and should endeavour to do so. Article 102 Use of terms For the purposes of this Statute: (a) "surrender" means the delivering up of a person by a State to the Court, pursuant to this Statute. (b) "extradition" means the delivering up of a person by one State to another as provided by treaty, convention or national legislation.
50 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 10. ENFORCEMENT Article 103 Role of States in enforcement of sentences of imprisonment 1. (a) A sentence of imprisonment shall be served in a State designated by the Court from a list of States which have indicated to the Court their willingness to accept sentenced persons. (b) At the time of declaring its willingness to accept sentenced persons, a State may attach conditions to its acceptance as agreed by the Court and in accordance with this Part. (c) A State designated in a particular case shall promptly inform the Court whether it accepts the Court's designation. 2. (a) The State of enforcement shall notify the Court of any circumstances, including the exercise of any conditions agreed under paragraph 1, which could materially affect the terms or extent of the imprisonment. The Court shall be given at least 45 days' notice of any such known or foreseeable circumstances. During this period, the State of enforcement shall take no action that might prejudice its obligations under article 110. (b) Where the Court cannot agree to the circumstances referred to in subparagraph (a), it shall notify the State of enforcement and proceed in accordance with article 104, paragraph 1. 3. In exercising its discretion to make a designation under paragraph 1, the Court shall take into account the following: (a) The principle that States Parties should share the responsibility for enforcing sentences of imprisonment, in accordance with principles of equitable distribution, as provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (b) The application of widely accepted international treaty standards governing the treatment of prisoners; (c) The views of the sentenced person; (d) The nationality of the sentenced person; (e) Such other factors regarding the circumstances of the crime or the person sentenced, or the effective enforcement of the sentence, as may be appropriate in designating the State of enforcement. 4. If no State is designated under paragraph 1, the sentence of imprisonment shall be served in a prison facility made available by the host State, in accordance with the conditions set out in the headquarters agreement referred to in article 3, paragraph 2. In such a case, the costs arising out of the enforcement of a sentence of imprisonment shall be borne by the Court. Article 104 Change in designation of State of enforcement 1. The Court may, at any time, decide to transfer a sentenced person to a prison of another State. 2. A sentenced person may, at any time, apply to the Court to be transferred from the State of enforcement. Article 105 Enforcement of the sentence 1. Subject to conditions which a State may have specified in accordance with article 103, paragraph 1 (b), the sentence of imprisonment shall be binding on the States Parties, which shall in no case modify it. 2. The Court alone shall have the right to decide any application for appeal and revision. The State of enforcement shall not impede the making of any such application by a sentenced person. Article 106 Supervision of enforcement of sentences and conditions of imprisonment 1. The enforcement of a sentence of imprisonment shall be subject to the supervision of the Court and shall be consistent with widely accepted international treaty standards governing treatment of prisoners.
51 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The conditions of imprisonment shall be governed by the law of the State of enforcement and shall be consistent with widely accepted international treaty standards governing treatment of prisoners; in no case shall such conditions be more or less favourable than those available to prisoners convicted of similar offences in the State of enforcement. 3. Communications between a sentenced person and the Court shall be unimpeded and confidential. Article 107 Transfer of the person upon completion of sentence 1. Following completion of the sentence, a person who is not a national of the State of enforcement may, in accordance with the law of the State of enforcement, be transferred to a State which is obliged to receive him or her, or to another State which agrees to receive him or her, taking into account any wishes of the person to be transferred to that State, unless the State of enforcement authorizes the person to remain in its territory. 2. If no State bears the costs arising out of transferring the person to another State pursuant to paragraph 1, such costs shall be borne by the Court. 3. Subject to the provisions of article 108, the State of enforcement may also, in accordance with its national law, extradite or otherwise surrender the person to a State which has requested the extradition or surrender of the person for purposes of trial or enforcement of a sentence. Article 108 Limitation on the prosecution or punishment of other offences 1. A sentenced person in the custody of the State of enforcement shall not be subject to prosecution or punishment or to extradition to a third State for any conduct engaged in prior to that person's delivery to the State of enforcement, unless such prosecution, punishment or extradition has been approved by the Court at the request of the State of enforcement. 2. The Court shall decide the matter after having heard the views of the sentenced person. 3. Paragraph 1 shall cease to apply if the sentenced person remains voluntarily for more than 30 days in the territory of the State of enforcement after having served the full sentence imposed by the Court, or returns to the territory of that State after having left it. Article 109 Enforcement of fines and forfeiture measures 1. States Parties shall give effect to fines or forfeitures ordered by the Court under Part 7, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties, and in accordance with the procedure of their national law. 2. If a State Party is unable to give effect to an order for forfeiture, it shall take measures to recover the value of the proceeds, property or assets ordered by the Court to be forfeited, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties. 3. Property, or the proceeds of the sale of real property or, where appropriate, the sale of other property, which is obtained by a State Party as a result of its enforcement of a judgement of the Court shall be transferred to the Court. Article 110 Review by the Court concerning reduction of sentence 1. The State of enforcement shall not release the person before expiry of the sentence pronounced by the Court. 2. The Court alone shall have the right to decide any reduction of sentence, and shall rule on the matter after having heard the person. 3. When the person has served two thirds of the sentence, or 25 years in the case of life imprisonment, the Court shall review the sentence to determine whether it should be reduced. Such a review shall not be conducted before that time. 4. In its review under paragraph 3, the Court may reduce the sentence if it finds that one or more of the following factors are present: (a) The early and continuing willingness of the person to cooperate with the Court in its investigations and prosecutions;
52 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) The voluntary assistance of the person in enabling the enforcement of the judgements and orders of the Court in other cases, and in particular providing assistance in locating assets subject to orders of fine, forfeiture or reparation which may be used for the benefit of victims; or (c) Other factors establishing a clear and significant change of circumstances sufficient to justify the reduction of sentence, as provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 5. If the Court determines in its initial review under paragraph 3 that it is not appropriate to reduce the sentence, it shall thereafter review the question of reduction of sentence at such intervals and applying such criteria as provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 111 Escape If a convicted person escapes from custody and flees the State of enforcement, that State may, after consultation with the Court, request the person's surrender from the State in which the person is located pursuant to existing bilateral or multilateral arrangements, or may request that the Court seek the person's surrender, in accordance with Part 9. It may direct that the person be delivered to the State in which he or she was serving the sentence or to another State designated by the Court.
53 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 11. ASSEMBLY OF STATES PARTIES Article 112 Assembly of States Parties 1. An Assembly of States Parties to this Statute is hereby established. Each State Party shall have one representative in the Assembly who may be accompanied by alternates and advisers. Other States which have signed this Statute or the Final Act may be observers in the Assembly. 2. The Assembly shall: (a) Consider and adopt, as appropriate, recommendations of the Preparatory Commission; (b) Provide management oversight to the Presidency, the Prosecutor and the Registrar regarding the administration of the Court; (c) Consider the reports and activities of the Bureau established under paragraph 3 and take appropriate action in regard thereto; (d) Consider and decide the budget for the Court; (e) Decide whether to alter, in accordance with article 36, the number of judges; (f) Consider pursuant to article 87, paragraphs 5 and 7, any question relating to non-cooperation; (g) Perform any other function consistent with this Statute or the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 3. (a) The Assembly shall have a Bureau consisting of a President, two Vice-Presidents and 18 members elected by the Assembly for three-year terms. (b) The Bureau shall have a representative character, taking into account, in particular, equitable geographical distribution and the adequate representation of the principal legal systems of the world. (c) The Bureau shall meet as often as necessary, but at least once a year. It shall assist the Assembly in the discharge of its responsibilities. 4. The Assembly may establish such subsidiary bodies as may be necessary, including an independent oversight mechanism for inspection, evaluation and investigation of the Court, in order to enhance its efficiency and economy. 5. The President of the Court, the Prosecutor and the Registrar or their representatives may participate, as appropriate, in meetings of the Assembly and of the Bureau. 6. The Assembly shall meet at the seat of the Court or at the Headquarters of the United Nations once a year and, when circumstances so require, hold special sessions. Except as otherwise specified in this Statute, special sessions shall be convened by the Bureau on its own initiative or at the request of one third of the States Parties. 7. Each State Party shall have one vote. Every effort shall be made to reach decisions by consensus in the Assembly and in the Bureau. If consensus cannot be reached, except as otherwise provided in the Statute: (a) Decisions on matters of substance must be approved by a two-thirds majority of those present and voting provided that an absolute majority of States Parties constitutes the quorum for voting; (b) Decisions on matters of procedure shall be taken by a simple majority of States Parties present and voting. 8. A State Party which is in arrears in the payment of its financial contributions towards the costs of the Court shall have no vote in the Assembly and in the Bureau if the amount of its arrears equals or exceeds the amount of the contributions due from it for the preceding two full years. The Assembly may, nevertheless, permit such a State Party to vote in the Assembly and in the Bureau if it is satisfied that the failure to pay is due to conditions beyond the control of the State Party. 9. The Assembly shall adopt its own rules of procedure. 10. The official and working languages of the Assembly shall be those of the General Assembly of the United Nations.
54 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 12. FINANCING Article 113 Financial Regulations Except as otherwise specifically provided, all financial matters related to the Court and the meetings of the Assembly of States Parties, including its Bureau and subsidiary bodies, shall be governed by this Statute and the Financial Regulations and Rules adopted by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 114 Payment of expenses Expenses of the Court and the Assembly of States Parties, including its Bureau and subsidiary bodies, shall be paid from the funds of the Court. Article 115 Funds of the Court and of the Assembly of States Parties The expenses of the Court and the Assembly of States Parties, including its Bureau and subsidiary bodies, as provided for in the budget decided by the Assembly of States Parties, shall be provided by the following sources: (a) Assessed contributions made by States Parties; (b) Funds provided by the United Nations, subject to the approval of the General Assembly, in particular in relation to the expenses incurred due to referrals by the Security Council. Article 116 Voluntary contributions Without prejudice to article 115, the Court may receive and utilize, as additional funds, voluntary contributions from Governments, international organizations, individuals, corporations and other entities, in accordance with relevant criteria adopted by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 117 Assessment of contributions The contributions of States Parties shall be assessed in accordance with an agreed scale of assessment, based on the scale adopted by the United Nations for its regular budget and adjusted in accordance with the principles on which that scale is based. Article 118 Annual audit The records, books and accounts of the Court, including its annual financial statements, shall be audited annually by an independent auditor.
55 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 13. FINAL CLAUSES Article 119 Settlement of disputes 1. Any dispute concerning the judicial functions of the Court shall be settled by the decision of the Court. 2. Any other dispute between two or more States Parties relating to the interpretation or application of this Statute which is not settled through negotiations within three months of their commencement shall be referred to the Assembly of States Parties. The Assembly may itself seek to settle the dispute or may make recommendations on further means of settlement of the dispute, including referral to the International Court of Justice in conformity with the Statute of that Court. Article 120 Reservations No reservations may be made to this Statute. Article 121 Amendments 1. After the expiry of seven years from the entry into force of this Statute, any State Party may propose amendments thereto. The text of any proposed amendment shall be submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall promptly circulate it to all States Parties. 2. No sooner than three months from the date of notification, the Assembly of States Parties, at its next meeting, shall, by a majority of those present and voting, decide whether to take up the proposal. The Assembly may deal with the proposal directly or convene a Review Conference if the issue involved so warrants. 3. The adoption of an amendment at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties or at a Review Conference on which consensus cannot be reached shall require a two-thirds majority of States Parties. 4. Except as provided in paragraph 5, an amendment shall enter into force for all States Parties one year after instruments of ratification or acceptance have been deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations by seven-eighths of them. 5. Any amendment to articles 5, 6, 7 and 8 of this Statute shall enter into force for those States Parties which have accepted the amendment one year after the deposit of their instruments of ratification or acceptance. In respect of a State Party which has not accepted the amendment, the Court shall not exercise its jurisdiction regarding a crime covered by the amendment when committed by that State Party's nationals or on its territory. 6. If an amendment has been accepted by seven-eighths of States Parties in accordance with paragraph 4, any State Party which has not accepted the amendment may withdraw from this Statute with immediate effect, notwithstanding article 127, paragraph 1, but subject to article 127, paragraph 2, by giving notice no later than one year after the entry into force of such amendment. 7. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall circulate to all States Parties any amendment adopted at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties or at a Review Conference. Article 122 Amendments to provisions of an institutional nature 1. Amendments to provisions of this Statute which are of an exclusively institutional nature, namely, article 35, article 36, paragraphs 8 and 9, article 37, article 38, article 39, paragraphs 1 (first two sentences), 2 and 4, article 42, paragraphs 4 to 9, article 43, paragraphs 2 and 3, and articles 44, 46, 47 and 49, may be proposed at any time, notwithstanding article 121, paragraph 1, by any State Party. The text of any proposed amendment shall be submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations or such other person designated by the Assembly of States Parties who shall promptly circulate it to all States Parties and to others participating in the Assembly. 2. Amendments under this article on which consensus cannot be reached shall be adopted by the Assembly of States Parties or by a Review Conference, by a two-thirds majority of States Parties. Such amendments shall enter into force for all States Parties six months after their adoption by the Assembly or, as the case may be, by the Conference.
56 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 123 Review of the Statute 1. Seven years after the entry into force of this Statute the Secretary-General of the United Nations shall convene a Review Conference to consider any amendments to this Statute. Such review may include, but is not limited to, the list of crimes contained in article 5. The Conference shall be open to those participating in the Assembly of States Parties and on the same conditions. 2. At any time thereafter, at the request of a State Party and for the purposes set out in paragraph 1, the Secretary-General of the United Nations shall, upon approval by a majority of States Parties, convene a Review Conference. 3. The provisions of article 121, paragraphs 3 to 7, shall apply to the adoption and entry into force of any amendment to the Statute considered at a Review Conference. Article 124 Transitional Provision Notwithstanding article 12, paragraphs 1 and 2, a State, on becoming a party to this Statute, may declare that, for a period of seven years after the entry into force of this Statute for the State concerned, it does not accept the jurisdiction of the Court with respect to the category of crimes referred to in article 8 when a crime is alleged to have been committed by its nationals or on its territory. A declaration under this article may be withdrawn at any time. The provisions of this article shall be reviewed at the Review Conference convened in accordance with article 123, paragraph 1. Article 125 Signature, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession 1. This Statute shall be open for signature by all States in Rome, at the headquarters of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, on 17 July 1998. Thereafter, it shall remain open for signature in Rome at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Italy until 17 October 1998. After that date, the Statute shall remain open for signature in New Y ork, at United Nations Headquarters, until 31 December 2000. 2. This Statute is subject to ratification, acceptance or approval by signatory States. Instruments of ratification, acceptance or approval shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. 3. This Statute shall be open to accession by all States. Instruments of accession shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Article 126 Entry into force 1. This Statute shall enter into force on the first day of the month after the 60th day following the date of the deposit of the 60th instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. 2. For each State ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to this Statute after the deposit of the 60th instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, the Statute shall enter into force on the first day of the month after the 60th day following the deposit by such State of its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Article 127 Withdrawal 1. A State Party may, by written notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, withdraw from this Statute. The withdrawal shall take effect one year after the date of receipt of the notification, unless the notification specifies a later date. 2. A State shall not be discharged, by reason of its withdrawal, from the obligations arising from this Statute while it was a Party to the Statute, including any financial obligations which may have accrued. Its withdrawal shall not affect any cooperation with the Court in connection with criminal investigations and proceedings in relation to which the withdrawing State had a duty to cooperate and which were commenced prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective, nor shall it prejudice in any way the continued consideration of any matter which was already under consideration by the Court prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective.
57 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 128 Authentic texts The original of this Statute, of which the Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish texts are equally authentic, shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall send certified copies thereof to all States. In W Itness W hereof , the undersigned, being duly authorized thereto by their respective Governments, have signed this Statute. Done at Rome, this 17th day of July 1998.
58 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court

[Previous Article]#[Next]

Snap Elections in Catalonia: Discard Illusions and Prepare for Struggle. Boycott the Electoral Farce! – The Red Herald (Red Herald)


We hereby publish an unofficial translation of an opinion-article on the upcoming Catalan elections.

Featured image: Boycott-Poster; Explanation: Maoism, embodied in Lenin, sweeps Catalonia of bourgeois politicians (Carles Puigdemont, Oriol Junqueras, Salvador Illa, Miquel Iceta, Ada Colau) and reactionaries of all kinds (Civil Guard, Riot Police, Fascists). The sweeping away of the old world brings the flags of tomorrow: socialist Catalonia federated in the Spanish Socialist Republic with the red flag of communism in the center.

The President of the Generality, Pere Aragonès, announced last Wednesday, March 13, that the regional elections were expedited to May 12. What should be the opinion of the revolutionaries on this matter? With this opinion article we aim to clarify some fundamental questions.

The parties of the Catalan bourgeoisie have betrayed the Catalan proletariat and people again and again

The torrent of mobilization and fury of the Catalan national liberation movement, whose qualitative leap we saw on October 1, 2017 with the holding of the referendum declared illegal by the Spanish State – and its subsequent repression – has led to nothing. We must learn a lesson from what happened.

The Catalan bourgeois politicians have betrayed the Catalan people over and over and again. They have governed in the same way as the political representatives of the Spanish imperialist bourgeoisie. The policy of the Generality of Catalonia (Junts, ERC, and PSC, including the CUP) regarding the increase in the CPI [Translator’s note: Consumer Price Index] and the gains has been the same: none. The policy regarding the housing issue has been the same: allow the gentrification of urban centers, allow the abusive increase in rents, evict the poorest families and vacate social centers. The health policy has been the same: privatization and cutting resources. The democratic rights policy has been the same: repress mobilizations and attack/torture political prisoners. The educational policy has been the same: allow the advancement of concerted and private education, cut resources and attack teachers’ labor rights. With one hand they falsely championed the right to an education in Catalan while with the other they attacked education. The international policy with the State of Israel has been the same: constant denial of the right to exist and defend Palestine. Immigration policy has been the same… even worse! The abuses of the Barcelona Urban Police and the Mossos d’Esquadra throughout Catalonia are notable. And a long etcetera in all the specific government policies.

“Thank goodness ours govern and not the PP and Vox” they say in the TV3 gatherings. The reality is that ERC, Junts and PSC govern exactly the same as PSOE, PP and Vox. The Catalan bourgeois politicians are class enemies of the proletariat and enemies of the people. They seek independence only for their economic interests, they do not hesitate to crush the proletariat and they absolutely do not care about the Catalan language and culture.

The national liberation movement at the crossroads:
follow the bourgeois path or the proletarian path?

There are two paths in the Catalan national liberation movement: the bourgeois path and the proletarian path. The two paths are completely different in class interests, method and objectives.

The bourgeois path serves the Catalan bourgeoisie, which seeks the independence of Catalonia from the Spanish State to become imperialist itself, continue oppressing its own people and take the leap to oppress other peoples in the world. The bourgeois path keeps the proletariat and the people in poverty, as it has done for centuries. Increase in prices and increase in the CPI, labor exploitation, increase in rents, evictions and police violence, etc. The Catalan bourgeois politicians in Barcelona have governed in the same way as the Spanish bourgeois politicians in Madrid. The bourgeois path urges the masses to participate in the electoral farce, seeking to extinguish the people’s desire for democratic rights and freedoms and spreads racism and chauvinism against the people (both the Spanish people and the oppressed nations of Latin America, Africa and Asia).

The proletarian path serves the proletariat and other democratic layers that make up the Catalan people (democratic petty bourgeoisie, small peasants, artisans and semi-proletarians, etc.), defends the right of self-determination and separation of nations tooth and nail, and fiercely combats the attacks of Spanish chauvinism against the Catalan language and culture. The proletarian path seeks the emancipation of the proletariat, destroying the oppressive bourgeois State – be it the Spanish one or a hypothetical Catalan State – to build socialism, to build the proletarian State. The proletarian path calls for proletarian internationalism and the common struggle of the proletariat of the nations of the Spanish State (Spain, Catalonia, Basque, Galicia) to struggle against the same enemy, the Spanish imperialist State, with the perspective of a federated Socialist Republic of nations and peoples inspired by the great and heroic Soviet Union. If the bourgeois path calls to participate in elections and legitimize the bourgeois State, the proletarian path calls to discard false parliamentary illusions and prepare for the present combats and those to come.

Boycott the electoral farce!

During the last few years, revisionists and opportunists of all kinds have called on the masses to participate in the electoral farce, to voice their political demands in parliament and to continue down the bourgeois path. The bourgeois path only serves the bourgeoisie. You cannot change the bourgeois State from within, you cannot change a machine of oppression from within. Much less can independence be achieved by participating within the institutions of the Spanish State (Generality, Provincial Councils, City Councils, …) and being part of it.

In an article published in Servir al Pueblo, it was explained, in a summarized way, why to apply the boycott. We reproduce it in full:

1. Why to boycott the elections?

– Because we chose the revolutionary path and socialism, the power of the working class against the bourgeoisie. The participation in the elections, directly or not directly, has nothing to do with the path to the socialism (proletarian revolution).

– Because the elections inside the Bourgeois State are a farce. This is the reason that we call them electoral farce or electoral farce of the bourgeoisie. There are not a farce because are rigged, but because don’t matter what you are gonna vote: there is no any democracy. All the really important decisions, absolutely all of them, are being decided in other ways and not in the parliamentary one.

– Because with the elections we chose the government, but not the State or the ruling class. The turn government is just the administrator of the interests of the financial oligarchy, the imperialist bourgeoisie, which is the ruler of the Spanish State. There is no substantial difference between all the governments of the Bourgeois democracy in the recent history (approximately, since 1975).

2. Why to vote is useless to stop fascism?

– Because the recent fascistization of the State (more presence on the streets and in the mass media of fascist parties/organizations, more influence of reactionary ideas, etc…) is the logic consequence of the militarization of the Spanish State. Since 1980, as approximate date, the States began to militarize themselves. Inside the plan of militarization of the Spanish State, the fascistization is a consequence of this. Therefore, a bigger presence of the fascism is not because of a electoral success. Is quite the opposite: the electoral success of reactionary forces and fascists is because of the fascism and the reaction being more present in the society, consequence of this militarization and fascistization of the States (and, in this case, of the Spanish State).

– There will be not more or less repression to the working class movement depending on the turn government, or at least, because of the decision of the party in the government. In other words, the bigger or smaller repression is because of the plans of the financial oligarchy, and not because of the plans of the bourgeois leader of turn. During the last years of progressive government of PSOE and Unidas Podemos, we have suffered repression in the general strike of the metal in Cadiz and Vigo; the imprisonment of the political prisoner Pablo Hasel; there have not repeal the “Ley Mordaza” [Translator’s note: the main repressive law in Spanish State, which the social-democrats promised to repeal]; they have been committed the genocide against the African masses in Melilla; they have committed thousands and thousands of evictions; they have infiltrated national policemen inside the social and political movements, etc.

3. Why is useless to vote the less bad option?

– Because the less bad option is not any option. Vote to PP, PSOE, Vox or Sumar doesn’t change anything, all of them are administrators of the financial capital. None of the parties of the parliament challenge nor the bourgeois order, neither the Spanish imperialist. During the last years of the progressive government of PSOE and Unidas Podemos, the life conditions of the working class became worst in all the aspects. We are gonna reward the administrators of the financial capital voting them again with the excuse of “stop the fascism” to allow them to worsen our life in the next years?

Because vote the less bad option doesn’t protect civil, social or trade-unionist rights. Which rights we have recovered with the progresist government of coalitin between PSOE and Unidas Podemos? They have break up the union movement and have repressed the movements of the combative masses. The prices are increasing much more than wages. The alleged winning of rights for the proletarian woman and the LGTB collective is a ghost in a paper, meanwhile the hate crimes non stop their increase. What have done the government for the proletariat?”

The Catalan proletariat must struggle side by side with the Spanish, Basque and Galician proletariat

The Catalan proletariat will be completely free not only when its national rights are respected, but when it is liberated as a social class. And that involves the destruction of the Spanish imperialist State, the old bourgeois State, and the generation of a new power, the new proletarian State. The Catalan proletariat cannot fight alone against the Spanish imperialist State. It must fight side by side with the Spanish, Basque and Galician proletariat as class brothers against the common enemy: the Spanish State, Spanish imperialism.

This titanic task involves the reconstitution of the Communist Party of Spain as a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, mainly Maoist, Party with the universally valid contributions of Chairman Gonzalo. A militarized Party prepared to take political power with People’s War and with the perspective of shaping the dictatorship of the proletariat as a federal Socialist Republic where the proletariat of all nations struggle, as class brothers and ultimately, until communism.

Thus, and only thus, the Catalan proletariat will be free. And the first step cannot be other than delegitimate the electoral farce, discard illusions in bourgeois democracy and preparing for the battles that will come in the struggle against the Spanish State.

No bourgeois politician will liberate Catalonia!
They have governed, they govern and they will govern against the Catalan proletariat and people!

Against all chauvinism and national narrow-mindedness!
For the class brotherhood between the Catalan proletariat and the Spanish, Basque and Galician proletariat!

For the Federal Socialist Republic where the proletariat of the different nations struggle side by side until communism!

Do not vote on May 12, boycott the electoral farce!
Throw away illusions and prepare for the fight!

PDF Content:



The text of the Rome Statute reproduced herein was originally circulated as document A/CONF.183/9 of 17 J uly 1 998 and corrected by procès-verbaux of 10 November 1998, 12 July 1999, 30 November 1999, 8 May 2000, 17 January 2001 and 16 January 2002. The amendments to article 8 reproduce the text contained in depositary notification C.N.651.2010 Treaties-6, while the amendments regarding articles 8 bis, 15 bis and 15 ter replicate the text contained in depositary notification C.N.651.2010 Treaties-8; both depositary communications are dated 29 November 2010. The table of contents is not part of the text of the Rome Statute adopted by the United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court on 17 July 1998. It has been included in this publication for ease of reference. Done at Rome on 17 July 1998, in force on 1 July 2002, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2187, No. 38544, Depositary: Secretary-General of the United Nations, http://treaties.un.org .Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPublished by the International Criminal Court ISBN No. 92-9227-232-2 ICC-PIOS-LT-03-002/15_Eng Copyright © International Criminal Court 2011 All rights reserved International Criminal Court | Po Box 19519 | 2500 CM | The Hague | The Netherlands | www.icc-cpi.int
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Table of Contents PREAMBLE 1 PART 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COURT 2 Article 1 The Court 2 Article 2 Relationship of the Court with the United Nations 2 Article 3 Seat of the Court 2 Article 4 Legal status and powers of the Court 2 PART 2. JURISDICTION, ADMISSIBILITY AND APPLICABLE LAW 3 Article 5 Crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court 3 Article 6 Genocide 3 Article 7 Crimes against humanity 3 Article 8 War crimes 4 Article 8 bis Crime of aggression 7 Article 9 Elements of Crimes 8 Article 10 8 Article 11 Jurisdiction ratione temporis 8 Article 12 Preconditions to the exercise of jurisdiction 8 Article 13 Exercise of jurisdiction 9 Article 14 Referral of a situation by a State Party 9 Article 15 Prosecutor 9 Article 15 bis Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (State referral, proprio motu ) 9 Article 15 ter Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (Security Council referral) 10 Article 16 Deferral of investigation or prosecution 10 Article 17 Issues of admissibility 10 Article 18 Preliminary rulings regarding admissibility 11 Article 19 Challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court or the admissibility of a case 12 Article 20 Ne bis in idem 1 3 Article 21 Applicable law 13 PART 3. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW 14 Article 22 Nullum crimen sine lege 14 Article 23 Nulla poena sine lege 14 Article 24 Non-retroactivity ratione personae 14 Article 25 Individual criminal responsibility 14 Article 26 Exclusion of jurisdiction over persons under eighteen 15 Article 27 Irrelevance of official capacity 15 Article 28 Responsibility of commanders and other superiors 15 Article 29 Non-applicability of statute of limitations 15 Article 30 Mental element 15 Article 31 Grounds for excluding criminal responsibility 16 Article 32 Mistake of fact or mistake of law 16 Article 33 Superior orders and prescription of law 16 PART 4. COMPOSITION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE COURT 17 Article 34 Organs of the Court 17 Article 35 Service of judges 17 Article 36 Qualifications, nomination and election of judges 17 Article 37 Judicial vacancies 19 Article 38 The Presidency 19 Article 39 Chambers 19 Article 40 Independence of the judges 20
Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 41 Excusing and disqualification of judges 20 Article 42 The Office of the Prosecutor 20 Article 44 Staff 21 Article 45 Solemn undertaking 21 Article 46 Removal from office 22 Article 47 Disciplinary measures 22 Article 48 Privileges and immunities 22 Article 49 Salaries, allowances and expenses 23 Article 50 Official and working languages 23 Article 51 Rules of Procedure and Evidence 23 Article 52 Regulations of the Court 23 PART 5. INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION 24 Article 53 Initiation of an investigation 24 Article 54 Duties and powers of the Prosecutor with respect to investigations 24 Article 55 Rights of persons during an investigation 25 Article 56 Role of the Pre-Trial Chamber in relation to a unique investigative opportunity 25 Article 57 Functions and powers of the Pre-Trial Chamber 26 Article 58 Issuance by the Pre-Trial Chamber of a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear 27 Article 59 Arrest proceedings in the custodial State 28 Article 60 Initial proceedings before the Court 28 Article 61 Confirmation of the charges before trial 28 PART 6. THE TRIAL 31 Article 62 Place of trial 31 Article 63 Trial in the presence of the accused 31 Article 64 Functions and powers of the Trial Chamber 31 Article 65 Proceedings on an admission of guilt 32 Article 66 Presumption of innocence 32 Article 67 Rights of the accused 33 Article 68 Protection of the victims and witnesses and their participation in the proceedings 33 Article 69 Evidence 34 Article 70 Offences against the administration of justice 34 Article 71 Sanctions for misconduct before the Court 35 Article 72 Protection of national security information 35 Article 73 Third-party information or documents 36 Article 74 Requirements for the decision 36 Article 75 Reparations to victims 36 Article 76 Sentencing 37 PART 7. PENALTIES 38 Article 77 Applicable penalties 38 Article 78 Determination of the sentence 38 Article 79 Trust Fund 38 Article 80 Non-prejudice to national application of penalties and national laws 38 PART 8. APPEAL AND REVISION 39 Article 81 Appeal against decision of acquittal or conviction or against sentence 39 Article 82 Appeal against other decisions 39 Article 83 Proceedings on appeal 40 Article 84 Revision of conviction or sentence 40 Article 85 Compensation to an arrested or convicted person 41
Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 9. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AND JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE 42 Article 86 General obligation to cooperate 42 Article 87 Requests for cooperation: general provisions 42 Article 88 Availability of procedures under national law 42 Article 89 Surrender of persons to the Court 42 Article 90 Competing requests 43 Article 91 Contents of request for arrest and surrender 44 Article 92 Provisional arrest 45 Article 93 Other forms of cooperation 45 Article 94 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of ongoing investigation or prosecution 47 Article 95 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of an admissibility challenge 47 Article 96 Contents of request for other forms of assistance under article 93 47 Article 97 Consultations 48 Article 98 Cooperation with respect to waiver of immunity and consent to surrender 48 Article 99 Execution of requests under articles 93 and 96 48 Article 100 Costs 49 Article 101 Rule of speciality 49 Article 102 Use of terms 49 PART 10. ENFORCEMENT 50 Article 103 Role of States in enforcement of sentences of imprisonment 50 Article 104 Change in designation of State of enforcement 50 Article 105 Enforcement of the sentence 50 Article 106 Supervision of enforcement of sentences and conditions of imprisonment 50 Article 107 Transfer of the person upon completion of sentence 51 Article 108 Limitation on the prosecution or punishment of other offences 51 Article 109 Enforcement of fines and forfeiture measures 51 Article 110 Review by the Court concerning reduction of sentence 51 Article 111 Escape 52 PART 11. ASSEMBLY OF STATES PARTIES 53 Article 112 Assembly of States Parties 53 PART 12. FINANCING 54 Article 113 Financial Regulations 54 Article 114 Payment of expenses 54 Article 115 Funds of the Court and of the Assembly of States Parties 54 Article 116 Voluntary contributions 54 Article 117 Assessment of contributions 54 Article 118 Annual audit 54 PART 13. FINAL CLAUSES 55 Article 119 Settlement of disputes 55 Article 120 Reservations 55 Article 121 Amendments 55 Article 122 Amendments to provisions of an institutional nature 55 Article 123 Review of the Statute 56 Article 124 Transitional Provision 56 Article 125 Signature, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession 56 Article 126 Entry into force 56 Article 127 Withdrawal 56 Article 128 Authentic texts 57
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
1 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPREAMBLE The States Parties to this Statute, Conscious that all peoples are united by common bonds, their cultures pieced together in a shared heritage, and concerned that this delicate mosaic may be shattered at any time, Mindful that during this century millions of children, women and men have been victims of unimaginable atrocities that deeply shock the conscience of humanity, Recognizing that such grave crimes threaten the peace, security and well-being of the world, Affirming that the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole must not go unpunished and that their effective prosecution must be ensured by taking measures at the national level and by enhancing international cooperation, Determined to put an end to impunity for the perpetrators of these crimes and thus to contribute to the prevention of such crimes, Recalling that it is the duty of every State to exercise its criminal jurisdiction over those responsible for international crimes, Reaffirming the Purposes and Principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and in particular that all States shall refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations, Emphasizing in this connection that nothing in this Statute shall be taken as authorizing any State Party to intervene in an armed conflict or in the internal affairs of any State, Determined to these ends and for the sake of present and future generations, to establish an independent permanent International Criminal Court in relationship with the United Nations system, with jurisdiction over the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole, Emphasizing that the International Criminal Court established under this Statute shall be complementary to national criminal jurisdictions, Resolved to guarantee lasting respect for and the enforcement of international justice, Have agreed as follows:
2 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COURT Article 1 The Court An International Criminal Court ("the Court") is hereby established. It shall be a permanent institution and shall have the power to exercise its jurisdiction over persons for the most serious crimes of international concern, as referred to in this Statute, and shall be complementary to national criminal jurisdictions. The jurisdiction and functioning of the Court shall be governed by the provisions of this Statute. Article 2 Relationship of the Court with the United Nations The Court shall be brought into relationship with the United Nations through an agreement to be approved by the Assembly of States Parties to this Statute and thereafter concluded by the President of the Court on its behalf. Article 3 Seat of the Court 1. The seat of the Court shall be established at The Hague in the Netherlands ("the host State"). 2. The Court shall enter into a headquarters agreement with the host State, to be approved by the Assembly of States Parties and thereafter concluded by the President of the Court on its behalf. 3. The Court may sit elsewhere, whenever it considers it desirable, as provided in this Statute. Article 4 Legal status and powers of the Court 1. The Court shall have international legal personality. It shall also have such legal capacity as may be necessary for the exercise of its functions and the fulfilment of its purposes. 2. The Court may exercise its functions and powers, as provided in this Statute, on the territory of any State Party and, by special agreement, on the territory of any other State.
3 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 2. JURISDICTION, ADMISSIBILITY AND APPLICABLE LAW Article 51 Crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court The jurisdiction of the Court shall be limited to the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole. The Court has jurisdiction in accordance with this Statute with respect to the following crimes: (a) The crime of genocide; (b) Crimes against humanity; (c) War crimes; (d) The crime of aggression. Article 6 Genocide For the purpose of this Statute, "genocide" means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. Article 7 Crimes against humanity 1. For the purpose of this Statute, "crime against humanity" means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack: (a) Murder; (b) Extermination; (c) Enslavement; (d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population; (e) Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law; (f) Torture; (g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity; (h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; (i) Enforced disappearance of persons; (j) The crime of apartheid; (k) Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health. 1 Paragraph 2 of article 5 (“The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression once a provision is adopted in accordance with articles 121 and 123 defining the crime and setting out the conditions under which the Court shall exercise jurisdiction with respect to this crime. Such a provision shall be consistent with the relevant provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.”) was deleted in accordance with RC/Res.6, annex I, of 11 June 2010.
4 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. For the purpose of paragraph 1: (a) "Attack directed against any civilian population" means a course of conduct involving the multiple commission of acts referred to in paragraph 1 against any civilian population, pursuant to or in furtherance of a State or organizational policy to commit such attack; (b) "Extermination" includes the intentional infliction of conditions of life, inter alia the deprivation of access to food and medicine, calculated to bring about the destruction of part of a population; (c) "Enslavement" means the exercise of any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership over a person and includes the exercise of such power in the course of trafficking in persons, in particular women and children; (d) "Deportation or forcible transfer of population" means forced displacement of the persons concerned by expulsion or other coercive acts from the area in which they are lawfully present, without grounds permitted under international law; (e) "Torture" means the intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, upon a person in the custody or under the control of the accused; except that torture shall not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions; (f) "Forced pregnancy" means the unlawful confinement of a woman forcibly made pregnant, with the intent of affecting the ethnic composition of any population or carrying out other grave violations of international law. This definition shall not in any way be interpreted as affecting national laws relating to pregnancy; (g) "Persecution" means the intentional and severe deprivation of fundamental rights contrary to international law by reason of the identity of the group or collectivity; (h) "The crime of apartheid" means inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime; (i) "Enforced disappearance of persons" means the arrest, detention or abduction of persons by, or with the authorization, support or acquiescence of, a State or a political organization, followed by a refusal to acknowledge that deprivation of freedom or to give information on the fate or whereabouts of those persons, with the intention of removing them from the protection of the law for a prolonged period of time. 3. For the purpose of this Statute, it is understood that the term "gender" refers to the two sexes, male and female, within the context of society. The term "gender" does not indicate any meaning different from the above. Article 82 War crimes 1. The Court shall have jurisdiction in respect of war crimes in particular when committed as part of a plan or policy or as part of a large-scale commission of such crimes. 2. For the purpose of this Statute, "war crimes" means: (a) Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention: (i) Wilful killing; (ii) Torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments; (iii) Wilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health; (iv) Extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly; (v) Compelling a prisoner of war or other protected person to serve in the forces of a hostile Power; (vi) Wilfully depriving a prisoner of war or other protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial; 2 Paragraphs 2 (e) (xiii) to 2 (e) (xv) were amended by resolution RC/Res.5 of 11 June 2010 (adding paragraphs 2 (e) (xiii) to 2 (e) (xv)).
5 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(vii) Unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement; (viii) Taking of hostages. (b) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts: (i) Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities; (ii) Intentionally directing attacks against civilian objects, that is, objects which are not military objectives; (iii) Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict; (iv) Intentionally launching an attack in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated; (v) Attacking or bombarding, by whatever means, towns, villages, dwellings or buildings which are undefended and which are not military objectives; (vi) Killing or wounding a combatant who, having laid down his arms or having no longer means of defence, has surrendered at discretion; (vii) Making improper use of a flag of truce, of the flag or of the military insignia and uniform of the enemy or of the United Nations, as well as of the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions, resulting in death or serious personal injury; (viii) The transfer, directly or indirectly, by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies, or the deportation or transfer of all or parts of the population of the occupied territory within or outside this territory; (ix) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military objectives; (x) Subjecting persons who are in the power of an adverse party to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons; (xi) Killing or wounding treacherously individuals belonging to the hostile nation or army; (xii) Declaring that no quarter will be given; (xiii) Destroying or seizing the enemy's property unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war; (xiv) Declaring abolished, suspended or inadmissible in a court of law the rights and actions of the nationals of the hostile party; (xv) Compelling the nationals of the hostile party to take part in the operations of war directed against their own country, even if they were in the belligerent's service before the commencement of the war; (xvi) Pillaging a town or place, even when taken by assault; (xvii) Employing poison or poisoned weapons; (xviii) Employing asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and all analogous liquids, materials or devices;
6 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(xix) Employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions; (xx) Employing weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare which are of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering or which are inherently indiscriminate in violation of the international law of armed conflict, provided that such weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare are the subject of a comprehensive prohibition and are included in an annex to this Statute, by an amendment in accordance with the relevant provisions set forth in articles 121 and 123; (xxi) Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (xxii) Committing rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, as defined in article 7, paragraph 2 (f), enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence also constituting a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions; (xxiii) Utilizing the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas or military forces immune from military operations; (xxiv) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings, material, medical units and transport, and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions in conformity with international law; (xxv) Intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions; (xxvi) Conscripting or enlisting children under the age of fifteen years into the national armed forces or using them to participate actively in hostilities. (c) In the case of an armed conflict not of an international character, serious violations of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts committed against persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention or any other cause: (i) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; (ii) Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (iii) Taking of hostages; (iv) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgement pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all judicial guarantees which are generally recognized as indispensable. (d) Paragraph 2 (c) applies to armed conflicts not of an international character and thus does not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence or other acts of a similar nature. (e) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in armed conflicts not of an international character, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts: (i) Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities; (ii) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings, material, medical units and transport, and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions in conformity with international law; (iii) Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict; (iv) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military objectives; (v) Pillaging a town or place, even when taken by assault;
7 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(vi) Committing rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, as defined in article 7, paragraph 2 (f), enforced sterilization, and any other form of sexual violence also constituting a serious violation of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions; (vii) Conscripting or enlisting children under the age of fifteen years into armed forces or groups or using them to participate actively in hostilities; (viii) Ordering the displacement of the civilian population for reasons related to the conflict, unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand; (ix) Killing or wounding treacherously a combatant adversary; (x) Declaring that no quarter will be given; (xi) Subjecting persons who are in the power of another party to the conflict to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons; (xii) Destroying or seizing the property of an adversary unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of the conflict; (xiii) Employing poison or poisoned weapons; (xiv) Employing asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and all analogous liquids, materials or devices; (xv) Employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions. (f) Paragraph 2 (e) applies to armed conflicts not of an international character and thus does not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence or other acts of a similar nature. It applies to armed conflicts that take place in the territory of a State when there is protracted armed conflict between governmental authorities and organized armed groups or between such groups. 3. Nothing in paragraph 2 (c) and (e) shall affect the responsibility of a Government to maintain or re- establish law and order in the State or to defend the unity and territorial integrity of the State, by all legitimate means. Article 8 bis3 Crime of aggression 1. For the purpose of this Statute, “crime of aggression” means the planning, preparation, initiation or execution, by a person in a position effectively to exercise control over or to direct the political or military action of a State, of an act of aggression which, by its character, gravity and scale, constitutes a manifest violation of the Charter of the United Nations. 2. For the purpose of paragraph 1, “act of aggression” means the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations. Any of the following acts, regardless of a declaration of war, shall, in accordance with United Nations General Assembly resolution 3314 (XXIX) of 14 December 1974, qualify as an act of aggression: (a) The invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another State, or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such invasion or attack, or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State or part thereof; (b) Bombardment by the armed forces of a State against the territory of another State or the use of any weapons by a State against the territory of another State; (c) The blockade of the ports or coasts of a State by the armed forces of another State; (d) An attack by the armed forces of a State on the land, sea or air forces, or marine and air fleets of another State; 3 Inserted by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010.
8 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(e) The use of armed forces of one State which are within the territory of another State with the agreement of the receiving State, in contravention of the conditions provided for in the agreement or any extension of their presence in such territory beyond the termination of the agreement; (f) The action of a State in allowing its territory, which it has placed at the disposal of another State, to be used by that other State for perpetrating an act of aggression against a third State; (g) The sending by or on behalf of a State of armed bands, groups, irregulars or mercenaries, which carry out acts of armed force against another State of such gravity as to amount to the acts listed above, or its substantial involvement therein. Article 94 Elements of Crimes 1. Elements of Crimes shall assist the Court in the interpretation and application of articles 6, 7, 8 and 8 bis. They shall be adopted by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 2. Amendments to the Elements of Crimes may be proposed by: (a) Any State Party; (b) The judges acting by an absolute majority; (c) The Prosecutor. Such amendments shall be adopted by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 3. The Elements of Crimes and amendments thereto shall be consistent with this Statute. Article 10 Nothing in this Part shall be interpreted as limiting or prejudicing in any way existing or developing rules of international law for purposes other than this Statute. Article 11 Jurisdiction ratione temporis 1. The Court has jurisdiction only with respect to crimes committed after the entry into force of this Statute. 2. If a State becomes a Party to this Statute after its entry into force, the Court may exercise its jurisdiction only with respect to crimes committed after the entry into force of this Statute for that State, unless that State has made a declaration under article 12, paragraph 3. Article 12 Preconditions to the exercise of jurisdiction 1. A State which becomes a Party to this Statute thereby accepts the jurisdiction of the Court with respect to the crimes referred to in article 5. 2. In the case of article 13, paragraph (a) or (c), the Court may exercise its jurisdiction if one or more of the following States are Parties to this Statute or have accepted the jurisdiction of the Court in accordance with paragraph 3: (a) The State on the territory of which the conduct in question occurred or, if the crime was committed on board a vessel or aircraft, the State of registration of that vessel or aircraft; (b) The State of which the person accused of the crime is a national. 3. If the acceptance of a State which is not a Party to this Statute is required under paragraph 2, that State may, by declaration lodged with the Registrar, accept the exercise of jurisdiction by the Court with respect to the crime in question. The accepting State shall cooperate with the Court without any delay or exception in accordance with Part 9. 4 As amended by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010 (inserting the reference to article 8 bis).
9 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 13 Exercise of jurisdiction The Court may exercise its jurisdiction with respect to a crime referred to in article 5 in accordance with the provisions of this Statute if: (a) A situation in which one or more of such crimes appears to have been committed is referred to the Prosecutor by a State Party in accordance with article 14; (b) A situation in which one or more of such crimes appears to have been committed is referred to the Prosecutor by the Security Council acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations; or (c) The Prosecutor has initiated an investigation in respect of such a crime in accordance with article 15. Article 14 Referral of a situation by a State Party 1. A State Party may refer to the Prosecutor a situation in which one or more crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court appear to have been committed requesting the Prosecutor to investigate the situation for the purpose of determining whether one or more specific persons should be charged with the commission of such crimes. 2. As far as possible, a referral shall specify the relevant circumstances and be accompanied by such supporting documentation as is available to the State referring the situation. Article 15 Prosecutor 1. The Prosecutor may initiate investigations proprio motu on the basis of information on crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. 2. The Prosecutor shall analyse the seriousness of the information received. For this purpose, he or she may seek additional information from States, organs of the United Nations, intergovernmental or non- governmental organizations, or other reliable sources that he or she deems appropriate, and may receive written or oral testimony at the seat of the Court. 3. If the Prosecutor concludes that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation, he or she shall submit to the Pre-Trial Chamber a request for authorization of an investigation, together with any supporting material collected. Victims may make representations to the Pre-Trial Chamber, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. If the Pre-Trial Chamber, upon examination of the request and the supporting material, considers that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation, and that the case appears to fall within the jurisdiction of the Court, it shall authorize the commencement of the investigation, without prejudice to subsequent determinations by the Court with regard to the jurisdiction and admissibility of a case. 5. The refusal of the Pre-Trial Chamber to authorize the investigation shall not preclude the presentation of a subsequent request by the Prosecutor based on new facts or evidence regarding the same situation. 6. If, after the preliminary examination referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, the Prosecutor concludes that the information provided does not constitute a reasonable basis for an investigation, he or she shall inform those who provided the information. This shall not preclude the Prosecutor from considering further information submitted to him or her regarding the same situation in the light of new facts or evidence. Article 15 bis5 Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (State referral, proprio motu ) 1. The Court may exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with article 13, paragraphs (a) and (c), subject to the provisions of this article. 2. The Court may exercise jurisdiction only with respect to crimes of aggression committed one year after the ratification or acceptance of the amendments by thirty States Parties. 3. The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with this article, subject to a decision to be taken after 1 January 2017 by the same majority of States Parties as is required for the adoption of an amendment to the Statute. 5 Inserted by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010.
10 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court4. The Court may, in accordance with article 12, exercise jurisdiction over a crime of aggression, arising from an act of aggression committed by a State Party, unless that State Party has previously declared that it does not accept such jurisdiction by lodging a declaration with the Registrar. The withdrawal of such a declaration may be effected at any time and shall be considered by the State Party within three years. 5. In respect of a State that is not a party to this Statute, the Court shall not exercise its jurisdiction over the crime of aggression when committed by that State’s nationals or on its territory. 6. Where the Prosecutor concludes that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation in respect of a crime of aggression, he or she shall first ascertain whether the Security Council has made a determination of an act of aggression committed by the State concerned. The Prosecutor shall notify the Secretary-General of the United Nations of the situation before the Court, including any relevant information and documents. 7. Where the Security Council has made such a determination, the Prosecutor may proceed with the investigation in respect of a crime of aggression. 8. Where no such determination is made within six months after the date of notification, the Prosecutor may proceed with the investigation in respect of a crime of aggression, provided that the Pre-Trial Division has authorized the commencement of the investigation in respect of a crime of aggression in accordance with the procedure contained in article 15, and the Security Council has not decided otherwise in accordance with article16. 9. A determination of an act of aggression by an organ outside the Court shall be without prejudice to the Court’s own findings under this Statute. 10. This article is without prejudice to the provisions relating to the exercise of jurisdiction with respect to other crimes referred to in article 5. Article 15 ter6 Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (Security Council referral) 1. The Court may exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with article 13, paragraph (b), subject to the provisions of this article. 2. The Court may exercise jurisdiction only with respect to crimes of aggression committed one year after the ratification or acceptance of the amendments by thirty States Parties. 3. The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with this article, subject to a decision to be taken after 1 January 2017 by the same majority of States Parties as is required for the adoption of an amendment to the Statute. 4. A determination of an act of aggression by an organ outside the Court shall be without prejudice to the Court’s own findings under this Statute. 5. This article is without prejudice to the provisions relating to the exercise of jurisdiction with respect to other crimes referred to in article 5. Article 16 Deferral of investigation or prosecution No investigation or prosecution may be commenced or proceeded with under this Statute for a period of 12 months after the Security Council, in a resolution adopted under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, has requested the Court to that effect; that request may be renewed by the Council under the same conditions. Article 17 Issues of admissibility 1. Having regard to paragraph 10 of the Preamble and article 1, the Court shall determine that a case is inadmissible where: (a) The case is being investigated or prosecuted by a State which has jurisdiction over it, unless the State is unwilling or unable genuinely to carry out the investigation or prosecution; 6 Inserted by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010.
11 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) The case has been investigated by a State which has jurisdiction over it and the State has decided not to prosecute the person concerned, unless the decision resulted from the unwillingness or inability of the State genuinely to prosecute; (c) The person concerned has already been tried for conduct which is the subject of the complaint, and a trial by the Court is not permitted under article 20, paragraph 3; (d) The case is not of sufficient gravity to justify further action by the Court. 2. In order to determine unwillingness in a particular case, the Court shall consider, having regard to the principles of due process recognized by international law, whether one or more of the following exist, as applicable: (a) The proceedings were or are being undertaken or the national decision was made for the purpose of shielding the person concerned from criminal responsibility for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court referred to in article 5; (b) There has been an unjustified delay in the proceedings which in the circumstances is inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice; (c) The proceedings were not or are not being conducted independently or impartially, and they were or are being conducted in a manner which, in the circumstances, is inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice. 3. In order to determine inability in a particular case, the Court shall consider whether, due to a total or substantial collapse or unavailability of its national judicial system, the State is unable to obtain the accused or the necessary evidence and testimony or otherwise unable to carry out its proceedings. Article 18 Preliminary rulings regarding admissibility 1. When a situation has been referred to the Court pursuant to article 13 (a) and the Prosecutor has determined that there would be a reasonable basis to commence an investigation, or the Prosecutor initiates an investigation pursuant to articles 13 (c) and 15, the Prosecutor shall notify all States Parties and those States which, taking into account the information available, would normally exercise jurisdiction over the crimes concerned. The Prosecutor may notify such States on a confidential basis and, where the Prosecutor believes it necessary to protect persons, prevent destruction of evidence or prevent the absconding of persons, may limit the scope of the information provided to States. 2. Within one month of receipt of that notification, a State may inform the Court that it is investigating or has investigated its nationals or others within its jurisdiction with respect to criminal acts which may constitute crimes referred to in article 5 and which relate to the information provided in the notification to States. At the request of that State, the Prosecutor shall defer to the State's investigation of those persons unless the Pre-Trial Chamber, on the application of the Prosecutor, decides to authorize the investigation. 3. The Prosecutor's deferral to a State's investigation shall be open to review by the Prosecutor six months after the date of deferral or at any time when there has been a significant change of circumstances based on the State's unwillingness or inability genuinely to carry out the investigation. 4. The State concerned or the Prosecutor may appeal to the Appeals Chamber against a ruling of the Pre-Trial Chamber, in accordance with article 82. The appeal may be heard on an expedited basis. 5. When the Prosecutor has deferred an investigation in accordance with paragraph 2, the Prosecutor may request that the State concerned periodically inform the Prosecutor of the progress of its investigations and any subsequent prosecutions. States Parties shall respond to such requests without undue delay. 6. Pending a ruling by the Pre-Trial Chamber, or at any time when the Prosecutor has deferred an investigation under this article, the Prosecutor may, on an exceptional basis, seek authority from the Pre-Trial Chamber to pursue necessary investigative steps for the purpose of preserving evidence where there is a unique opportunity to obtain important evidence or there is a significant risk that such evidence may not be subsequently available. 7. A State which has challenged a ruling of the Pre-Trial Chamber under this article may challenge the admissibility of a case under article 19 on the grounds of additional significant facts or significant change of circumstances.
12 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 19 Challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court or the admissibility of a case 1. The Court shall satisfy itself that it has jurisdiction in any case brought before it. The Court may, on its own motion, determine the admissibility of a case in accordance with article 17. 2. Challenges to the admissibility of a case on the grounds referred to in article 17 or challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court may be made by: (a) An accused or a person for whom a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear has been issued under article 58; (b) A State which has jurisdiction over a case, on the ground that it is investigating or prosecuting the case or has investigated or prosecuted; or (c) A State from which acceptance of jurisdiction is required under article 12. 3. The Prosecutor may seek a ruling from the Court regarding a question of jurisdiction or admissibility. In proceedings with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility, those who have referred the situation under article 13, as well as victims, may also submit observations to the Court. 4. The admissibility of a case or the jurisdiction of the Court may be challenged only once by any person or State referred to in paragraph 2. The challenge shall take place prior to or at the commencement of the trial. In exceptional circumstances, the Court may grant leave for a challenge to be brought more than once or at a time later than the commencement of the trial. Challenges to the admissibility of a case, at the commencement of a trial, or subsequently with the leave of the Court, may be based only on article 17, paragraph 1 (c). 5. A State referred to in paragraph 2 (b) and (c) shall make a challenge at the earliest opportunity. 6. Prior to the confirmation of the charges, challenges to the admissibility of a case or challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court shall be referred to the Pre-Trial Chamber. After confirmation of the charges, they shall be referred to the Trial Chamber. Decisions with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility may be appealed to the Appeals Chamber in accordance with article 82. 7. If a challenge is made by a State referred to in paragraph 2 (b) or (c), the Prosecutor shall suspend the investigation until such time as the Court makes a determination in accordance with article 17. 8. Pending a ruling by the Court, the Prosecutor may seek authority from the Court: (a) To pursue necessary investigative steps of the kind referred to in article 18, paragraph 6; (b) To take a statement or testimony from a witness or complete the collection and examination of evidence which had begun prior to the making of the challenge; and (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. 9. The making of a challenge shall not affect the validity of any act performed by the Prosecutor or any order or warrant issued by the Court prior to the making of the challenge. 10. If the Court has decided that a case is inadmissible under article 17, the Prosecutor may submit a request for a review of the decision when he or she is fully satisfied that new facts have arisen which negate the basis on which the case had previously been found inadmissible under article 17. 11. If the Prosecutor, having regard to the matters referred to in article 17, defers an investigation, the Prosecutor may request that the relevant State make available to the Prosecutor information on the proceedings. That information shall, at the request of the State concerned, be confidential. If the Prosecutor thereafter decides to proceed with an investigation, he or she shall notify the State to which deferral of the proceedings has taken place.
13 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 207 Ne bis in idem 1. Except as provided in this Statute, no person shall be tried before the Court with respect to conduct which formed the basis of crimes for which the person has been convicted or acquitted by the Court. 2. No person shall be tried by another court for a crime referred to in article 5 for which that person has already been convicted or acquitted by the Court. 3. No person who has been tried by another court for conduct also proscribed under article 6, 7, 8 or 8 bis shall be tried by the Court with respect to the same conduct unless the proceedings in the other court: (a) Were for the purpose of shielding the person concerned from criminal responsibility for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court; or (b) Otherwise were not conducted independently or impartially in accordance with the norms of due process recognized by international law and were conducted in a manner which, in the circumstances, was inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice. Article 21 Applicable law 1. The Court shall apply: (a) In the first place, this Statute, Elements of Crimes and its Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (b) In the second place, where appropriate, applicable treaties and the principles and rules of international law, including the established principles of the international law of armed conflict; (c) Failing that, general principles of law derived by the Court from national laws of legal systems of the world including, as appropriate, the national laws of States that would normally exercise jurisdiction over the crime, provided that those principles are not inconsistent with this Statute and with international law and internationally recognized norms and standards. 2. The Court may apply principles and rules of law as interpreted in its previous decisions. 3. The application and interpretation of law pursuant to this article must be consistent with internationally recognized human rights, and be without any adverse distinction founded on grounds such as gender as defined in article 7, paragraph 3, age, race, colour, language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, wealth, birth or other status. 7 As amended by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010 (inserting the reference to article 8 bis).
14 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 3. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW Article 22 Nullum crimen sine lege 1. A person shall not be criminally responsible under this Statute unless the conduct in question constitutes, at the time it takes place, a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court. 2. The definition of a crime shall be strictly construed and shall not be extended by analogy. In case of ambiguity, the definition shall be interpreted in favour of the person being investigated, prosecuted or convicted. 3. This article shall not affect the characterization of any conduct as criminal under international law independently of this Statute. Article 23 Nulla poena sine leg e A person convicted by the Court may be punished only in accordance with this Statute. Article 24 Non-retroactivity ratione personae 1. No person shall be criminally responsible under this Statute for conduct prior to the entry into force of the Statute. 2. In the event of a change in the law applicable to a given case prior to a final judgement, the law more favourable to the person being investigated, prosecuted or convicted shall apply. Article 258 Individual criminal responsibility 1. The Court shall have jurisdiction over natural persons pursuant to this Statute. 2. A person who commits a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court shall be individually responsible and liable for punishment in accordance with this Statute. 3. In accordance with this Statute, a person shall be criminally responsible and liable for punishment for a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court if that person: (a) Commits such a crime, whether as an individual, jointly with another or through another person, regardless of whether that other person is criminally responsible; (b) Orders, solicits or induces the commission of such a crime which in fact occurs or is attempted; (c) For the purpose of facilitating the commission of such a crime, aids, abets or otherwise assists in its commission or its attempted commission, including providing the means for its commission; (d) In any other way contributes to the commission or attempted commission of such a crime by a group of persons acting with a common purpose. Such contribution shall be intentional and shall either: (i) Be made with the aim of furthering the criminal activity or criminal purpose of the group, where such activity or purpose involves the commission of a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; or (ii) Be made in the knowledge of the intention of the group to commit the crime; (e) In respect of the crime of genocide, directly and publicly incites others to commit genocide; (f) Attempts to commit such a crime by taking action that commences its execution by means of a substantial step, but the crime does not occur because of circumstances independent of the person's intentions. However, a person who abandons the effort to commit the crime or otherwise prevents the completion of the crime shall not be liable for punishment under this Statute for the attempt to commit that crime if that person completely and voluntarily gave up the criminal purpose. 8 As amended by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010 (adding paragraph 3 bis).
15 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3 bis. In respect of the crime of aggression, the provisions of this article shall apply only to persons in a position effectively to exercise control over or to direct the political or military action of a State. 4. No provision in this Statute relating to individual criminal responsibility shall affect the responsibility of States under international law. Article 26 Exclusion of jurisdiction over persons under eighteen The Court shall have no jurisdiction over any person who was under the age of 18 at the time of the alleged commission of a crime. Article 27 Irrelevance of official capacity 1. This Statute shall apply equally to all persons without any distinction based on official capacity. In particular, official capacity as a Head of State or Government, a member of a Government or parliament, an elected representative or a government official shall in no case exempt a person from criminal responsibility under this Statute, nor shall it, in and of itself, constitute a ground for reduction of sentence. 2. Immunities or special procedural rules which may attach to the official capacity of a person, whether under national or international law, shall not bar the Court from exercising its jurisdiction over such a person. Article 28 Responsibility of commanders and other superiors In addition to other grounds of criminal responsibility under this Statute for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court: (a) A military commander or person effectively acting as a military commander shall be criminally responsible for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court committed by forces under his or her effective command and control, or effective authority and control as the case may be, as a result of his or her failure to exercise control properly over such forces, where: (i) That military commander or person either knew or, owing to the circumstances at the time, should have known that the forces were committing or about to commit such crimes; and (ii) That military commander or person failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power to prevent or repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecution. (b) With respect to superior and subordinate relationships not described in paragraph (a), a superior shall be criminally responsible for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court committed by subordinates under his or her effective authority and control, as a result of his or her failure to exercise control properly over such subordinates, where: (i) The superior either knew, or consciously disregarded information which clearly indicated, that the subordinates were committing or about to commit such crimes; (ii) The crimes concerned activities that were within the effective responsibility and control of the superior; and (iii) The superior failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power to prevent or repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecution. Article 29 Non-applicability of statute of limitations The crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court shall not be subject to any statute of limitations. Article 30 Mental element 1. Unless otherwise provided, a person shall be criminally responsible and liable for punishment for a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court only if the material elements are committed with intent and knowledge. 2. For the purposes of this article, a person has intent where: (a) In relation to conduct, that person means to engage in the conduct;
16 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) In relation to a consequence, that person means to cause that consequence or is aware that it will occur in the ordinary course of events. 3. For the purposes of this article, "knowledge" means awareness that a circumstance exists or a consequence will occur in the ordinary course of events. "Know" and "knowingly" shall be construed accordingly. Article 31 Grounds for excluding criminal responsibility 1. In addition to other grounds for excluding criminal responsibility provided for in this Statute, a person shall not be criminally responsible if, at the time of that person's conduct: (a) The person suffers from a mental disease or defect that destroys that person's capacity to appreciate the unlawfulness or nature of his or her conduct, or capacity to control his or her conduct to conform to the requirements of law; (b) The person is in a state of intoxication that destroys that person's capacity to appreciate the unlawfulness or nature of his or her conduct, or capacity to control his or her conduct to conform to the requirements of law, unless the person has become voluntarily intoxicated under such circumstances that the person knew, or disregarded the risk, that, as a result of the intoxication, he or she was likely to engage in conduct constituting a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; (c) The person acts reasonably to defend himself or herself or another person or, in the case of war crimes, property which is essential for the survival of the person or another person or property which is essential for accomplishing a military mission, against an imminent and unlawful use of force in a manner proportionate to the degree of danger to the person or the other person or property protected. The fact that the person was involved in a defensive operation conducted by forces shall not in itself constitute a ground for excluding criminal responsibility under this subparagraph; (d) The conduct which is alleged to constitute a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been caused by duress resulting from a threat of imminent death or of continuing or imminent serious bodily harm against that person or another person, and the person acts necessarily and reasonably to avoid this threat, provided that the person does not intend to cause a greater harm than the one sought to be avoided. Such a threat may either be: (i) Made by other persons; or (ii) Constituted by other circumstances beyond that person's control. 2. The Court shall determine the applicability of the grounds for excluding criminal responsibility provided for in this Statute to the case before it. 3. At trial, the Court may consider a ground for excluding criminal responsibility other than those referred to in paragraph 1 where such a ground is derived from applicable law as set forth in article 21. The procedures relating to the consideration of such a ground shall be provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 32 Mistake of fact or mistake of law 1. A mistake of fact shall be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility only if it negates the mental element required by the crime. 2. A mistake of law as to whether a particular type of conduct is a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court shall not be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility. A mistake of law may, however, be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility if it negates the mental element required by such a crime, or as provided for in article 33. Article 33 Superior orders and prescription of law 1. The fact that a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been committed by a person pursuant to an order of a Government or of a superior, whether military or civilian, shall not relieve that person of criminal responsibility unless: (a) The person was under a legal obligation to obey orders of the Government or the superior in question; (b) The person did not know that the order was unlawful; and (c) The order was not manifestly unlawful. 2. For the purposes of this article, orders to commit genocide or crimes against humanity are manifestly unlawful.
17 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 4. COMPOSITION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE COURT Article 34 Organs of the Court The Court shall be composed of the following organs: (a) The Presidency; (b) An Appeals Division, a Trial Division and a Pre-Trial Division; (c) The Office of the Prosecutor; (d) The Registry. Article 35 Service of judges 1. All judges shall be elected as full-time members of the Court and shall be available to serve on that basis from the commencement of their terms of office. 2. The judges composing the Presidency shall serve on a full-time basis as soon as they are elected. 3. The Presidency may, on the basis of the workload of the Court and in consultation with its members, decide from time to time to what extent the remaining judges shall be required to serve on a full-time basis. Any such arrangement shall be without prejudice to the provisions of article 40. 4. The financial arrangements for judges not required to serve on a full-time basis shall be made in accordance with article 49. Article 36 Qualifications, nomination and election of judges 1. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2, there shall be 18 judges of the Court. 2. (a) The Presidency, acting on behalf of the Court, may propose an increase in the number of judges specified in paragraph 1, indicating the reasons why this is considered necessary and appropriate The Registrar shall promptly circulate any such proposal to all States Parties. (b) Any such proposal shall then be considered at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties to be convened in accordance with article 112. The proposal shall be considered adopted if approved at the meeting by a vote of two thirds of the members of the Assembly of States Parties and shall enter into force at such time as decided by the Assembly of States Parties. (c) (i) Once a proposal for an increase in the number of judges has been adopted under subparagraph (b), the election of the additional judges shall take place at the next session of the Assembly of States Parties in accordance with paragraphs 3 to 8, and article 37, paragraph 2; (ii) Once a proposal for an increase in the number of judges has been adopted and brought into effect under subparagraphs (b) and (c) (i), it shall be open to the Presidency at any time thereafter, if the workload of the Court justifies it, to propose a reduction in the number of judges, provided that the number of judges shall not be reduced below that specified in paragraph 1. The proposal shall be dealt with in accordance with the procedure laid down in subparagraphs (a) and (b). In the event that the proposal is adopted, the number of judges shall be progressively decreased as the terms of office of serving judges expire, until the necessary number has been reached. 3. (a) The judges shall be chosen from among persons of high moral character, impartiality and integrity who possess the qualifications required in their respective States for appointment to the highest judicial offices. (b) Every candidate for election to the Court shall: (i) Have established competence in criminal law and procedure, and the necessary relevant experience, whether as judge, prosecutor, advocate or in other similar capacity, in criminal proceedings; or (ii) Have established competence in relevant areas of international law such as international humanitarian law and the law of human rights, and extensive experience in a professional legal capacity which is of relevance to the judicial work of the Court;
18 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(c) Every candidate for election to the Court shall have an excellent knowledge of and be fluent in at least one of the working languages of the Court. 4. (a) Nominations of candidates for election to the Court may be made by any State Party to this Statute, and shall be made either: (i) By the procedure for the nomination of candidates for appointment to the highest judicial offices in the State in question; or (ii) By the procedure provided for the nomination of candidates for the International Court of Justice in the Statute of that Court. Nominations shall be accompanied by a statement in the necessary detail specifying how the candidate fulfils the requirements of paragraph 3. (b) Each State Party may put forward one candidate for any given election who need not necessarily be a national of that State Party but shall in any case be a national of a State Party. (c) The Assembly of States Parties may decide to establish, if appropriate, an Advisory Committee on nominations. In that event, the Committee's composition and mandate shall be established by the Assembly of States Parties. 5. For the purposes of the election, there shall be two lists of candidates: List A containing the names of candidates with the qualifications specified in paragraph 3 (b) (i); and List B containing the names of candidates with the qualifications specified in paragraph 3 (b) (ii). A candidate with sufficient qualifications for both lists may choose on which list to appear. At the first election to the Court, at least nine judges shall be elected from list A and at least five judges from list B. Subsequent elections shall be so organized as to maintain the equivalent proportion on the Court of judges qualified on the two lists. 6. (a) The judges shall be elected by secret ballot at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties convened for that purpose under article 112. Subject to paragraph 7, the persons elected to the Court shall be the 18 candidates who obtain the highest number of votes and a two-thirds majority of the States Parties present and voting. (b) In the event that a sufficient number of judges is not elected on the first ballot, successive ballots shall be held in accordance with the procedures laid down in subparagraph (a) until the remaining places have been filled. 7. No two judges may be nationals of the same State. A person who, for the purposes of membership of the Court, could be regarded as a national of more than one State shall be deemed to be a national of the State in which that person ordinarily exercises civil and political rights. 8. (a) The States Parties shall, in the selection of judges, take into account the need, within the membership of the Court, for: (i) The representation of the principal legal systems of the world; (ii) Equitable geographical representation; and (iii) A fair representation of female and male judges. (b) States Parties shall also take into account the need to include judges with legal expertise on specific issues, including, but not limited to, violence against women or children. 9. (a) Subject to subparagraph (b), judges shall hold office for a term of nine years and, subject to subparagraph (c) and to article 37, paragraph 2, shall not be eligible for re-election. (b) At the first election, one third of the judges elected shall be selected by lot to serve for a term of three years; one third of the judges elected shall be selected by lot to serve for a term of six years; and the remainder shall serve for a term of nine years. (c) A judge who is selected to serve for a term of three years under subparagraph (b) shall be eligible for re-election for a full term. 10. Notwithstanding paragraph 9, a judge assigned to a Trial or Appeals Chamber in accordance with article 39 shall continue in office to complete any trial or appeal the hearing of which has already commenced before that Chamber.
19 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 37 Judicial vacancies 1. In the event of a vacancy, an election shall be held in accordance with article 36 to fill the vacancy. 2. A judge elected to fill a vacancy shall serve for the remainder of the predecessor's term and, if that period is three years or less, shall be eligible for re-election for a full term under article 36. Article 38 The Presidency 1. The President and the First and Second Vice-Presidents shall be elected by an absolute majority of the judges. They shall each serve for a term of three years or until the end of their respective terms of office as judges, whichever expires earlier. They shall be eligible for re-election once. 2. The First Vice-President shall act in place of the President in the event that the President is unavailable or disqualified. The Second Vice-President shall act in place of the President in the event that both the President and the First Vice-President are unavailable or disqualified. 3. The President, together with the First and Second Vice-Presidents, shall constitute the Presidency, which shall be responsible for: (a) The proper administration of the Court, with the exception of the Office of the Prosecutor; and (b) The other functions conferred upon it in accordance with this Statute. 4. In discharging its responsibility under paragraph 3 (a), the Presidency shall coordinate with and seek the concurrence of the Prosecutor on all matters of mutual concern. Article 39 Chambers 1. As soon as possible after the election of the judges, the Court shall organize itself into the divisions specified in article 34, paragraph (b). The Appeals Division shall be composed of the President and four other judges, the Trial Division of not less than six judges and the Pre-Trial Division of not less than six judges. The assignment of judges to divisions shall be based on the nature of the functions to be performed by each division and the qualifications and experience of the judges elected to the Court, in such a way that each division shall contain an appropriate combination of expertise in criminal law and procedure and in international law. The Trial and Pre-Trial Divisions shall be composed predominantly of judges with criminal trial experience. 2. (a) The judicial functions of the Court shall be carried out in each division by Chambers. (b) (i) The Appeals Chamber shall be composed of all the judges of the Appeals Division; (ii) The functions of the Trial Chamber shall be carried out by three judges of the Trial Division; (iii) The functions of the Pre-Trial Chamber shall be carried out either by three judges of the Pre- Trial Division or by a single judge of that division in accordance with this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (c) Nothing in this paragraph shall preclude the simultaneous constitution of more than one Trial Chamber or Pre-Trial Chamber when the efficient management of the Court's workload so requires. 3. (a) Judges assigned to the Trial and Pre-Trial Divisions shall serve in those divisions for a period of three years, and thereafter until the completion of any case the hearing of which has already commenced in the division concerned. (b) Judges assigned to the Appeals Division shall serve in that division for their entire term of office. 4. Judges assigned to the Appeals Division shall serve only in that division. Nothing in this article shall, however, preclude the temporary attachment of judges from the Trial Division to the Pre-Trial Division or vice versa, if the Presidency considers that the efficient management of the Court's workload so requires, provided that under no circumstances shall a judge who has participated in the pre-trial phase of a case be eligible to sit on the Trial Chamber hearing that case.
20 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 40 Independence of the judges 1. The judges shall be independent in the performance of their functions. 2. Judges shall not engage in any activity which is likely to interfere with their judicial functions or to affect confidence in their independence. 3. Judges required to serve on a full-time basis at the seat of the Court shall not engage in any other occupation of a professional nature. 4. Any question regarding the application of paragraphs 2 and 3 shall be decided by an absolute majority of the judges. Where any such question concerns an individual judge, that judge shall not take part in the decision. Article 41 Excusing and disqualification of judges 1. The Presidency may, at the request of a judge, excuse that judge from the exercise of a function under this Statute, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 2. (a) A judge shall not participate in any case in which his or her impartiality might reasonably be doubted onany ground. A judge shall be disqualified from a case in accordance with this paragraph if, inter alia, that judge has previously been involved in any capacity in that case beforethe Court or in a related criminal case at the national level involving the person being investigated or prosecuted. A judge shall also be disqualified on such other grounds as may be provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. (b) The Prosecutor or the person being investigated or prosecuted may request the disqualification of a judge under this paragraph. (c) Any question as to the disqualification of a judge shall be decided by an absolute majority of the judges. The challenged judge shall be entitled to present his or her comments on the matter, but shall not take part in the decision. Article 42 The Office of the Prosecutor 1. The Office of the Prosecutor shall act independently as a separate organ of the Court. It shall be responsible for receiving referrals and any substantiated information on crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court, for examining them and for conducting investigations and prosecutions before the Court. A member of the Office shall not seek or act on instructions from any external source. 2. The Office shall be headed by the Prosecutor. The Prosecutor shall have full authority over the management and administration of the Office, including the staff, facilities and other resources thereof. The Prosecutor shall be assisted by one or more Deputy Prosecutors, who shall be entitled to carry out any of the acts required of the Prosecutor under this Statute. The Prosecutor and the Deputy Prosecutors shall be of different nationalities. They shall serve on a full-time basis. 3. The Prosecutor and the Deputy Prosecutors shall be persons of high moral character, be highly competent in and have extensive practical experience in the prosecution or trial of criminal cases. They shall have an excellent knowledge of and be fluent in at least one of the working languages of the Court. 4. The Prosecutor shall be elected by secret ballot by an absolute majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. The Deputy Prosecutors shall be elected in the same way from a list of candidates provided by the Prosecutor. The Prosecutor shall nominate three candidates for each position of Deputy Prosecutor to be filled. Unless a shorter term is decided upon at the time of their election, the Prosecutor and the Deputy Prosecutors shall hold office for a term of nine years and shall not be eligible for re-election. 5. Neither the Prosecutor nor a Deputy Prosecutor shall engage in any activity which is likely to interfere with his or her prosecutorial functions or to affect confidence in his or her independence. They shall not engage in any other occupation of a professional nature. 6. The Presidency may excuse the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor, at his or her request, from acting in a particular case.
21 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court7. Neither the Prosecutor nor a Deputy Prosecutor shall participate in any matter in which their impartiality might reasonably be doubted on any ground. They shall be disqualified from a case in accordance with this paragraph if, inter alia , they have previously been involved in any capacity in that case before the Court or in a related criminal case at the national level involving the person being investigated or prosecuted. 8. Any question as to the disqualification of the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor shall be decided by the Appeals Chamber. (a) The person being investigated or prosecuted may at any time request the disqualification of the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor on the grounds set out in this article; (b) The Prosecutor or the Deputy Prosecutor, as appropriate, shall be entitled to present his or her comments on the matter; 9. The Prosecutor shall appoint advisers with legal expertise on specific issues, including, but not limited to, sexual and gender violence and violence against children. Article 43 The Registry 1. The Registry shall be responsible for the non-judicial aspects of the administration and servicing of the Court, without prejudice to the functions and powers of the Prosecutor in accordance with article 42. 2. The Registry shall be headed by the Registrar, who shall be the principal administrative officer of the Court. The Registrar shall exercise his or her functions under the authority of the President of the Court. 3. The Registrar and the Deputy Registrar shall be persons of high moral character, be highly competent and have an excellent knowledge of and be fluent in at least one of the working languages of the Court. 4. The judges shall elect the Registrar by an absolute majority by secret ballot, taking into account any recommendation by the Assembly of States Parties. If the need arises and upon the recommendation of the Registrar, the judges shall elect, in the same manner, a Deputy Registrar. 5. The Registrar shall hold office for a term of five years, shall be eligible for re-election once and shall serve on a full-time basis. The Deputy Registrar shall hold office for a term of five years or such shorter term as may be decided upon by an absolute majority of the judges, and may be elected on the basis that the Deputy Registrar shall be called upon to serve as required. 6. The Registrar shall set up a Victims and Witnesses Unit within the Registry. This Unit shall provide, in consultation with the Office of the Prosecutor, protective measures and security arrangements, counseling and other appropriate assistance for witnesses, victims who appear before the Court, and others who are at risk on account of testimony given by such witnesses. The Unit shall include staff with expertise in trauma, including trauma related to crimes of sexual violence. Article 44 Staff 1. The Prosecutor and the Registrar shall appoint such qualified staff as may be required to their respective offices. In the case of the Prosecutor, this shall include the appointment of investigators. 2. In the employment of staff, the Prosecutor and the Registrar shall ensure the highest standards of efficiency, competency and integrity, and shall have regard, mutatis mutandis , to the criteria set forth in article 36, paragraph 8. 3. The Registrar, with the agreement of the Presidency and the Prosecutor, shall propose Staff Regulations which include the terms and conditions upon which the staff of the Court shall be appointed, remunerated and dismissed. The Staff Regulations shall be approved by the Assembly of States Parties. 4. The Court may, in exceptional circumstances, employ the expertise of gratis personnel offered by States Parties, intergovernmental organizations or non-governmental organizations to assist with the work of any of the organs of the Court. The Prosecutor may accept any such offer on behalf of the Office of the Prosecutor. Such gratis personnel shall be employed in accordance with guidelines to be established by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 45 Solemn undertaking Before taking up their respective duties under this Statute, the judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors, the Registrar and the Deputy Registrar shall each make a solemn undertaking in open court to exercise his or her respective functions impartially and conscientiously.
22 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 46 Removal from office 1. A judge, the Prosecutor, a Deputy Prosecutor, the Registrar or the Deputy Registrar shall be removed from office if a decision to this effect is made in accordance with paragraph 2, in cases where that person: (a) Is found to have committed serious misconduct or a serious breach of his or her duties under this Statute, as provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; or (b) Is unable to exercise the functions required by this Statute. 2. A decision as to the removal from office of a judge, the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor under paragraph 1 shall be made by the Assembly of States Parties, by secret ballot: (a) In the case of a judge, by a two-thirds majority of the States Parties upon a recommendation adopted by a two-thirds majority of the other judges; (b) In the case of the Prosecutor, by an absolute majority of the States Parties; (c) In the case of a Deputy Prosecutor, by an absolute majority of the States Parties upon the recommendation of the Prosecutor. 3. A decision as to the removal from office of the Registrar or Deputy Registrar shall be made by an absolute majority of the judges. 4. A judge, Prosecutor, Deputy Prosecutor, Registrar or Deputy Registrar whose conduct or ability to exercise the functions of the office as required by this Statute is challenged under this article shall have full opportunity to present and receive evidence and to make submissions in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The person in question shall not otherwise participate in the consideration of the matter. Article 47 Disciplinary measures A judge, Prosecutor, Deputy Prosecutor, Registrar or Deputy Registrar who has committed misconduct of a less serious nature than that set out in article 46, paragraph 1, shall be subject to disciplinary measures, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 48 Privileges and immunities 1. The Court shall enjoy in the territory of each State Party such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the fulfilment of its purposes. 2. The judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors and the Registrar shall, when engaged on or with respect to the business of the Court, enjoy the same privileges and immunities as are accorded to heads of diplomatic missions and shall, after the expiry of their terms of office, continue to be accorded immunity from legal process of every kind in respect of words spoken or written and acts performed by them in their official capacity. 3. The Deputy Registrar, the staff of the Office of the Prosecutor and the staff of the Registry shall enjoy the privileges and immunities and facilities necessary for the performance of their functions, in accordance with the agreement on the privileges and immunities of the Court. 4. Counsel, experts, witnesses or any other person required to be present at the seat of the Court shall be accorded such treatment as is necessary for the proper functioning of the Court, in accordance with the agreement on the privileges and immunities of the Court. 5. The privileges and immunities of: (a) A judge or the Prosecutor may be waived by an absolute majority of the judges; (b) The Registrar may be waived by the Presidency; (c) The Deputy Prosecutors and staff of the Office of the Prosecutor may be waived by the Prosecutor; (d) The Deputy Registrar and staff of the Registry may be waived by the Registrar.
23 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 49 Salaries, allowances and expenses The judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors, the Registrar and the Deputy Registrar shall receive such salaries, allowances and expenses as may be decided upon by the Assembly of States Parties. These salaries and allowances shall not be reduced during their terms of office. Article 50 Official and working languages 1. The official languages of the Court shall be Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish. The judgements of the Court, as well as other decisions resolving fundamental issues before the Court, shall be published in the official languages. The Presidency shall, in accordance with the criteria established by the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, determine which decisions may be considered as resolving fundamental issues for the purposes of this paragraph. 2. The working languages of the Court shall be English and French. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence shall determine the cases in which other official languages may be used as working languages. 3. At the request of any party to a proceeding or a State allowed to intervene in a proceeding, the Court shall authorize a language other than English or French to be used by such a party or State, provided that the Court considers such authorization to be adequately justified. Article 51 Rules of Procedure and Evidence 1. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence shall enter into force upon adoption by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 2. Amendments to the Rules of Procedure and Evidence may be proposed by: (a) Any State Party; (b) The judges acting by an absolute majority; or (c) The Prosecutor. Such amendments shall enter into force upon adoption by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 3. After the adoption of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, in urgent cases where the Rules do not provide for a specific situation before the Court, the judges may, by a two-thirds majority, draw up provisional Rules to be applied until adopted, amended or rejected at the next ordinary or special session of the Assembly of States Parties. 4. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence, amendments thereto and any provisional Rule shall be consistent with this Statute. Amendments to the Rules of Procedure and Evidence as well as provisional Rules shall not be applied retroactively to the detriment of the person who is being investigated or prosecuted or who has been convicted. 5. In the event of conflict between the Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, the Statute shall prevail. Article 52 Regulations of the Court 1. The judges shall, in accordance with this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, adopt, by an absolute majority, the Regulations of the Court necessary for its routine functioning. 2. The Prosecutor and the Registrar shall be consulted in the elaboration of the Regulations and any amendments thereto. 3. The Regulations and any amendments thereto shall take effect upon adoption unless otherwise decided by the judges. Immediately upon adoption, they shall be circulated to States Parties for comments. If within six months there are no objections from a majority of States Parties, they shall remain in force.
24 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 5. INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION Article 53 Initiation of an investigation 1. The Prosecutor shall, having evaluated the information made available to him or her, initiate an investigation unless he or she determines that there is no reasonable basis to proceed under this Statute. In deciding whether to initiate an investigation, the Prosecutor shall consider whether: (a) The information available to the Prosecutor provides a reasonable basis to believe that a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been or is being committed; (b) The case is or would be admissible under article 17; and (c) Taking into account the gravity of the crime and the interests of victims, there are nonetheless substantial reasons to believe that an investigation would not serve the interests of justice. If the Prosecutor determines that there is no reasonable basis to proceed and his or her determination is based solely on subparagraph (c) above, he or she shall inform the Pre-Trial Chamber. 2. If, upon investigation, the Prosecutor concludes that there is not a sufficient basis for a prosecution because: (a) There is not a sufficient legal or factual basis to seek a warrant or summons under article 58; (b) The case is inadmissible under article 17; or (c) A prosecution is not in the interests of justice, taking into account all the circumstances, including the gravity of the crime, the interests of victims and the age or infirmity of the alleged perpetrator, and his or her role in the alleged crime; the Prosecutor shall inform the Pre-Trial Chamber and the State making a referral under article 14 or the Security Council in a case under article 13, paragraph (b), of his or her conclusion and the reasons for the conclusion. 3. (a) At the request of the State making a referral under article 14 or the Security Council under article 13, paragraph (b), the Pre-Trial Chamber may review a decision of the Prosecutor under paragraph 1 or 2 not to proceed and mayrequest the Prosecutor to reconsider that decision. (b) In addition, the Pre-Trial Chamber may, on its own initiative, review a decision of the Prosecutor not to proceed if it is based solely on paragraph 1 (c) or 2 (c). In such a case, the decision of the Prosecutor shall be effective only if confirmed by the Pre-Trial Chamber. 4. The Prosecutor may, at any time, reconsider a decision whether to initiate an investigation or prosecution based on new facts or information. Article 54 Duties and powers of the Prosecutor with respect to investigations 1. The Prosecutor shall: (a) In order to establish the truth, extend the investigation to cover all facts and evidence relevant to an assessment of whether there is criminal responsibility under this Statute, and, in doing so, investigate incriminating and exonerating circumstances equally; (b) Take appropriate measures to ensure the effective investigation and prosecution of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court, and in doing so, respect the interests and personal circumstances of victims and witnesses, including age, gender as defined in article 7, paragraph 3, and health, and take into account the nature of the crime, in particular where it involves sexual violence, gender violence or violence against children; and (c) Fully respect the rights of persons arising under this Statute. 2. The Prosecutor may conduct investigations on the territory of a State: (a) In accordance with the provisions of Part 9; or (b) As authorized by the Pre-Trial Chamber under article 57, paragraph 3 (d).
25 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3. The Prosecutor may: (a) Collect and examine evidence; (b) Request the presence of and question persons being investigated, victims and witnesses; (c) Seek the cooperation of any State or intergovernmental organization or arrangement in accordance with its respective competence and/or mandate; (d) Enter into such arrangements or agreements, not inconsistent with this Statute, as may be necessary to facilitate the cooperation of a State, intergovernmental organization or person; (e) Agree not to disclose, at any stage of the proceedings, documents or information that the Prosecutor obtains on the condition of confidentiality and solely for the purpose of generating new evidence, unless the provider of the information consents; and (f) Take necessary measures, or request that necessary measures be taken, to ensure the confidentiality of information, the protection of any person or the preservation of evidence. Article 55 Rights of persons during an investigation 1. In respect of an investigation under this Statute, a person: (a) Shall not be compelled to incriminate himself or herself or to confess guilt; (b) Shall not be subjected to any form of coercion, duress or threat, to torture or to any other form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; (c) Shall, if questioned in a language other than a language the person fully understands and speaks, have, free of any cost, the assistance of a competent interpreter and such translations as are necessary to meet the requirements of fairness; and (d) Shall not be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention, and shall not be deprived of his or her liberty except on such grounds and in accordance with such procedures as are established in this Statute. 2. Where there are grounds to believe that a person has committed a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court and that person is about to be questioned either by the Prosecutor, or by national authorities pursuant to a request made under Part 9, that person shall also have the following rights of which he or she shall be informed prior to being questioned: (a) To be informed, prior to being questioned, that there are grounds to believe that he or she has committed a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; (b) To remain silent, without such silence being a consideration in the determination of guilt or innocence; (c) To have legal assistance of the person's choosing, or, if the person does not have legal assistance, to have legal assistance assigned to him or her, in any case where the interests of justice so require, and without payment by the person in any such case if the person does not have sufficient means to pay for it; and (d) To be questioned in the presence of counsel unless the person has voluntarily waived his or her right to counsel. Article 56 Role of the Pre-Trial Chamber in relation to a unique investigative opportunity 1. (a) Where the Prosecutor considers an investigation to present a unique opportunity to take testimony or a statement from a witness or to examine, collect or test evidence, which may not be available subsequently for the purposes of a trial, the Prosecutor shall so inform the Pre-Trial Chamber. (b) In that case, the Pre-Trial Chamber may, upon request of the Prosecutor, take such measures as may be necessary to ensure the efficiency and integrity of the proceedings and, in particular, to protect the rights of the defence. (c) Unless the Pre-Trial Chamber orders otherwise, the Prosecutor shall provide the relevant information to the person who has been arrested or appeared in response to a summons in connection with the investigation referred to in subparagraph (a), in order that he or she may be heard on the matter.
26 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The measures referred to in paragraph 1 (b) may include: (a) Making recommendations or orders regarding procedures to be followed; (b) Directing that a record be made of the proceedings; (c) Appointing an expert to assist; (d) Authorizing counsel for a person who has been arrested, or appeared before the Court in response to a summons, to participate, or where there has not yet been such an arrest or appearance or counsel has not been designated, appointing another counsel to attend and represent the interests of the defence; (e) Naming one of its members or, if necessary, another available judge of the Pre-Trial or Trial Division to observe and make recommendations or orders regarding the collection and preservation of evidence and the questioning of persons; (f) Taking such other action as may be necessary to collect or preserve evidence. 3. (a) Where the Prosecutor has not sought measures pursuant to this article but the Pre-Trial Chamberconsiders that such measures are required to preserve evidence that it deems would be essential for the defence at trial, it shall consult with the Prosecutor as to whether there is good reason for the Prosecutor's failure to request the measures. If upon consultation, the Pre-Trial Chamber concludes that the Prosecutor's failure to request such measures is unjustified, the Pre-Trial Chamber may take such measures on its own initiative. (b) A decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber to act on its own initiative under this paragraph may be appealedby the Prosecutor. The appeal shall be heard on an expedited basis. 4. The admissibility of evidence preserved or collected for trial pursuant to this article, or the record thereof, shall be governed at trial by article 69, and given such weight as determined by the Trial Chamber. Article 57 Functions and powers of the Pre-Trial Chamber 1. Unless otherwise provided in this Statute, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall exercise its functions in accordance with the provisions of this article. 2. (a) Orders or rulings of the Pre-Trial Chamber issued under articles 15, 18, 19, 54, paragraph 2, 61, paragraph 7, and 72 must be concurred in by a majority of its judges. (b) In all other cases, a single judge of the Pre-Trial Chamber may exercise the functions provided for in this Statute, unless otherwise provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence or by a majority of the Pre-Trial Chamber. 3. In addition to its other functions under this Statute, the Pre-Trial Chamber may: (a) At the request of the Prosecutor, issue such orders and warrants as may be required for the purposes of an investigation; (b) Upon the request of a person who has been arrested or has appeared pursuant to a summons under article 58, issue such orders, including measures such as those described in article 56, or seek such cooperation pursuant to Part 9 as may be necessary to assist the person in the preparation of his or her defence; (c) Where necessary, provide for the protection and privacy of victims and witnesses, the preservation of evidence, the protection of persons who have been arrested or appeared in response to a summons, and the protection of national security information; (d) Authorize the Prosecutor to take specific investigative steps within the territory of a State Party without having secured the cooperation of that State under Part 9 if, whenever possible having regard to the views of the State concerned, the Pre-Trial Chamber has determined in that case that the State is clearly unable to execute a request for cooperation due to the unavailability of any authority or any component of its judicial system competent to execute the request for cooperation under Part 9; (e) Where a warrant of arrest or a summons has been issued under article 58, and having due regard to the strength of the evidence and the rights of the parties concerned, as provided for in this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, seek the cooperation of States pursuant to article 93, paragraph 1 (k), to take protective measures for the purpose of forfeiture, in particular for the ultimate benefit of victims.
27 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 58 Issuance by the Pre-Trial Chamber of a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear 1. At any time after the initiation of an investigation, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall, on the application of the Prosecutor, issue a warrant of arrest of a person if, having examined the application and the evidence or other information submitted by the Prosecutor, it is satisfied that: (a) There are reasonable grounds to believe that the person has committed a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; and (b) The arrest of the person appears necessary: (i) To ensure the person's appearance at trial; (ii) To ensure that the person does not obstruct or endanger the investigation or the court proceedings; or (iii) Where applicable, to prevent the person from continuing with the commission of that crime or a related crime which is within the jurisdiction of the Court and which arises out of the same circumstances. 2. The application of the Prosecutor shall contain: (a) The name of the person and any other relevant identifying information; (b) A specific reference to the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court which the person is alleged to have committed; (c) A concise statement of the facts which are alleged to constitute those crimes; (d) A summary of the evidence and any other information which establish reasonable grounds to believe that the person committed those crimes; and (e) The reason why the Prosecutor believes that the arrest of the person is necessary. 3. The warrant of arrest shall contain: (a) The name of the person and any other relevant identifying information; (b) A specific reference to the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court for which the person's arrest is sought; and (c) A concise statement of the facts which are alleged to constitute those crimes. 4. The warrant of arrest shall remain in effect until otherwise ordered by the Court. 5. On the basis of the warrant of arrest, the Court may request the provisional arrest or the arrest and surrender of the person under Part 9. 6. The Prosecutor may request the Pre-Trial Chamber to amend the warrant of arrest by modifying or adding to the crimes specified therein. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall so amend the warrant if it is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the person committed the modified or additional crimes. 7. As an alternative to seeking a warrant of arrest, the Prosecutor may submit an application requesting that the Pre-Trial Chamber issue a summons for the person to appear. If the Pre-Trial Chamber is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the person committed the crime alleged and that a summons is sufficient to ensure the person's appearance, it shall issue the summons, with or without conditions restricting liberty (other than detention) if provided for by national law, for the person to appear. The summons shall contain: (a) The name of the person and any other relevant identifying information; (b) The specified date on which the person is to appear; (c) A specific reference to the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court which the person is alleged to have committed; and (d) A concise statement of the facts which are alleged to constitute the crime. The summons shall be served on the person.
28 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 59 Arrest proceedings in the custodial State 1. A State Party which has received a request for provisional arrest or for arrest and surrender shall immediately take steps to arrest the person in question in accordance with its laws and the provisions of Part 9. 2. A person arrested shall be brought promptly before the competent judicial authority in the custodial State which shall determine, in accordance with the law of that State, that: (a) The warrant applies to that person; (b) The person has been arrested in accordance with the proper process; and (c) The person's rights have been respected. 3. The person arrested shall have the right to apply to the competent authority in the custodial State for interim release pending surrender. 4. In reaching a decision on any such application, the competent authority in the custodial State shall consider whether, given the gravity of the alleged crimes, there are urgent and exceptional circumstances to justify interim release and whether necessary safeguards exist to ensure that the custodial State can fulfil its duty to surrender the person to the Court. It shall not be open to the competent authority of the custodial State to consider whether the warrant of arrest was properly issued in accordance with article 58, paragraph 1 (a) and (b). 5. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall be notified of any request for interim release and shall make recommendations to the competent authority in the custodial State. The competent authority in the custodial State shall give full consideration to such recommendations, including any recommendations on measures to prevent the escape of the person, before rendering its decision. 6. If the person is granted interim release, the Pre-Trial Chamber may request periodic reports on the status of the interim release. 7. Once ordered to be surrendered by the custodial State, the person shall be delivered to the Court as soon as possible. Article 60 Initial proceedings before the Court 1. Upon the surrender of the person to the Court, or the person's appearance before the Court voluntarily or pursuant to a summons, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall satisfy itself that the person has been informed of the crimes which he or she is alleged to have committed, and of his or her rights under this Statute, including the right to apply for interim release pending trial. 2. A person subject to a warrant of arrest may apply for interim release pending trial. If the Pre-Trial Chamber is satisfied that the conditions set forth in article 58, paragraph 1, are met, the person shall continue to be detained. If it is not so satisfied, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall release the person, with or without conditions. 3. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall periodically review its ruling on the release or detention of the person, and may do so at any time on the request of the Prosecutor or the person. Upon such review, it may modify its ruling as to detention, release or conditions of release, if it is satisfied that changed circumstances so require. 4. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall ensure that a person is not detained for an unreasonable period prior to trial due to inexcusable delay by the Prosecutor. If such delay occurs, the Court shall consider releasing the person, with or without conditions. 5. If necessary, the Pre-Trial Chamber may issue a warrant of arrest to secure the presence of a person who has been released. Article 61 Confirmation of the charges before trial 1. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2, within a reasonable time after the person's surrender or voluntary appearance before the Court, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall hold a hearing to confirm the charges on which the Prosecutor intends to seek trial. The hearing shall be held in the presence of the Prosecutor and the person charged, as well as his or her counsel.
29 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The Pre-Trial Chamber may, upon request of the Prosecutor or on its own motion, hold a hearing in the absence of the person charged to confirm the charges on which the Prosecutor intends to seek trial when the person has: (a) Waived his or her right to be present; or (b) Fled or cannot be found and all reasonable steps have been taken to secure his or her appearance before the Court and to inform the person of the charges and that a hearing to confirm those charges will be held. In that case, the person shall be represented by counsel where the Pre-Trial Chamber determines that it is in the interests of justice. 3. Within a reasonable time before the hearing, the person shall: (a) Be provided with a copy of the document containing the charges on which the Prosecutor intends to bring the person to trial; and (b) Be informed of the evidence on which the Prosecutor intends to rely at the hearing. The Pre-Trial Chamber may issue orders regarding the disclosure of information for the purposes of the hearing. 4. Before the hearing, the Prosecutor may continue the investigation and may amend or withdraw any charges. The person shall be given reasonable notice before the hearing of any amendment to or withdrawal of charges. In case of a withdrawal of charges, the Prosecutor shall notify the Pre-Trial Chamber of the reasons for the withdrawal. 5. At the hearing, the Prosecutor shall support each charge with sufficient evidence to establish substantial grounds to believe that the person committed the crime charged. The Prosecutor may rely on documentary or summary evidence and need not call the witnesses expected to testify at the trial. 6. At the hearing, the person may: (a) Object to the charges; (b) Challenge the evidence presented by the Prosecutor; and (c) Present evidence. 7. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall, on the basis of the hearing, determine whether there is sufficient evidence to establish substantial grounds to believe that the person committed each of the crimes charged. Based on its determination, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall: (a) Confirm those charges in relation to which it has determined that there is sufficient evidence, and commit the person to a Trial Chamber for trial on the charges as confirmed; (b) Decline to confirm those charges in relation to which it has determined that there is insufficient evidence; (c) Adjourn the hearing and request the Prosecutor to consider: (i) Providing further evidence or conducting further investigation with respect to a particular charge; or (ii) Amending a charge because the evidence submitted appears to establish a different crime within the jurisdiction of the Court. 8. Where the Pre-Trial Chamber declines to confirm a charge, the Prosecutor shall not be precluded from subsequently requesting its confirmation if the request is supported by additional evidence. 9. After the charges are confirmed and before the trial has begun, the Prosecutor may, with the permission of the Pre-Trial Chamber and after notice to the accused, amend the charges. If the Prosecutor seeks to add additional charges or to substitute more serious charges, a hearing under this article to confirm those charges must be held. After commencement of the trial, the Prosecutor may, with the permission of the Trial Chamber, withdraw the charges. 10. Any warrant previously issued shall cease to have effect with respect to any charges which have not been confirmed by the Pre-Trial Chamber or which have been withdrawn by the Prosecutor.
30 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court11. Once the charges have been confirmed in accordance with this article, the Presidency shall constitute a Trial Chamber which, subject to paragraph 9 and to article 64, paragraph 4, shall be responsible for the conduct of subsequent proceedings and may exercise any function of the Pre-Trial Chamber that is relevant and capable of application in those proceedings.
31 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 6. THE TRIAL Article 62 Place of trial Unless otherwise decided, the place of the trial shall be the seat of the Court. Article 63 Trial in the presence of the accused 1. The accused shall be present during the trial. 2. If the accused, being present before the Court, continues to disrupt the trial, the Trial Chamber may remove the accused and shall make provision for him or her to observe the trial and instruct counsel from outside the courtroom, through the use of communications technology, if required. Such measures shall be taken only in exceptional circumstances after other reasonable alternatives have proved inadequate, and only for such duration as is strictly required. Article 64 Functions and powers of the Trial Chamber 1. The functions and powers of the Trial Chamber set out in this article shall be exercised in accordance with this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 2. The Trial Chamber shall ensure that a trial is fair and expeditious and is conducted with full respect for the rights of the accused and due regard for the protection of victims and witnesses. 3. Upon assignment of a case for trial in accordance with this Statute, the Trial Chamber assigned to deal with the case shall: (a) Confer with the parties and adopt such procedures as are necessary to facilitate the fair and expeditious conduct of the proceedings; (b) Determine the language or languages to be used at trial; and (c) Subject to any other relevant provisions of this Statute, provide for disclosure of documents or information not previously disclosed, sufficiently in advance of the commencement of the trial to enable adequate preparation for trial. 4. The Trial Chamber may, if necessary for its effective and fair functioning, refer preliminary issues to the Pre- Trial Chamber or, if necessary, to another available judge of the Pre-Trial Division. 5. Upon notice to the parties, the Trial Chamber may, as appropriate, direct that there be joinder or severance in respect of charges against more than one accused. 6. In performing its functions prior to trial or during the course of a trial, the Trial Chamber may, as necessary: (a) Exercise any functions of the Pre-Trial Chamber referred to in article 61, paragraph 11; (b) Require the attendance and testimony of witnesses and production of documents and other evidence by obtaining, if necessary, the assistance of States as provided in this Statute; (c) Provide for the protection of confidential information; (d) Order the production of evidence in addition to that already collected prior to the trial or presented during the trial by the parties; (e) Provide for the protection of the accused, witnesses and victims; and (f) Rule on any other relevant matters. 7. The trial shall be held in public. The Trial Chamber may, however, determine that special circumstances require that certain proceedings be in closed session for the purposes set forth in article 68, or to protect confidential or sensitive information to be given in evidence. 8. (a) At the commencement of the trial, the Trial Chamber shall have read to the accused the charges previously confirmed by the Pre-Trial Chamber. The Trial Chamber shall satisfy itself that the accused understands the nature of the charges. It shall afford him or her the opportunity to make an admission of guilt in accordance with article 65 or to plead not guilty.
32 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) At the trial, the presiding judge may give directions for the conduct of proceedings, including to ensure that they are conducted in a fair and impartial manner. Subject to any directions of the presiding judge, the parties may submit evidence in accordance with the provisions of this Statute. 9. The Trial Chamber shall have, inter alia , the power on application of a party or on its own motion to: (a) Rule on the admissibility or relevance of evidence; and (b) Take all necessary steps to maintain order in the course of a hearing. 10. The Trial Chamber shall ensure that a complete record of the trial, which accurately reflects the proceedings, is made and that it is maintained and preserved by the Registrar. Article 65 Proceedings on an admission of guilt 1. Where the accused makes an admission of guilt pursuant to article 64, paragraph 8 (a), the Trial Chamber shall determine whether: (a) The accused understands the nature and consequences of the admission of guilt; (b) The admission is voluntarily made by the accused after sufficient consultation with defence counsel; and (c) The admission of guilt is supported by the facts of the case that are contained in: (i) The charges brought by the Prosecutor and admitted by the accused; (ii) Any materials presented by the Prosecutor which supplement the charges and which the accused accepts; and (iii) Any other evidence, such as the testimony of witnesses, presented by the Prosecutor or the accused. 2. Where the Trial Chamber is satisfied that the matters referred to in paragraph 1 are established, it shall consider the admission of guilt, together with any additional evidence presented, as establishing all the essential facts that are required to prove the crime to which the admission of guilt relates, and may convict the accused of that crime. 3. Where the Trial Chamber is not satisfied that the matters referred to in paragraph 1 are established, it shall consider the admission of guilt as not having been made, in which case it shall order that the trial be continued under the ordinary trial procedures provided by this Statute and may remit the case to another Trial Chamber. 4. Where the Trial Chamber is of the opinion that a more complete presentation of the facts of the case is required in the interests of justice, in particular the interests of the victims, the Trial Chamber may: (a) Request the Prosecutor to present additional evidence, including the testimony of witnesses; or (b) Order that the trial be continued under the ordinary trial procedures provided by this Statute, in which case it shall consider the admission of guilt as not having been made and may remit the case to another Trial Chamber. 5. Any discussions between the Prosecutor and the defence regarding modification of the charges, the admission of guilt or the penalty to be imposed shall not be binding on the Court. Article 66 Presumption of innocence 1. Everyone shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty before the Court in accordance with the applicable law. 2. The onus is on the Prosecutor to prove the guilt of the accused. 3. In order to convict the accused, the Court must be convinced of the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
33 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 67 Rights of the accused 1. In the determination of any charge, the accused shall be entitled to a public hearing, having regard to the provisions of this Statute, to a fair hearing conducted impartially, and to the following minimum guarantees, in full equality: (a) To be informed promptly and in detail of the nature, cause and content of the charge, in a language which the accused fully understands and speaks; (b) To have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of the defence and to communicate freely with counsel of the accused's choosing in confidence; (c) To be tried without undue delay; (d) Subject to article 63, paragraph 2, to be present at the trial, to conduct the defence in person or through legal assistance of the accused's choosing, to be informed, if the accused does not have legal assistance, of this right and to have legal assistance assigned by the Court in any case where the interests of justice so require, and without payment if the accused lacks sufficient means to pay for it; (e) To examine, or have examined, the witnesses against him or her and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his or her behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him or her. The accused shall also be entitled to raise defences and to present other evidence admissible under this Statute; (f) To have, free of any cost, the assistance of a competent interpreter and such translations as are necessary to meet the requirements of fairness, if any of the proceedings of or documents presented to the Court are not in a language which the accused fully understands and speaks; (g) Not to be compelled to testify or to confess guilt and to remain silent, without such silence being a consideration in the determination of guilt or innocence; (h) To make an unsworn oral or written statement in his or her defence; and (i) Not to have imposed on him or her any reversal of the burden of proof or any onus of rebuttal. 2. In addition to any other disclosure provided for in this Statute, the Prosecutor shall, as soon as practicable, disclose to the defence evidence in the Prosecutor's possession or control which he or she believes shows or tends to show the innocence of the accused, or to mitigate the guilt of the accused, or which may affect the credibility of prosecution evidence. In case of doubt as to the application of this paragraph, the Court shall decide. Article 68 Protection of the victims and witnesses and their participation in the proceedings 1. The Court shall take appropriate measures to protect the safety, physical and psychological well-being, dignity and privacy of victims and witnesses. In so doing, the Court shall have regard to all relevant factors, including age, gender as defined in article 7, paragraph 3, and health, and the nature of the crime, in particular, but not limited to, where the crime involves sexual or gender violence or violence against children. The Prosecutor shall take such measures particularly during the investigation and prosecution of such crimes. These measures shall not be prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial. 2. As an exception to the principle of public hearings provided for in article 67, the Chambers of the Court may, to protect victims and witnesses or an accused, conduct any part of the proceedings in camera or allow the presentation of evidence by electronic or other special means. In particular, such measures shall be implemented in the case of a victim of sexual violence or a child who is a victim or a witness, unless otherwise ordered by the Court, having regard to all the circumstances, particularly the views of the victim or witness. 3. Where the personal interests of the victims are affected, the Court shall permit their views and concerns to be presented and considered at stages of the proceedings determined to be appropriate by the Court and in a manner which is not prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial. Such views and concerns may be presented by the legal representatives of the victims where the Court considers it appropriate, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. The Victims and Witnesses Unit may advise the Prosecutor and the Court on appropriate protective measures, security arrangements, counselling and assistance as referred to in article 43, paragraph 6.
34 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court5. Where the disclosure of evidence or information pursuant to this Statute may lead to the grave endangerment of the security of a witness or his or her family, the Prosecutor may, for the purposes of any proceedings conducted prior to the commencement of the trial, withhold such evidence or information and instead submit a summary thereof. Such measures shall be exercised in a manner which is not prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial. 6. A State may make an application for necessary measures to be taken in respect of the protection of its servants or agents and the protection of confidential or sensitive information. Article 69 Evidence 1. Before testifying, each witness shall, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, give an undertaking as to the truthfulness of the evidence to be given by that witness. 2. The testimony of a witness at trial shall be given in person, except to the extent provided by the measures set forth in article 68 or in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The Court may also permit the giving of viva voce (oral) or recorded testimony of a witness by means of video or audio technology, as well as the introduction of documents or written transcripts, subject to this Statute and in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. These measures shall not be prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused. 3. The parties may submit evidence relevant to the case, in accordance with article 64. The Court shall have the authority to request the submission of all evidence that it considers necessary for the determination of the truth. 4. The Court may rule on the relevance or admissibility of any evidence, taking into account, inter alia , the probative value of the evidence and any prejudice that such evidence may cause to a fair trial or to a fair evaluation of the testimony of a witness, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 5. The Court shall respect and observe privileges on confidentiality as provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 6. The Court shall not require proof of facts of common knowledge but may take judicial notice of them. 7. Evidence obtained by means of a violation of this Statute or internationally recognized human rights shall not be admissible if: (a) The violation casts substantial doubt on the reliability of the evidence; or (b) The admission of the evidence would be antithetical to and would seriously damage the integrity of the proceedings. 8. When deciding on the relevance or admissibility of evidence collected by a State, the Court shall not rule on the application of the State's national law. Article 70 Offences against the administration of justice 1. The Court shall have jurisdiction over the following offences against its administration of justice when committed intentionally: (a) Giving false testimony when under an obligation pursuant to article 69, paragraph 1, to tell the truth; (b) Presenting evidence that the party knows is false or forged; (c) Corruptly influencing a witness, obstructing or interfering with the attendance or testimony of a witness, retaliating against a witness for giving testimony or destroying, tampering with or interfering with the collection of evidence; (d) Impeding, intimidating or corruptly influencing an official of the Court for the purpose of forcing or persuading the official not to perform, or to perform improperly, his or her duties; (e) Retaliating against an official of the Court on account of duties performed by that or another official; (f) Soliciting or accepting a bribe as an official of the Court in connection with his or her official duties. 2. The principles and procedures governing the Court's exercise of jurisdiction over offences under this article shall be those provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The conditions for providing international cooperation to the Court with respect to its proceedings under this article shall be governed by the domestic laws of the requested State.
35 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3. In the event of conviction, the Court may impose a term of imprisonment not exceeding five years, or a fine in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, or both. 4. (a) Each State Party shall extend its criminal laws penalizing offences against the integrity of its own investigative or judicial process to offences against the administration of justice referred to in this article, committed on its territory, or by one of its nationals; (b) Upon request by the Court, whenever it deems it proper, the State Party shall submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution. Those authorities shall treat such cases with diligence and devote sufficient resources to enable them to be conducted effectively. Article 71 Sanctions for misconduct before the Court 1. The Court may sanction persons present before it who commit misconduct, including disruption of its proceedings or deliberate refusal to comply with its directions, by administrative measures other than imprisonment, such as temporary or permanent removal from the courtroom, a fine or other similar measures provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 2. The procedures governing the imposition of the measures set forth in paragraph 1 shall be those provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 72 Protection of national security information 1. This article applies in any case where the disclosure of the information or documents of a State would, in the opinion of that State, prejudice its national security interests. Such cases include those falling within the scope of article 56, paragraphs 2 and 3, article 61, paragraph 3, article 64, paragraph 3, article 67, paragraph 2, article 68, paragraph 6, article 87, paragraph 6 and article 93, as well as cases arising at any other stage of the proceedings where such disclosure may be at issue. 2. This article shall also apply when a person who has been requested to give information or evidence has refused to do so or has referred the matter to the State on the ground that disclosure would prejudice the national security interests of a State and the State concerned confirms that it is of the opinion that disclosure would prejudice its national security interests. 3. Nothing in this article shall prejudice the requirements of confidentiality applicable under article 54, paragraph 3 (e) and (f), or the application of article 73. 4. If a State learns that information or documents of the State are being, or are likely to be, disclosed at any stage of the proceedings, and it is of the opinion that disclosure would prejudice its national security interests, that State shall have the right to intervene in order to obtain resolution of the issue in accordance with this article. 5. If, in the opinion of a State, disclosure of information would prejudice its national security interests, all reasonable steps will be taken by the State, acting in conjunction with the Prosecutor, the defence or the Pre-Trial Chamber or Trial Chamber, as the case may be, to seek to resolve the matter by cooperative means. Such steps may include: (a) Modification or clarification of the request; (b) A determination by the Court regarding the relevance of the information or evidence sought, or a determination as to whether the evidence, though relevant, could be or has been obtained from a source other than the requested State; (c) Obtaining the information or evidence from a different source or in a different form; or (d) Agreement on conditions under which the assistance could be provided including, among other things, providing summaries or redactions, limitations on disclosure, use of in camera or ex parte proceedings, or other protective measures permissible under the Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 6. Once all reasonable steps have been taken to resolve the matter through cooperative means, and if the State considers that there are no means or conditions under which the information or documents could be provided or disclosed without prejudice to its national security interests, it shall so notify the Prosecutor or the Court of the specific reasons for its decision, unless a specific description of the reasons would itself necessarily result in such prejudice to the State's national security interests.
36 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court7. Thereafter, if the Court determines that the evidence is relevant and necessary for the establishment of the guilt or innocence of the accused, the Court may undertake the following actions: (a) Where disclosure of the information or document is sought pursuant to a request for cooperation under Part 9 or the circumstances described in paragraph 2, and the State has invoked the ground for refusal referred to in article 93, paragraph 4: (i) The Court may, before making any conclusion referred to in subparagraph 7 (a) (ii), request further consultations for the purpose of considering the State's representations, which may include, as appropriate, hearings in camera and ex parte ; (ii) If the Court concludes that, by invoking the ground for refusal under article 93, paragraph 4, in the circumstances of the case, the requested State is not acting in accordance with its obligations under this Statute, the Court may refer the matter in accordance with article 87, paragraph 7, specifying the reasons for its conclusion; and (iii) The Court may make such inference in the trial of the accused as to the existence or non- existence of a fact, as may be appropriate in the circumstances; or (b) In all other circumstances: (i) Order disclosure; or (ii) To the extent it does not order disclosure, make such inference in the trial of the accused as to the existence or non-existence of a fact, as may be appropriate in the circumstances. Article 73 Third-party information or documents If a State Party is requested by the Court to provide a document or information in its custody, possession or control, which was disclosed to it in confidence by a State, intergovernmental organization or international organization, it shall seek the consent of the originator to disclose that document or information. If the originator is a State Party, it shall either consent to disclosure of the information or document or undertake to resolve the issue of disclosure with the Court, subject to the provisions of article 72. If the originator is not a State Party and refuses to consent to disclosure, the requested State shall inform the Court that it is unable to provide the document or information because of a pre-existing obligation of confidentiality to the originator. Article 74 Requirements for the decision 1. All the judges of the Trial Chamber shall be present at each stage of the trial and throughout their deliberations. The Presidency may, on a case-by-case basis, designate, as available, one or more alternate judges to be present at each stage of the trial and to replace a member of the Trial Chamber if that member is unable to continue attending. 2. The Trial Chamber's decision shall be based on its evaluation of the evidence and the entire proceedings. The decision shall not exceed the facts and circumstances described in the charges and any amendments to the charges. The Court may base its decision only on evidence submitted and discussed before it at the trial. 3. The judges shall attempt to achieve unanimity in their decision, failing which the decision shall be taken by a majority of the judges. 4. The deliberations of the Trial Chamber shall remain secret. 5. The decision shall be in writing and shall contain a full and reasoned statement of the Trial Chamber's findings on the evidence and conclusions. The Trial Chamber shall issue one decision. When there is no unanimity, the Trial Chamber's decision shall contain the views of the majority and the minority. The decision or a summary thereof shall be delivered in open court. Article 75 Reparations to victims 1. The Court shall establish principles relating to reparations to, or in respect of, victims, including restitution, compensation and rehabilitation. On this basis, in its decision the Court may, either upon request or on its own motion in exceptional circumstances, determine the scope and extent of any damage, loss and injury to, or in respect of, victims and will state the principles on which it is acting.
37 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The Court may make an order directly against a convicted person specifying appropriate reparations to, or in respect of, victims, including restitution, compensation and rehabilitation. Where appropriate, the Court may order that the award for reparations be made through the Trust Fund provided for in article 79. 3. Before making an order under this article, the Court may invite and shall take account of representations from or on behalf of the convicted person, victims, other interested persons or interested States. 4. In exercising its power under this article, the Court may, after a person is convicted of a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court, determine whether, in order to give effect to an order which it may make under this article, it is necessary to seek measures under article 93, paragraph 1. 5. A State Party shall give effect to a decision under this article as if the provisions of article 109 were applicable to this article. 6. Nothing in this article shall be interpreted as prejudicing the rights of victims under national or international law. Article 76 Sentencing 1. In the event of a conviction, the Trial Chamber shall consider the appropriate sentence to be imposed and shall take into account the evidence presented and submissions made during the trial that are relevant to the sentence. 2. Except where article 65 applies and before the completion of the trial, the Trial Chamber may on its own motion and shall, at the request of the Prosecutor or the accused, hold a further hearing to hear any additional evidence or submissions relevant to the sentence, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 3. Where paragraph 2 applies, any representations under article 75 shall be heard during the further hearing referred to in paragraph 2 and, if necessary, during any additional hearing. 4. The sentence shall be pronounced in public and, wherever possible, in the presence of the accused.
38 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 7. PENALTIES Article 77 Applicable penalties 1. Subject to article 110, the Court may impose one of the following penalties on a person convicted of a crime referred to in article 5 of this Statute: (a) Imprisonment for a specified number of years, which may not exceed a maximum of 30 years; or (b) A term of life imprisonment when justified by the extreme gravity of the crime and the individual circumstances of the convicted person. 2. In addition to imprisonment, the Court may order: (a) A fine under the criteria provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (b) A forfeiture of proceeds, property and assets derived directly or indirectly from that crime, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties. Article 78 Determination of the sentence 1. In determining the sentence, the Court shall, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, take into account such factors as the gravity of the crime and the individual circumstances of the convicted person. 2. In imposing a sentence of imprisonment, the Court shall deduct the time, if any, previously spent in detention in accordance with an order of the Court. The Court may deduct any time otherwise spent in detention in connection with conduct underlying the crime. 3. When a person has been convicted of more than one crime, the Court shall pronounce a sentence for each crime and a joint sentence specifying the total period of imprisonment. This period shall be no less than the highest individual sentence pronounced and shall not exceed 30 years imprisonment or a sentence of life imprisonment in conformity with article 77, paragraph 1 (b). Article 79 Trust Fund 1. A Trust Fund shall be established by decision of the Assembly of States Parties for the benefit of victims of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court, and of the families of such victims. 2. The Court may order money and other property collected through fines or forfeiture to be transferred, by order of the Court, to the Trust Fund. 3. The Trust Fund shall be managed according to criteria to be determined by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 80 Non-prejudice to national application of penalties and national laws Nothing in this Part affects the application by States of penalties prescribed by their national law, nor the law of States which do not provide for penalties prescribed in this Part.
39 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 8. APPEAL AND REVISION Article 81 Appeal against decision of acquittal or conviction or against sentence 1. A decision under article 74 may be appealed in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence as follows: (a) The Prosecutor may make an appeal on any of the following grounds: (i) Procedural error, (ii) Error of fact, or (iii) Error of law; (b) The convicted person, or the Prosecutor on that person's behalf, may make an appeal on any of the following grounds: (i) Procedural error, (ii) Error of fact, (iii) Error of law, or (iv) Any other ground that affects the fairness or reliability of the proceedings or decision. 2. (a) A sentence may be appealed, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, by the Prosecutor or the convicted person on the ground of disproportion between the crime and the sentence; (b) If on an appeal against sentence the Court considers that there are grounds on which the conviction might be set aside, wholly or in part, it may invite the Prosecutor and the convicted person to submit grounds under article 81, paragraph 1 (a) or (b), and may render a decision on conviction in accordance with article 83; (c) The same procedure applies when the Court, on an appeal against conviction only, considers that there are grounds to reduce the sentence under paragraph 2 (a). 3. (a) Unless the Trial Chamber orders otherwise, a convicted person shall remain in custody pending an appeal; (b) When a convicted person's time in custody exceeds the sentence of imprisonment imposed, that person shall be released, except that if the Prosecutor is also appealing, the release may be subject to the conditions under subparagraph (c) below; (c) In case of an acquittal, the accused shall be released immediately, subject to the following: (i) Under exceptional circumstances, and having regard, inter alia , to the concrete risk of flight, the seriousness of the offence charged and the probability of success on appeal, the Trial Chamber, at the request of the Prosecutor, may maintain the detention of the person pending appeal; (ii) A decision by the Trial Chamber under subparagraph (c) (i) may be appealed in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 3 (a) and (b), execution of the decision or sentence shall be suspended during the period allowed for appeal and for the duration of the appeal proceedings. Article 82 Appeal against other decisions 1. Either party may appeal any of the following decisions in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence: (a) A decision with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility; (b) A decision granting or denying release of the person being investigated or prosecuted; (c) A decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber to act on its own initiative under article 56, paragraph 3; (d) A decision that involves an issue that would significantly affect the fair and expeditious conduct of the proceedings or the outcome of the trial, and for which, in the opinion of the Pre-Trial or Trial Chamber, an immediate resolution by the Appeals Chamber may materially advance the proceedings.
40 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. A decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber under article 57, paragraph 3 (d), may be appealed against by the State concerned or by the Prosecutor, with the leave of the Pre-Trial Chamber. The appeal shall be heard on an expedited basis. 3. An appeal shall not of itself have suspensive effect unless the Appeals Chamber so orders, upon request, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. A legal representative of the victims, the convicted person or a bona fide owner of property adversely affected by an order under article 75 may appeal against the order for reparations, as provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 83 Proceedings on appeal 1. For the purposes of proceedings under article 81 and this article, the Appeals Chamber shall have all the powers of the Trial Chamber. 2. If the Appeals Chamber finds that the proceedings appealed from were unfair in a way that affected the reliability of the decision or sentence, or that the decision or sentence appealed from was materially affected by error of fact or law or procedural error, it may: (a) Reverse or amend the decision or sentence; or (b) Order a new trial before a different Trial Chamber. For these purposes, the Appeals Chamber may remand a factual issue to the original Trial Chamber for it to determine the issue and to report back accordingly, or may itself call evidence to determine the issue. When the decision or sentence has been appealed only by the person convicted, or the Prosecutor on that person's behalf, it cannot be amended to his or her detriment. 3. If in an appeal against sentence the Appeals Chamber finds that the sentence is disproportionate to the crime, it may vary the sentence in accordance with Part 7. 4. The judgement of the Appeals Chamber shall be taken by a majority of the judges and shall be delivered in open court. The judgement shall state the reasons on which it is based. When there is no unanimity, the judgement of the Appeals Chamber shall contain the views of the majority and the minority, but a judge may deliver a separate or dissenting opinion on a question of law. 5. The Appeals Chamber may deliver its judgement in the absence of the person acquitted or convicted. Article 84 Revision of conviction or sentence 1. The convicted person or, after death, spouses, children, parents or one person alive at the time of the accused's death who has been given express written instructions from the accused to bring such a claim, or the Prosecutor on the person's behalf, may apply to the Appeals Chamber to revise the final judgement of conviction or sentence on the grounds that: (a) New evidence has been discovered that: (i) Was not available at the time of trial, and such unavailability was not wholly or partially attributable to the party making application; and (ii) Is sufficiently important that had it been proved at trial it would have been likely to have resulted in a different verdict; (b) It has been newly discovered that decisive evidence, taken into account at trial and upon which the conviction depends, was false, forged or falsified; (c) One or more of the judges who participated in conviction or confirmation of the charges has committed, in that case, an act of serious misconduct or serious breach of duty of sufficient gravity to justify the removal of that judge or those judges from office under article 46. 2. The Appeals Chamber shall reject the application if it considers it to be unfounded. If it determines that the application is meritorious, it may, as appropriate: (a) Reconvene the original Trial Chamber; (b) Constitute a new Trial Chamber; or
41 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(c) Retain jurisdiction over the matter, with a view to, after hearing the parties in the manner set forth in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, arriving at a determination on whether the judgement should be revised. Article 85 Compensation to an arrested or convicted person 1. Anyone who has been the victim of unlawful arrest or detention shall have an enforceable right to compensation. 2. When a person has by a final decision been convicted of a criminal offence, and when subsequently his or her conviction has been reversed on the ground that a new or newly discovered fact shows conclusively that there has been a miscarriage of justice, the person who has suffered punishment as a result of such conviction shall be compensated according to law, unless it is proved that the non-disclosure of the unknown fact in time is wholly or partly attributable to him or her. 3. In exceptional circumstances, where the Court finds conclusive facts showing that there has been a grave and manifest miscarriage of justice, it may in its discretion award compensation, according to the criteria provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, to a person who has been released from detention following a final decision of acquittal or a termination of the proceedings for that reason.
42 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 9. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AND JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE Article 86 General obligation to cooperate States Parties shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Statute, cooperate fully with the Court in its investigation and prosecution of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. Article 87 Requests for cooperation: general provisions 1. (a) The Court shall have the authority to make requests to States Parties for cooperation. The requestsshall be transmitted through the diplomatic channel or any other appropriate channel as may be designated by each State Party upon ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Subsequent changes to the designation shall be made by each State Party in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. (b) When appropriate, without prejudice to the provisions of subparagraph (a), requests may also be transmitted through the International Criminal Police Organization or any appropriate regional organization. 2. Requests for cooperation and any documents supporting the request shall either be in or be accompanied by a translation into an official language of the requested State or one of the working languages of the Court, in accordance with the choice made by that State upon ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Subsequent changes to this choice shall be made in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 3. The requested State shall keep confidential a request for cooperation and any documents supporting the request, except to the extent that the disclosure is necessary for execution of the request. 4. In relation to any request for assistance presented under this Part, the Court may take such measures, including measures related to the protection of information, as may be necessary to ensure the safety or physical or psychological well-being of any victims, potential witnesses and their families. The Court may request that any information that is made available under this Part shall be provided and handled in a manner that protects the safety and physical or psychological well-being of any victims, potential witnesses and their families. 5. (a) The Court may invite any State not party to this Statute to provide assistance under this Part on the basis of an ad hoc arrangement, an agreement with such State or any other appropriate basis. (b) Where a State not party to this Statute, which has entered into an ad hoc arrangement or an agreement with the Court, fails to cooperate with requests pursuant to any such arrangement or agreement, the Court may so inform the Assembly of States Parties or, where the Security Council referred the matter to the Court, the Security Council. 6. The Court may ask any intergovernmental organization to provide information or documents. The Court may also ask for other forms of cooperation and assistance which may be agreed upon with such an organization and which are in accordance with its competence or mandate. 7. Where a State Party fails to comply with a request to cooperate by the Court contrary to the provisions of this Statute, thereby preventing the Court from exercising its functions and powers under this Statute, the Court may make a finding to that effect and refer the matter to the Assembly of States Parties or, where the Security Council referred the matter to the Court, to the Security Council. Article 88 Availability of procedures under national law States Parties shall ensure that there are procedures available under their national law for all of the forms of cooperation which are specified under this Part. Article 89 Surrender of persons to the Court 1. The Court may transmit a request for the arrest and surrender of a person, together with the material supporting the request outlined in article 91, to any State on the territory of which that person may be found and shall request the cooperation of that State in the arrest and surrender of such a person. States Parties shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Part and the procedure under their national law, comply with requests for arrest and surrender.
43 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. Where the person sought for surrender brings a challenge before a national court on the basis of the principle of ne bis in idem as provided in article 20, the requested State shall immediately consult with the Court to determine if there has been a relevant ruling on admissibility. If the case is admissible, the requested State shall proceed with the execution of the request. If an admissibility ruling is pending, the requested State may postpone the execution of the request for surrender of the person until the Court makes a determination on admissibility. 3. (a) A State Party shall authorize, in accordance with its national procedural law, transportation through its territory of a person being surrendered to the Court by another State, except where transit through that State would impede or delay the surrender. (b) A request by the Court for transit shall be transmitted in accordance with article 87. The request for transit shall contain: (i) A description of the person being transported; (ii) A brief statement of the facts of the case and their legal characterization; and (iii) The warrant for arrest and surrender; (c) A person being transported shall be detained in custody during the period of transit; (d) No authorization is required if the person is transported by air and no landing is scheduled on the territory of the transit State; (e) If an unscheduled landing occurs on the territory of the transit State, that State may require a request for transit from the Court as provided for in subparagraph (b). The transit State shall detain the person being transported until the request for transit is received and the transit is effected, provided that detention for purposes of this subparagraph may not be extended beyond 96 hours from the unscheduled landing unless the request is received within that time. 4. If the person sought is being proceeded against or is serving a sentence in the requested State for a crime different from that for which surrender to the Court is sought, the requested State, after making its decision to grant the request, shall consult with the Court. Article 90 Competing requests 1. A State Party which receives a request from the Court for the surrender of a person under article 89 shall, if it also receives a request from any other State for the extradition of the same person for the same conduct which forms the basis of the crime for which the Court seeks the person's surrender, notify the Court and the requesting State of that fact. 2. Where the requesting State is a State Party, the requested State shall give priority to the request from the Court if: (a) The Court has, pursuant to article 18 or 19, made a determination that the case in respect of which surrender is sought is admissible and that determination takes into account the investigation or prosecution conducted by the requesting State in respect of its request for extradition; or (b) The Court makes the determination described in subparagraph (a) pursuant to the requested State's notification under paragraph 1. 3. Where a determination under paragraph 2 (a) has not been made, the requested State may, at its discretion, pending the determination of the Court under paragraph 2 (b), proceed to deal with the request for extradition from the requesting State but shall not extradite the person until the Court has determined that the case is inadmissible. The Court's determination shall be made on an expedited basis. 4. If the requesting State is a State not Party to this Statute the requested State, if it is not under an international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State, shall give priority to the request for surrender from the Court, if the Court has determined that the case is admissible. 5. Where a case under paragraph 4 has not been determined to be admissible by the Court, the requested State may, at its discretion, proceed to deal with the request for extradition from the requesting State. 6. In cases where paragraph 4 applies except that the requested State is under an existing international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State not Party to this Statute, the requested State shall determine whether to surrender the person to the Court or extradite the person to the requesting State. In making its decision, the requested State shall consider all the relevant factors, including but not limited to:
44 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(a) The respective dates of the requests; (b) The interests of the requesting State including, where relevant, whether the crime was committed in its territory and the nationality of the victims and of the person sought; and (c) The possibility of subsequent surrender between the Court and the requesting State. 7. Where a State Party which receives a request from the Court for the surrender of a person also receives a request from any State for the extradition of the same person for conduct other than that which constitutes the crime for which the Court seeks the person's surrender: (a) The requested State shall, if it is not under an existing international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State, give priority to the request from the Court; (b) The requested State shall, if it is under an existing international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State, determine whether to surrender the person to the Court or to extradite the person to the requesting State. In making its decision, the requested State shall consider all the relevant factors, including but not limited to those set out in paragraph 6, but shall give special consideration to the relative nature and gravity of the conduct in question. 8. Where pursuant to a notification under this article, the Court has determined a case to be inadmissible, and subsequently extradition to the requesting State is refused, the requested State shall notify the Court of this decision. Article 91 Contents of request for arrest and surrender 1. A request for arrest and surrender shall be made in writing. In urgent cases, a request may be made by any medium capable of delivering a written record, provided that the request shall be confirmed through the channel provided for in article 87, paragraph 1 (a). 2. In the case of a request for the arrest and surrender of a person for whom a warrant of arrest has been issued by the Pre-Trial Chamber under article 58, the request shall contain or be supported by: (a) Information describing the person sought, sufficient to identify the person, and information as to that person's probable location; (b) A copy of the warrant of arrest; and (c) Such documents, statements or information as may be necessary to meet the requirements for the surrender process in the requested State, except that those requirements should not be more burdensome than those applicable to requests for extradition pursuant to treaties or arrangements between the requested State and other States and should, if possible, be less burdensome, taking into account the distinct nature of the Court. 3. In the case of a request for the arrest and surrender of a person already convicted, the request shall contain or be supported by: (a) A copy of any warrant of arrest for that person; (b) A copy of the judgement of conviction; (c) Information to demonstrate that the person sought is the one referred to in the judgement of conviction; and (d) If the person sought has been sentenced, a copy of the sentence imposed and, in the case of a sentence for imprisonment, a statement of any time already served and the time remaining to be served. 4. Upon the request of the Court, a State Party shall consult with the Court, either generally or with respect to a specific matter, regarding any requirements under its national law that may apply under paragraph 2 (c). During the consultations, the State Party shall advise the Court of the specific requirements of its national law.
45 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 92 Provisional arrest 1. In urgent cases, the Court may request the provisional arrest of the person sought, pending presentation of the request for surrender and the documents supporting the request as specified in article 91. 2. The request for provisional arrest shall be made by any medium capable of delivering a written record and shall contain: (a) Information describing the person sought, sufficient to identify the person, and information as to that person's probable location; (b) A concise statement of the crimes for which the person's arrest is sought and of the facts which are alleged to constitute those crimes, including, where possible, the date and location of the crime; (c) A statement of the existence of a warrant of arrest or a judgement of conviction against the person sought; and (d) A statement that a request for surrender of the person sought will follow. 3. A person who is provisionally arrested may be released from custody if the requested State has not received the request for surrender and the documents supporting the request as specified in article 91 within the time limits specified in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. However, the person may consent to surrender before the expiration of this period if permitted by the law of the requested State. In such a case, the requested State shall proceed to surrender the person to the Court as soon as possible. 4. The fact that the person sought has been released from custody pursuant to paragraph 3 shall not prejudice the subsequent arrest and surrender of that person if the request for surrender and the documents supporting the request are delivered at a later date. Article 93 Other forms of cooperation 1. States Parties shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Part and under procedures of national law, comply with requests by the Court to provide the following assistance in relation to investigations or prosecutions: (a) The identification and whereabouts of persons or the location of items; (b) The taking of evidence, including testimony under oath, and the production of evidence, including expert opinions and reports necessary to the Court; (c) The questioning of any person being investigated or prosecuted; (d) The service of documents, including judicial documents; (e) Facilitating the voluntary appearance of persons as witnesses or experts before the Court; (f) The temporary transfer of persons as provided in paragraph 7; (g) The examination of places or sites, including the exhumation and examination of grave sites; (h) The execution of searches and seizures; (i) The provision of records and documents, including official records and documents; (j) The protection of victims and witnesses and the preservation of evidence; (k) The identification, tracing and freezing or seizure of proceeds, property and assets and instrumentalities of crimes for the purpose of eventual forfeiture, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties; and (l) Any other type of assistance which is not prohibited by the law of the requested State, with a view to facilitating the investigation and prosecution of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. 2. The Court shall have the authority to provide an assurance to a witness or an expert appearing before the Court that he or she will not be prosecuted, detained or subjected to any restriction of personal freedom by the Court in respect of any act or omission that preceded the departure of that person from the requested State.
46 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3. Where execution of a particular measure of assistance detailed in a request presented under paragraph 1, is prohibited in the requested State on the basis of an existing fundamental legal principle of general application, the requested State shall promptly consult with the Court to try to resolve the matter. In the consultations, consideration should be given to whether the assistance can be rendered in another manner or subject to conditions. If after consultations the matter cannot be resolved, the Court shall modify the request as necessary. 4. In accordance with article 72, a State Party may deny a request for assistance, in whole or in part, only if the request concerns the production of any documents or disclosure of evidence which relates to its national security. 5. Before denying a request for assistance under paragraph 1 (l), the requested State shall consider whether the assistance can be provided subject to specified conditions, or whether the assistance can be provided at a later date or in an alternative manner, provided that if the Court or the Prosecutor accepts the assistance subject to conditions, the Court or the Prosecutor shall abide by them. 6. If a request for assistance is denied, the requested State Party shall promptly inform the Court or the Prosecutor of the reasons for such denial. 7. (a) The Court may request the temporary transfer of a person in custody for purposes of identification or for obtaining testimony or other assistance. The person may be transferred if the following conditions are fulfilled: (i) The person freely gives his or her informed consent to the transfer; and (ii) The requested State agrees to the transfer, subject to such conditions as that State and the Court may agree. (b) The person being transferred shall remain in custody. When the purposes of the transfer have been fulfilled, the Court shall return the person without delay to the requested State. 8. (a) The Court shall ensure the confidentiality of documents and information, except as required for the investigation and proceedings described in the request. (b) The requested State may, when necessary, transmit documents or information to the Prosecutor on a confidential basis. The Prosecutor may then use them solely for the purpose of generating new evidence. (c) The requested State may, on its own motion or at the request of the Prosecutor, subsequently consent to the disclosure of such documents or information. They may then be used as evidence pursuant to the provisions of Parts 5 and 6 and in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 9. (a) (i) In the event that a State Party receives competing requests, other than for surrender or extradition, from the Court and from another State pursuant to an international obligation, the State Party shall endeavour, in consultation with the Court and the other State, to meet both requests, if necessary by postponing or attaching conditions to one or the other request. (ii) Failing that, competing requests shall be resolved in accordance with the principles established in article 90. (b) Where, however, the request from the Court concerns information, property or persons which are subject to the control of a third State or an international organization by virtue of an international agreement, the requested States shall so inform the Court and the Court shall direct its request to the third State or international organization. 10. (a) The Court may, upon request, cooperate with and provide assistance to a State Party conducting an investigation into or trial in respect of conduct which constitutes a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court or which constitutes a serious crime under the national law of the requesting State. (b) (i) The assistance provided under subparagraph (a) shall include, inter alia : a. The transmission of statements, documents or other types of evidence obtained in the course of an investigation or a trial conducted by the Court; and b. The questioning of any person detained by order of the Court;
47 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(ii) In the case of assistance under subparagraph (b) (i) a: a. If the documents or other types of evidence have been obtained with the assistance of a State, such transmission shall require the consent of that State; b. If the statements, documents or other types of evidence have been provided by a witness or expert, such transmission shall be subject to the provisions of article 68. (c) The Court may, under the conditions set out in this paragraph, grant a request for assistance under this paragraph from a State which is not a Party to this Statute. Article 94 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of ongoing investigation or prosecution 1. If the immediate execution of a request would interfere with an ongoing investigation or prosecution of a case different from that to which the request relates, the requested State may postpone the execution of the request for a period of time agreed upon with the Court. However, the postponement shall be no longer than is necessary to complete the relevant investigation or prosecution in the requested State. Before making a decision to postpone, the requested State should consider whether the assistance may be immediately provided subject to certain conditions. 2. If a decision to postpone is taken pursuant to paragraph 1, the Prosecutor may, however, seek measures to preserve evidence, pursuant to article 93, paragraph 1 (j). Article 95 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of an admissibility challenge Where there is an admissibility challenge under consideration by the Court pursuant to article 18 or 19, the requested State may postpone the execution of a request under this Part pending a determination by the Court, unless the Court has specifically ordered that the Prosecutor may pursue the collection of such evidence pursuant to article 18 or 19. Article 96 Contents of request for other forms of assistance under article 93 1. A request for other forms of assistance referred to in article 93 shall be made in writing. In urgent cases, a request may be made by any medium capable of delivering a written record, provided that the request shall be confirmed through the channel provided for in article 87, paragraph 1 (a). 2. The request shall, as applicable, contain or be supported by the following: (a) A concise statement of the purpose of the request and the assistance sought, including the legal basis and the grounds for the request; (b) As much detailed information as possible about the location or identification of any person or place that must be found or identified in order for the assistance sought to be provided; (c) A concise statement of the essential facts underlying the request; (d) The reasons for and details of any procedure or requirement to be followed; (e) Such information as may be required under the law of the requested State in order to execute the request; and (f) Any other information relevant in order for the assistance sought to be provided. 3. Upon the request of the Court, a State Party shall consult with the Court, either generally or with respect to a specific matter, regarding any requirements under its national law that may apply under paragraph 2 (e). During the consultations, the State Party shall advise the Court of the specific requirements of its national law. 4. The provisions of this article shall, where applicable, also apply in respect of a request for assistance made to the Court.
48 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 97 Consultations Where a State Party receives a request under this Part in relation to which it identifies problems which may impede or prevent the execution of the request, that State shall consult with the Court without delay in order to resolve the matter. Such problems may include, inter alia : (a) Insufficient information to execute the request; (b) In the case of a request for surrender, the fact that despite best efforts, the person sought cannot be located or that the investigation conducted has determined that the person in the requested State is clearly not the person named in the warrant; or (c) The fact that execution of the request in its current form would require the requested State to breach a pre-existing treaty obligation undertaken with respect to another State. Article 98 Cooperation with respect to waiver of immunity and consent to surrender 1. The Court may not proceed with a request for surrender or assistance which would require the requested State to act inconsistently with its obligations under international law with respect to the State or diplomatic immunity of a person or property of a third State, unless the Court can first obtain the cooperation of that third State for the waiver of the immunity. 2. The Court may not proceed with a request for surrender which would require the requested State to act inconsistently with its obligations under international agreements pursuant to which the consent of a sending State is required to surrender a person of that State to the Court, unless the Court can first obtain the cooperation of the sending State for the giving of consent for the surrender. Article 99 Execution of requests under articles 93 and 96 1. Requests for assistance shall be executed in accordance with the relevant procedure under the law of the requested State and, unless prohibited by such law, in the manner specified in the request, including following any procedure outlined therein or permitting persons specified in the request to be present at and assist in the execution process. 2. In the case of an urgent request, the documents or evidence produced in response shall, at the request of the Court, be sent urgently. 3. Replies from the requested State shall be transmitted in their original language and form. 4. Without prejudice to other articles in this Part, where it is necessary for the successful execution of a request which can be executed without any compulsory measures, including specifically the interview of or taking evidence from a person on a voluntary basis, including doing so without the presence of the authorities of the requested State Party if it is essential for the request to be executed, and the examination without modification of a public site or other public place, the Prosecutor may execute such request directly on the territory of a State as follows: (a) When the State Party requested is a State on the territory of which the crime is alleged to have been committed, and there has been a determination of admissibility pursuant to article 18 or 19, the Prosecutor may directly execute such request following all possible consultations with the requested State Party; (b) In other cases, the Prosecutor may execute such request following consultations with the requested State Party and subject to any reasonable conditions or concerns raised by that State Party. Where the requested State Party identifies problems with the execution of a request pursuant to this subparagraph it shall, without delay, consult with the Court to resolve the matter. 5. Provisions allowing a person heard or examined by the Court under article 72 to invoke restrictions designed to prevent disclosure of confidential information connected with national security shall also apply to the execution of requests for assistance under this article.
49 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 100 Costs 1. The ordinary costs for execution of requests in the territory of the requested State shall be borne by that State, except for the following, which shall be borne by the Court: (a) Costs associated with the travel and security of witnesses and experts or the transfer under article 93 of persons in custody; (b) Costs of translation, interpretation and transcription; (c) Travel and subsistence costs of the judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors, the Registrar, the Deputy Registrar and staff of any organ of the Court; (d) Costs of any expert opinion or report requested by the Court; (e) Costs associated with the transport of a person being surrendered to the Court by a custodial State; and (f) Following consultations, any extraordinary costs that may result from the execution of a request. 2. The provisions of paragraph 1 shall, as appropriate, apply to requests from States Parties to the Court. In that case, the Court shall bear the ordinary costs of execution. Article 101 Rule of speciality 1. A person surrendered to the Court under this Statute shall not be proceeded against, punished or detained for any conduct committed prior to surrender, other than the conduct or course of conduct which forms the basis of the crimes for which that person has been surrendered. 2. The Court may request a waiver of the requirements of paragraph 1 from the State which surrendered the person to the Court and, if necessary, the Court shall provide additional information in accordance with article 91. States Parties shall have the authority to provide a waiver to the Court and should endeavour to do so. Article 102 Use of terms For the purposes of this Statute: (a) "surrender" means the delivering up of a person by a State to the Court, pursuant to this Statute. (b) "extradition" means the delivering up of a person by one State to another as provided by treaty, convention or national legislation.
50 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 10. ENFORCEMENT Article 103 Role of States in enforcement of sentences of imprisonment 1. (a) A sentence of imprisonment shall be served in a State designated by the Court from a list of States which have indicated to the Court their willingness to accept sentenced persons. (b) At the time of declaring its willingness to accept sentenced persons, a State may attach conditions to its acceptance as agreed by the Court and in accordance with this Part. (c) A State designated in a particular case shall promptly inform the Court whether it accepts the Court's designation. 2. (a) The State of enforcement shall notify the Court of any circumstances, including the exercise of any conditions agreed under paragraph 1, which could materially affect the terms or extent of the imprisonment. The Court shall be given at least 45 days' notice of any such known or foreseeable circumstances. During this period, the State of enforcement shall take no action that might prejudice its obligations under article 110. (b) Where the Court cannot agree to the circumstances referred to in subparagraph (a), it shall notify the State of enforcement and proceed in accordance with article 104, paragraph 1. 3. In exercising its discretion to make a designation under paragraph 1, the Court shall take into account the following: (a) The principle that States Parties should share the responsibility for enforcing sentences of imprisonment, in accordance with principles of equitable distribution, as provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (b) The application of widely accepted international treaty standards governing the treatment of prisoners; (c) The views of the sentenced person; (d) The nationality of the sentenced person; (e) Such other factors regarding the circumstances of the crime or the person sentenced, or the effective enforcement of the sentence, as may be appropriate in designating the State of enforcement. 4. If no State is designated under paragraph 1, the sentence of imprisonment shall be served in a prison facility made available by the host State, in accordance with the conditions set out in the headquarters agreement referred to in article 3, paragraph 2. In such a case, the costs arising out of the enforcement of a sentence of imprisonment shall be borne by the Court. Article 104 Change in designation of State of enforcement 1. The Court may, at any time, decide to transfer a sentenced person to a prison of another State. 2. A sentenced person may, at any time, apply to the Court to be transferred from the State of enforcement. Article 105 Enforcement of the sentence 1. Subject to conditions which a State may have specified in accordance with article 103, paragraph 1 (b), the sentence of imprisonment shall be binding on the States Parties, which shall in no case modify it. 2. The Court alone shall have the right to decide any application for appeal and revision. The State of enforcement shall not impede the making of any such application by a sentenced person. Article 106 Supervision of enforcement of sentences and conditions of imprisonment 1. The enforcement of a sentence of imprisonment shall be subject to the supervision of the Court and shall be consistent with widely accepted international treaty standards governing treatment of prisoners.
51 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The conditions of imprisonment shall be governed by the law of the State of enforcement and shall be consistent with widely accepted international treaty standards governing treatment of prisoners; in no case shall such conditions be more or less favourable than those available to prisoners convicted of similar offences in the State of enforcement. 3. Communications between a sentenced person and the Court shall be unimpeded and confidential. Article 107 Transfer of the person upon completion of sentence 1. Following completion of the sentence, a person who is not a national of the State of enforcement may, in accordance with the law of the State of enforcement, be transferred to a State which is obliged to receive him or her, or to another State which agrees to receive him or her, taking into account any wishes of the person to be transferred to that State, unless the State of enforcement authorizes the person to remain in its territory. 2. If no State bears the costs arising out of transferring the person to another State pursuant to paragraph 1, such costs shall be borne by the Court. 3. Subject to the provisions of article 108, the State of enforcement may also, in accordance with its national law, extradite or otherwise surrender the person to a State which has requested the extradition or surrender of the person for purposes of trial or enforcement of a sentence. Article 108 Limitation on the prosecution or punishment of other offences 1. A sentenced person in the custody of the State of enforcement shall not be subject to prosecution or punishment or to extradition to a third State for any conduct engaged in prior to that person's delivery to the State of enforcement, unless such prosecution, punishment or extradition has been approved by the Court at the request of the State of enforcement. 2. The Court shall decide the matter after having heard the views of the sentenced person. 3. Paragraph 1 shall cease to apply if the sentenced person remains voluntarily for more than 30 days in the territory of the State of enforcement after having served the full sentence imposed by the Court, or returns to the territory of that State after having left it. Article 109 Enforcement of fines and forfeiture measures 1. States Parties shall give effect to fines or forfeitures ordered by the Court under Part 7, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties, and in accordance with the procedure of their national law. 2. If a State Party is unable to give effect to an order for forfeiture, it shall take measures to recover the value of the proceeds, property or assets ordered by the Court to be forfeited, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties. 3. Property, or the proceeds of the sale of real property or, where appropriate, the sale of other property, which is obtained by a State Party as a result of its enforcement of a judgement of the Court shall be transferred to the Court. Article 110 Review by the Court concerning reduction of sentence 1. The State of enforcement shall not release the person before expiry of the sentence pronounced by the Court. 2. The Court alone shall have the right to decide any reduction of sentence, and shall rule on the matter after having heard the person. 3. When the person has served two thirds of the sentence, or 25 years in the case of life imprisonment, the Court shall review the sentence to determine whether it should be reduced. Such a review shall not be conducted before that time. 4. In its review under paragraph 3, the Court may reduce the sentence if it finds that one or more of the following factors are present: (a) The early and continuing willingness of the person to cooperate with the Court in its investigations and prosecutions;
52 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) The voluntary assistance of the person in enabling the enforcement of the judgements and orders of the Court in other cases, and in particular providing assistance in locating assets subject to orders of fine, forfeiture or reparation which may be used for the benefit of victims; or (c) Other factors establishing a clear and significant change of circumstances sufficient to justify the reduction of sentence, as provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 5. If the Court determines in its initial review under paragraph 3 that it is not appropriate to reduce the sentence, it shall thereafter review the question of reduction of sentence at such intervals and applying such criteria as provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 111 Escape If a convicted person escapes from custody and flees the State of enforcement, that State may, after consultation with the Court, request the person's surrender from the State in which the person is located pursuant to existing bilateral or multilateral arrangements, or may request that the Court seek the person's surrender, in accordance with Part 9. It may direct that the person be delivered to the State in which he or she was serving the sentence or to another State designated by the Court.
53 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 11. ASSEMBLY OF STATES PARTIES Article 112 Assembly of States Parties 1. An Assembly of States Parties to this Statute is hereby established. Each State Party shall have one representative in the Assembly who may be accompanied by alternates and advisers. Other States which have signed this Statute or the Final Act may be observers in the Assembly. 2. The Assembly shall: (a) Consider and adopt, as appropriate, recommendations of the Preparatory Commission; (b) Provide management oversight to the Presidency, the Prosecutor and the Registrar regarding the administration of the Court; (c) Consider the reports and activities of the Bureau established under paragraph 3 and take appropriate action in regard thereto; (d) Consider and decide the budget for the Court; (e) Decide whether to alter, in accordance with article 36, the number of judges; (f) Consider pursuant to article 87, paragraphs 5 and 7, any question relating to non-cooperation; (g) Perform any other function consistent with this Statute or the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 3. (a) The Assembly shall have a Bureau consisting of a President, two Vice-Presidents and 18 members elected by the Assembly for three-year terms. (b) The Bureau shall have a representative character, taking into account, in particular, equitable geographical distribution and the adequate representation of the principal legal systems of the world. (c) The Bureau shall meet as often as necessary, but at least once a year. It shall assist the Assembly in the discharge of its responsibilities. 4. The Assembly may establish such subsidiary bodies as may be necessary, including an independent oversight mechanism for inspection, evaluation and investigation of the Court, in order to enhance its efficiency and economy. 5. The President of the Court, the Prosecutor and the Registrar or their representatives may participate, as appropriate, in meetings of the Assembly and of the Bureau. 6. The Assembly shall meet at the seat of the Court or at the Headquarters of the United Nations once a year and, when circumstances so require, hold special sessions. Except as otherwise specified in this Statute, special sessions shall be convened by the Bureau on its own initiative or at the request of one third of the States Parties. 7. Each State Party shall have one vote. Every effort shall be made to reach decisions by consensus in the Assembly and in the Bureau. If consensus cannot be reached, except as otherwise provided in the Statute: (a) Decisions on matters of substance must be approved by a two-thirds majority of those present and voting provided that an absolute majority of States Parties constitutes the quorum for voting; (b) Decisions on matters of procedure shall be taken by a simple majority of States Parties present and voting. 8. A State Party which is in arrears in the payment of its financial contributions towards the costs of the Court shall have no vote in the Assembly and in the Bureau if the amount of its arrears equals or exceeds the amount of the contributions due from it for the preceding two full years. The Assembly may, nevertheless, permit such a State Party to vote in the Assembly and in the Bureau if it is satisfied that the failure to pay is due to conditions beyond the control of the State Party. 9. The Assembly shall adopt its own rules of procedure. 10. The official and working languages of the Assembly shall be those of the General Assembly of the United Nations.
54 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 12. FINANCING Article 113 Financial Regulations Except as otherwise specifically provided, all financial matters related to the Court and the meetings of the Assembly of States Parties, including its Bureau and subsidiary bodies, shall be governed by this Statute and the Financial Regulations and Rules adopted by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 114 Payment of expenses Expenses of the Court and the Assembly of States Parties, including its Bureau and subsidiary bodies, shall be paid from the funds of the Court. Article 115 Funds of the Court and of the Assembly of States Parties The expenses of the Court and the Assembly of States Parties, including its Bureau and subsidiary bodies, as provided for in the budget decided by the Assembly of States Parties, shall be provided by the following sources: (a) Assessed contributions made by States Parties; (b) Funds provided by the United Nations, subject to the approval of the General Assembly, in particular in relation to the expenses incurred due to referrals by the Security Council. Article 116 Voluntary contributions Without prejudice to article 115, the Court may receive and utilize, as additional funds, voluntary contributions from Governments, international organizations, individuals, corporations and other entities, in accordance with relevant criteria adopted by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 117 Assessment of contributions The contributions of States Parties shall be assessed in accordance with an agreed scale of assessment, based on the scale adopted by the United Nations for its regular budget and adjusted in accordance with the principles on which that scale is based. Article 118 Annual audit The records, books and accounts of the Court, including its annual financial statements, shall be audited annually by an independent auditor.
55 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 13. FINAL CLAUSES Article 119 Settlement of disputes 1. Any dispute concerning the judicial functions of the Court shall be settled by the decision of the Court. 2. Any other dispute between two or more States Parties relating to the interpretation or application of this Statute which is not settled through negotiations within three months of their commencement shall be referred to the Assembly of States Parties. The Assembly may itself seek to settle the dispute or may make recommendations on further means of settlement of the dispute, including referral to the International Court of Justice in conformity with the Statute of that Court. Article 120 Reservations No reservations may be made to this Statute. Article 121 Amendments 1. After the expiry of seven years from the entry into force of this Statute, any State Party may propose amendments thereto. The text of any proposed amendment shall be submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall promptly circulate it to all States Parties. 2. No sooner than three months from the date of notification, the Assembly of States Parties, at its next meeting, shall, by a majority of those present and voting, decide whether to take up the proposal. The Assembly may deal with the proposal directly or convene a Review Conference if the issue involved so warrants. 3. The adoption of an amendment at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties or at a Review Conference on which consensus cannot be reached shall require a two-thirds majority of States Parties. 4. Except as provided in paragraph 5, an amendment shall enter into force for all States Parties one year after instruments of ratification or acceptance have been deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations by seven-eighths of them. 5. Any amendment to articles 5, 6, 7 and 8 of this Statute shall enter into force for those States Parties which have accepted the amendment one year after the deposit of their instruments of ratification or acceptance. In respect of a State Party which has not accepted the amendment, the Court shall not exercise its jurisdiction regarding a crime covered by the amendment when committed by that State Party's nationals or on its territory. 6. If an amendment has been accepted by seven-eighths of States Parties in accordance with paragraph 4, any State Party which has not accepted the amendment may withdraw from this Statute with immediate effect, notwithstanding article 127, paragraph 1, but subject to article 127, paragraph 2, by giving notice no later than one year after the entry into force of such amendment. 7. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall circulate to all States Parties any amendment adopted at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties or at a Review Conference. Article 122 Amendments to provisions of an institutional nature 1. Amendments to provisions of this Statute which are of an exclusively institutional nature, namely, article 35, article 36, paragraphs 8 and 9, article 37, article 38, article 39, paragraphs 1 (first two sentences), 2 and 4, article 42, paragraphs 4 to 9, article 43, paragraphs 2 and 3, and articles 44, 46, 47 and 49, may be proposed at any time, notwithstanding article 121, paragraph 1, by any State Party. The text of any proposed amendment shall be submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations or such other person designated by the Assembly of States Parties who shall promptly circulate it to all States Parties and to others participating in the Assembly. 2. Amendments under this article on which consensus cannot be reached shall be adopted by the Assembly of States Parties or by a Review Conference, by a two-thirds majority of States Parties. Such amendments shall enter into force for all States Parties six months after their adoption by the Assembly or, as the case may be, by the Conference.
56 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 123 Review of the Statute 1. Seven years after the entry into force of this Statute the Secretary-General of the United Nations shall convene a Review Conference to consider any amendments to this Statute. Such review may include, but is not limited to, the list of crimes contained in article 5. The Conference shall be open to those participating in the Assembly of States Parties and on the same conditions. 2. At any time thereafter, at the request of a State Party and for the purposes set out in paragraph 1, the Secretary-General of the United Nations shall, upon approval by a majority of States Parties, convene a Review Conference. 3. The provisions of article 121, paragraphs 3 to 7, shall apply to the adoption and entry into force of any amendment to the Statute considered at a Review Conference. Article 124 Transitional Provision Notwithstanding article 12, paragraphs 1 and 2, a State, on becoming a party to this Statute, may declare that, for a period of seven years after the entry into force of this Statute for the State concerned, it does not accept the jurisdiction of the Court with respect to the category of crimes referred to in article 8 when a crime is alleged to have been committed by its nationals or on its territory. A declaration under this article may be withdrawn at any time. The provisions of this article shall be reviewed at the Review Conference convened in accordance with article 123, paragraph 1. Article 125 Signature, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession 1. This Statute shall be open for signature by all States in Rome, at the headquarters of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, on 17 July 1998. Thereafter, it shall remain open for signature in Rome at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Italy until 17 October 1998. After that date, the Statute shall remain open for signature in New Y ork, at United Nations Headquarters, until 31 December 2000. 2. This Statute is subject to ratification, acceptance or approval by signatory States. Instruments of ratification, acceptance or approval shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. 3. This Statute shall be open to accession by all States. Instruments of accession shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Article 126 Entry into force 1. This Statute shall enter into force on the first day of the month after the 60th day following the date of the deposit of the 60th instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. 2. For each State ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to this Statute after the deposit of the 60th instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, the Statute shall enter into force on the first day of the month after the 60th day following the deposit by such State of its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Article 127 Withdrawal 1. A State Party may, by written notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, withdraw from this Statute. The withdrawal shall take effect one year after the date of receipt of the notification, unless the notification specifies a later date. 2. A State shall not be discharged, by reason of its withdrawal, from the obligations arising from this Statute while it was a Party to the Statute, including any financial obligations which may have accrued. Its withdrawal shall not affect any cooperation with the Court in connection with criminal investigations and proceedings in relation to which the withdrawing State had a duty to cooperate and which were commenced prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective, nor shall it prejudice in any way the continued consideration of any matter which was already under consideration by the Court prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective.
57 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 128 Authentic texts The original of this Statute, of which the Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish texts are equally authentic, shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall send certified copies thereof to all States. In W Itness W hereof , the undersigned, being duly authorized thereto by their respective Governments, have signed this Statute. Done at Rome, this 17th day of July 1998.
58 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court

[Previous Article]#[Next]

Camponeses são reprimidos por agentes da Polícia Federal e por paramilitares em Machadinho D’Oeste, Rondônia - A Nova Democracia (A Nova Democracia)


Representantes das famílias camponesas que ocuparam recentemente a fazenda Ipê, em Machadinho D’Oeste, região nordeste de Rondônia, denunciaram um ataque brutal ao acampamento, promovido por um bando de paramilitares e policiais, no dia 07 de março de 2024.

Os acampados foram surpreendidos por vários homens sem farda que invadiram o acampamento pela mata. O bando paramilitar algemou, espancou os trabalhadores e os entregou a policiais que estavam esperando numa área de soja, com várias viaturas e até um helicóptero. Os camponeses pensaram que seriam encarcerados, mas sofreram nova sessão de agressão física, dessa vez pelos policiais; apenas um acampado foi levado preso.

O helicóptero, provavelmente era o mesmo que atuou na região de Machadinho, desde o dia 05/03, era vinculado à Polícia Federal, como é possível ver no vídeo:

Os representantes dos camponeses suspeitam que um dos mandantes desse crime seja o latifundiário “Ivo da Ipê”, que se diz o dono da fazenda Ipê – terras públicas destinada à reforma agrária – grilada por seu sogro, Sijuca, já falecido, proprietário da Madeireira Ipê, em Jaru.

“Ivo do Ipê” é um antigo inimigo dos camponeses, responsável pelo assassinato do camponês Ivo Martins, da Área Cristo Rei, em Cacaulândia, segundo denúncias feitas por lideranças da luta pela terra ao Ministério do Desenvolvimento Agrário, em fevereiro de 2003. Camponeses também o responsabilizam pelos assassinatos covardes dos companheiros Tonha e Serafim, no dia 01 de agosto de 2003. Eles eram lideranças de vários acampamentos na região de Machadinho e foram vítimas de uma emboscada, quando voltavam de uma reunião no Incrade Ariquemes, marcada de emergência pelo órgão federal.

Novo caso de repressão à justa luta pela terra

Este novo ataque a camponeses, no início de março, se soma a vários outros na região, promovidos por um consórcio de latifundiários da extrema direita que tem atuado com grupos paramilitares em conjunto com as tropas oficiais do velho Estado.

No dia 28 de fevereiro, um helicóptero da polícia tinha sobrevoado várias áreas de luta pela terra em Machadinho. Camponeses de ao menos 3 localidades relataram o sobrevoo desta aeronave, que saiu cedo do município e só retornou pra base no final da tarde. Lideranças camponesas da região temem que isso seja parte de algum planejamento conjunto entre latifundiários e polícias para uma onda de repressão a camponeses em luta pelo direito a terra.

Na semana passada, camponeses da área Paredão, na rodovia RO-257, também em Machadinho, se reuniram para preparar a resistência contra nova ordem de despejo, expedida injustamente pelo judiciário. Terra pública, tem uma ordem da justiça federal para retirar o fazendeiro, desde 2012 – para isso nunca vieram, para retirar os camponeses, já despejaram cerca de 3 vezes.

‘Não sairemos de nossas terras!’

Por outro lado, os camponeses organizados reafirmam sua decisão de resistir em suas terras e se preparam, cada vez de forma mais unida, organizada e combativa.


[Previous Article]#[Next]

PALO QUEMADO-LAS PAMPAS RESISTE CONTRA EL IMPERIALISMO MINERO (FDLP EC)


El imperialismo despliega sus garras

Las botas imperialistas, de diferente laya, invaden al Ecuador, en búsqueda de nuestra tierra, recursos naturales, mano de obra barata, mercado (principalmente armamentístico), coludiendo y pugnando por el reparto del mundo. En Ecuador nos enfrentamos a la expansión del monopolio minero extractivista.

El imperialismo, mediante las empresas transnacionales mineras, escupen cual veneno sus narrativas, dicen que vienen con progreso, fuentes de empleo, industrialización, riqueza, entre otras falacias. A la víbora poco o nada le interesa el bienestar de los pueblos oprimidos, todo lo contrario, son evidentes sus prácticas colonizadoras y sus ansias de enriquecerse a costa de lo que sea.

Esos tigres de papel les apetece irrumpir en Ecuador, pues, los derechos laborales son vulnerados y así saciarse del trabajo ajeno. Entonces, las mineras tienen garantizada la mano de obra barata con relaciones de producción semifeudales. El gobierno burgués/terrateniente de Noboa, va más allá de ser un representante de la facción gran burguesa compradora, es la encarnación del feudalismo, un terrateniente criado a imagen y semejanza de los yanquis para reproducir la feudalidad, el gamonalismo, la servidumbre, el trabajo no pago y la semicolonialidad.

Invasión a Palo Quemado-Las Pampas

Los gobiernos de turno, desde el fascista Correa, pasando por Moreno, Lasso y hoy el terrateniente de Noboa, conjuntamente con otras instituciones del viejo estado, han agachado la cabeza ante sus amos imperialistas. Han prestado todas las condiciones para que despojen las tierras al campesino.

Lo que está sucediendo en Palo Quemado-Las Pampas, del cantón  Sigchos, provincia de Cotopaxi, no es más que la imposición imperialista del capitalismo burocrático (semicolonial/semifeudal), concesionaron a las parroquias Palo Quemado y Las Pampas 2.200 hectáreas a favor de la empresa minera terrateniente La Plata S.A., propiedad de la Atico Mining Corporation S.A., ahora ingresan a las comunidades campesinas con el objetivo de concentrar la tierra, explotar minerales como oro, plata, cobre, entre otros.

Burócratas del Ministerio de Ambiente y asalariados de la minera La Plata S.A., se han dado la tarea de realizar mediocres talleres y charlas de socialización, distrayendo el verdadero impacto social y ambiental, ofreciendo fuentes de trabajo, capacitaciones, vacunas a niños, educación, camionetas y maquinaria, en resumen, intentando comprar conciencias. Lo hacen frente unos cuantos pobladores despistados y traidores, bajo el pretexto de una supuesta socialización del proyecto minero, con ese mecanismo ingresan al pueblo para dividirlo y contraponerlo.

Resistencia antimperialista

El viejo estado activó sus aparatos represivos el 19 y 20 de marzo, miembros de la Policía Nacional y Fuerzas Armadas, según denuncias de comuneros, en coordinación con mafias paramilitares al servicio del imperialismo y de los grupos de poder, atacaron al campesinado. Además, la Fiscalía General del Estado criminalizó el derecho a la resistencia y la protesta, procesando alrededor de 72 comuneros, insólitamente, por el delito de terrorismo. 

A pesar de toda la represión y persecución, las masas valientes han resistido de forma beligerante, los campesinos desarrollan luchas para expulsar al invasor, incineraron dos vehículos de lacayos imperialistas e hirieron a seis policías y militares.

Abajo las consultas e institucionalidad burguesa/terrateniente

Se desarrolla la farsa de las consultas previas, libres e informadas, consultas populares, elecciones y la espuria democracia burguesa. Por ejemplo, la consulta popular por la no explotar del Yasuní ITT ¿de qué ha servido?, ¿De qué sirve elegir cada cuatro años un verdugo como presidente? Las socializaciones mineras en el cantón Las Naves ¿de qué sirvieron? Sirven únicamente para adormecer las luchas populares.

Los traidores, revisionistas, reformistas y oportunistas intentan llevar al despeñadero la lucha de los pueblos, dirigiendo al abismo electorero e institucional a las masas, empujándoles a una consulta previa, libre e informada, que está amañada en favor de la minería imperialista, que legitima. la invasión y se convierte en el extintor de las chispas de resistencia.

No debemos romantizar la lucha de los pueblos oprimidos, esto va más allá del agua, de la naturaleza, tampoco es un tema de indígenas, mestizos, negros o blancos. Abramos los ojos, el mundo atraviesa varias invasiones imperialistas contra los pueblos oprimidos.

El imperialismo desea apoderarse de nuestro principal medio de producción, la tierra y todo lo que le contiene, despojando de sus parcelas a nuestros campesinos. Entonces, el pueblo de Palo Quemado-Las Pampas su principal contradicción es contra el imperialismo, contra la semifeudalidad y contra el capitalismo burocrático, en ese orden.

No podemos confiar ni un gramo de arroz en las instituciones del viejo estado, todos están al servicio del imperialismo y de los grupos de poder, tampoco de las Fuerzas Armadas y Policía Nacional que apuntan sus armas a los más pobres del país en beneficio del explotador. y no dudarán en halar el gatillo. En contraposición, está el proletariado, los campesinos pobres, los intelectuales democráticos, el pueblo aguerrido, que emprendemos la lucha antimperialista por la pacha mama.

¡ABAJO EL IMPERIALISMO MINERO!

¡ABAJO LAS CONSULTAS PREVIAS!

¡VIVA LA LUCHA DE LIBERACIÓN NACIONAL!

¡VIVA LA RESISTENCIA COMBATIVA DEL PUEBLO DE PALO QUEMADO-LAS PAMPAS!

¡LA LUCHA POR LA TIERRA ES PRINCIPAL, LA LUCHA POR EL AGUA Y TERRITORIO ES COMPLEMENTO!

¡ORGANIZAR, COMBATIR Y RESISTIR!


 


[Previous Article]#[Next]

Brasilien: Folkedomstolen mod jordberøvelser og landbaserede forbrydelser afholdt i Junco do Maranhão (Socialistisk Revolution)


Hermed offentliggør vi en uofficiel oversættelse af en artikel offentliggjort i A Nova Democracia (AND).

Den 9. og 10. marts blev den sejrrige folkedomstol mod jordberøvelser og landbaserede forbrydelser afholdt i landsbyen Vilela i Junco do Maranhão. Her deltog folkelige advokater, forskere, fagforeningsfolk og statslige journalister fra andre regioner i landet, som var med i rettens dommerkomité.

Domstolen havde også deltagelse af forskellige organisationer, såsom União das Comunidades em Luta og Coletivo Estudantil Filhos do Povo, som organiserede studerende til at deltage i begivenheden. Bondelederen Luiz Vila Nova deltog også i arrangementet.

Overalt i auditoriet prydede organisationsflag og bannere med paroler om kampen for omfordelingen af jord. Lige ved adgangsvejen hang et banner »Ud med jordberøverne! For titulering af vores ejendele!« slog tonen an for arrangementet. Inde i auditoriet var der andre bannere, som fordømte jordberøvelser, minedrift i stor skala og opfordrede til bondeenhed. Underskrifterne kom fra besættere fra forskellige samfund som Gleba Campina, Povoado Vilela, Caranandeua- og Jaraquara-samfundene og bondeforeningen Povoado de Maracacuera i Carutapera kommune.

I en af arrangementets aktiviteter organiserede bønderne en motorcykelkaravane for at besøge Gleba Campina og undersøge de forbrydelser, som jordberøverne har begået der.

Som anvist af Folkedomstolen opfordrede de tilstedeværende organisationer til en dag med mobilisering og kamp mod delstaten Maranhãos lov om jordberøvesle den 1. maj. Notatet kan læses i sin helhed her.

I en fælles note skriver Solidarity Comitê de Solidariedade à Luta pela Terra (COMSOLUTE) og União das Comunidades em Luta (UCL): »Dette er en sejrrig begivenhed på alle måder: ved at etablere og forene en politisk dagsorden for at forsvare befolkningens menneskerettigheder; ved at producere juridisk materiale til støtte for lokalsamfundenes sag; ved at røre de tilstedeværende omkring solidaritet med kampen for jord«.

Noten giver også en varm hilsen til Coletivo Estudantil Filhos do Povo, som havde forberedt en bus fuld af studerende. Ifølge de tilstedeværende var Folkedomstolen en milepæl i udviklingen af den nye studenterbevægelse i Maranhão.


[Previous Article]#[Next]

From Ang Bayan: Wage Armed Struggle Against The
 US-Marcos Regime’s Fascist Onslaught - Redspark (Redspark)


Ang Bayan

March 21, 2024

The Filipino people are burning with rage at the US-Marcos regime over its all-out fascist oppression throughout the country, especially in the countryside. The peasant masses are outraged that amidst widespread misery and hunger, the reactionary regime is intent on fascism and land grabbing.

Desperate to “finish off” the revolutionary armed resistance of the Filipino people, the US-Marcos regime’s armed tentacles is carrying out a rampant terrorist and fascist rampage throughout the country. Marcos and the AFP are set to make one false declaration after another that provinces have become “insurgency-free,” especially in areas that have long been targets of foreign corporations for mining, plantation and energy projects. At the behest of US imperialism, the AFP is also in a hurry to “end” the armed struggle of the Filipino people so that the US military can fully employ the AFP in its war of provocation against China which is likely to intensify in the coming year.

Marcos and the leadership of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) have recently ordered an all-out war. The declared aim of this war is to dismantle all NPA guerrilla fronts by the end of March, destroy all NPA combat units by the end of June, and destroy all regional Party committees before the end of the year. Thousands of military troops, alongside police combat troops and tens of thousands of paramilitaries armed by the AFP, have been dispatched to ravage the countryside.

Hundreds of villages are being garrisoned by Marcos’ fascist minions. Oppressive soldiers are controlling people’s lives and livelihoods, silencing them and trampling on their rights and freedoms. Checkpoints and food blockades, prohibiting people from working in their fields or swidden farms, armed soldiers occupying barangay centers, going house to house and forcing people to “surrender,” harassing young women or even married women, all-night drinking, beatings and altercations, indiscriminate firing of guns—this is how people perceive the rotten soldiers. Amid drought and disasters, fascist soldiers are like pests who bring nothing but disaster to their communities.

Using powerful weapons such as drones and jet fighters, helicopters and howitzers, Marcos’s terrorist soldiers are bombing mountains and fields, indiscriminately firing night or day, destroying the forests and poisoning waters, shattering the peace and causing deep trauma to the people, especially children, pregnant women and the elderly. These result in unnecessary number of lives lost, contrary to all principles and laws of civilized warfare.

The evil aim of Marcos is to instill fear in the hearts of the people and force them prostrate while allowing their land to be grabbed by big foreign capitalists and their partner comprador bourgeoisie and big landlords. But instead of falling on the ground, the people are more and more roused to stand up and fight, and tread the path of armed revolution.

In the guerrilla fronts across the country, the units of the New People’s Army (NPA) continue to enjoy deep and widespread support from the peasant masses. Military officers of the AFP and the reactionary state are furious that despite their intensified all-out war which has lasted for almost seven years, the peasant masses continue to provide political and material support to the Red fighters. Young farmers, as well as young students, workers, as well as professionals continue to join the people’s army.

The people’s desire to carry forward the armed struggle continues to burn. Amid fascist attacks perpetrated by the armed minions of the US-Marcos regime, and oppressive policies that worsen their plight, it is becoming clearer to the minds and consciousness of the peasant masses that they completely have nothing if they do not have the New People’s Army on their side to defend their lives and rights, and to fight with for their land and livelihood.

In recent years, the NPA has suffered losses and setbacks in various parts of the country due to the errors and weaknesses of conservatism and complacency with its previous accomplishments. Instead of boldly treading the path of continuous expansion and invigoration of the armed struggle, the scope and mass base of guerrilla units were reduced, and units became passive and vulnerable to enemy encirclement. Under the guidance of and inspired by the Party, the NPA is determined to rectify errors and move forward on the path of strengthening and galvanizing the people’s war.

In the spirit of the rectification movement, the NPA must more vigorously wage armed struggle in all parts of the country. Utilizing the broad mass movement in guerrilla warfare, they must use all weapons—guns and rocks, spears and punji traps, shotguns and landmines—and carry out large or small tactical offensives that can be won against weak and isolated parts of the enemy. Strike at the enemy’s fascist troops and all its tentacles by way of rendering justice for the people and inspiring their resistance. Only by waging widespread armed resistance can the NPA consolidate, overcome setbacks and strengthen.

Since its establishment, five and a half decades ago, the NPA has served as the true people’s army in promoting the revolutionary aspirations of the Filipino people for national democracy. On its coming anniversary on March 29, let us celebrate its accomplishments for the past 55 years, pay tribute to all the martyrs and heroes, and reaffirm the determination to advance the protracted people’s war, without fear of sacrifices and hardships, to achieve ultimate victory in the future.

Source : https://philippinerevolution.nu/2024/03/21/wage-armed-struggle-against-the-us-marcos-regimes-fascist-onslaught/


[Previous Article]#[Next]

pc 22 marzo - Massimo sostegno alla decisione dell'università di Torino per il blocco della collaborazione con Israele - info (proletari comunisti)


Guerra a Gaza, l'Università di Torino blocca il bando di collaborazione con Israele. Meloni: «Scelta preoccupante»

L’ateneo è il primo a sospendere la collaborazione con le realtà accademiche israeliane ma precisa: lo stop è solo al bando Maeci, le altre attività continuano. Parziale vittoria per i collettivi studenteschi che hanno bloccato la riunione del Senato accademico. Sette ottobre: «Gravissimo»

«Considero preoccupante che il Senato accademico dell'Università di Torino scelga di non partecipare al bando per la cooperazione scientifica con Israele. E lo faccia dopo un'occupazione da parte dei collettivi. Se le istituzioni si piegano a questi metodi rischiamo di avere molti problemi». Sono le parole della premier Giorgia Meloni alla Camera, durante la replica nel dibattito sulle sue comunicazioni in vista del Consiglio europeo

Bloccato il bando di collaborazione con Israele

Cosa è successo. L’ateneo di Torino, primo a livello italiano, ha deciso di sospendere la collaborazione con le realtà accademiche israeliane. «Il Senato dell’Università ritiene non opportuna la partecipazione al bando del Ministero degli Affari Esteri (Maeci), visto il protrarsi della situazione di guerra a Gaza». La comunicazione si configura come una parziale vittoria per i collettivi studenteschi che hanno prima bloccato la riunione dei senatori e poi ottenuto un’assemblea pubblica per discutere la loro richiesta di boicottaggio di tutte le intese con le università israeliane. Dopo una lunga discussione, i vertici dell’ateneo hanno deciso di approvare un documento che di fatto chiude le porte ad un unico bando, quello pubblicato recentemente dal Maeci che mira a finanziare progetti congiunti di ricerca tra

Italia e Israele in tre settori di applicazione: le tecnologie per il suolo, quelle per l’acqua ( come trattamento di quella potabile, delle acque industriali e di scarico o la desalinizzazione) e l’ottica di precisione, elettronica e tecnologie quantistiche.

Bernini

Sul caso interviene anche il ministro dell'Università e della ricerca Anna Maria Bernini: «Quella dell'Università di Torino è una decisione che non condivido seppur assunta nell'ambito dell'autonomia propria degli Atenei. È triste che una scelta simile coincida con la prima giornata nazionale delle Università che ha come titolo: "Porte aperte". Ed è francamente sconcertante che si possa pensare di chiuderle. Ritengo ogni forma di esclusione o boicottaggio sbagliata ed estranea alla tradizione e alla cultura dei nostri Atenei da sempre ispirata all'apertura e all'inclusività». 

La nota dell'Università di Torino

L’Università di Torino, dal canto suo, in una nota, chiarisce che la mozione approvata dal Senato Accademico nella seduta di ieri 19 marzo, con la quale «visto il perdurare dello stato di guerra si è ritenuta non opportuna la partecipazione al bando MAECI 2024 Italia-Israele», si riferisce esclusivamente al bando in questione. Pertanto, tutti gli accordi e le collaborazioni in corso con le università israeliane rimangono attivi, nel pieno rispetto dei principi e dei valori di libertà di pensiero e di ricerca dell’Università di Torino.

Un solo voto contrario

A votare lo stop al bando Maeci per la raccolta di progetti congiunti per l’anno 2024 è stata quasi la totalità dei senatori di Unito. Due gli astenuti e un unico «no», espresso dalla professoressa Susanna Terracini. La direttrice del dipartimento di Matematica spiega: «Non avrei avuto problemi ad approvare una richiesta per il cessate il fuoco, perché sono fortemente turbata per la strage che sta avvenendo nella Striscia di Gaza. Mentre, sono fortemente contraria ai boicottaggi accademici, perché, essendo esclusi possibili progetti bellici, le collaborazioni sono un elemento portatore di comprensione e di pace». Di parere diverso i militanti del Progetto Palestina, di Cambiare Rotta, di Studenti Indipendenti e della altre sigle di sinistra universitaria. Gli studenti spingono per approvare l’appello — lanciato dalla torinese Paola Rivetti, oggi docente di Scienze politiche a Dublino, e firmata da 1.600 colleghi del nostro Paese (60 dall’ateneo torinese) —, che chiede al ministro degli Esteri, Antonio Tajani, di sospendere l’intero accordo di Cooperazione Industriale, Scientifica e Tecnologica tra Italia e Israele per «il rischio di dual use e la violazione del diritto internazionale e umanitario».

Su questo, i vertici dell’Università di Torino prendono tempo. Accolta così la proposta di Francesco Ramella, direttore del dipartimento di Cultura, Politica e Società, di limitare l’azione a un documento che di fatto sospende la partecipazione di Unito al bando Maeci di quest’anno. «Ad oggi, solo tre colleghi avevano manifestato il loro interesse a partecipare, tutti appartenenti ad Agraria, ma poi hanno rinunciato autonomamente», spiega Gianluca Cuniberti. Il direttore di Storia che, dopo aver sottolineato la capacità di Unito di dialogare anche su temi così divisivi, annuncia un’altra iniziativa che farà discutere: tra pochi mesi sarà lanciato il corso di storia della Striscia di Gaza ospitando Sara Roy, la docente di Harvard.

«Gravissimo»

La decisione del Senato accademico «è gravissima ed inquietante e ci riporta ad un passato lontano che non avremmo mai voluto rivivere», dichiara Stefano Parisi, presidente dell'Associazione Setteottobre. «Colpire il mondo dell’università e della ricerca di Israele che è all’avanguardia nel mondo ed impedire la collaborazione con un ateneo importante come quello di Torino, che potrebbe portare ricadute positive per il nostro Paese è l’ennesima dimostrazione del clima di odio antisemita che dal 7 ottobre sta montando con furia in Italia. Chiediamo a tutte le istituzioni ed in particolare al Ministro per l’Università e la Ricerca, alla CRUI e alla società civile di impegnarsi e di intervenire per bloccare una deriva allarmante e intollerabile per una democrazia liberale».

L'università di Torino e lo stop al bando con Israele, il rettore Stefano Geuna: «Non è boicottaggio né antisemitismo»

Dopo una giornata di polemiche, il rettore prova a rassicurare: «Non volevamo far arrabbiare nessuno, tanto meno la premier Meloni. Tutti gli accordi in vigore con Israele rimangono validi»

Lo ammetta rettore Stefano Geuna, con la decisione del senato accademico di ieri, parliamo della mozione con la quale l’ateneo di Torino definisce inopportuno partecipare al bando del Ministero degli Esteri per la ricerca condivisa tra Italia e Israele, «visto — è stato scritto e approvato — il protrarsi della situazione di guerra a Gaza», lei e la sua Università volevate mettere in difficoltà il governo Meloni? 

«Non volevamo far arrabbiare nessuno, tanto meno la premier Meloni. E voglio ribadire cosa è accaduto nel Senato accademico, l’organo più rappresentativo della nostra comunità. È stata un’azione riferita ad un bando specifico e non si è parlato di boicottaggio. Questo non è vero».

Perché?
«Tutti gli accordi attualmente in vigore con le università israeliane, che sono tanti, rimangono validi. Non è questo quello che è successo».

E allo cosa è accaduto?
«È stata fatta una valutazione da parte della comunità accademica che credo vada rispettata per quello che è. Non c’è alcuna intenzione di far infuriare nessuno e non c’è il boicottaggio, men che meno antisemitismo come ho anche letto. I fatti parlano da soli. E non vorrei commentare ulteriormente per attivare un dibattito su una questione che abbiamo chiarito oggi, forse perché ieri non era molto chiara. Si tratta di una cosa molto specifica. Ma le collaborazioni con gli atenei israeliani rimangono assolutamente in piedi».

Alcuni colleghi dicono che in alcuni dipartimenti ci sono pulsione anti-israeliani.
«Io non vedo queste cose, onestamente, specialmente nella nostra università. Siamo una comunità di centomila persone e io, ripeto, parlo a nome del Senato accademico, l’organo rappresentativo ed elettivo di tutte le componenti: docenti, personate tecnico amministrativo, studenti».

Morale.
«Questo organo ha preso una decisione su una cosa specifica che non è un’avversione contro Israele. Non lo è nessuno dei membri del Senato accademico. Ieri, nel momento di ascolto che abbiamo fatto con i ragazzi che protestavano, tutti i docenti hanno detto: “Non vogliamo i boicottaggi”. I boicottaggi scientifici non servono, la scienza è stata e sempre sarà un ponte, soprattutto in momenti di difficoltà internazionale come questo che stiamo vivendo. Questo ci dice la storia e su questa linea si sono concentrati gli interventi dei professori».

Non tutti hanno votato a favore, in realtà.
«È vero, una collega si è espressa in maniera contraria, ma tutti hanno ribadito che il boicottaggio accademico non serve».

E la premier Meloni dice che vi siete fatti trascinare dai collettivi degli studenti di estrema sinistra.
«I collettivi? Parliamo dei rappresenti degli studenti. Oggi come ieri, nel dibattito di oggi, abbiamo creato un momento dove tutti hanno parlato, anche chi lo fa in modo effervescente e chi preferisce un tono più posato perché ha qualche anno in più. Ci interessato molto farlo, tutti gli interventi portano spunti interessanti. Questo è il nostro metodo».

Ma lei la riapproverebbe la mozione?
Il rettore Geuna gira le spalle e se ne va.


[Previous Article]#[Next]

pc 22 marzo - Scritti e interventi sulla Comune di Parigi a base del discorso di proletari comunisti in occasione dell'anniversario del 18 marzo - 1 (proletari comunisti)


"Il suo vero segreto fu questo: che essa fu essenzialmente un governo della classe operaia...

... il prodotto della lotta di classe dei produttori contro la classe appropriatrice, la forma politica finalmente scoperta, nella quale si poteva compiere l'emancipazione economica del lavoro... La Comune doveva dunque servire da leva per svellere le basi economiche su cui riposa l'esistenza delle classi, e quindi del dominio di classe. Con l'emancipazione del lavoro tutti diventano operai, e il lavoro produttivo cessa di essere un attributo di classe". (Karl Marx - "La guerra civile in Francia").

Il 18 marzo del 1871 nasceva la prima grande esperienza di potere del proletariato, la Comune di Parigi. La Comune di Parigi è durata due mesi e dieci giorni, dal 18 marzo al 28 maggio, ma questi due mesi hanno segnato tutta la storia dell'umanità.

Marx ne “La guerra civile in Francia”. Scrive alla fine: “Parigi operaia, con la sua Comune, sarà celebrata in eterno, come l'araldo glorioso di una nuova società. I suoi martiri hanno per urna il grande cuore della classe operaia. I suoi sterminatori, la storia li ha già inchiodati a quella gogna eterna dalla quale non riusciranno a riscattarli tutte le preghiere dei loro preti”.

La Comune di Parigi per essere sconfitta ci volle un intero esercito, giorni e giorni di massacri. Ci furono più di 30 mila comunardi uccisi e tra questi anche tante donne e bambini. Seguirono 45mila arresti, decine di migliaia di condanne - molte trasformatisi in uccisioni - e di deportazioni, mentre migliaia di parigini fuggirono all'estero. In quei giorni ci fu un fiume di sangue che scorreva nelle strade.

Ma Lenin dice: "Il ricordo dei combattenti della Comune è onorato non solo dagli operai francesi, ma anche dal proletariato di tutto il mondo, perché essa non combattè per un obiettivo locale o strettamente nazionale, ma per l'emancipazione di tutta l'umanità lavoratrice, di tutti gli umiliati e offesi. Come combattente d'avanguardia della rivoluzione sociale, la Comune ha conquistato la simpatia in tutti i

luoghi in cui il proletariato soffre e lotta... Il rombo dei cannoni di Parigi ha risvegliato dal loro sonno profondo gli strati più arretrati del proletariato e ha dato dappertutto un impulso alla propaganda socialista rivoluzionaria. Per questo la causa della Comune non è morta, per questo continua a vivere fino ad oggi in ognuno di noi. La causa della Comune è la causa della rivoluzione sociale è la causa della completa emancipazione politica ed economica dei lavoratori, è la causa del proletariato mondiale. E in questo senso è immortale".

La Comune di Parigi viene organizzata in una fase in cui la Francia che aveva tentato nel 1870 di fare la guerra alla Prussia ne viene schiacciata. Il popolo cerca di resistere, di rilanciare la battaglia contro i nemici prussiani, impone la proclamazione della Repubblica, contando di ottenere riforme sociali e invece trova nel governo, Thiers - "questo nano mostruoso", come scrive Marx, "(che) mai durante la sua lunga carriera politica, si è macchiato neppure di un solo provvedimento, sia pure dei più insignificanti, di qualche utilità pratica. L'unica sua coerenza è stata l'avidità di ricchezze e l'odio contro coloro che le producono" - colui che si inginocchia nei confronti dei prussiani e vuole disarmare le masse. Una situazione che provocava per le masse una gravissima condizione in cui mancava tutto e  che portò alla decisione il 18 marzo di insorgere, cacciare il governo che aveva firmato una pace disastrosa ed eleggere il 26 marzo e proclamare il 28 marzo la Comune di Parigi

I prezzi aumentavano e molti prodotti sparirono dal mercato, come la carne bovina. Si vendeva la carne di cavallo, poi fu la volta della carne di gatto, di cane e di topo. A dicembre furono abbattuti gli animali del giardino zoologico, e furono macellati gli elefanti, gli orsi, le antilopi. Furono introdotte le tessere per la carne, e i più poveri, che avevano bisogno di denaro, le vendevano. Essenziale alimento quotidiano rimaneva il pane, «un impasto nero che torceva gli intestini».

L'inverno 1870-1871 fu particolarmente rigido, e per l'alto costo della legna e del carbone la popolazione smantellò palizzate, segò gli alberi dei parchi del Bois de Boulogne, di Vincennes, degli Champs-Élysées, di qualche boulevard, e si rubò legname dai depositi e dalle fabbriche. L'erogazione del gas interrotta, razionato il petrolio, le strade di notte erano immerse nel buio più completo. La situazione sanitaria peggiorò. Prima della guerra la mortalità a Parigi era di 750 decessi a settimana, con l'assedio passò a 1.500 in ottobre e a 4.500 a gennaio”.

Questo è stato il contesto della insurrezione di Parigi.

La Comune fu il primo governo operaio. In due mesi e dieci giorni prese provvedimenti che andavano nella direzione degli interessi del proletariato e del popolo.

Scrive Marx: "La Comune fu composta dai consiglieri municipali eletti a suffragio universale nei diversi mandamenti di Parigi, responsabili e revocabili in qualunque momento. La maggioranza dei suoi membri erano naturalmente operai, o rappresentanti riconosciuti dalla classe operaia. La Comune doveva essere non un organismo parlamentare, ma di lavoro, esecutivo e legislativo allo stesso tempo. Invece di continuare a essere l'agente del governo centrale, la polizia fu immediatamente spogliata delle sue attribuzioni politiche e trasformata in strumento responsabile della Comune, revocabile in qualunque momento. Lo stesso venne fatto per i funzionari di tutte le altre branche dell'amministrazione. Dai membri della Comune in giù, il servizio pubblico doveva essere compiuto per salari da operai. I diritti acquisiti e le indennità di rappresentanza degli alti dignitari dello stato scomparvero insieme con i dignitari stessi. Le cariche pubbliche cessarono di essere proprietà privata delle creature del governo centrale. Non solo l'amministrazione municipale, ma tutte le iniziative già prese dallo stato passarono nelle mani della Comune...

...la Comune si preoccupò di spezzare la forza della repressione spirituale, il "potere dei preti", sciogliendo ed espropriando tutte le chiese in quanto enti possidenti. I sacerdoti furono restituiti alla quiete della vita privata, per vivere delle elemosine dei fedeli, ad imitazione dei loro predecessori, gli apostoli. Tutti gli istituti di istruzione furono aperti gratuitamente al popolo e liberati in pari tempo da ogni ingerenza della chiesa e dello stato. Così non solo l'istruzione fu resa accessibile a tutti, ma la scienza stessa fu liberata dalle catene che le avevano imposto i pregiudizi di classe e la forza del governo... I magistrati e i giudici dovevano essere elettivi, responsabili e revocabili come tutti gli altri pubblici funzionari...

...La Comune fece una realtà dello slogan delle rivoluzioni borghesi, il governo a buon mercato, distruggendo le due maggiori fonti di spese, l'esercito permanente e il funzionalismo statale...”

Meravigliosa - continua Marx - fu la trasformazione operata dalla Comune di Parigi! Sparita ogni traccia della Parigi meretricia del II impero! Parigi non fu più il ritrovo dei grandi proprietari fondiari inglesi, dai latifondisti assenteisti irlandesi, degli ex negrieri e loschi affaristi americani, degli ex proprietari di servi russi e dei boiardi valacchi. Non più cadaveri alla Morgue, non più rapine e scassi notturni, quasi spariti i furti. Invero, per la prima volta dopo i giorni del febbraio 1848, le vie di Parigi furono sicure e senza nessun servizio di polizia. "Non sentiamo più parlare - diceva un membro della Comune - di assassinii, furti e aggressioni. Si direbbe davvero che la polizia abbia trascinato con sé a Versailles tutti i suoi amici conservatori". Le cocottes avevano seguito le orme dei loro protettori, gli scomparsi campioni della famiglia, della religione e sopratutto della proprietà. Al posto loro ricomparvero alla superficie le vere donne di Parigi, eroiche, nobili e devote come le donne dell'antichità. Parigi lavoratrice, pensatrice, combattente, insanguinata, raggiante nell'entusiasmo della sua iniziativa storica, quasi dimentica, nella incubazione di una nuova società, dei cannibali che erano alle sue porte!”.

E' veramente emozionante ed entusiasmante leggere tutto quello che la Comune fece in quei pochissimi giorni, giorno per giorno.

Dall'introduzione di Engels del 1891 a "La guerra civile in Francia:

"Il 30 marzo la Comune abolì la coscrizione e l'esercito permanente e proclamò che la Guardia nazionale, nella quale dovevano arruolarsi tutti i cittadini atti alle armi, sarebbe stata la sola forza armata. Essa dichiarò una moratoria di tutte le pigioni per le case di abitazione dall'ottobre 1870 fino all'aprile, stabilendo che gli affitti già pagati si dovessero computare in acconto delle pigioni future; e sospese ogni vendita di oggetti impegnati al Monte di pietà. Lo stesso giorno gli stranieri eletti a far parte della Comune furono confermati nella loro carica, perché "la bandiera della Comune è la bandiera della repubblica mondiale".

Il primo aprile venne deciso che lo stipendio più elevato di un impiegato della Comune, compreso dunque quello dei suoi stessi membri, non dovesse superare 6.000 franchi. 

Il giorno seguente (2 aprile) la Comune decretò la separazione della Chiesa dallo Stato e l'abrogazione di tutti i versamenti dello Stato a scopi religiosi, come pure la trasformazione di tutti i beni ecclesiastici in patrimonio nazionale; in seguito a ciò l'8 aprile fu deciso di dare il bando dalle scuole a tutti i simboli religiosi, immagini, dogmi, preghiere, insomma a "tutto ciò che appartiene al campo della coscienza individuale", e la misura venne a poco a poco applicata. Il giorno 5, in risposta alle fucilazioni, che si rinnovavano ogni giorno, dei combattenti della Comune fatti prigionieri dalle truppe di Versailles, fu emanato un decreto circa l'arresto di ostaggi, ma non venne mai eseguito. Il 6 fu tirata fuori la ghigliottina... e bruciata in pubblico tra alte grida di giubilo popolare. Il 12 la Comune decise di abbattere la colonna della vittoria di Piazza Vendôme, fusa dopo la guerra del 1809 con i cannoni presi da Napoleone, ed eretta come simbolo dello sciovinismo e dell'odio tra i popoli. La cosa venne fatta il 16 maggio. Il 16 aprile la Comune ordinò una statistica delle fabbriche lasciate inoperose dagli industriali, e la elaborazione di progetti per l'esercizio di queste fabbriche a mezzo degli operai fino allora occupati in esse, da riunirsi ora in società cooperative, e per l'organizzazione di queste società in una grande unione. Il 20 essa abolì il lavoro notturno dei fornai, come pure la registrazione degli operai esercitata a partire dal Secondo Impero esclusivamente per mezzo di soggetti nominati dalla polizia, autentici sfruttatori degli operai. La registrazione venne affidata ai municipi dei venti mandamenti di Parigi.

Il 30 aprile ordinò l'abolizione delle case di pegno, che non erano se non uno sfruttamento privato degli operai, in contraddizione col diritto degli operai ai loro strumenti di lavoro e al credito. Il 5 maggio decretò la demolizione della cappella espiatoria costruita in ammenda della esecuzione capitale di Luigi XVI."

E Engels spiega chiaro il carattere proletario del governo della Comune: "Come nella Comune vi erano quasi solo operai o rappresentanti riconosciuti degli operai, così anche le loro deliberazioni avevano una marcata impronta proletaria".

Marx, poi anche Lenin, vede anche le debolezze, i limiti di questa prima grande esperienza della classe operaia. Marx dice ad un certo punto che i comunardi erano stati troppo "magnanimi", quando dovevano perseguire i rappresentanti del governo, dello Stato, i borghesi che scapparono a Versailles e si riorganizzarono per tornare a Parigi e massacrare più di 30mila uomini, donne, bambini “La Comune fece uso del fuoco esclusivamente come mezzo di difesa” - scrive Marx.

Uno stesso generale allora scriveva: “L'errore più grave fu probabilmente quello di non attaccare immediatamente Versailles, errore gravissimo e irreparabile... il Comitato centrale non utilizzò “tutti i vantaggi inaspettatamente conseguiti. In quel momento tutte le probabilità erano dalla sua parte. Esso avrebbe dovuto tentare l'attacco il giorno seguente”.

Da questa esperienza che Marx teorizza la necessità della dittatura del proletariato. Il proletariato non può solo prendere il potere, per conservarlo deve esercitare una dittatura verso la borghesia che ha sconfitto, altrimenti la borghesia si organizza e riprende il suo potere. E proprio dalle grandi lezioni di questa breve ma intensa prima esperienza del proletariato che nasce la necessità della dittatura del proletariato.

Un'altra lezione importante che Marx ed Engels traggono è il problema dello Stato. Lo Stato borghese non basta prenderlo da parte della classe operaia nelle proprie mani e trasformarlo, ma occorre rovesciarlo e costruire un nuovo Stato, totalmente diverso, rispetto ai principi, alla classe che rappresenta. E la Comune cominciò a fare questo.

Senza questa esperienza della Comune di Parigi, non ci sarebbe stata né la Rivoluzione d'Ottobre e la costruzione del socialismo in Urss, né la rivoluzione cinese, con la grande Rivoluzione culturale proletaria.

Per i comunisti rivoluzionari, per gli operai d'avanguardia la Comune deve essere più viva che mai. Questa grande prima esperienza della classe operaia fornisce lezioni teoriche, politiche, ideologiche, e pratiche che mostrano che il proletariato ha una sola soluzione la conquista del potere politico con la rivoluzione, e che col potere nelle proprie mani il proletariato con i suoi "decreti" affronta e risolve in pochi giorni problemi fondamentali delle masse che oggi sembrano irrisolvibili.


[Previous Article]#[Next]

En libertad con cargos las diez activistas solidarias con Palestina detenidas en Barcelona - nueva manifestacion madrid - info solidaria (maoistroad)


 

/ Por

Las detenciones están relacionadas con hechos ocurridos durante la jornada de lucha estatal contra el genocidio en la Franja de Gaza del pasado 7 de febrero y han sido puertas en libertad con cargos.

Las diez activistas son acusadas de los delitos de desórdenes públicos, daños, manifestación ilícita y grupo criminal, que pueden comportar penas de prisión.

Las diez activistas habían sido detenidas en diferentes lugares del Área Metropolitana de Barcelona en un operativo coordinado por la Comisaría General de Información de los Mossos d’Esquadra.

Las ocho detenciones iniciales se produjeron el lunes 18 de marzo y todas las personas arrestadas pasaron una primera noche en los calabozos de la comisaría de Les Corts. Durante la mañana de martes les empezaron a tomar declaración en comisaría, pero no fue hasta el miércoles que fueron trasladadas a la Ciutat de la Justícia para pasar a disposición judicial. Las dos personas restantes fueron detenidas al mediodía y por la tarde de martes, respectivamente.

A las diez personas solidarias se las acusa de delitos de desórdenes públicos, daños, manifestación ilícita y grupo criminal, que pueden comportar penas de prisión. Para exigir su liberación se convocaron acciones el martes por la tarde ante la comisaría y el miércoles por la mañana en la Ciutat de la Justícia. Las convocatorias recibieron el apoyo de distintos colectivos solidarios con Palestina y antirrepresivos, entre ellos Egida – Defensa Col·lectiva Anarquista.

Las personas activistas participaron en la jornada de lucha del pasado 7 de febrero convocada con el lema “Estimamos la vida, defendemos a Palestina, paramos el mundo” en que miles de personas se movilizaron en toda Cataluña y otros puntos del Estado coincidiendo con los cuatro meses del inicio de la nueva ofensiva genocida del Estado de Israel contra el pueblo palestino. En esa jornada, en que los sindicatos CGT y IAC convocaron huelga parcial en Catalunya,  se exigió multitudinariamente la ruptura de relaciones económicas e institucionales con el Estado de Israel. En las movilizaciones, las empresas Indra, Carrefour, Comsa, AXA y McDonald’s fueron señaladas como “cómplices” de la violencia contra la población palestina.


 



[Previous Article]#[Next]

France : Attaque d’un commissariat suite à la mort d’un jeune tué par une collision avec un véhicule de police (maoistroad)



Plusieurs dizaines de personnes ont pris pour cible le commissariat de La Courneuve (Seine-Saint-Denis) dimanche soir, procédant à d’importants tirs de mortiers d’artifice et de projectiles. Des renforts ont dû être déployés pour sécuriser le bâtiment. Cette révolte a éclaté suite à la mort d’un jeune, tué quatre jours plus tôt dans une collision avec un véhicule de police, alors qu’il circulait sur un scooter à Aubervilliers. Neuf personnes ont été arrêtées suite à ces affrontements.



[Previous Article]#[Next]

Rearmament plans for the german military - info (maoistroad)


 

Ready for war." This is what the German army is should become again. For this, the Ministry of Defense, which reports to the german defense minister Boris Pistorius, has now presented a concept paper as a proposal in which initial measures are set out to drive forward in the rearmament of the german military

The document is entitled "Bundeswehr of the Future". Bundeswehr is the name of the german military. The document lists various points that need to be implemented in order to make the German army "fit for war" again. One of these points is the strengthening of the military branches. Military branches are a part of the armed forces divided into various specialized areas. In Germany, the military comprises three branches. The army, navy and air force. In the future, however, there will also be a fourth branch of the armed forces, which concerns the area of "cyber and information space".

In addition, there will also be restructuring in the command of operations aimed at strengthening centralization. An "operational leadership command of the Bundeswehr" is to be created in future. All Bundeswehr operations, whether at home or abroad, would then be centrally controlled and coordinated by this command.

Furthermore, under the motto: "The Bundeswehr as a whole must be geared towards an emergency", it is demanded that the Bundeswehr must be put in a logistical position to be able to make war at any time.
To this end, the military administration should already be planning ahead for "emergencies". Accordingly, requirements such as infrastructure, personnel, material, etc. should be identified and made available.

Even if only in passing, the document also raises the issue of military conscription. The document proposes structural and process changes, particularly in the area of personnel. The structures should operate "largely smoothly" and "especially in
situations of extreme turmoil and great coordination effort on the part of the state
be able to fold up." To this purpose, a coordination center is also to be created to "control the personnel growth capability". This should be in a position to "quickly ensure that personnel requirements are met". In other words, in the case of war, they conscript masses of young people as cannon fodder for the German bourgeoisie.

The creation of such a coordination office is also relevant for a future reintroduction of a compulsory military service. It is well known that the German Minister of Defense, or one could rather say Minister of War, Pistorius, is a vehement campaigner for the reintroduction of compulsory military service. In this context, it also makes sense that he is calling for the creation of structures that would be able to operate immediately after the introduction of such military conscription.

Ultimately, it can be said that the German bourgeoisie is increasingly calling for war.  The introduction to the above-mentioned document already makes it clear, that it is not about using the german military as a defensive army.

So they write:
"Germany, as a globally networked nation in all respects, will therefore have to be able to counter threats and destabilization at home, in Europe and in the world at all times in the future. To this end, the Bundeswehr also provides politicians with instruments for action."

Even if there is always talk of "defending" Germany, it is much more about defending the economic interests of German imperialism with fire and steel all over the world against the oppressed people and imperialist competitors. A fact that is confirmed by germanys actual military operations.

 

den volke dienen

[Previous Article]#[Next]

CPI (Maoist) CC Calls Upon Masses To Celebrate March 23rd As Anti-Imperialism Day - info - (maoistroad)


 tomorrow ICSPWI publishes the call


Hyderabad District, March 21, 2024: The Central Committee of the CPI (Maoist) has called upon all democratic forces and others including peasantry, Dalits, women’s organizations, and others to celebrate March 23 as an anti-imperialism day with revolutionary spirit and enthusiasm.

It also appealed to the masses to conduct seminars, meetings, rallies upholding the ideas of Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru; and to expose the alleged treacherous design of the Hindutva forces to saffronize Bhagat Singh and his comrades who laid down their lives fighting the imperialist forces.

A statement issued today in the name of Comrade Pratap, spokesperson for the Central Regional Bureau of the Communist Party of India (Maoist), has emphasized the need to combat imperialism and Brahmanical Hindutva fascism, advocating for a New Democratic India.

“March 23 holds historical significance as it was the day Bhagat Singh, Sukdev, and Rajguru were martyred by British colonial powers,” Comrade Pratap said, adding that the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) had no moral right to even speak about freedom fighters and to hijack the freedom movement.

Comrade Pratap criticized the post-independence economic policies, accusing ruling classes of serving imperialism and exacerbating exploitation. Pointing at the BJP government led by Narendra Modi, Comrade Pratap accused it of facilitating foreign capital exploitation through various flagship programs. He also criticized the BJP’s alleged promotion of Hindu Rashtra ideology, contrary to the secular and socialist ideals upheld by Bhagat Singh.



[Previous Article]#[Next]

Assemblea per Ilaria Salis a Torino (femminismo proletario rivoluzionario)


Si può seguire in diretta facebook



[Previous Article]#[Next]

EU und NATO rüsten auf: Österreich macht mit. (DIE ROTE FAHNE)





NATO-Generalsekretär Jens Stoltenberg forderte jüngst die Umstellung auf Kriegswirtschaft, in der EU debattiert man die nukleare Bewaffnung der Union und Österreich verpflichtete sich 1,17 Milliarden jährlich an die Ukraine zu zahlen. Das sind nur die Spitzen der derzeitigen militärischen Vorstöße, die den Kriegskurs vorantreiben sollen. Ungeachtet der Neutralität, wird die österreichische Bevölkerung in die Kriegspläne der Herrschenden hineingezogen. Wie kann dem entgegengetreten werden?

 


Österreich als Teil der Kriegspläne von NATO und EU


In einem „gemeinsamen Entschließungsantrag“ des EU-Parlaments stimmten die österreichischen Abgeordneten Ende Februar 2024 zu, jährlich 0,25 Prozent des BIP (rund 1,17 Milliarden Euro) für den Krieg in der Ukraine zu finanzieren. Zudem wurde eine militärische Unterstützung der Ukraine und die weitere Aufrüstung Österreichs beschlossen. In dem Originaldokument wird festgehalten, „dass alle Mitgliedstaaten der EU und alle Verbündeten in der NATO die Ukraine militärisch mit mindestens 0,25 % ihres BIP jährlich unterstützen sollten (...)“ (1). NATO und EU gehen also Hand in Hand was die Durchsetzung der Kriegsinteressen der „westlichen“ Imperialisten betrifft – und Österreich geht mit! Matthew Karnitschnig, Journalist der US-Politikfachzeitschrift Politico, formulierte die NATO-Pläne für Österreich folgendermaßen: „Österreich ist ein Land der ‚Herr Karl‘, das alle Seiten bedient, sich zu westlichen Idealen bekennt, während es im Stillen nach Wegen sucht, um weiterhin von den freundschaftlichen Beziehungen zu Moskau zu profitieren. (…) Heute ist die österreichische Neutralität kaum mehr als eine bequeme Ausrede, um sich vor der Verantwortung zu drücken (…) Österreich ist ein Trittbrettfahrer seiner Nachbarn und der USA (…) Bis zum heutigen Tag beherzigen Österreicher selten die besseren Engel ihrer Natur, es sei denn, die Außenwelt zwingt sie dazu, entweder durch Beschämung oder rohe Gewalt.“ (2) Erklärungen wie diese lassen einen Schauer über den Rücken ziehen und geben einen Hinweis darauf, was uns als EU-Mitglied und „NATO-Partner“ noch blühen wird. Anders sehen das die Herrschenden Österreichs, die sich zu größten Teilen bereitwillig an diesem Kurs beteiligen. Der österreichische Bundesheer-Brigadier Robert Brieger, derzeit Vorsitzender des EU-Militärausschusses, findet sogar die Debatte rund um eine atomare Bewaffnung der EU „legitim“ (3).

 


Umstellung auf Kriegswirtschaft?!


Die militärische Aufrüstung in der EU zielt ab in Richtung „Kriegswirtschaft“. So wird im oben genannten EU-„Entschließungsantrag“ festgehalten, dass die Verteidigungsproduktion erheblich gesteigert werden und der Waffenproduktion für die Ukraine Vorrang eingeräumt werden muss. Außerdem fordert der Entschließungsantrag die EU und ihre Mitgliedsstaaten dazu auf, „die europäische militärische Zusammenarbeit in der Industrie und auf Ebene der Streitkräfte [zu] verbessern und die EU damit zu einem stärkeren und leistungsfähigeren Sicherheitsgaranten [zu] machen, der mit der NATO interoperabel und komplementär zu ihr ist“ (4) Die EU-Aufrüstungspläne sind also „interoperabel“ und „komplementär“ zu den Plänen der NATO, insbesondere der USA. Insgesamt resultiert das aus einer komplexen und schwierigen Lage in der sich der US-Imperialismus befindet: er kann seine Hegemonie, die im Niedergang begriffen ist, nur erhalten, wenn seine Allianzpartner ihre militärischen Kapazitäten und Kompetenzen erhöhen und er die zahlreichen militärischen Konflikte nicht alleine austragen muss. Daher wird auch der Druck auf die „Partner“ erhöht, was sich beispielsweise in der Androhung Trumps ausdrückt, nur jene NATO-Mitgliedsstaaten zu unterstützen, die auch dementsprechend aufrüsten. Es drückt sich aber auch im kürzlich stattgefundenen Besuch einer Vertreterin des US-Finanzministeriums bei Raiffeisenbank und Behörden in Wien aus, bei dem ein Ausschluss aus dem US-Finanzsystem angedroht wurde, falls Russland-Sanktionen umgangen werden. All das zeigt, dass Länder wie Österreich zunehmend dazu gezwungen werden, sich zu „disziplinieren“ und noch weiter der US-Hegemonie unterzuordnen. Dabei sind die Herrschenden in Österreich und der EU keine „Marionetten“, sondern erhoffen sich möglichst große eigene Vorteile. Es ist offensichtlich: Wenn die österreichische Bevölkerung sich nicht weiter in die Kriegstreiberei hineinziehen lassen will, muss sie selbst für die Wiederherstellung der Neutralität und gegen Aufrüstung und Militarisierung kämpfen!

 


Aufrüstung und Sozialabbau gehen Hand in Hand


Während im Zeitraum 2022 bis 2027 die Militärausgaben um 85 Prozent steigen sollen, das sind plus 2,3 Milliarden Euro, sinken beispielsweise die Gesundheitsausgaben im selben Zeitraum um 52 Prozent, bzw. 2,9 Milliarden. Die Einsparungen im Gesundheitswesen sind auch ein Resultat des EU-Fiskalpakts und der EU-Kommission. Nick Witney, ein früherer Chef des EU-Rüstungsamtes, erklärte vor geraumer Zeit, warum sich die EU in solche Fragen der nationalen Budgetpolitik einmischt: „Wenige Abgeordnete wollen ihrer Wählerschaft begründen, warum deren Steuern für Kampfhubschrauber statt für Spitäler verwendet werden soll (…) Militärische Operationen kosten Geld und riskieren Menschenleben (…) Nur ein eiserner politischer Wille, untermauert von klarem Zielbewusstsein, kann dafür sorgen, dass sich diese strategische Orientierung gegen kurzfristige Unannehmlichkeiten durchsetzt.“ (5) Diese „kurzfristigen Unannehmlichkeiten“ sind heute beinharte Realität und die Zeichen stehen auf weitere Verschlechterungen. Sozialabbau, Abbau demokratischer Rechte und Aufrüstung sind das Programm der Stunde, dass den Massen durch die Herrschenden aufgezwungen wird. Dieses Programm erfordert entschiedene Ablehnung, Widerstand und Kampf – gegen NATO, EU und die Herrschenden Österreichs!

 


Quellen:

(1) komintern.at

(2) Politico.eu

(3) industriemagazin.at

(4) komintern.at

(5) solidarwerkstatt.at

 

Bildquellen:

Bild_001 - Christian Lue – unsplash

Bild_022 - Clker-Free-Vector-Images – pixabay


[Previous Article]#[Next]

Ausgehöhlte Neutralität? Neutralität wiederherstellen! (DIE ROTE FAHNE)




Nachdem vor rund zwei Jahren ein erster Vorstoß zur offiziellen Beseitigung der Neutralität relativ schnell fallen gelassen wurde, wird seither in raschen Schritten die völlige Aushöhlung der Neutralität praktiziert. In Worten verteidigen Politiker verschiedener Couleur die Neutralität, während sie in Taten nur mehr selten Beachtung findet. Die Wiederherstellung der Neutralität wird zur Forderung jener, die sich gegen diese Entwicklungen stellen – und das sind viele!

 

Im Februar dieses Jahres wurde eine Umfrage veröffentlicht, laut der 51 Prozent folgendem zustimmen: „Österreichs Neutralität ist ausgehöhlt“ (1). Rund 80 Prozent sind für die Beibehaltung der Neutralität. Das bedeutet, dass die absolute Mehrheit der Bevölkerung gegen die Abschaffung der Neutralität ist. Das in Worten praktizierte Festhalten der Herrschenden spielt also die Rolle des Betrugs und der Besänftigung der Bevölkerung. Denn während amtierende Politiker sich nicht die Finger verbrennen wollen, sind ehemalige da nicht so zimperlich. Die ehemalige Außenministerin Ursula Plassnik bedient dazu den plattesten Angriff auf die Neutralität: „Unser liebstes Kleidungsstück ist die Tarnkappe, die hierzulande Neutralität heißt“ (2). Der ehemalige Bundeskanzler Wolfgang Schüssel (ÖVP) meint: „Die Neutralität bietet keinen Schutz.“ (3) Ein Kreis (ehemaliger) SPÖ-Diplomaten, der den SP-Chef Babler schon seit Beginn berät (die sogenannte „Initiative Demokratische Außenpolitik“) meint: „Die Neutralität wird in der SPÖ oft überhöht“ und spricht sich gegen „nostalgischen Neutralismus“ (4) aus. Der ORF, derzeit ein Einpeitscher eines neuen Anlaufs der Debatte über einen NATO-Beitritt, propagiert die Plattform „unseresicherheit.org“. Diese verbreitete bisher zwei „offene Briefe“ an „den Bundespräsidenten, die Bundesregierung, den Nationalrat und die Bevölkerung Österreichs“, in denen eine Debatte über die Abschaffung der Neutralität gefordert wird. Zu den Unterstützern dieser Initiative zählen neben zahlreichen Unternehmern und Diplomaten auch bspw. Othmar Karas (ÖVP), Johannes Kopf (Vorstandsmitglied AMS) und diverse bekannte Gesichter der SPÖ, wie Rudolf Fußi und Robert Misik. All diese Beispiele verdeutlichen, dass das formelle Festhalten an der Neutralität, bei gleichzeitiger Aushöhlung, schon Teil ihrer Abschaffung ist. Verteidigungsministerin Tanner formulierte: „(…) die Neutralität heißt, keinem Militärbündnis auf absehbare Zeit beizutreten“ (5). Unterschiedlichste „Interpretationen“ zur Neutralität stehen ebenfalls auf der Tagesordnung: während Tanner das Wort „immerwährend“ mit „auf absehbare Zeit“ ersetzt, betonen andere vor allem den rein „militärischen“ Charakter der Neutralität. Auch das ist natürlich eine Spitzfindigkeit, um politische Interessen durchzusetzen.

 

In der derzeitigen Lage kann es also nicht nur darum gehen, die Neutralität als Gesetz beizubehalten, sondern auch die tatsächliche Einhaltung, also die Wiederherstellung der Neutralität einzufordern. Die bürgerlichen Parteien sind dabei allesamt keine Alternative, da sie lediglich verschiedenen Schattierungen einer Aushöhlung der Neutralität repräsentieren. Die Aufgabe des Kampfes um die Verteidigung und Wiederherstellung der Neutralität liegt auf den Schultern der Massen, der Bevölkerung. Nicht der Stimmzettel bei einer Wahl, sondern nur der aktive Zusammenschluss und Kampf wird Erfolge bringen. Die Verteidigung der Neutralität bedeutet heute die Interessen Volkes gegen jene der Herrschenden durchzusetzen.

 

 

(1) kurier.at

(2) imZentrum, orf.at

(3) ebd.

(4) derstandard.at

(5) imZentrum, orf.at

 


[Previous Article]#[Next]

ΘΕΣΣΑΛΟΝΙΚΗ | ΜΑΖΙΚΗ ΣΥΓΚΕΝΤΡΩΣΗ ΚΑΙ ΜΑΧΗΤΙΚΗ ΔΙΑΔΗΛΩΣΗ ΚΑΤΑΔΙΚΗΣ ΤΗΣ ΓΕΝΟΚΤΟΝΙΑΣ ΤΟΥ ΠΑΛΑΙΣΤΙΝΙΑΚΟΥ ΛΑΟΥ (Resistance in the neighbourhood)




Εκατοντάδες αγωνιστές ανταποκρίθηκαν στο κάλεσμα των «Οργανώσεων – Συλλογικοτήτων της Θεσσαλονίκης» και Μελών της Παλαιστινιακής Κοινότητας της Θεσσαλονίκης, για να καταδικάσουν και να καταγγείλουν προς το λαό της πόλης την συνεχιζόμενη πολιτική γενοκτονίας του παλαιστινιακού λαού στην Λωρίδα της Γάζας, από το σιωνιστικό κράτος με όπλα τις χιλιάδες βόμβες, την πείνα και τις αρρώστιες. Συγκεντρώθηκαν και διαδήλωσαν για να καταγγείλουν τους δυτικούς προστάτες του φασιστικού κράτους του Ισραήλ, τους ιμπεριαλιστές των ΗΠΑ- ΝΑΤΟ και ΕΕ, αλλά και την ολοένα και βαθύτερη εμπλοκή της χώρας μας στην σφαγή στην Παλαιστίνη.





Πριν από τις 7μμ άρχισε να συγκεντρώνεται κόσμος στο Άγαλμα Βενιζέλου, που άρχισε να γεμίζει τον χώρο. Η μικροφωνική έπαιζε επαναστατικά παλαιστινιακά τραγούδια, ενώ διαβάστηκε και η ανακοίνωση των διοργανωτών. Ιδιαίτερα συγκινητική ήταν η στιγμή που διαβάστηκε το ποίημα ενός δολοφονημένου από τις σιωνιστικές βόμβες, Παλαιστίνιου της Γάζας.

Πολύ ενθαρρυντική υπήρξε η συμμετοχή αρκετών δεκάδων Παλαιστίνιων προσφύγων και μελών της Παλαιστινιακή Κοινότητας της Θεσσαλονίκης, που έδωσαν παλμό και μαχητικότητα τόσο στη συγκέντρωση όσο και στην διαδήλωση που ακολούθησε. Η μέρα αυτή έχει ιδιαίτερη σημασία για τον Παλαιστινιακό λαό μιας και είναι η μνήμη της μάχης του αλ-Καραμά, που διεξήχθηκε στις 21/3 του 1968, ενάντια στα σιωνιστικά στρατεύματα. Ταυτόχρονα μιας και είναι η Παγκόσμια Ημέρα κατά του Ρατσισμού, οι διοργανωτές ήθελαν υπογραμμίσουν τον δίκαιο αγώνα του λαού της Παλαιστίνης ενάντια στο καθεστώς του απαρτχάιντ που έχει επιβάλλει για πάνω από εφτά δεκαετίες το σιωνιστικό κράτος του Ισραήλ. Ένα καθεστώς που τα τελευταία χρόνια κλιμακώνει την πολιτική των φυλετικών διαχωρισμών σε βάρος των Παλαιστινίων και των Αράβων σε όλη την ιστορική Παλαιστίνη.





Η διαδήλωση στην οποία συμμετείχαν με μπλοκ το ΚΚΕ(μ-λ), η ΟΚΔΕ, το ΝΑΡ, ο ΔΙΑΡΚΗΣ ΑΓΩΝΑΣ, κ.α. αλλά και στήριξαν με την παρουσία τους η ΔΕΑ, το ΞΕΚΙΝΗΜΑ, πορεύτηκε από την Εγνατία, προς την Αγίας Σοφίας και την Τσιμισκή, φώναξε συνθήματα μπροστά στο μισητό προξενείο των αμερικανών για να καταλήξει από την Αριστοτέλους ξανά στο Άγαλμα Βενιζέλου. Θετική ήταν και η συμμετοχή με πανό του Συλλόγου Φοιτητών Φυσικού, που συνεχίζει την κατάληψη ενάντια στο νόμο για τα ιδιωτικά πανεπιστήμια απαντώντας έμπρακτα στην πρόσφατη εισβολή των ΜΑΤ στη ΣΘΕ και τις συλλήψεις φοιτητών αλλά και συνολικότερη προσπάθεια τρομοκράτησης των φοιτητικών αγώνων.

Το ΚΚΕ(μ-λ) που το προηγούμενο διάστημα κατέβαλε σημαντική προσπάθεια για την επιτυχία αυτής της συγκέντρωσης- διαδήλωσης, συνέβαλε στην διακίνηση του κοινού Δελτίου Τύπου των Οργανώσεων – Συλλογικοτήτων, διακίνησε την «Προλεταριακή Σημαία» και συγκρότησε μαζικό και μαχητικό μπλοκ, φωνάζοντας αντιπολεμικά, αντιιμπεριαλιστικά συνθήματα αλληλεγγύης στον αγώνα του λαού της Παλαιστίνης.

Οι «Οργανώσεις- Συλλογικότητες της Θεσσαλονίκης» στην οποία συμμετέχουν και μέλη της Παλαιστινιακής Κοινότητας, θα συναντηθούν τις αμέσως επόμενες μέρες για να καθορίσουν τις επόμενες δράσεις αλληλεγγύης στον παλαιστινιακό λαό.









[Previous Article]#[Next]

Un omaggio a Tina Modotti, una grande donna degli anni 20, attivista politica di rilievo alla quale la Galleria Nazionale Jeu de Peume di Parigi ha dedicato una bellissima mostra (femminismo proletario rivoluzionario)



Tina Modotti, l’occhio della rivoluzione

A Parigi, la Galleria Nazionale Jeu de Paume fino al 12/05/2024 rende omaggio a Tina Modotti (1896-1942) con una grande mostra, la più grande mai dedicata a Parigi a questa fotografa e attivista politica di origine italiana.
La vita di Tina Modotti (Udine, Italia, 1896 - Città del Messico, 1942) è stata segnata da alcuni degli eventi storici più importanti della prima metà del XX secolo: l'emigrazione economica degli europei in America, la nascita del cinema muto sulla costa occidentale degli Stati Uniti, i movimenti agrari post-rivoluzionari in Messico, l'ascesa del muralismo politico, il recupero della cultura indigena messicana, l'emancipazione delle donne nella sfera pubblica, la contrapposizione tra stalinisti e trotzkisti dopo la Rivoluzione russa del 1917 e la guerra civile spagnola.
Fa parte di una generazione di donne che hanno dato un grande contributo alla fotografia negli anni Venti e ha esercitato una forte influenza sulla successiva fotografia messicana, da Manuel Álvarez Bravo a Graciela Iturbide. La Modotti fu introdotta alla pratica fotografica da Edward Weston, ma il suo lavoro, che sviluppa una visione molto personale, va oltre l'insegnamento formalista di Weston. Dopo essere emigrata economicamente dalla città italiana di Udine a San Francisco e Los Angeles, Modotti parte per il Messico, dove partecipa al "rinascimento messicano" e all'effervescenza culturale post-rivoluzionaria. Entrando a far parte del circolo di artisti e muralisti lì stabilitosi, combina rapidamente la "fotografia incarnata" con il formalismo di Weston. Attivista del Partito Comunista Messicano (PCM) dal 1927, denuncia la condizione dei diseredati, usa la sua macchina fotografica per denunciare la condizione dei diseredati, concentrandosi in particolare sulla costruzione di un nuovo mondo immaginario intorno alle donne messicane.
Nel settembre del 1928 diventa la compagna di Julio Antonio Mella, giovane rivoluzionario cubano, con cui Tina vive un amore profondo e al cui fianco intensifica il lavoro di fotografa impegnata e di militante politica. Nel 1930 Modotti fu espulsa dal Messico per le sue attività comuniste. Visse per diversi anni in Unione Sovietica, dove il suo attivismo fotografico divenne attivismo. A metà degli anni Trenta, il Partito Comunista Sovietico la invia in Spagna. Durante la guerra civile, organizzò l'evacuazione dei "bambini di guerra", coordinò la gestione degli ospedali militari e svolse missioni di propaganda. Dopo la sconfitta dei repubblicani nel 1939, attraversò i Pirenei insieme a migliaia di esuli. Esausta e disillusa dall'esito della guerra di Spagna, dovette lasciare nuovamente l'Europa. Morì nel 1942 a Città del Messico.

[Previous Article]#[Next]

From Ang Bayan: Women Bear Half The Imperialist Sky - Redspark (Redspark)


Ang Bayan

March 21, 2024

Filipino women bear the worst effects of the neo-liberal policies imposed by US imperialism and its puppet state in the past four decades. Due to policies of liberalization, deregulation and privatization, they are further marginalized to the fringes of society, where they are forced to endure informal, insecure and jobs with slave-like wages.

The majority of women belong to the most exploited and oppressed sectors of society—workers, farmers and indigenous people, the rural and urban poor. In the past decade, more than half of them, age 15 and older, have not been counted as part of the labor force because of the nature of the jobs they perform. Among them are the millions of housewives who engage in farm work and accept “sideline” jobs while burdened with heavy housework and childcare. In 2022, about 20 million were excluded from the labor force, unemployed and underemployed.

Seven out of every ten women considered employed are in the service sector. Jobs here are classified as “low-skilled” and are irregular. This is despite women’s relatively higher educational attainment.

In the manufacturing sector, 90% of women are “irregular” and very few (2.7%) are under unions. A significant number of women are in factories of big foreign capitalists within the export processing zones, making them part of the international assembly line (what imperialists call the global value chain). Foreigners are said to “prefer” female workers because of their docility, skill in detailed work such as assembling semiconductors or sewing, and flexibility in overtime. The truth is, these qualities are not inherent in women, but arise from desperation resulting from the acute employment crisis, which capitalists and labor agencies exploit.

Furthermore, they are generally paid less, compared to men. In the clothing industry, for example, their wage levels are generally 17%-25% lower.

Manufacturing companies pay literally small change to urban poor women who they contract wholesale to perform some part of the assembly work. They are what the International Labor Organization calls “home-based” industrial workers. Some of their jobs are small-scale sewing, embroidery, assembling small household items, food manufacturing, making handicrafts and tourist decorations and others.

Among freelancers, women in digital jobs earn 18.4% less, compared to men. This is due to the “traditional view” that women are more suited to the type of jobs that are “less complex” such as encoding, as opposed to “more complex” and higher value-added jobs such as digital design which is said to be “more suitable” for men.

In agriculture, women farm workers receive 8% to 15% less wages, compared to the already meager wages of men. (Both daily wages are lower compared to the wages of service and industrial workers, and all wages are insufficient for their families’ needs.) More often than not, women (and children) are not paid because their role in production are considered “extensions of housework.”

To support their families, many women leave their children behind, go out of the country to work as maids, nannies and other jobs that expose them to extreme exploitation, oppression, violence, and in some cases, their deaths. In 2022, 1.10 million women (60.2%) emigrated, compared to 726,000 men (39.8%). Despite this, the average remittances of female migrant workers are lower (₱61,000) compared to men (₱126,000).

In rural areas, women farmers suffer widespread landlessness. A very small number (6.1%) have sole or shared ownership of land. They bear the brunt of the problem of high prices of farm inputs, low prices of produce and losses during calamities. A large majority are in debt to moneylenders and microfinance institutions, not only for production, but for the daily needs of their families.

Source : https://philippinerevolution.nu/2024/03/21/women-bear-half-the-imperialist-sky/


[Previous Article]#[Next]

Nr. 28 der Roten Fahne (DIE ROTE FAHNE)



Liebe LeserInnen,


die Nr. 28 der Roten Fahne ist nun in der Online- und Printversion erhältlich.

Zum Abo geht´s hier:





Editorial: Zu einigen aktuellen Fragen.

Leitartikel: EU und NATO rüsten auf: Österreich macht mit.




Weiter zum Inhalt:

Die Rote Fahne | Nr. 28 | März 2024




[Previous Article]#[Next]

pc 22 marzo - ORE 12 Controinformazione Rossoperaia - Palermo: contro guerra e repressione / dalla Fincantieri / parlano le lavoratrici (proletari comunisti)


 


[Previous Article]#[Next]

pc 22 marzo - Il sostegno al popolo palestinese e alla sua Resistenza deve continuare (da Controinformazione rossoperaia del 21/03) (proletari comunisti)


Vogliamo mettere al centro alcuni aspetti che ci sono dietro la mobilitazione per la Palestina che si è sviluppata nel nostro paese e che raccoglie tutta una serie di necessità e indicazioni rispetto a quella che è la prospettiva internazionale dei popoli per liberarsi dall'imperialismo contro i piani di guerra e la guerra imperialista e il genocidio che avvengono in Palestina, ma che avvengono anche in altri paesi, dove ci sono, e si sviluppano, le guerre popolari.

La Palestina è un'opportunità per i proletari, per le forze comuniste ed è parte del lavoro che dobbiamo portare avanti anche nel nostro paese per smascherare quello che ci sta dietro, la disumanità di questo sistema imperialista/capitalista che bisogna abbattere perché o socialismo o barbarie.

Ogni giorno la Palestina ci dà questa indicazione. Fino a dove arriva questo sistema imperialista che compie i peggiori crimini e li compie quotidianamente verso le masse, verso i proletari, verso i popoli che rialzano la testa.

Per questo oggi è necessario continuare le mobilitazioni contro il genocidio del popolo palestinese. E non bisogna mai perdere di vista - e dimenticare – il perché avviene questo genocidio da parte di Israele e della copertura dell'imperialismo principalmente USA, ma anche la complicità di tanti altri paesi imperialisti, tra cui il nostro governo.

Questo genocidio avviene come una risposta all’azione della resistenza del 7 ottobre. Il 7 ottobre ha

indicato la strada a tutti i popoli che l'unica soluzione è quella di rialzare la testa e lottare con tutti i mezzi necessari per la liberazione dall'apartheid, dal sionismo, generati dal sistema imperialista.

I palestinesi non sono come vorrebbero le “anime belle” del movimento o dei partiti riformisti che li vogliono sempre come vittime passive del dominio coloniale israeliano, ma la grande azione del 7 ottobre delle forze della resistenza ha messo al centro l'uso della violenza da parte degli oppressi, dei colonizzati, nella loro lotta per le loro liberazione contro gli oppressori. E questo fa paura a tutti i governi e le borghesie imperialiste nel mondo.

Quindi c’è un legame tra resistenza e guerra imperialista, all'interno di un contesto internazionale di crisi dell'imperialismo e del suo tentativo di uscirne attraverso le guerre interimperialiste, mentre i popoli oppressi, gli sfruttati, i proletari, gli operai non hanno nulla da perdere che le loro catene e organizzare la loro guerra di popolo per spazzare via governi, Stati imperialisti al servizio dei profitti dei padroni.

Quando i popoli rompono il monopolio della violenza della borghesia, questa ha paura perché si agita lo spettro della sua fine come classe parassitaria.

Noi, in questo contesto generale, internazionale, e all'interno del nostro paese, dobbiamo fare la nostra parte di comunisti. In particolare nel nostro paese, nella prospettiva che l'esempio della resistenza palestinese è la resistenza che serve anche qua in Italia. La Palestina è l'esempio dei popoli che lottano. La liberazione del popolo palestinese è la liberazione di tutti gli oppressi. Dobbiamo scendere in piazza con questo spirito, portarlo nelle mobilitazioni per legare la solidarietà al popolo palestinese, alla lotta contro chi tutti i giorni non ci dà garanzie: agli operai quelle di lavoro, ai giovani di futuro, agli studenti solo scuole-caserme.

Noi siamo in mezzo a questo movimento della Palestina per portare anche noi il nostro contributo, le nostre proposte perché questa lotta diventi sempre più efficace e diventi sempre più una lotta politica contro il governo fascista Meloni, contro il comitato di affari odierno della borghesia imperialista che sta facendo affari ed è complice con le armi ed è complice attiva del genocidio ed è uno dei maggiori sponsor di Netanyahu e del governo fascista/nazisionista israeliano.

Per questo sono necessari i Comitati di solidarietà per la Palestina, in cui le forze di sostegno alla Palestina si devono unire ai comitati e alle associazioni dei palestinesi sulla strada dell'internazionalismo.

Così come è sempre al centro anche la battaglia per una delegazione internazionale che metta a nudo quelli che sono anche le responsabilità dei governi imperialisti, come quello italiano.

Queste parole d'ordine di fase sono necessarie dopo la mobilitazione del 23 e 24 febbraio a livello nazionale: la giornata di sciopero del 23 che ha visto scendere in campo una parte di lavoratori, in particolare nella logistica a fianco della solidarietà palestinese e la giornata del 24 con una grande manifestazione a Milano che ha compattato una parte delle forze che si definiscono comuniste, antimperialiste, di classe, solidali con la lotta e la resistenza del popolo palestinese, senza se e senza ma.

Di tutto questo forse ne ha più coscienza il governo Meloni che in queste settimane non a caso dopo queste iniziative del 23 e 24, risponde alzando il livello della repressione, come è successo la montatura de L'Aquila con cui si vorrebbe definire terrorista chi lotta per la liberazione del proprio popolo: Anan, Mansur, Alì, è un messaggio preciso che il governo vuole mandare per intimidire tutte le forze dei palestinesi e dei solidali che si sono mobilitati.

Ma non ci riusciranno se riusciremo ad estendere e a essere sempre più incisivi nel lavoro, in ogni nostro posto, in ogni città dove siamo presenti, perché ci siano delle mobilitazioni sempre più adeguate a questi sviluppi. Questo è quello che stiamo facendo, anche nella realtà specifica di Bergamo.

Una delle questioni principali è quello di tornare alle fabbriche, è quella di tornare tra gli operai per farli schierare, per fargli prendere posizione, per scendere in campo effettivamente, per cercare di spiegare il legame tra Palestina/guerra/governo, perché la resistenza della Palestina è il nostro migliore alleato contro una guerra che torna a casa e che in Italia sta generando un regime di moderno fascismo, di repressione, di aumento dei morti sul lavoro, di non soddisfazione di nessun bisogno delle masse, sanitario, di lavoro, di futuro e di prospettiva. Solamente guerra.

Infatti il nostro governo è in guerra  nel Mar Rosso contro il popolo palestinese. Per questo sosteniamo e operiamo perché si estendono le iniziative, le azioni dirette di denuncia, di mobilitazione contro le università e i loro legami con Israele, contro le fabbriche come la Leonardo o tante altre che in Italia producono armi che vengono date per compiere il massacro in Palestina, contro un governo fascista che vieta le manifestazioni e si spaccia per essere a difesa dei semiti, proprio lui che rappresenta il filo nero di questo paese. Al governo in Italia ci sono gli amici dei nazisti, quelli che dicono che gli ebrei devono essere messi al rogo e vogliono silenziare il movimento di lotta dei palestinesi. Oggi in Italia c'è un governo che spinge alla guerra, alla guerra imperialista, per gli interessi delle grandi aziende delle armi e di tutto quello che è collegato con lo scontro economico in atto a livello mondiale: il petrolio e gas.

Non c'è solo la Leonardo, c'è l’ENI, c'è la Tenaris Dalmine che fornisce i tubi per forare davanti a Gaza e portare via il petrolio ai palestinesi e darlo agli israeliani. Queste sono tutte connivenze che devono essere denunciate e spezzate.

Noi siamo parte di tutti i popoli oppressi, dei proletari che vogliono costruire la loro guerra giusta per farla finita con queste guerre ingiuste, con queste guerre che arricchiscono pochi per il profitto e ci conducono alla miseria, allo sfruttamento, al fascismo e alla repressione in tutti i paesi in cui sono presenti.

Il migliore aiuto al popolo palestinese è quello di colpire il nostro governo e tutti i suoi sporchi interessi, dei padroni delle multinazionali delle fabbriche di armi, ma anche contrastare la fabbrica di menzogne della stampa, dei media asserviti, di tutto l'apparato dello Stato e delle sue Istituzioni che non vogliono far altro che equiparare la lotta dei palestinesi come come antisemita, quando nella realtà stanno facendo un nuovo olocausto, perché questo sistema imperialista è fondato sulla sopraffazione della dignità umana, sulla cancellazione dei diritti dei popoli, sulla cancellazione dei diritti dei lavoratori e della loro vita per tenerli sempre in schiavitù.


[Previous Article]#[Next]

ΜΑΘΗΤΙΚΗ ΑΝΤΙΣΤΑΣΗ | Αυστηρά μέτρα για τις απουσίες και ποινολόγιο για μαθητές αγωνιστές! Η τρομοκρατία δε θα περάσει! (Resistance in the neighbourhood)


 

Μαζί με τις υπόλοιπες αλλαγές που φέρνει φέτος το υπουργείο Παιδείας, σχεδιάζει και να κάνει πιο αυστηρή την διαχείριση των απουσιών και να επιβάλλει αυστηρότερες ποινές για ό,τι φυσικά το υπουργείο ορίζει ως «παράβαση»! Σχεδιάζει να επιβάλλει οικονομικές και ποινικές ευθύνες στους μαθητές που συμμετέχουν σε καταλήψεις αλλά και στους γονείς τους!

Στόχος του υπουργείου είναι να τρομοκρατήσει γονείς και μαθητές και να καταφέρει να καταστείλει τους μαθητικούς αγώνες. Αυτή η κίνηση είναι η συνέχεια μιας σειράς μέτρων τρομοκρατίας και καταστολής τα οποία εφάρμοσε το προηγούμενο διάστημα, όπως οι έφοδοι της αστυνομίας στα σχολεία, τα τηλεμαθήματα αλλά και η συνεχής τρομοκρατία από τις διευθύνσεις για τις ενδεχόμενες συνέπειες ύστερα από μια κατάληψη, μια αποχή, ή οποιαδήποτε άλλη πράξη εναντιώνεται στο κλίμα πειθάρχησης που θέλει το υπουργείο. Μέτρα τα οποία εφάρμοσε απευθείας για να σπάσει καταλήψεις, ενώ μερικές φορές δε χρειάστηκε καν αφού αρκούσε και μόνο η απειλή της δυνατότητας εφαρμογής τους.

Με τις νέες αυτές αλλαγές, σε συνδυασμό με μέτρα που ήδη έχουν περάσει (όπως τράπεζα θεμάτων, ελάχιστη  βάση εισαγωγής) αλλά και αυτά που ετοιμάζονται  (εθνικό απολυτήριο, πολλαπλό βιβλίο κλπ) θα επιβληθεί ένα κλίμα εντατικοποίησης και πειθάρχησης όπου κανένας δε θα σηκώνει κεφάλι. Στόχος τους είναι να μας αναγκάσουν να μην αγωνιζόμαστε, αφού θα είμαστε αντιμέτωποι είτε με ένα κλίμα φόβου, είτε με μια ασφυχτική εντατικοποίηση που δε θα έχουμε χρόνο για τίποτα πέρα από το διάβασμα. Φοβούνται τους αγώνες των μαθητών απέναντι στα μέτρα που τους  ετοιμάζουν, όπως το εθνικό απολυτήριο, σύμφωνα με το οποίο θα μετράνε οι βαθμοί και των τριών τάξεων του Λυκείου για την εισαγωγή στο πανεπιστήμιο. Με αυτόν τον τρόπο όχι μόνο θα αποκλείονται από την Τριτοβάθμια Εκπαίδευση παιδιά των οποίων οι οικογένειες τους είναι φτωχές και δεν έχουν καν την οικονομική δυνατότητα να καλύπτουν όλα τα φροντιστήρια τα οποία θα απαιτούνται προκειμένου να καταφέρουν να ανταπεξέλθουν στις απαιτήσεις αυτής της υπέρογκης ύλης, αλλά θα δύσκολέψει ακόμη και η  απόκτηση του απολυτήριου Λυκείου.

Καθιστούν πιο αυστηρές τις ποινές στο ποινολόγιο και αυστηροποιούν τις απουσίες επαναφέροντας τις 50 αδικαιολόγητες και 50 δικαιολογημένες, προκειμένου να τρομοκρατήσουν τους μαθητές για τις ποινές που θα τους περιμένουν! Όλα αυτά τα μέτρα τρομοκρατίας το υπουργείο λοιπόν τα περνάει γιατί φοβάται τους μαθητικούς αγώνες! Και τούς φοβάται γιατί ξέρει τι μπορούν να καταφέρουν!

Δεν πρέπει λοιπόν να αφήσουμε κανένα από τα νέα μέτρα να περάσει. Πρέπει να αγωνιστούμε και να τα  ανατρέψουμε. Ούτε εθνικό απολυτήριο, ούτε ιδιωτικά πανεπιστήμια, ούτε ποινολόγια! Πρέπει να οργανωθούμε με συνελεύσεις, καταλήψεις! Με τους αγώνες μας μπορούμε να ανατρέψουμε όλα τα μέτρα που έχουν ως στόχο να μας τρομοκρατήσουν, αλλά συνολικά και να ανατρέψουμε το μαύρο μέλλον που μας ετοιμάζουν!  

  • ΚΑΤΩ ΤΑ ΧΕΡΙΑ ΑΠΟ ΤΟΥΣ ΜΑΘΗΤΕΣ ΚΑΙ ΤΟΥΣ ΑΓΩΝΕΣ ΤΟΥΣ! ΟΙ ΠΟΙΝΕΣ ΑΠΕΝΑΝΤΙ ΣΕ ΑΓΩΝΙΣΤΕΣ ΜΑΘΗΤΕΣ ΔΕ ΘΑ ΠΕΡΑΣΟΥΝ!
  • ΑΝΑΤΡΟΠΗ ΤΩΝ ΣΧΕΔΙΩΝ ΤΟΥ ΥΠΟΥΡΓΕΙΟΥ ΓΙΑ ΑΥΣΤΗΡΟΠΟΙΗΣΗ ΤΩΝ ΑΠΟΥΣΙΩΝ ΚΑΙ ΤΩΝ ΠΟΙΝΩΝ!
  • ΟΧΙ ΣΤΟ «ΕΘΝΙΚΟ ΑΠΟΛΥΤΗΡΙΟ»
  • ΑΝΑΤΡΟΠΗ ΤΟΥ ΝΟΜΟΣΧΕΔΙΟΥ ΠΙΕΡΡΑΚΑΚΗ !

Αναδημοσίευση από Μαθητική Αντίσταση




[Previous Article]#[Next]

Lucha de Dos Líneas No. 3 en Castellano | Revolución Obrera (Revolucion Obrera)


Lucha de Dos Líneas No. 3 en Castellano 1

Camaradas del Movimiento Comunista Internacional, les damos a conocer la revista Lucha de Dos Líneas No. 3, la cual es una entrega especial con motivo de los 130 años del aniversario del nacimiento del gran dirigente MaoTse-Tung y los 30 años de la declaración del Movimiento Revolucionario Internacionalista ¡Viva el Marxismo Leninismo Maoísmo!

En ella econtrarán distintos documentos muy valiosos explicando la importancia de estas dos celebraciones para los comunistas. Los invitamos a estudiarla y difundirla.

Lucha de Dos Líneas No. 3 en Castellano 2

Puede descargar aquí


[Previous Article]#[Next]

pc 22 marzo - Controinformazione rossoperaia e Formazione Operaia: strumenti necessari dell'azione dei comunisti oggi (da Controinformazione rossoperaia del 21/03) (proletari comunisti)


per il dibattito tra i compagni, nelle avanguardie operaie, nel movimento per la costruzione del Partito comunista

La stampa economica dei quotidiani di ieri ha riportato che alla Unilever Group da 59,6 miliardi, la nuova dirigenza per conquistare la fiducia degli investitori e recuperare margini di profitto, ha dichiarato l'intenzione di scorporare la sezione gelati, un settore stagionale e con una logistica più complessa. E di preparare un taglio da 7500 posti di lavoro.

Nella sua semplicità questa notizia economico politica apre ad una grande verità che oggi ci è utile per tornare sul fatto che gli interessi dei padroni sono antagonisti, inconciliabili a quelli degli operai, di tutti i proletari. Semplicità naturalmente non vuol dire banale, lo possiamo notare se da un altro punto di vista osserviamo lo stato della classe operaia oggi.

L'individualismo fa danni enormi dentro le fabbriche, un modo di essere e di pensare che gli operai hanno assorbito e che porta a dire: “la lotta mette a rischio il posto di lavoro o il mutuo, devo pensare alla mia situazione”.

Ma è la vita nella società capitalista che è a rischio, quella dovrebbe spaventare. Si muore di profitto, di povertà, per razzismo. Non c'è un settore, un aspetto della vita, lavorativo, sociale, culturale, che le masse popolari attraversano, che si salva, che non sia duro, a rischio spaventoso o sotto attacco della reazione. E oggi ancora di più nella tendenza generale ad un allargamento globale dei conflitti con il nemico di casa nostra, imperialista e moderno fascista, governo Meloni, che ci trascina ogni giorno che passa in queste guerre.

Nelle statistiche per la povertà sono entrati in massa i lavoratori che non ce la fanno più a raggiungere

la fine del mese. L'aumento dei prezzi è certificato soprattutto nel settore alimentare. Si spende di più e si porta a casa una quantità di spesa minore, e questi tagli, che sono vere e proprie privazioni, i proletari li fanno pesantemente anche sulla propria salute.

Tagli, privatizzazione, aumento dei costi, strutture sotto organico, quando non vengono chiuse, fanno ammalare, fanno morire per mancanza di prevenzione, di cure. E cosa dire di casa, lavoro, servizi sociali, scuola?

Tutto questo è strettamente collegato alla fabbrica, a come la classe agisce e reagisce nelle grandi fabbriche, alla necessità del lavoro politico nelle fabbriche.

In fabbrica oggi l'ideologia borghese sottomette i lavoratori alla produzione capitalista, li fa “stare nel proprio guscio”, per usare le parole di un operaio. Come ti senti diverso dagli altri se parli di politica, della guerra, degli investimenti in titoli di Stato fino a 50.000 €, che sono stati esclusi dall'Isee dal nuovo governo, se fai delle proposte ti guardano come un alieno.

“Qui tutto sommato si sta ancora bene” - si dice - lo stipendio e il posto fisso hanno prodotto un frutto avvelenato. Ognuno per sé e tutti paghiamo, sottomessi alle condizioni di vita e di lavoro imposte dal sistema capitalista che ha il suo centro nelle grandi fabbriche. Fabbriche dove il livello di risposta è basso, anche agli attacchi diretti alle condizioni di lavoro, al salario, al posto di lavoro, alla salute e sicurezza, ai diritti sindacali, ai piani di ristrutturazione o delocalizzazione che toccano tutti gli aspetti.

Complice l'assenza di un movimento sindacale confederale di opposizione, la sua azione è di controllo sui lavoratori anziché quella di impugnarne gli interessi. Azione che nel complesso alimenta la subordinazione e la passività degli operai. Sono un esempio di questo gli accordi sindacali che legano il salario e la produttività, e spesso anche la sicurezza, alla promozione di fondi integrativi per pensioni e sanità anziché alla difesa dei servizi pubblici, vertenze su parole d’ordini rinunciatarie e confinate alla singola fabbrica. E chiaramente, ancor di più, l'assenza di attività contro il governo, contro la guerra, per la Palestina.

Da una parte, quindi, un bombardamento ideologico che attacca da più fronti la classe operaia.

Dall'altra le forze di classe, rivoluzionarie, oggi piccole ma con una sola alternativa: portare con ottimismo rivoluzionario il lavoro necessario verso gli operai perché le fabbriche devono e possano tornare ad essere centro di socializzazione e di organizzazione di classe, attraverso la lotta politica per sottrarre la classe operaia all'influenza dell'ideologia borghese, nella prospettiva rivoluzionaria, nella prospettiva della ricostruzione del partito comunista.

Uno strumento di questo lavoro è la Controinformazione rossoperaia che ora esce come quotidiano online e settimanale, stampato e diffuso alle portinerie. Nella situazione attuale, in cui le forze sono limitate, i militanti sono pochi, questo significa nel concreto portare agli operai la situazione politica generale, la situazione di tutte le classi della popolazione, la situazione dei movimenti che si traduca in conoscenza per gli operai di quello che realmente succede, per farne alimento della coscienza politica di classe. E tra queste, come si ricordava anche nella prima parte della controinformazione di oggi, oggi c'è la solidarietà a fianco della resistenza palestinese che non può mancare nell'attività verso gli operai, che non deve sottomettersi alla parte arretrata, magari per guadagnare un facile consenso di massa, cioè senza rompere con le posizioni attuali.

Altro indispensabile strumento è la Formazione Operaia, formazione ideologica per lottare contro il predominio dell'ideologia borghese dentro la classe, come abbiamo visto, contro il culto della spontaneità che soffoca lo sviluppo della coscienza proletaria.

Nella FO stiamo riprendendo e utilizzando il testo di Lenin  Che fare? come arma basilare per la lotta all'economismo, che influisce anche oggi in maniera determinante nel separare i comunisti dall'avanguardia operaia e le avanguardie operaie dai comunisti. L'economismo è il primato della lotta sindacale sulla lotta politica, il primato dell'organizzazione sindacale sull'organizzazione politica. Un lavoro di studio da applicare all'attività, alla nostra attività, la teoria come parte della battaglia, dove anche i militanti sono strumenti e bersaglio della lotta teorica, militanti che incorrono in errori anche spontaneamente che frenare lo sviluppo della coscienza, come si può comprendere anche dai passi di Lenin che mette in guardia a proposito della lotta sindacale e della lotta politica.

Dice Lenin: “esistono due politiche, la politica tradunionista e la politica socialdemocratica, dato che gli economisti non negano in assoluto la politica ma deviano continuamente dalla concezione socialdemocratica, cioè rivoluzionaria, verso la concezione tradunionista della politica, la concezione sindacale della politica. E non si tratta di dare alla stessa lotta economica carattere politico o che alla lotta economica è già di per sé lotta politica e che questo sia il metodo di portare agli operai alla politica attraverso rivendicazioni tangibili, al contrario. Il rivoluzionario approfitta dell'agitazione economica non soltanto per presentare rivendicazioni di ogni genere, ma anche innanzitutto per rivendicare la soppressione del regime autocratico”.

Oggi, in questo contesto di marcia verso un regime moderno fascista, ogni cosa diventa politica e quindi diventa necessaria la formazione come guida all'azione e rispetto ai compiti della politica rivoluzionaria, agitazione di classe, propaganda, organizzazione. Senza fare la nostra parte per uno studio sistematico di partito come possiamo fare la battaglia e portare il problema della formazione tra la classe operaia che, come dice Marx, possiede un elemento di successo, il numero, ma il numero non pesa sulla bilancia se non quando è unito in collettività ed è guidato dalla conoscenza? Perché l'attività politica, il lavoro per la rivoluzione proletaria del partito comunista mlm è lo scopo delle nostre lotte che organizziamo, della denuncia della controinformazione e attraversa tutti gli strumenti dell'attività quotidiana.

Formazione è uno studio agente, legato alla pratica quotidiana, che permette all'avanguardia di fare un passo avanti. Oggi il problema attuale non è fare la rivoluzione, ma incarnare il primo passo per farla. Il primo passo è costruire l'avanguardia forgiata dalla teoria e dal programma necessario per farla. E che nel fuoco della lotta in stretto legame con gli operai e le masse, sia in grado di trasformare questi libri in uno strumento pratico, in un'indicazione che ci dia la forza necessaria per invertire la rotta di un mondo orribile e intraprendere la lotta vera per un mondo nuovo, fondato sul rovesciamento delle classi dominanti e la costruzione del potere proletario, popolare con la sua classe più avanzata, la classe operaia, quella che può realmente cambiare la produzione, il sistema sociale e costruire uno Stato adatto a trasformare l'economia in economia al servizio del popolo. Un'economia socialista.


[Previous Article]#[Next]

TV-N Sachsen - aufgeheizte Stimmung (Dem Volke Dienen)


Nachdem die Arbeitskäufer die zweite Verhandlungsrunde der Tarifauseinandersetzung im öffentlichen Personennahverkehr in der Absicht die Streikmaßnahmen der Gewerkschaft auch jurisitsch anzugehen cancelten, haben diese in der dann dritten Verhandlungsrunde eine Frechheit von "Angebot" vorgelegt.

 

Dabei sind zentrale Forderungen der Arbeitskäufer:

1. Abkopplung des TV-N vom Tarifvertrage der Länder, insbesondere was eventuelle Lohnerhöhungen und Arbeitszeitverkürzungen angeht.

2. Erhöhung der Arbeitszeit von bisher möglichen 38 Stunden auf bis zu 44 Stunden pro Woche, ohne die Möglichkeit eines (steuerfreien) Freizeitausgleichs wie zuvor.

3. Absolute Friedenspflicht für DREI Jahre, d.h. Streikverbot auf für bislang nicht im Tarifvertrag geregelte Fragen.

Sich des Affront bewusst, behaupteten die Arbeitskäufer nach Ende der Gespräche schließlich, dass sie ein solches "Angebot" gar niemals vorgelegt hätten.

 

Während die Gewerkschaftsbürokratie, auch in Persona Paul Schmidt, versucht weiter einen versöhnlerischen Kurs zu fahren, ist die Stimmung unter den Arbeitern im ÖPNV, besonders in Leipzig, explosiv. Anstelle die Verhandlungen sofort abzubrechen wurde von Seiten der ver.di tatsächlich noch mit den Arbeitskäufern über deren "Angebot" verhandelt, bis schließlich die Gespräche als gescheitert erklärt wurden.

TVN Sachsen 2

Es gibt darüber hinaus Berichte, dass in den Kreisen der kämpfenden Kollegen Nebelkerzen gezündet werden. Es wurden auch Forderungen von Kollegen laut, dass Gewerkschaftsfunktionäre zurücktreten sollen.

Heute zeigt sich erneut, dass der Streik durchaus erfolgreich von den Arbeitern im Nahverkehr geführt wird. Die Leipziger LVB war heute sogar nicht in der Lage einen Notfallfahrplan umzusetzen.


[Previous Article]#[Next]

Bergen: Aktivister blokkerte Equinor for Palestina (Tjen Folket)


Av en kommentator for Tjen Folket Media.


Tjen Folket Media var til stede på en demonstrasjon utenfor Equinor sitt kontor på Sandsli i Bergen. Demonstranter blokkerte innkjørselen til kontorets parkeringsplass. Det var et samarbeid mellom miljø, og klimabevegelsen og palestina-aktivister. Demonstrantene krevde at Equinor skulle stoppe samarbeidet med det israelske selskapet Ithaca Energy og stoppe utbygging av Rosebank-oljefeltet.

Ifølge demonstrantene gjennomføres det lignende aksjoner i Oslo, Florø, Stavanger og London. Demonstrasjonen var et samarbeid mellom aksjonsstemmer for Palestina, Stopp Oljeletinga og Extinction Rebellion. Demonstrantene var til stede tidlig på morgenen. Med palestinske flagg og plakater og banner med teksten “Equinor har skitne bånd – Olje og Israel hånd i hånd”.

Demonstrantene begynte klokken 07.30. De holdt flere appeller og ropte slagord. Før klokken var 8 hadde det bygd seg opp lang kø i området. Og politiet ble dermed tvunget til å vise vekk disse bilene for å hindre at køen skulle bygge seg opp. Da klokken nærmet seg 9 var dermed området nesten tomt for biler.

Tjen Folket Media har intervjuet flere av deltakerne og en talsperson for aksjonen.

En talsperson for aksjonen forklar hvorfor de demonstrerer:

“I dag har aksjonstemmer fra Palestina, stopp oljeletinga og extinction rebellion norge gått sammen for å demonstrere mot Rosebank-oljeplattformen som kommer til å ha katastrofale miljøkonsekvenser. I tillegg skal denne plattformen bygges sammen med Ithaca Energy. De er eid av israelske Delek Group. Som er svartelistet av FN og er selskap som bidrar til de ulovlige israelske bosettingene. Vi krever at regjeringen følger opp sin egeneierskapsmelding for Equinor. Der skriver de at selskap som Equinor, skal følge vitenskapsbaserte klimamål, kutte utslipp i tråd med disse, og at de skal inngå samarbeid med aktører som respekterer internasjonal humanitær rett. Det er det vi står for her i dag. At Equinor har et handlingsrom som de bør benytte. De bør avslutte Rosebank-plattformen og de bør avslutte samarbeidet med Ithaca Energy.”

Flere deltagere på aksjonen ble også intervjuet.

En aktivist forklarer hvorfor slike demonstrasjonsformer må til:

“Fordi det er veldig tragisk. Politikerne hører ikke på oss. De har ingen respekt for opinionen i Norge og folkeviljen. Og da man ty til mer ulydige og desperate metoder. Som streik og sivil ulydighet. Alt må til for å få slutt på folkemordet og okkupasjonen.”

En annen aktivist forklarte det slik:

“Det handler om Equinors rykte. Om folk skal se hva Equinor gjør må vi ta plass, må vi skrike høyt. Det er ikke nok. Vi tror ikke de har lyst å snakke med oss selv om vi prøver det. Miljøbevegelsen har prøvd det mange ganger. Equinor er ikke en aktør man kan ha en dialog med tror jeg.”

Aktivisten forklarer hvorfor dialog med Equinor ikke fungerer:


“Fordi hele selskapet er bygget på prinsippet om hele miljøet kan utnyttes og også at sårbare mennesker kan utnyttes. Ja, de kan jo ha en dialog med oss, men equinor kan ikke eksistere om de ikke gjør slike ting.”


Aktivisten avsluttet med:

“Det er veldig fint å samle miljøbevegelsen og palestinabevegelsen her i dag. Det er veldig viktig. Å forklare og vise frem at disse problemene har noe med hverandre å gjøre. Jeg tror at solidaritet er det som avgjør om en bevegelse overlever eller faller sammen. Vi trenger en kritisk masse. Det er hele poenget i det vi gjør. Jeg er veldig stolt av å se dette samarbeidet.”

Etter klokken 9 ble aksjonen avsluttet etter at det ikke lenger var biler å se i området. Aksjonistene lyktes med å avsløre samarbeidet statseide Equinor har med israelske Ithaca Energy som bidrar til okkupasjonen. Samtidig ble det sendt et signal om at selskapene ikke kan jobbe som normalt mens de bidrar til et pågående folkemord.


[Previous Article]#[Next]

SITUACIÓN ACTUAL: NOTAS SOBRE LA CRISIS MUNDIAL ( 9. Declaraciones sobre Ucrania) (Association New Democracy)


 SOBRE LAS ÚLTIMAS DECLARACIONES DE LOS REPRESENTANTES IMPERIALISTAS 

 

En este post, consignamos algunas de las últimas declaraciones de los representantes políticos alemanes del Ejecutivo y el Bundestag (Parlamento), de ministro de Defensa de los EEUU y otros, sobre la guerra de agresión del imperialismo ruso a Ucrania y la „ayuda“ imperialista.

 

 Los siguientes temas de las declaraciones y reuniones entre los imperialistas están estrechamente relacionados: declaraciones de Macrón de enviar tropas a Ucrania, negaiva del canciller alemán Scholz de los cohetes „Taurus“ para Ucrania, las últimas declaraciones de éste de usar los intereses de 3 mil a 4 mil millones de Euros de las reservas del Banco Central de Rusia que estan en depósitos de la UE y congeladas y las declaraciones del jefe de la fracción parlamentaria del SPD Mützenich de „congelar la guerra“.

 

Mützenich en el Bundestag dijo: "Las opciones para poner fin a un conflicto militar serían en última instancia "políticas", subrayó el líder del grupo parlamentario del SPD. Los políticos deben llevar a cabo estos debates “en lugar de hablar de dónde están los tornillos del Taurus”.

 

La declaración anterior ha dado lugar a enconadas discusiones.

 

El escenario y la ocasión, de la declaración, no pudo ser mejor escogida por el representante jefe de la fracción parlamentaria del partido de gobierno (SPD), de la Coalición del Semáforo junto con los Verdes y el FDP.

 

Algunos, han tratado de presentar las palabras de Mützenich como una cuestión personal; pero no es así, ha sido refrendada por el propio canciller alemán a la manera de un equilibrista como es su costubre. Pero, más aún, en entrevistas de los máximos funcionarios de su partido en sendos programas de la la TV alemana lo han respaldado y explicado.

 

No es tampoco un globo de ensayo, al parecer es algo consensuado con Biden y otras cancillerias, esto por la relación que hay entre todos los temas y declaraciones de los maximos representantes de los países imperialistas en colsión y pugna. Pensamos, que lo que acabamos de decir, no son simples especulaciones, hay otros hechos que se tienen que tomar en cuenta y son:

 

 Ya está claro que con quien tienen que tratar en Rusia es con Putin;

 

Biden necesita éxitos diplómaticos para su reelección y puede presionar a Zelensky con un futuro incierto en las elecciones por la posibilidad cierta de la elección de Donald Trump;

 

Pero, lo cierto es que ambos apuntan a un acuerdo yanqui-ruso para centra en el Indo-Pacífico (contención de China contra sus afanen de hegemonizar en la región);

 

El gobierno alemán está en „año superelectoral“,se llevarán elecciones en algunos estados claves y elecciones europeas, si sale mal parado de ellas puede caer y Macron en dificultades internas;

 

La nueva presión al gobierno de Putin con otras medidas, por parte de los "aliados" imperialistas, como la iniciativa de Scholz de utilizar los intereses de la cuentas rusas congeladas para comprar armas para „ayudar“ a Ucrania y la amenaza de examinar la posibilidad de usarla en su integridad para la „reconstrucción“ de Ucrania.

 

Las razones anteriores son algunas de las cuestiones que abonan para nuestra opinión.

 

 Con el agregado por parte de la mayor parte de los nombrados del que en „ultima instancia debe decidir es Zalensky. Est último explica un tanto el toma y daca a que esta atado Zalensky con la dependencia de la „ayuda“ imperialista. Y que  las presiones para un „acuerdo“ político para „congelar la guerra“ apunta a éste y su gobierno.

 

Por eso tiene gran importancia lo que venimos repitiendo desde el inicio de la guerra de agresión del imperialismo ruso contra la nación Ucrania:

 

1. Mediante la „ayuda“ los imperialistas remachan las cadenas de la atadura del la nación ucraniana al imperialismo, los lleva de las garras del imperialismo ruso a las de sus rivales imperialistas, principalmente el imperialismo yanqui.

 

2. En la presente situación, la „ayuda“, es una „obligación“ que adquieren los lacayo ucranianos del imperialismo a nombre de toda la nación Ucrania, que desde el derecho romano se rige por el principio de „doy para que hagas“, etc. Es decir, por ese camino el país se convierte en ficha de intercambio de la colusión y pugna imperialista. Es decir repartir el país, en una zona bajo protectorado del imperialismo ruso y un Estado en el resto bajo protectorado del imperialismo yanqui. Eso es lo que debe entenderse cuando el ministro de Defensa de los EEUU en Ramstein, dijo:

 

„El secretario de Defensa de Estados Unidos, Lloyd Austin, destacó el papel de dichas coaliciones de capacidades en la adquisición de municiones y armas. Austin dijo que las coaliciones subrayarían un "compromiso compartido con la seguridad a largo plazo de Ucrania". El gasto en defensa de Ucrania es una "inversión en nuestra seguridad compartida", dijo Austin“.

A donde van empujando las cosas, teniendo en cuanta que „ayuda“ y „solución política“ (colusión) se complementan no están en contraposición, se filtra en estas palabras:

„Mützenich dijo ahora al periódico "Neue Westfälische" que no quería corregir su afirmación: "Estoy formado en ciencias sociales y de la paz. Allí se utiliza la congelación como término para permitir ceses del fuego locales temporales y ceses del fuego humanitarios en situaciones especiales. que puede trasladarse a una ausencia permanente de fuerza militar". Por supuesto, esto requiere el consentimiento de ambas partes en conflicto, que no puede dictarse desde fuera“.

 

El líder del SPD, Klingbeil, dijo en el programa de TV:

"Una mala interpretación deliberada de este discurso" (…) Según el líder del partido, se trata de una “situación increíblemente controvertida” en la que se encuentra el gobierno del semáforo. Mützenich simplemente planteaba una pregunta legítima y no está solo en su postura: en última instancia, el presidente ucraniano Volodymyr Zelenskyj también exigiría negociaciones de paz, según Klingbeil.

El periodista, aclara al respecto: „Zelenskyj efectivamente pide negociaciones de paz, pero al mismo tiempo cita la retirada del El ejército ruso como base para las conversaciones desde los territorios ocupados de Ucrania. Esto es totalmente opuesto a la idea de “congelar” el conflicto, como había pedido Rolf Mützenich“.

Luego el mismo Klingbeil liga las declaraciones de Mützenich con el asunto de Scholz y el „Taurus“, así:

„"Nada de lo que dice Rolf Mützenich y lo que defiende el SPD sugiere que nosotros decidamos sobre la mentalidad de los ucranianos", continuó Klingbeil. En Ucrania no hay duda de qué lado está el SPD, como lo demuestran los suministros de armas y el apoyo financiero hasta la fecha. Klingbeil explicó el poder de la Canciller en materia de entregas de "Taurus": "Al final, Olaf Scholz es responsable de ellos, políticamente es su decisión." Si la Canciller decide que la entrega del "Taurus" representaría un peligro demasiado grande para la República Federal, entonces tendremos que aceptarlo. "Creo que esta decisión debe ser tratada con respeto"“

El 20 de marzo,Olaf Scholz en el Bundestag, según la noticia, „Scholz respondió con una tríada: más y duradero apoyo a Ucrania, ahora también con suministro internacional de municiones, sin participación de la OTAN y sin "la paz dictada". En su discurso de media hora“.

Preguntamos: ¿ por qué eso de „apoyo a Ucrania (…) sin la paz dictada?, eso da más pié para pensar por donde va la colusión entre imperialistas sbre la presa de la contienda imperialista, en este caso, Ucrania. Además, si lo imperialistas afirman algo, antes de que la tinta se haya secado, ya están haciendo todo lo contrario.

 

3. La „ayuda“ es negocio redondo para los imperialistas: como vimos en el pos las notas del evento del Center for Strategic and International Studies “Ukraine in the Balance: A Battlefield Update on the War in Ukraine” , donde los imperialistas yanquis dicen:

 

„ (…) el dinero que  gastamos en Ucrania no deja los EE.UU.  va a la industria de defensa de los EE.UU..  Va a compañías de EE.UU. que envía ayuda a Ucrania. La mayoría vasta de ello se queda aquí“.

 

En estos día, se les ha escuchado decir, en la UE:  que „ del 100 de los intereses de 3 mil millones de Euros de las cuentas rusas congeladas destinados a la ayuda a Ucrania, el 90% será para comprar armas para la defensa de Ucrania y solo el 10% para la reconstrucción“. Que, por ahora no se puede destinar más hasta el fin del conflicto.

 

Nosotros: reiteramos nuestra posición sobre el desarrollo de las contradicciones en esta guerra de agresión del imperialismo ruso contra la nación ucraniana:

 

En la guerra en Ucrania se expresan dos contradicciones: El desarrollo de la contradicción principal entre la nación ucraniana y el imperialismo ruso; y, como secudaria, el desarrollo en medio de colusión y pugna de la contradicción inter-imperialista (tercera contradicción); principalmente, entre la superpotencia imperialista hegemónica única, los EEUU y “aliados”, y la superpotencia atómica,Rusia; y, este desarrollo, agudiza el desarrollo de la segunda contradicción (proletariado burguesía) en los países imperialistas, como lo estamos mostrando en las presentes notas sobre la Situación Actual.

 

La esencia de la guerra para Rusia es imperialista, apropiarse de Ucrania, cambiar su estatus a colonia. La esencia de la guerra para Ucrania es de una guerra realmente nacional; es una guerra de una nación oprimida contra un opresor extranjero. Defender su derecho a la autodeterminación, su liberación nacional. Es guerra de resistencia nacional.

 

Que los imperialistas en sus guerras contra las naciones oprimidas no pueden más que coquistar fracasos y enfrascarse en el atolladero. Que el imperrialismo yanqui es el perro gordo y enemigo principal de los pueblos del mundo y el imperialismo ruso es el perro flaco, como imperialismo agresor  en Ucrania es el enemigo principal allí.

 

La nación ucraniana ha resistido desde el comienzo. La nación ucraniana, las masas de ese país, deslindando con lacayos de otros imperialistas como Zalensky, etc., están persistiendo en la guerra de resistencia nacional, conjurando el peligro de capitulación nacional.

 

La lucha de la nación ucraniana será larga y solo luchando con independencia, ausostenimiento y autodecisión, confiando solo en sus propias fuerzas y en la solidaridad internacional del proletariado y los pueblos del mundo; llevando la guerra de resistencia nacional como guerra prolongada; luchando con independecia sin someterse a superpotencia ni potencia imperialista alguna; practicando que el hombre y no las armas son lo decisivo y que hay que impedir que el oso entre por la puerta principal y, al mismo tiempo, conjurar que el lobo entre por la puerta traser; persistiendo en la necesidad de unir a todas las fuerzas suceptibles de ser unidas por la resistencia nacional, aislado al punado de traidores y vendepatria proimperialistas de cualquier lado, la nación ucraniana alcanzará la victoria definitiva sobre el invasor y cualquier otro que amenaze su independencia e integridad. 


Pero, la situación en la guerra de resistencia nacional demanda que los comunistan reconstituyan su Partido Comunista, como partido marxista-leninista-maoísta militarizado para poder dirigir la guerra de resistencia nacional y transformarla en guerra popular de resistencia nacional para alcanzar la vuictoria contra el invasor imperialista y continuar la revolución para constrarestaurar y pasar a desarrollar la revolución socialista.


 

A CONTINUACIÓN LAS NOTICIAS EN LA PRENSA BURGUESA.

 

El Tagesschau de Alemanía, bajo el título Mützenich bleibt dabei (Mützenich se mantiene firme), el 19 de marzo de 2024, informó:

A pesar de todas las críticas, el jefe de la fracción parlamentaria del SPD, Mützenich, quiere mantener sus declaraciones sobre "congelar" la guerra en Ucrania. También explica por qué. El Ministro de Asuntos Exteriores y el Ministro de Defensa se distanciaron de la elección de las palabras.

Con su declaración en el Bundestag sobre la “congelación” de la guerra en Ucrania, el líder del grupo parlamentario del SPD, Rolf Mützenich, causó mucha incomprensión. También hubo oposición dentro de sus propias filas. Sin embargo, Mützenich quiere mantener su formulación.

Se trata concretamente de una pregunta que el político planteó el jueves pasado en el debate del Bundestag sobre la entrega de los misiles de crucero "Taurus": "¿No es hora de que no sólo hablemos de cómo librar una guerra, sino también de "pensar en ¿Cómo congelar una guerra y luego ponerle fin?

Se requiere el consentimiento de ambas partes en conflicto

Siguió una tormenta de indignación. Mützenich dijo ahora al periódico "Neue Westfälische" que no quería corregir su afirmación: "Estoy formado en ciencias sociales y de la paz. Allí se utiliza la congelación como término para permitir ceses del fuego locales temporales y ceses del fuego humanitarios en situaciones especiales. que puede trasladarse a una ausencia permanente de fuerza militar". Por supuesto, esto requiere el consentimiento de ambas partes en conflicto, que no puede dictarse desde fuera, esto requiere el consentimiento de ambas partes en conflicto, que no puede dictarse desde fuera

Aufregung über Mützenich-Rede"Rückfall in die alte Russlandpolitik"

Die Äußerungen des SPD-Fraktionschefs Mützenich im Bundestag haben zu teilweise heftige Reaktionen gesorgt. mehr

 

15 de marzo de 2024

Conmoción por el discurso de Mützenich: “Recaída en la vieja política rusa”

Las declaraciones del jefedel grupo parlamentario del SPD, Mützenich, en el Bundestag han provocado en ocasiones reacciones violentas.

 Más Alternativas para resolver el conflicto

Cuando se le preguntó si sus recientes declaraciones habían sido malinterpretadas deliberadamente, dijo: "No quiero acusar a nadie de eso. Pero quien me critica tan severamente obviamente no está preparado para liderar un debate político que también tenga en cuenta las alternativas".

Según Mützenich, China probablemente podría influir en Rusia para una posible solución. "Tenemos que convencer a China de que la República Popular tiene un interés existencial y económico en volverse más activa diplomáticamente en la guerra de la que Rusia es responsable". Probablemente China todavía tenga cierta influencia sobre Rusia. "Los políticos tienen que tener estos debates en lugar de hablar sobre dónde están los tornillos del 'Taurus'. Las opciones sobre cómo se puede poner fin a un conflicto militar serán, en última instancia, políticas".

Pistorius: “Al final sólo ayudaría a Putin”

Mützenich también encontró oposición dentro de su partido SPD. Ayer también se distanció su compañero de partido y ministro de Defensa, Boris Pistorius. "Al final, sólo ayudaría a Putin", dijo durante una visita a Polonia.

Pistorius añadió hoy más información en Deutschlandfunk: La palabra "congelar" indica que "se puede simplemente congelar una guerra como esta - y no estamos hablando de un conflicto de ambos lados - y luego esperar que mejore. Lo sabemos por la historia Y según la experiencia con Putin, esto nunca será así". Las palabras de Mützenich significaban el deseo de paz. Pistorius enfatizó: "El SPD no es un partido que entienda a Putin". El SPD tiene a Olaf Scholz como canciller y Alemania está a la cabeza de todos los europeos que apoyan a Ucrania.

 

18 de marzo de 2024

Declaración sobre "congelar la guerra" Pistorius se distancia de Mützenich

El líder del grupo parlamentario del SPD, Mützenich, había sugerido pensar en “congelar” la guerra. más

Críticas también del ministro Baerbock

También hubo críticas desde las filas de los socios de coalición FDP y Los Verdes. La ministra de Asuntos Exteriores, Annalena Baerbock, por ejemplo, explicó en los temas diarios que desde una perspectiva humana podía entender la idea de cuándo terminará finalmente esta guerra. Sin embargo, la paz es algo por lo que hay que trabajar todos los días. Por eso es importante seguir apoyando a Ucrania.

"El mayor favor que podemos hacerle a Putin es que nos peleemos en Alemania, en Europa", afirmó el político verde. "Lo que Putin subestimó por completo es que en el momento en que nuestro orden de paz europeo está siendo atacado, toda Europa permanece unida". Para defender la paz y la libertad también se necesita un gobierno federal alemán fuerte.

También hubo duras críticas hacia Mützenich por parte de la Unión. "Considero que este enfoque es absolutamente inaceptable", afirmó el director general parlamentario de los miembros del Bundestag CDU/CSU, Thorsten Frei (CDU). Y añadió: "No veo por ningún lado cómo podemos llegar a negociaciones de paz". Considera que la sugerencia de Mützenich es "ingenua en el mejor de los casos, pero en realidad muy peligrosa".

Conversaciones en Ramstein

La cuestión de un mayor apoyo militar a Ucrania también se debate hoy en la base aérea estadounidense de Ramstein, en Renania-Palatinado. Allí se reunirán ministros de Defensa y representantes militares de alto rango por invitación del secretario de Defensa estadounidense, Lloyd Austin, y también estará presente el ministro federal de Defensa, Pistorius. Recientemente ha habido desacuerdos entre los socios occidentales sobre el alcance de las entregas de armas a Ucrania. Alemania está bajo presión para entregar misiles de crucero Taurus, lo que el Canciller Scholz rechaza.

Tras una reunión con el presidente francés, Emmanuel Macron, y el primer ministro polaco, Donald Tusk, Scholz anunció hace unos días que se había acordado una nueva coalición para la "artillería de cohetes de largo alcance". La coalición debería formarse dentro del marco de Ramstein.

DeutschlandTrend

Player: videoARD-DeutschlandTrend

 

07.03.2024

ARD-DeutschlandTrendMehrheit gegen "Taurus"-Lieferung an die Ukraine

61 Prozent der Deutschen sind dagegen, dass Deutschland "Taurus"-

 

Grupo de Contacto Ramstein: Estados Unidos promete más ayuda a Ucrania

Mayor apoyo del mundo occidental a Ucrania. "Estados Unidos no permitirá que Ucrania fracase", dijo el secretario de Defensa estadounidense, Austin, en Ramstein. Mientras tanto, en Alemania continúa el debate sobre "congelar" la guerra.

Reportado sobre este tema: Noticia del 19 de marzo de 2024 a las 10:00 a.m.

En la reunión del llamado Grupo de Contacto de Ucrania en Ramstein, el secretario de Defensa estadounidense, Lloyd Austin, aseguró al gobierno de Kiev el apoyo continuo de sus aliados occidentales. Austin dijo en la inauguración de la reunión en la base de la fuerza aérea estadounidense en Renania-Palatinado: "Estados Unidos no permitirá que Ucrania fracase. Esta coalición no permitirá que Ucrania fracase. El mundo libre no permitirá que Ucrania fracase".

 

Noticias actuales sobre la guerra entre Rusia y Ucrania en el teletipo de noticias

El grupo de contacto también analiza las diferencias de opinión

Austin había invitado a los miembros del grupo de contacto a Ramstein. Allí quieren discutir cómo proceder en la guerra entre Rusia y Ucrania. Entre los participantes se encuentran numerosos ministros de Defensa y representantes militares. El grupo incluye más de 50 estados que apoyan a Ucrania en la guerra contra Rusia. La propia Ucrania también está representada para aclarar qué apoyo se necesita.

 

El grupo de contacto de Ramstein quiere discutir exactamente cómo debería ser este apoyo. Recientemente ha habido diferencias de opinión al respecto: mientras que el presidente francés, Emmanuel Macron, no descartó el uso de tropas terrestres en Ucrania, Alemania es mucho más cautelosa.

Las “coaliciones de capacidad” deberían responsabilizar a los estados de contacto

El canciller Olaf Scholz (SPD) se niega a suministrar misiles de crucero Taurus. Después de una reunión con Macron y el primer ministro polaco Tusk la semana pasada, Scholz anunció una "coalición de capacidades" para "artillería de cohetes de largo alcance" en el marco de Ramstein.

 

El secretario de Defensa de Estados Unidos, Lloyd Austin, destacó el papel de dichas coaliciones de capacidades en la adquisición de municiones y armas. Austin dijo que las coaliciones subrayarían un "compromiso compartido con la seguridad a largo plazo de Ucrania". El gasto en defensa de Ucrania es una "inversión en nuestra seguridad compartida", dijo Austin.

 

Austin: "Putin no estará satisfecho con Ucrania"

Dirigiéndose a los miembros del Grupo de Contacto de Ucrania, Austin añadió: "No nos engañemos. Putin no se conformará con Ucrania". Pero Ucrania puede “detener a Putin”, como dijo el presidente estadounidense Joe Biden, si “apoyamos a Ucrania y le proporcionamos las armas que necesita para su defensa”. Austin enfatizó: "La supervivencia de Ucrania está en peligro. Y toda nuestra seguridad está en peligro".

 

Mützenich no quiere retirar la expresión "congelar".

Mientras tanto, en Alemania continúa el debate sobre la afirmación del líder del grupo parlamentario del SPD, Rolf Mützenich, de que el conflicto en Ucrania debería "congelarse". El jueves, en el debate del Bundestag sobre el suministro de los misiles de crucero Taurus, Mützenich preguntó si también se debería pensar en "¿cómo se puede congelar una guerra y ponerle fin más tarde?".

 

En una conversación con el periódico "Neue Westfälische", Mützenich respondió a la pregunta de si quería corregir esto: "No, no quiero". Está "formado en ciencias sociales y de la paz" y allí "la congelación se utiliza como terminología" para permitir altos el fuego temporales y treguas, que luego podrían conducir a soluciones a más largo plazo. Esto "por supuesto requiere el consentimiento de ambas partes en conflicto", afirmó Mützenich.

 

"Las opciones para poner fin a un conflicto militar serían en última instancia "políticas", subrayó el líder del grupo parlamentario del SPD. Los políticos deben llevar a cabo estos debates “en lugar de hablar de dónde están los tornillos del Taurus”.

Pistorius: “El SPD no es un partido que entienda a Putin”

En vísperas de la reunión de Ramstein, el ministro federal de Defensa, Boris Pistorius, reiteró que no había hablado de congelar la guerra en Ucrania, como hizo Mützenich. Su elección de palabras indica que uno puede “simplemente congelar” una guerra así y luego esperar “que las cosas mejoren”. Sabemos "por la historia y por nuestras experiencias con Putin que esto nunca será así", dijo el ministro de Defensa en Deutschlandfunk.

 

"El SPD no es un partido que comprenda a Putin", dijo Pistorius. El SPD tiene a Olaf Scholz como canciller y Alemania está a la cabeza de todos los europeos que apoyan a Ucrania. Pistorius exigió que no haya "dudas sobre nuestra solidaridad y nuestro apoyo a Ucrania. Todo lo demás es un debate fabricado que nadie necesita y que no ayuda a nadie, y menos a Ucrania".

 

Con información de AFP y dpa



Por qué el Canciller habla claro

A partir de: 20 de marzo de 2024 19:00 horas

 

Después de la declaración de Mützenich sobre la "congelación" del conflicto en Ucrania, la aparición de Scholz en el Bundestag se convirtió en un acto de equilibrio. Pero quizás el líder del grupo parlamentario del SPD incluso le haya hecho un favor a la Canciller.

Corinna Emundts

Por Corinna Emundts, tagesschau.de

¿Cómo se posiciona usted como Canciller entre un líder del grupo parlamentario del SPD, amante de la paz, y un ministro de Defensa que acaba de distanciarse decididamente del líder de su propio grupo parlamentario sobre la política en Ucrania? En declaraciones anteriores del gobierno, el partido de Scholz no fue el problema para él. A menudo tuvo que lidiar con disputas entre su coalición entre el FDP y los Verdes.

Scholz pide más apoyo a Ucrania en una declaración del gobierno

Jakob Schaumann, ARD Berlín, tagesthemen, 20 de marzo de 2024 22:15

Ahora las cosas son diferentes: desde hace días el debate político gira en torno a una sola palabra del líder del grupo parlamentario del SPD, Rolf Mützenich. La semana pasada, en el atril del Bundestag, formuló la siguiente pregunta sobre la política ucraniana: Si no era hora no sólo de hablar sobre cómo librar una guerra, "sino también de pensar en cómo congelar una guerra y... "congelar". - Esta expresión provocó que el ministro federal de Defensa, Boris Pistorius, miembro del SPD, respondiera claramente el lunes durante un viaje al extranjero: "Al final, esto sólo ayudaría a Putin". No debería haber una paz dictada y "ninguna paz que conduzca a eso -o a un alto el fuego o a un congelamiento- en el que Putin emerja más fuerte al final y continúe el conflicto cuando le plazca", dijo Pistorius. Ucrania debe seguir recibiendo apoyo “sin peros”.

Olaf Scholz en el Bundestag

Al menos el pasaje de la declaración del gobierno de Olaf Scholz estaba casi escrito. Scholz también dejó claro que Alemania es el mayor apoyo de Ucrania en Europa, especialmente en lo que respecta a las capacidades de defensa del país. Y durante el tiempo que ella lo necesite. Por esta aclaración, que en realidad no es nueva, incluso recibió el agradecimiento del líder de la oposición y del grupo parlamentario de la Unión, Friedrich Merz. Scholz respondió con una tríada: más y duradero apoyo a Ucrania, ahora también con suministro internacional de municiones, sin participación de la OTAN y sin "la paz dictada". En su discurso de media hora, la Canciller logró no mencionar los puntos críticos del debate de los últimos días: ni el sistema de armas "Taurus" ni el "congelamiento" de Mützenich para perjudicar al líder de la facción popular. Además, Scholz no necesariamente habrá perturbado el debate de los últimos días. Especialmente en lo que respecta a la política alemana en Ucrania, en su opinión, demasiadas personas en el Berlín político se han preguntado por qué no se está cumpliendo más, pero muy raramente se han preguntado si es necesario actuar con prudencia.

En anteriores discursos de la coalición de semáforo sobre la cantidad adecuada o el sistema de armas adecuado para apoyar a Ucrania, Scholz siempre apareció inicialmente como el vacilante y más tarde como el impulsado por el FDP y los políticos de defensa verdes, por ejemplo cuando estaba preocupado por la entrega del carro de combate "Leopard" 2" decidió hacerlo tarde. En este sentido, Mützenich incluso le hizo un favor, porque Scholz pudo presentarse hoy como un hombre activo y un orador claro y dejar claro que no sólo Alemania, pero también Europa, está acelerando el paso en su apoyo al país atacado.

Siempre hay diferencias sustanciales en la política ucraniana. En última instancia, los debates recurrentes sobre la política ucraniana muestran la tensión sustancial en la coalición semáforo para apoyar a Ucrania. Ha existido desde el comienzo de la guerra de agresión de Rusia, que viola el derecho internacional. Existe el deseo, especialmente entre los socios más pequeños de la coalición, de obtener un apoyo mayor y más rápido de lo que Mützenich y su entorno en el SPD parecían aconsejables. Recientemente, Agnieszka Brugger, de los Verdes, se pronunció a favor del suministro del sistema de armas "Taurus", aunque Scholz se había opuesto claramente: "El debate no puede terminar con Basta". "La mejor garantía para nuestra seguridad es una derrota para Putin "Por eso también apoyamos a Ucrania", dijo Brugger en el Bundestag la semana pasada. Las vacilaciones y las dudas también pueden contribuir a la escalada. Por eso el debate sobre "Tauro" "no puede terminar con un solo pedazo de mierda". El posicionamiento de Mützenich también debe entenderse como una respuesta a esto: al fin y al cabo, el líder del grupo parlamentario del SPD logró desviar el interés público de Scholz y del debate sobre "Taurus" que le molestaba, dice alguien cercano a él. Aún no está claro si esto fue intencional o un efecto secundario.

 

Klingbeil sobre el discurso de Mützenich

“Malinterpretación deliberada”

A partir de: 18 de marzo de 2024 7:07 a.m.

 

Las declaraciones del líder del grupo parlamentario del SPD, Mützenich, sobre la guerra en Ucrania provocaron fuertes críticas, también en la coalición. El líder del SPD, Klingbeil, defendió a Mützenich y habló de una "interpretación errónea selectiva" de Caren Miosga.

Por Lucas Weyell

El motivo de la visita del líder del SPD, Lars Klingbeil, a Caren Miosga no podría haber sido más oportuno. El jueves pasado, el líder del grupo parlamentario del SPD, Rolf Mützenich, causó revuelo con un discurso en el Bundestag. En el pleno habló de "congelar" la guerra en Ucrania y las posteriores negociaciones de paz con Rusia. Mützenich calificó de "maliciosas" las críticas de la oposición y de los políticos del semáforo al canciller Olaf Scholz: el líder del grupo parlamentario del SPD había sido criticado varias veces por su elección de palabras, incluso por parte de los partidos del semáforo. La ministra de Asuntos Exteriores, Annalena Baerbock, se sentó visiblemente molesta durante el discurso en el estrado del gobierno y meneó enérgicamente la cabeza. Los Verdes y el FDP se negaron a aplaudir a Mützenich durante su discurso.

Rolf Mützenich

Reproductor: audioDe guerras congeladas y minas congeladas

15 de marzo de 2024

 

Klingbeil: "Una mala interpretación deliberada de este discurso" El propio Klingbeil dijo el domingo por la tarde en el programa de entrevistas de ARD Caren Miosga: "Creo que reducir el discurso de Rolf Mützenich a este pasaje es una mala interpretación deliberada de este discurso". Según el líder del partido, se trata de una “situación increíblemente controvertida” en la que se encuentra el gobierno del semáforo. Mützenich simplemente planteaba una pregunta legítima y no está solo en su postura: en última instancia, el presidente ucraniano Volodymyr Zelenskyj también exigiría negociaciones de paz, según Klingbeil. Zelenskyj efectivamente pide negociaciones de paz, pero al mismo tiempo cita la retirada del El ejército ruso como base para las conversaciones desde los territorios ocupados de Ucrania. Esto es totalmente opuesto a la idea de “congelar” el conflicto, como había pedido Rolf Mützenich. Una "congelación" significaría mantener el status quo actual, es decir, conservar las zonas ocupadas por el ejército ruso. Klingbeil: No hay duda de qué lado está el SPD. Klingbeil rechazó tajantemente la acusación de que los socialdemócratas negarían apoyo al país en él mismo en la guerra defensiva: "Nada de lo que dice Rolf Mützenich y lo que defiende el SPD sugiere que nosotros decidamos sobre la mentalidad de los ucranianos", continuó Klingbeil. En Ucrania no hay duda de qué lado está el SPD, como lo demuestran los suministros de armas y el apoyo financiero hasta la fecha. Klingbeil explicó el poder de la Canciller en materia de entregas de "Taurus": "Al final, Olaf Scholz es responsable de ellos políticamente decisión." Si la Canciller decide que la entrega del "Taurus" representaría un peligro demasiado grande para la República Federal, entonces tendremos que aceptarlo. "Creo que esta decisión debe ser tratada con respeto".

Guerra en Ucrania y Gaza (TAZ)

:La cumbre de la UE rompe tabúes

Menos moderación hacia Israel y más dinero para armas para Ucrania: los Estados de la UE están desmantelando poco a poco sus grandes obras de construcción.

El presidente del Consejo de la UE, Charles Michel, está satisfecho con una mayor ayuda para Ucrania y un enfoque más duro hacia IsraelFoto: Johanna Geron/Reuters

BRUSELAS taz | Las guerras en Ucrania y Gaza mantienen en vilo a la Unión Europea. En Bruselas, los 27 jefes de Estado y de Gobierno de la UE rompieron dos importantes tabúes de política exterior. Los líderes de la UE se pronunciaron por primera vez a favor de un alto el fuego en la Franja de Gaza. En un comunicado, pidieron "una pausa humanitaria inmediata que conduzca a un alto el fuego permanente, la liberación incondicional de todos los rehenes y la prestación de asistencia humanitaria".

 

La reticencia que antes se practicaba hacia Israel es ahora cosa del pasado. La posición de la UE está en gran medida en línea con la nueva postura de Estados Unidos, dijo el primer ministro belga, Alexander De Croo, quien actualmente ocupa la presidencia de la UE. Washington también se ha alejado recientemente de Jerusalén.

También hubo un punto de inflexión en la disputa sobre la financiación de la ayuda armamentista a Ucrania. Los jefes de Estado y de Gobierno han pedido a la Comisión de la UE que desarrolle un plan sobre cómo se pueden utilizar los ingresos por intereses de los activos rusos congelados para comprar armas. Hasta ahora, los activos extranjeros se consideraban sacrosantos. El Banco Central Europeo había advertido sobre turbulencias si la UE accedía al dinero del banco central ruso. Ahora es sólo una cuestión de interés. Los primeros mil millones podrían fluir antes del 1 de julio, dijo la presidenta de la Comisión, Ursula von der Leyen.

 

Sin embargo, los problemas que rodean la guerra de Ucrania están lejos de estar resueltos. Es “vergonzoso para Europa” que los Estados miembros hayan entregado tan pocos proyectiles de artillería, dijo el presidente ucraniano Volodymyr Zelenskyj en un enlace de vídeo. La UE necesita urgentemente hacer más“.

Hasta aquí la prensa burguesa.



[Previous Article]#[Next]

Ενεργή η διελκυστίνδα μεταξύ ΗΠΑ και Ισραήλ ενώ η σφαγή συνεχίζεται - ΚΚΕ(μ-λ) (KKE m l)


Έχουμε μπει πια στον έκτο μήνα της γενοκτονικής σφαγής του σιωνιστικού κράτους του Ισραήλ ενάντια στον λαό της Παλαιστίνης στη Λωρίδα της Γάζας. Οι ασταμάτητοι καθημερινοί βομβαρδισμοί μετατρέπουν την περιοχή σε ερείπια γεμάτα από δολοφονημένους αμάχους, ενώ εγκρίθηκε από το πολεμικό συμβούλιο του Ισραήλ και η εισβολή στη Ράφα. Ταυτόχρονα, το Ισραήλ χρησιμοποιεί την πείνα σαν όπλο ενάντια στον παλαιστινιακό λαό, αλλά και όπως επισημαίνουν αρκετοί αναλυτές, σαν εργαλείο πίεσης στις διαπραγματεύσεις με τη Χαμάς. Στην ίδια κατεύθυνση -της πίεσης- χρησιμοποιούν οι σιωνιστές και την απειλή της εισβολής στη Ράφα, που πάντως απηχεί συνάμα και τη βούληση της ακραίας αντιδραστικής ομάδας σιωνιστών που κυβερνά το Ισραήλ και που έχει ενσωματώσει στις πολιτικές της τις πρακτικές των Γερμανών Ναζί.

Μάξιμουμ στόχος των σιωνιστών, η χρησιμοποίηση της γενοκτονικής πολιτικής σαν μέσο για τον μαζικό εκτοπισμό των Παλαιστινίων από τη Λωρίδα της Γάζας. Αυτός ο στόχος, παρά τα δεινά του παλαιστινιακού λαού, δεν είναι καθόλου εύκολα επιτεύξιμος, όχι κυρίως γιατί βρίσκει τα αντιδραστικά αραβικά καθεστώτα απέναντι για να «μην φορτωθούν το πρόβλημα». Αλλά γιατί ο λαός της Γάζας αρνείται επίμονα και με γενναιότητα να εγκαταλείψει τον τόπο που ζει και να γίνει για δεύτερη φορά πρόσφυγας.

Μίνιμουμ στόχος, η δημιουργία προϋποθέσεων για κατατεμαχισμό της Λωρίδας της Γάζας σε στρατιωτικά επιτηρούμενες περιοχές στα πρότυπα των γκέτο που έχουν δημιουργήσει στη Δυτική Όχθη (που με τη σειρά τους είναι μια, εξελιγμένη και αναβαθμισμένη σε βαρβαρότητα, αντιγραφή των εβραϊκών γκέτο που έφτιαξαν οι ναζί). Θεωρούν ότι έτσι θα μπορέσουν να υλοποιήσουν μια έστω πιο αργόσυρτη διαδικασία εκτοπισμού του παλαιστινιακού λαού από τη γη του. Άλλωστε, αυτή η διαδικασία συμβαίνει σε ενεστώτα χρόνο στην, κομματιασμένη σε ασφυκτικά επιτηρούμενες περιοχές από τις προδοτικές συμφωνίες του Όσλο, Δυτική Όχθη. Για του λόγου το αληθές, ο ρυθμός δημιουργίας νέων σπιτιών εποίκων στην παλαιστινιακή γη έχει εκτοξευθεί          : από τον Οκτώβριο του 2022 έως τον Οκτώβριο του 2023, καταγράφηκαν 24.500 νέες οικιστικές μονάδες εποίκων. Παράλληλα, φαίνεται πως για παν ενδεχόμενο οι σιωνιστές έχουν προσεγγίσει φατρίες μέσα στη Λωρίδα της Γάζας, για να διαμορφώσουν, όπως πριν το 2005, ένα δίκτυο δωσίλογων, μέσω των οποίων να εμπεδώνουν την ισραηλινή κατοχή στην περιοχή.

ΗΠΑ: εμπλοκή και στοχεύσεις

Ο υπότιτλος δεν αναφέρεται στην εμπλοκή των ΗΠΑ στη σφαγή που εξελίσσεται μέσω της συνεχιζόμενης και μαζικής τροφοδοσίας με κάθε φονικό σιδερικό προς το σιωνιστικό Ισραήλ. Αυτή συνεχίζεται και θα συνεχιστεί και μάλλον αποτελούν μοχλό πίεσης οι φήμες πως ενδέχεται οι ΗΠΑ να σταματήσουν τη στρατιωτική βοήθεια προς το Τελ Αβίβ.

Ο αμερικανικός ιμπεριαλισμός, βλέποντας να διακυβεύονται τα στρατηγικά του συμφέροντα στη Μέση Ανατολή από την πολιτική Νετανιάχου, παράλληλα με τη στήριξη που παρέχει στους σιωνιστές, έχει το τελευταίο διάστημα εμπλακεί εντείνοντας ξανά την πίεση και τους εκβιασμούς στη σιωνιστική ηγεσία. Μετά τις αλλεπάλληλες δηλώσεις ή «διαρροές» με ανοιχτά μικρόφωνα του Μπάιντεν και του Μπλίνκεν, ήρθε ο επικεφαλής των Δημοκρατικών και πρόεδρος της αμερικανικής Γερουσίας, Τζακ Σούμερ, να δηλώσει πως το Ισραήλ πρέπει να πάει σε εκλογές και να αντικατασταθεί ο Νετανιάχου, μιας και αποτελεί εμπόδιο για την ειρήνη. Ο ίδιος ο Σούμερ, όπως και συνολικά η αμερικανική κυβέρνηση, απαίτησαν παράλληλα μια «νέα» Παλαιστινιακή Αρχή. Μάλιστα, ο ανεκδιήγητος Μαχμούντ Αμπάς έσπευσε αμέσως να υπακούσει στις αμερικανικές προσταγές, αλλάζοντας τον πρωθυπουργό της ΠΑ με έναν γνωστό για τις διασυνδέσεις του με τις ΗΠΑ και πρώην στέλεχος της Παγκόσμιας Τράπεζας. Γι’ αυτό και πολύ σωστά, σημαντικές παλαιστινιακές οργανώσεις (Χαμάς, ισλαμική Τζιχάντ, Λαϊκό Μέτωπο για την Απελευθέρωση της Παλαιστίνης, Κίνημα Εθνικής Πρωτοβουλίας) κατήγγειλαν απερίφραστα «τα νέα προδοτικά κόλπα» του Αμπάς, την στιγμή που «η ύψιστη εθνική προτεραιότητα τώρα είναι η αντιμετώπιση της βάρβαρης σιωνιστικής επιθετικότητας και του γενοκτονικού και λιμοκτονικού πολέμου της Κατοχής ενάντια στον λαό μας στη Λωρίδα της Γάζας και η αντιμετώπιση των εγκλημάτων των εποίκων της στη Δυτική Όχθη και την υπό κατοχή Αλ-Κουντς (σ.σ. Ιερουσαλήμ) -ιδιαίτερα στο Τέμενος Αλ-Ακσα- και των σημαντικών κινδύνων που αντιμετωπίζει η εθνική μας υπόθεση -στην πρώτη γραμμή των οποίων βρίσκεται ο εξελισσόμενος κίνδυνος του εκτοπισμού».

Οι Αμερικάνοι φαίνεται ότι θα ήθελαν με μια διπλή αντικατάσταση (κυβέρνησης Ισραήλ, Παλαιστινιακής Αρχής) να αναστήσουν το σχέδιο ενός κράτους Μπαντουστάν για τους Παλαιστίνιους, προτεκτοράτο του Ισραήλ, των αραβικών καθεστώτων και φυσικά δικό τους και σε δεύτερο χρόνο να ανοίξουν τον δρόμο για την επαναφορά σε πρώτο πλάνο της προσέγγισης Ισραήλ-Αραβικών καθεστώτων, με στόχο το Ιράν και στο βάθος τη Ρωσία και την Κίνα.

Επιπλέον, αδίστακτοι καθώς είναι, χρησιμοποιούν και την «ανθρωπιστική βοήθεια» για να αποκτήσουν μεταφορικά και κυριολεκτικά άμεση πρόσβαση στη Λωρίδα της Γάζας. Με την ελληνοκυπριακή ηγεσία, διπλά δουλική σε ΗΠΑ και Ισραήλ και ακολουθώντας πιστά την άρχουσα τάξη της χώρας μας, να έχει μετατρέψει την Κύπρο σε ξέφραγο αμπέλι των σιωνιστών και ταυτόχρονα να βάζει πλάτη στους αμερικανικούς σχεδιασμούς για την παρουσία τους στην περιοχή. Ας σημειώσουμε εδώ ότι μέσω της επιχείρησης «Αμάλθειας» μεταφέρθηκαν στη Λωρίδα μόλις 200 τόνοι τρόφιμα, όσα δηλαδή μπορούν να μεταφέρουν 10 φορτηγά από την ξηρά, την ίδια στιγμή που το Ισραήλ αρνείται την είσοδο στη Λωρίδα εκατοντάδων φορτηγών από το πέρασμα της Ράφα.

Ταυτόχρονα και παράλληλα με τα προηγούμενα, οι ΗΠΑ πιέζουν ασφυκτικά τη σιωνιστική ηγεσία να γυρίσει στο τραπέζι των διαπραγματεύσεων, μιας και είναι αυτή που συνεχώς τις τορπιλίζει. Έτσι, η πίεση των ΗΠΑ αλλά και οι σοβαρές αντιθέσεις στο εσωτερικό του πολεμικού συμβουλίου και της σιωνιστικής κυβέρνησης, λόγω του βαλτώματος της στρατιωτικής εισβολής, είχαν σαν αποτέλεσμα η σιωνιστική διαπραγματευτική ομάδα να γυρίσει στην Ντόχα την περασμένη Τρίτη 19/3. Όσον αφορά τις διαπραγματεύσεις, η πλευρά της Χαμάς, που βρίσκεται σε συνεννόηση με όλες τις αντιστασιακές παλαιστινιακές οργανώσεις, αρνείται, και σωστά, την απελευθέρωση όλων των ομήρων, διότι αυτό απλά θα σήμαινε την αποθράσυνση των σιωνιστών. Από την πλευρά της, και σωστά, θέτει ως βασικό (και ίσως μάξιμουμ) όρο την επίτευξη μιας μόνιμης κατάπαυσης του πυρός, την αποχώρηση των στρατευμάτων κατοχής από τη Λωρίδα και από κει και πέρα την ελευθερία στον λαό της Λωρίδας να γυρίσει στον τόπο του και φυσικά την έναρξη μια διαδικασίας αποκατάστασης όλων των υποδομών και τελικά της ζωής στην πολύπαθη και ματωμένη Λωρίδα της Γάζας. Το πώς ακριβώς θα προχωρήσουν οι εξελίξεις μένει να το δούμε.


[Previous Article]#[Next]

Να δώσουμε διεξόδους μέσα από τη μαζική πάλη! - ΚΚΕ(μ-λ) (KKE m l)


Η υπουργός Παιδείας της Γερμανίας δηλώνει ότι τα σχολεία οφείλουν να προετοιμάσουν τους μαθητές για το ενδεχόμενο πολέμου, την ίδια στιγμή που το ντόπιο αστικό πολιτικό σύστημα χορεύει στον ρυθμό της ευρωκάλπης του Ιουνίου. Ο πρόεδρος του Ευρωπαϊκού Συμβουλίου, Σαρλ Μισέλ, διακηρύσσει ότι «αν θέλει ειρήνη, η Ευρώπη πρέπει να ετοιμαστεί για πόλεμο» και πως χρειάζεται να «περάσουμε σε λειτουργία οικονομίας πολέμου», ενώ, παράλληλα, τα ξέφτια των πάλαι ποτέ κραταιών αυταπατών και ψεμάτων για την «Ευρώπη των λαών» επιστρατεύονται ξανά από τους κυρίαρχους για να σύρουν τους λαούς τους στην επερχόμενη εκλογική φάρσα. Έτσι και εδώ, ο εγχώριος αστισμός ετοιμάζεται να φορέσει τα «δημοκρατικά» του κουστούμια, την ίδια ώρα που κάνει σχέδια για να ντύσει τον κόσμο της δουλειάς και τη νεολαία στις παραλλαγές, όποτε αυτό απαιτηθεί.

Γιατί εκεί ακριβώς οδηγεί η αναβάθμιση της εμπλοκής της χώρας στις εστίες αντιπαράθεσης που έχει ανάψει η παρόξυνση του ιμπεριαλιστικού ανταγωνισμού των ΗΠΑ-Δύσης με τη Ρωσία, αλλά και την Κίνα! Η συνάντηση του Μητσοτάκη με τον Ζελένσκι στην Οδησσό, κατά παραγγελία των Αμερικάνων και σε αναζήτηση ρόλων για λογαριασμό της ντόπιας άρχουσας τάξης σε πεδία που ήδη έχει κατοχυρώσει συμμετοχή η ανταγωνίστρια τουρκική, σημαδεύτηκε από τη «συμπτωματική» ρωσική πυραυλική επιδρομή μερικές εκατοντάδες μέτρα πιο δίπλα. Και οι προειδοποιητικές αναφορές του ρωσικού υπουργείου Εξωτερικών προς την Ελλάδα, που ακολούθησαν, αποτέλεσαν μια υπενθύμιση για το μέγεθος των κινδύνων που προκύπτουν από το γεγονός ότι η χώρα μετατρέπεται σε εν δυνάμει «στόχο» στο πλαίσιο της ενδοϊμπεριαλιστικής διαπάλης. Το ίδιο ισχύει και σε σχέση με την όλο και βαθύτερη ένταξη στο μέτωπο της Μέσης Ανατολής, με τη φρεγάτα «Ύδρα» να αναλαμβάνει ενεργό στρατιωτικό ρόλο στην Ερυθρά Θάλασσα στο πλαίσιο της «ευρωπαϊκής» αποστολής Aspides, κόντρα στα drones των Χούθι και προς στήριξη της σιωνιστικής γενοκτονίας του παλαιστινιακού λαού.

«Ευρωπαϊκής» και όχι γνήσια ευρωπαϊκής, μιας και είναι γνωστό το πόσο διχασμένη εμφανίστηκε η ΕΕ μπροστά στην πρωτοβουλία του αμερικάνικου ιμπεριαλισμού να ενισχύσει τη στρατιωτική του παρουσία στην Ερυθρά Θάλασσα με την επιχείρηση Prosperity Guardian. Αυτός ο διχασμός καταγράφηκε και στην πρόσφατη σύνοδο κορυφής, που επί της ουσίας είχε ως βασικό αντικείμενο το πώς θα σταθούν οι Ευρωπαίοι ιμπεριαλιστές σε μια σειρά από μέτωπα, δεδομένης της αδυναμίας τους να κινηθούν ανεξάρτητα από τους συμμάχους-ανταγωνιστές τους στις ΗΠΑ, αλλά και των κενών και αντιφάσεων που έχει παρουσιάσει το τελευταίο διάστημα η πολιτική των τελευταίων. Έτσι, για άλλη μια φορά, όπως αποτυπώθηκε στην αντιπαράθεση Γαλλίας-Γερμανίας για την πρόταση έκδοσης ευρωομολόγου της τελευταίας, με την οποία έσπευσε να συνταχθεί και ο Μητσοτάκης, τα φιλόδοξα στρατιωτικά και εξοπλιστικά σχέδια για «στρατηγική αυτονομία» της ΕΕ είναι πολύ αμφίβολο αν θα υπερβούν τις ιδιοτελείς φιλοδοξίες της κάθε ιμπεριαλιστικής δύναμης για τον εαυτό της! Το μόνο σίγουρο είναι ότι στη συζήτηση που έχει ανοίξει για τους «τρόπους χρηματοδότησης» των διαφόρων πολεμικών προγραμμάτων, στο στόχαστρο βρίσκονται τα συνήθη υποζύγια των λαών της Ευρώπης, και ιδιαίτερα των εξαρτημένων χωρών, που θα κληθούν να πληρώσουν το μάρμαρο.

Εξακολουθώντας να παραδέρνει στις αντιθέσεις και τα εγγενή αδιέξοδά του, επομένως, το ευρωπαϊκό ιμπεριαλιστικό οικοδόμημα βαδίζει προς την κάλπη για την ανάδειξη του διακοσμητικού του οργάνου, για να φτιασιδώσει ό,τι μπορεί από το αποκρουστικό του πρόσωπο, που έχει αποκαλυφθεί πλατιά. Με πύρινους λόγους για τη «δημοκρατία» και τη «συμμετοχή» ετοιμάζονται να εμφανιστούν οι ηγέτες των ιμπεριαλιστικών μητροπόλεων, που πριν από λίγο καιρό κατέβαζαν τον στρατό στους δρόμους ενάντια στις εξεγέρσεις των λαών τους και ποινικοποιούσαν κάθε έκφραση αλληλεγγύης προς τον ηρωικό παλαιστινιακό λαό. Οι πρωταγωνιστές των αντικομμουνιστικών μνημονίων και της εξίσωσης κομμουνισμού-ναζισμού, που θρέφουν ξανά τα πιο μαύρα σκοτάδια του παρελθόντος της ανθρώπινης ιστορίας, που έχουν κανονικοποιήσει τον φασισμό και τον πόλεμο στην καθημερινότητα των λαών τους, ετοιμάζονται να μιλήσουν για το «μέλλον». Κατά πόδας τους ακολουθούν και οι πολιτικοί εκπρόσωποι της ντόπιας κεφαλαιοκρατίας.

Τόσο η κυβέρνηση της ΝΔ όσο και τα υπόλοιπα αστικά κόμματα της αντιπολίτευσης, λοιπόν, παίρνουν θέσεις ενόψει των ευρωεκλογών. Δεν θα μπορούσε να γίνει διαφορετικά, μιας και πέρα από την ανάγκη ενσωμάτωσης του λαού στα ιμπεριαλιστικά ευρωπαϊκά ιδεώδη που καλούνται διαχρονικά να υπηρετήσουν, αντιλαμβάνονται, επίσης, ότι οφείλουν και τα ίδια να αποδείξουν την προσήλωσή τους και να δώσουν κάθε λογής διαπιστευτήρια στους Ευρωπαίους «προστάτες» τους, σε μια εποχή, μάλιστα, μεγάλης γεωπολιτικής αναταραχής και έντονων ανισορροπιών στις σχέσεις των τελευταίων με τον έτερο υπερατλαντικό πυλώνα του καθεστώτος της εξάρτησης της χώρας, τους Αμερικάνους ιμπεριαλιστές.

Τα αδιέξοδα που παράγονται από αυτή την κατάσταση, άλλωστε, είναι που εισπράττει η κυβέρνηση της ΝΔ, η οποία έχει εμφανίσει σοβαρά σημάδια κάμψης, παρά τη σαφή δημοσκοπική της υπεροχή έναντι των υπολοίπων. Έτσι, μετά το καταδικαστικό ψήφισμα του ευρωκοινοβουλίου, ήρθαν οι αποκαλύψεις για το σκάνδαλο Ασημακοπούλου με τις επακόλουθες καρατομήσεις κυβερνητικών στελεχών, καθώς και οι παρεμβάσεις της ευρωπαϊκής εισαγγελίας για τα Τέμπη. Από αυτή την άποψη μπορεί και να εξηγηθεί το πόσο «ευρύχωρη» θέλει να εμφανίζεται ξαφνικά η ευρωβουλή και οι επιτροπές της για μια σειρά από κοινωνικές διεκδικήσεις, είτε αυτές αφορούν την απαίτηση των συγγενών των θυμάτων του εγκλήματος στα Τέμπη για απόδοση δικαιοσύνης είτε τα αιτήματα των κατοίκων των Εξαρχείων ενάντια στην καταστροφή της γειτονιάς τους. Δεν είναι μόνο οι τόνοι υποκρισίας που από πάντα κουβαλούν τα δήθεν ευαίσθητα στελέχη των Βρυξελλών και του Στρασβούργου! Είναι η σημερινή φάση που θέτει ως αναγκαιότητα στους Ευρωπαίους ιμπεριαλιστές ξανά και ξανά να αμφισβητήσουν την επιλογή της ντόπιας άρχουσας τάξης να αποτελεί το πιο πιστό και καλό παιδί των Αμερικάνων στην περιοχή.

Γι’ αυτό, όσο συγκλονιστικό είναι το μεγαλείο ενός γονιού που έχει χάσει το παιδί του και αγωνίζεται για δικαίωση, τόσο ασυγχώρητη είναι η άθλια αξιοποίησή του στο πλαίσιο των ιμπεριαλιστικών αντιθέσεων ή της ανάγκης των ευρωπαϊκών αφεντικών να συνετίσουν τους υποτελείς τους! Ακόμα περισσότερο, είναι ολέθριες για την εργατική τάξη, τον λαό και τη νεολαία οι αυταπάτες που καλλιεργούνται το τελευταίο διάστημα από την αστική αντιπολίτευση του ΣΥΡΙΖΑ, του ΠΑΣΟΚ, της Νέας Αριστεράς και άλλων, αλλά και από δυνάμεις της ποικιλώνυμης αριστεράς, ότι η ΕΕ και το κοινοβούλιό της είναι περίπου ο «φύλακας άγγελος» των λαϊκών δικαιωμάτων, ότι θα τιμωρήσουμε την «κακιά» κυβέρνηση Μητσοτάκη απευθυνόμενοι στους «καλούς» Ευρωπαίους που μας προστατεύουν.

Φυσικά, άλλο που δεν θέλει η αριστερά της ήττας και της υποταγής! Με χαρακτηριστική την περίπτωση του ΚΚΕ, που σπεύδει να κλείσει τον αγώνα της νεολαίας για να φορέσει τις εκλογικές του γραβάτες, με το που τελείωσαν οι τοπικές εκλογές έστρεψε κατευθείαν το βλέμμα της εκεί και όλη της η δράση περιστρέφεται εδώ και μήνες γύρω από τη «μητέρα των μαχών». Κάποιες οργανώσεις έφτασαν, μάλιστα, να καταρτίζουν ευρωψηφοδέλτια εν μέσω φοιτητικού ξεσηκωμού! Όλοι τους, μπροστά στην εκλογική παραζάλη και τις αυταπάτες, τρέχουν για άλλη μια φορά να δώσουν τη νομιμοποίησή τους στην κάλπη της ιμπεριαλιστικής λυκοσυμμαχίας και να συνδράμουν στον αγώνα των κυρίαρχων ενάντια στην «επάρατη» αποχή!

Γιατί οι δυνάμεις του συστήματος της εξάρτησης και της εκμετάλλευσης γνωρίζουν πολύ καλά ότι στη σημερινή φάση βαδίζουν στο πυρακτωμένο έδαφος της κοινωνικής οργής και αγανάκτησης που ολοένα και διευρύνεται και επιδρά πολλαπλασιαστικά στους ήδη υπάρχοντες όρους αστάθειας του αστικού πολιτικού σκηνικού. Έτσι, στους τριγμούς που παράγει η γεωπολιτική θέση της αστικής «μας» τάξης, αλλά και, σε συνάρτηση με το προηγούμενο, στους κραδασμούς μια παραπαίουσας παραρτηματοποιημένης οικονομίας, που στέκεται αδύναμη μπροστά σε «εξωγενείς απειλές», σύμφωνα με πρόσφατη έκθεση της JP Morgan, θα προστίθενται διαρκώς τα δεδομένα που θα διαμορφώνει η οργή των «από κάτω».

Η μαζική αποδοκιμασία του πορίσματος συγκάλυψης της εξεταστικής επιτροπής για τα Τέμπη αυτό ακριβώς αποτυπώνει. Με τη φτώχεια και την εξαθλίωση να απλώνονται, με την καπιταλιστική ακρίβεια να έχει γονατίσει την κοινωνική πλειονότητα, με την κυβέρνηση να ανακοινώνει το τέλος των διαφόρων επιδομάτων και pass και την υποταγή στη «δημοσιονομική σταθερότητα», με τον λαό να εξορίζεται από τα νοσοκομεία και κάθε δυνατότητα πρόσβασης σε υγειονομική περίθαλψη, με την πολυαναμενόμενη αύξηση του κατώτατου μισθού να αποδεικνύεται κοροϊδία που ήδη έχει εξανεμιστεί, είναι σαφές ότι διαμορφώνονται κύματα δυσαρέσκειας στις λαϊκές μάζες, που κάθε άλλο παρά μπορούν να ελεγχθούν, όσο και αν πασχίζουν άπαντες να τα εγκλωβίσουν στην κάλπη και σε ανώδυνες ή και επικίνδυνες λύσεις.

Η βαναυσότητα των δυνάμεων καταστολής απέναντι στους φοιτητές που επιμένουν να κάνουν καταλήψεις ενάντια στον ψηφισμένο νόμο Πιερρακάκη, οι απειλές για φυλάκιση ενάντια στους «ατίθασους» εκπαιδευτικούς που αρνούνται την αξιολόγηση, αποδεικνύει ότι οι ιθύνοντες όλο και πιο συχνά θα καταφεύγουν «στον νόμο και την τάξη» για να ανακόψουν τις κοινωνικές διεργασίες που εξελίσσονται, γιατί πολύ απλά δεν έχουν άλλη επιλογή. «Μπροστά στον νόμο δεν επιτρέπεται ο δρόμος» είναι το μήνυμα που επιδιώκουν να στείλουν, γιατί αυτή η διέξοδος είναι που φοβούνται!

Αυτή τη διέξοδο οφείλουμε να ενισχύσουμε! Με συσπείρωση των δυνάμεων και των αγωνιστών που επιμένουν ότι τίποτα δεν τελείωσε, πως ο αγώνας για την ανατροπή του νόμου Πιερρακάκη πρέπει να συνεχιστεί, πως είναι υπαρκτή δυνατότητα το κοινό μέτωπο εργαζομένων και νεολαίας. Με τη συμπόρευση των τάσεων εκείνων που αρνούνται να παρέχουν νομιμοποίηση στο άθλιο κατασκεύασμα της ευρωκάλπης των ιμπεριαλιστών, βροντοφωνάζοντας παντού την επιλογή της ΑΠΟΧΗΣ από την εκλογική φάρσα, δείχνοντας τον δρόμο της πάλης των μαζών ενάντια στα δεσμά της ΕΕ και του ΝΑΤΟ. Για να υπηρετήσουμε, σε τελευταία ανάλυση, την προοπτική της αναμέτρησης της εργατικής τάξης, του λαού και της νεολαίας με το καθεστώς της ιμπεριαλιστικής εξάρτησης, την προοπτική της επαναστατικής ανατροπής της εκμετάλλευσης και της κοινωνικής απελευθέρωσης!


[Previous Article]#[Next]

Οι ένοχοι συνεχίζουν την επιχείρηση συγκάλυψης - ΚΚΕ(μ-λ) (KKE m l)


Μετά την ολοκλήρωση των εργασιών της Εξεταστικής Επιτροπής της Βουλής για το έγκλημα των Τεμπών, με βάση τη δημοσιότητα που είχε πάρει το ζήτημα των υπογραφών και με πρόσφατη τη μαύρη πρώτη επέτειο και την οργή του κόσμου που εκφράστηκε μαζικά στην απεργία στις 28 Φλεβάρη, το κλίμα βάραινε για την κυβέρνηση και δυσχέραινε την επιχείρηση συγκάλυψης.

Η κυβέρνηση, όπως ήταν αναμενόμενο, πέρασε στην αντεπίθεση και κινήθηκε σε δυο βασικούς άξονες: Πρώτον κατηγόρησε την αντιπολίτευση ότι εργαλειοποιεί την τραγωδία και χρησιμοποιεί τους νεκρούς και τον πόνο των συγγενών τους στην πολιτική της αντιπαράθεση με αυτήν (πολιτικές βδέλλες, τους χαρακτήρισε ο κυβερνητικός εκπρόσωπος Μαρινάκης). Και δεύτερον, παρουσιάστηκε ως η μόνη υπεύθυνη που θα μπορούσε πραγματικά να ικανοποιήσει το αίτημα των συγγενών, αλλά και όλου του λαού, για πλήρη διαλεύκανση της υπόθεσης και τιμωρία των ενόχων με πραγματικά και αντικειμενικά στοιχεία.

Σε αυτές τις κατευθύνσεις κινήθηκε και ο ίδιος ο Μητσοτάκης στη συνέντευξή του στον ΣΚΑΪ. Παίρνοντας το γνωστό, προφανώς πολυδουλεμένο από το επικοινωνιακό επιτελείο του «ανθρώπινο» ύφος, είπε πως δεν ξέχασε τις εικόνες και τις μυρωδιές την άλλη μέρα, όταν πήγε στον τόπο του εγκλήματος, του οποίου το μπάζωμα επέβαλε η ανθρώπινη ανάγκη να στηριχθούν κάπου οι γερανοί για να σηκώσουν τα βαγόνια και να ανασυρθούν τα πτώματα. Η ανθρωπιά του εξαντλήθηκε κάπου εκεί, γιατί ήταν πολύ κυνικός όταν έλεγε ότι ο σιδηρόδρομος είναι όσο ασφαλής μπορεί να είναι, χωρίς να αποκλείει, στην πραγματικότητα, κι άλλους νεκρούς στο μέλλον…

Τις ίδιες κατευθύνσεις ακολούθησε, με σχετικά επιθετικούς τόνους, η κυβέρνηση στη συζήτηση στη Βουλή για το πόρισμα της Εξεταστικής, δηλαδή της ΝΔ! Ένα πόρισμα που δεν βρήκε άλλο υπεύθυνο παρά τον ανθρώπινο παράγοντα και …την κακιά την ώρα που τα ‘φερε και έγιναν απανωτά λάθη και παραλείψεις που οδήγησαν στη σύγκρουση.

Στην πραγματικότητα, η ΝΔ απευθύνθηκε σε όλο τον λαό. Γνωρίζει ότι το έγκλημα των Τεμπών έχει προκαλέσει την οργή του, η οποία έχει εκφραστεί επανειλημμένα στον δρόμο, σε πολύ μαζικές συγκεντρώσεις, αλλά ακόμα και στο ενάμισι εκατομμύριο υπογραφές, παρά τις ενστάσεις που έχουμε γι΄ αυτές.

Αυτό που την ανησυχεί, πολύ περισσότερο απ’ ό,τι θέλει να δείχνει, είναι ότι αυτή η οργή του κόσμου συσσωρεύεται και αφορά σχεδόν όλες τις πλευρές της ζωής του. Κάποιο απ’ όλα τα ζητήματα που ανοίγει καθημερινά η επίθεσή της στα δικαιώματα λαού και νεολαίας μπορεί να γίνει η σταγόνα που θα κάνει το ποτήρι να ξεχειλίσει, με απρόβλεπτες συνέπειες.

Έτσι, στο ζήτημα των Τεμπών θέλει να πετύχει δυο αντικρουόμενους στόχους: Να συγκαλύψει το έγκλημα, να απαλλάξει τους υπουργούς της, αλλά και την ίδια, από πολιτικές ευθύνες και να κατευνάσει την οργή και των συγγενών και του λαού. Και την πίτα ολάκερη και τον σκύλο χορτάτο, δηλαδή, κάτι που αν έχει ελπίδες να καταφέρει είναι μόνο λόγω της κυριαρχίας της στο αστικό πολιτικό σκηνικό και, κυρίως, λόγω της απουσίας ενός λαϊκού κινήματος τόσο μαζικού, διεκδικητικού και ανυποχώρητου που θα την αναγκάσει να κάνει πίσω.

Στη συζήτηση στη Βουλή, αυτή η υπεροχή της ήταν φανερή, όχι μόνο γιατί τόλμησε και πέρασε στην αντεπίθεση, αλλά και γιατί το «Πυρ ομαδόν» εναντίον της, που γράφτηκε στον τύπο, μάλλον δεν την άγγιξε καν. ΣΥΡΙΖΑ, ΠΑΣΟΚ, Νέα Αριστερά αλλά και Πλεύση Ελευθερίας βρέθηκαν πολύ μακριά από το να εκφράσουν το λαϊκό αίσθημα για τη συγκάλυψη. Και πώς θα μπορούσαν άλλωστε, τη στιγμή που όλοι έχουν να λογοδοτήσουν για όσα έκαναν ή δεν έκαναν όταν βρέθηκαν σε κυβερνητικές θέσεις, προετοιμάζοντας τον δρόμο που οδήγησε στο έγκλημα.

Όσο για το ΚΚΕ, υπερασπίστηκε την πρότασή του για τη συγκρότηση της Εξεταστικής Επιτροπής, η οποία υλοποιήθηκε, λέγοντας πως δεν είχε αυταπάτες γιατί γνώριζε τα όριά της, αλλά την αποτίμησε θετικά γιατί αποκαλύφθηκε η προσπάθεια συγκάλυψης, ήρθαν στο φως νέα στοιχεία, αλλά και τροφοδοτήθηκαν οι κινητοποιήσεις λαού και νεολαίας! Αν δεν ήταν η Εξεταστική θα είχε λιγότερο κόσμο η απεργία και οι συγκεντρώσεις στις 28 Φλεβάρη δηλαδή; Ξεδιάντροπη διαστρέβλωση της πραγματικότητας, με στόχους που δεν είναι της παρούσης…

Ωστόσο, πιέσεις ασκούνται στην κυβέρνηση από την πλευρά της ΕΕ, μετά την παρέμβαση της Ευρωπαϊκής Εισαγγελίας και της αμφισβήτησης της βουλευτικής ασυλίας και του νόμου περί ευθύνης υπουργών, η οποία άνοιξε και όλη τη συζήτηση για το αν η ευρωπαϊκή νομοθεσία υπερισχύει του σχετικού άρθρου 86 του Συντάγματος. Επίσης, μετά τις ομιλίες της Καρυστιανού στο Ευρωκοινοβούλιο, αποφασίστηκε να παραμείνουν σε λειτουργία οι αρμόδιες επιτροπές της ΕΕ για τον έλεγχο της δικαστικής διαδικασίας, η οποία, πάντως, προχωρά πολύ γρήγορα, για τα ελληνικά δεδομένα.

Το ερώτημα είναι προς τα πού. Οι πιέσεις από την ΕΕ δεν έχουν την …αγνή πρόθεση της απονομής δικαιοσύνης σε ένα κράτος-μέλος της που σε αυτόν τον τομέα πάσχει. Αλλά είναι κινήσεις στην πολιτική-γεωπολιτική σκακιέρα, με στόχο ένα κράτος-μέλος που όλο και περισσότερο προσδένεται στο άρμα του μεγάλου υπερατλαντικού συμμάχου και πάσχει στον τομέα της …αφοσίωσης στην Ένωση.

Σε κάθε περίπτωση, η πιο ουσιαστική πίεση που μπορεί να ασκηθεί στην κυβέρνηση είναι αυτή από τον λαό, μέσα από τις κινητοποιήσεις του. Γιατί όπως κάποια στιγμή είπε και η ίδια η Καρυστιανού, η δικαίωση θα είναι να μην ξανασυμβεί κάτι τέτοιο. Ό,τι κι αν σημαίνει αυτό, θα συμπληρώσουμε εμείς…

 


[Previous Article]#[Next]

Φάρμακο δια πάσα νόσο... ο λαός να πληρώνει το μάρμαρο - ΚΚΕ(μ-λ) (KKE m l)


Πριν από μερικές μέρες, καρκινοπαθής στο Ηράκλειο Κρήτης αυτοκτόνησε απ’ την απόγνωση που βίωνε στην προσπάθειά του να λάβει θεραπεία. Στο σημείωμα που άφησε αναφέρει ότι δεν μπορούσε ν’ αντέξει άλλο τους πόνους όσο περίμενε το φάρμακό του, που βρισκόταν σε έλλειψη. Οι συγγενείς του αποκάλυψαν και τη δίμηνη κόλαση απ’ τη μέρα της διάγνωσης, καθώς προσπαθούσε να βρει περίθαλψη. Να ολοκληρώσει τις διαγνωστικές εξετάσεις με δική του ευθύνη στον ιδιωτικό τομέα, να προγραμματίσει εξειδικευμένες εξετάσεις για τις οποίες θα έπρεπε να μεταβεί στην Αθήνα χωρίς να έχει την οικονομική δυνατότητα, ν’ αναζητήσει και να προμηθευτεί ο ίδιος το φάρμακό του και να κλείσει το ραντεβού στο νοσοκομείο για να γίνουν οι χημειοθεραπείες. Αποτέλεσμα αυτών η τουλάχιστον δίμηνη καθυστέρηση, με αποτέλεσμα τον διπλασιασμό του όγκου και τους αφόρητους πόνους. Απέναντι σ’ όλα αυτά, ο υπουργός Υγείας Γεωργιάδης βρήκε το πρόβλημα στην ατομική ευθύνη του ασθενή που δεν πήγε στο ραντεβού, το οποίο είχε αρχικά ακυρωθεί λόγω της έλλειψης του φαρμάκου.

Η περίπτωση του εκλιπόντος δεν είναι μοναδική. Τουναντίον, είναι η συνήθης και περιγράφει την κανονικότητα που υφίσταται ο λαός ως αποτέλεσμα της χρόνιας επίθεσης του συστήματος στο λαϊκό δικαίωμα σε ίση, πλήρη και δωρεάν περίθαλψη. Ο πρωθυπουργός Κυρ. Μητσοτάκης υπερηφανεύεται για την αναβάθμιση του ΕΣΥ διαφημίζοντας την απορρόφηση κονδυλίων απ’ το Ταμείο Ανάκαμψης για την ανακαίνιση κτιρίων, ενώ ο υπουργός Γεωργιάδης φωτογραφίζεται με τον πρώτο ασθενή που θα χειρουργηθεί σε απογευματινό επί πληρωμή χειρουργείο. Μάλιστα ο Γεωργιάδης υποστηρίζει ότι μόνο το 1% διαφωνεί με τα επί πληρωμή χειρουργεία και οι υπόλοιποι υγειονομικοί και λαός το περίμεναν εδώ και δεκαετίες!

Δεν πρόκειται για μία προσπάθεια μετατροπής του άσπρου σε μαύρο. Η πραγματικότητα είναι αμείλικτη κι ο λαός δεν μασάει κουτόχορτο. Γνωρίζουν ωστόσο τα όρια της πολιτικής υποταγής των συνδικαλιστικών ηγεσιών και των ρεφορμιστικών δυνάμεων και έχουν ζυγίσει την αντίδραση των «από κάτω». Γνωρίζουν φυσικά ότι δεν μπορεί να έχουν λαϊκή αποδοχή μια σειρά μέτρων που δυσχεραίνουν ακόμη περισσότερο τους εργασιακούς όρους των υγειονομικών και αναγκάζουν τον λαό να βάλει ακόμη πιο βαθιά το χέρι στην τσέπη για να βρει την υγειά του.

Τα απογευματινά χειρουργεία, που τράβηξαν και την περισσότερη δημοσιότητα, είναι μια σοβαρή παρέμβαση για μια σειρά από λόγους. Όσον αφορά τα εργασιακά δικαιώματα, σε συνδυασμό με την κατεύθυνση οι γιατροί του ΕΣΥ να εργάζονται και στον ιδιωτικό τομέα, η κυβέρνηση απαντά στους υγειονομικούς να δουλέψουν περισσότερο, μπροστά στην κλιμακούμενη ακρίβεια και τους καθηλωμένους μισθούς. Χτυπιέται ακόμη περισσότερο το δικαίωμα στη μόνιμη και σταθερή δουλειά και το δικαίωμα να μπορούμε να ζούμε από μία δουλειά με αξιοπρεπείς συνθήκες και μισθούς που να καλύπτουν το κόστος ζωής. Πέραν τούτου, είναι πραγματική κοροϊδία για τους υγειονομικούς, όπου ο μέσος εργαζόμενος έχει ωφελούμενα ρεπό και άδειες από δύο και τρία προηγούμενα έτη και παλεύουν για προσλήψεις ως μοναδική απάντηση στην εντατικοποίηση, να τους λέει η κυβέρνηση «δουλέψτε περισσότερο». Αυτήν ακριβώς την πραγματικότητα καταδεικνύουν κι οι παραιτήσεις αναισθησιολόγων απ’ το Βενιζέλειο Ηρακλείου λόγω της υπερεργασίας. Καθόλου δεν είδαν τα απογευματινά χειρουργεία σαν αναβάθμιση της εργασιακής τους κατάστασης, όπως ευαγγελίζεται ο Γεωργιάδης. Κρυφό σημείο, αλλά ιδιαίτερα σοβαρό, είναι η λεγόμενη δικλείδα ασφαλείας απ’ την κυβέρνηση, δηλαδή η προϋπόθεση να ολοκληρώνεται το πρωινό έργο. Ωστόσο αυτό θα καταμετράται ανά κλινική και όχι ανά γιατρό, δημιουργώντας νέες αντιθέσεις και ανταγωνισμούς μεταξύ των γιατρών και γιατρούς δύο ταχυτήτων. Πάντως το πόσο θα παραμείνει το συγκεκριμένο μέτρο μένει να το δούμε, μιας και έχει επιχειρηθεί ξανά εδώ και πολλές δεκαετίες. Η εικόνα προς το παρόν είναι η εφαρμογή του με πιεστικούς και εκβιαστικούς όρους απ’ την πλευρά του υπουργείου, χωρίς βέβαια κατά τόπους να λείπουν κι οι πρόθυμοι, χρήσιμοι ηλίθιοι.

Όσον αφορά το δικαίωμα του λαού στην περίθαλψη, το επιχείρημα ότι θα μειωθεί η λίστα των χειρουργείων είναι το λιγότερο φαιδρό. Τα χέρια είναι δεδομένα και τα όρια της ανθρώπινης αντοχής επίσης. Εξάλλου είναι καταμετρημένες απ’ την ΠΟΕΔΗΝ οι κλειστές χειρουργικές αίθουσες που δεν λειτουργούν ήδη το πρωινό ωράριο λόγω έλλειψης προσωπικού. Υπάρχει φυσικά κι η εμπειρία απ’ τα απογευματινά ιατρεία, που όχι μόνο δεν μείωσε την αναμονή για εξέταση αλλά την επιδείνωσε και υποβάθμισε και την ποιότητα παροχής υπηρεσιών. Ο τιμοκατάλογος που δημοσιεύθηκε δεν είναι καθόλου ευκαταφρόνητος για το λαϊκό εισόδημα, που μαστίζεται απ’ την ακρίβεια. Αυτό όμως που κατά βάση επιχειρεί η κυβέρνηση είναι η επέκταση του πεδίου -και μέσα στα νοσοκομεία- όπου καταργείται η έννοια της δωρεάν περίθαλψης. Η επέκταση της αντίληψης σε κάθε πτυχή της περίθαλψης ότι δεν είναι δικαίωμα αλλά εμπόρευμα προς εξαγορά. Έτσι ώστε να μετατρέπεται σε «φυσιολογική» η κατάσταση ο ασθενής να πληρώνει για το κάθε τι. Σ’ αυτό το πλαίσιο, το νομοσχέδιο που έφερε προς ψήφιση ο Γεωργιάδης φορτώνει ένα σωρό ακόμη κόστη στον λαό, σε διάφορες βαθμίδες της περίθαλψης.

Ο λαός θα πληρώνει νέο χαράτσι για τις διαγνωστικές εξετάσεις ανά παραπεμπτικό. Ένα ευρώ για τις εργαστηριακές και τρία για τις απεικονιστικές, με σκοπό την αποπληρωμή του clawback. Το clawback ουσιαστικά είναι χρήματα που δεν πληρώθηκαν γιατροί και διαγνωστικά κέντρα για εξετάσεις που ήδη διενεργήθηκαν με κάλυψη ΕΟΠΥΥ λόγω των δημοσιονομικών αναπροσαρμογών. Τα επιτυχή πλεονάσματα του Μητσοτάκη κατά επιταγή των ιμπεριαλιστών ληστεύουν την περίθαλψη του λαού.

Έχουν ήδη προηγηθεί οι αυξήσεις στα φάρμακα, με πληρωμή επιπλέον της εισφοράς ακόμη κι όταν ο ασφαλισμένος λαμβάνει το φθηνότερο γενόσημο (βλ. ΠΣ φ.957). Αυτή η, κατά την κυβέρνηση «μικρή», διαφορά ξεκοκαλίζει τη σύνταξη των ηλικιωμένων, που συνήθως λαμβάνουν περισσότερα του ενός φάρμακα. Ειδικά σε περιπτώσεις που δεν τίθεται καν η επιλογή φθηνότερου φαρμάκου, μιας κι οι ελλείψεις έχουν γίνει κανονικότητα μετά την άρση απαγόρευσης εξαγωγών και τα φαρμακεία προμηθεύονται τα φάρμακα απ’ τις αποθήκες με το σταγονόμετρο. Στο πλάι αυτών, θεσπίζεται κι η πληρωμή πέντε ευρώ για τη διενέργεια του εμβολίου για τον COVID19 στα φαρμακεία.

Τέλος, αλλά σίγουρα όχι τελειωτικά μιας κι η ίδια πολιτική θα συνεχίσει όσο δεν συγκροτούνται ικανές λαϊκές αντιστάσεις, επί πληρωμή θα είναι και ο προσωπικός ιατρός. Ο προσωπικός γιατρός δηλωμένα έρχεται ν’ αποτελέσει φραγμό στην πρόσβαση των ασθενών στα νοσοκομεία. Μαζί με τον ηλεκτρονικό φάκελο ασθενή, η κυβέρνηση προσπαθεί να στεγανοποιήσει το περιβάλλον του ΕΣΥ, ώστε ν’ αναβαθμίσει τη δυνατότητά του να περιορίσει την πρόσβαση και να διευρύνει τις χρεώσεις. Σκόνταψε και στα δύο στην απροθυμία συμμετοχής των γιατρών, λόγω χαμηλών απολαβών και εντατικοποίησης. Ο ηλεκτρονικός φάκελος προχωράει με κονδύλια που εκταμιεύονται από ΕΕ και υποχρεωτική εφαρμογή στα νοσοκομεία. Το εμπόδιο της μη συμμετοχής των ιδιωτών γιατρών λόγω των χαμηλών απολαβών προσπερνιέται με το να πληρώνει τον γιατρό ο ασθενής. Το πιθανότερο τελικά είναι ο ασθενής να μην μπορεί καν να επισκεφθεί τον προσωπικό γιατρό ο οποίος θα του αρνηθεί την πρόσβαση στο νοσοκομείο. Φραγμός για τον φραγμό...

Η συνέχεια κι η ένταση της πολιτικής που θα ρημάζει εργασιακά δικαιώματα για τους υγειονομικούς και το δικαίωμα του λαού στη δωρεάν πλήρη και ίση για όλους περίθαλψη είναι δεδομένη. Αυτό που θα πρέπει να μας απασχολεί διαρκώς είναι το πώς οικοδομούνται αντιστάσεις απ’ την πλευρά των λαϊκών δυνάμεων στην κατεύθυνση να μπαίνει φραγμός σ’ αυτή την πολιτική. Ο σκόπελος των ξεπουλημένων συνδικαλιστικών ηγεσιών και η πολιτική γραμμή των ρεφορμιστικών δυνάμεων, με κύριο το ΚΚΕ, είναι αναγνωρισμένα εμπόδια στην ανάπτυξη αυτής της κατεύθυνσης. Όπως, όμως, δεδομένη είναι και η γενικευμένη λαϊκή δυσαρέσκεια, που μπορεί να τροφοδοτήσει σημαντικές εστίες αντίστασης.


[Previous Article]#[Next]

Έξω η Ελλάδα από την ΕΕ! - Aποχή από τις ευρωεκλογές! - ΚΚΕ(μ-λ) (KKE m l)


Η ΕΕ δεν είναι των λαών, είναι των ιμπεριαλιστών!

Όχι στην εκμετάλλευση, την εξαθλίωση και τον πόλεμο!

Αλληλεγγύη - κοινή πάλη εργατών - λαών - μεταναστών/προσφύγων!

Έξω η Ελλάδα από την ΕΕ! - Αποχή από τις ευρωεκλογές!

 

  1. Από την αρχική της φάση και σε όλη τη διαδρομή της μέχρι τη σημερινή μορφή της, η ΕΕ υπήρξε και υπάρχει ως ένα εγχείρημα των ιμπεριαλιστών της Ευρώπης. Είναι ένας συνασπισμός για την υπηρέτηση και την προώθηση των συμφερόντων και των επιδιώξεων πριν από όλα των ιμπεριαλιστικών πυλώνων του. Οι αξεπέραστες αντιθέσεις μεταξύ αυτών των ιμπεριαλιστικών δυνάμεων είναι που βάζουν όρια στην «ενότητα» του εγχειρήματος, το οποίο κάθε άλλο παρά ιστορική νομοτέλεια είναι. Το Brexit ήταν μια σαφής εκδήλωση αυτών των αντιθέσεων, που σήμερα εκδηλώνονται μεταξύ των δύο βασικών πυλώνων του (Γαλλία-Γερμανία) και μεταφέρονται στους δορυφόρους τους, αλλά τροφοδοτούνται και από την ανάμειξη των ΗΠΑ σε μια σειρά χώρες και αστικές τάξεις που βρίσκονται στο σημερινό συνασπισμό των «27».
  2. Ως εγχείρημα στην υπηρεσία του ευρωπαϊκού μονοπωλιακού κεφαλαίου, η ΕΕ πρωταγωνίστησε πάντα στην εκμετάλλευση και την καταλήστευση εργατών, λαών και χωρών εντός της ΕΕ και έξω από αυτήν. Η πολιτική αυτή κλιμακώθηκε μετά το ξέσπασμα της κρίσης του 2008 και συνεχίζεται ολοένα πιο άγρια, επιβεβαιώνοντας με τον πιο οδυνηρό τρόπο για τις εργαζόμενες μάζες ότι είναι αντιδραστικός μύθος η λεγόμενη «σύγκλιση». Οι χώρες της περιφέρειας, οι εξαρτημένες χώρες –είτε είναι είτε δεν είναι στην ΟΝΕ– γίνονται ολοένα και περισσότερο οικονομικά παραρτήματα των ιμπεριαλιστικών μονοπωλίων. Ταυτόχρονα, και εντός της Γαλλίας και της Γερμανίας κλιμακώνεται η άγρια καπιταλιστική επίθεση ενάντια στην εργατική τάξη, τον λαό και τη νεολαία. Οι μεγάλοι εργατικοί και λαϊκοί αγώνες που ξεσπούν και στις χώρες αυτές αντιμετωπίζονται με τρομοκρατία και καταστολή, με κήρυξη καταστάσεων απαγόρευσης και περιστολής των λαϊκών ελευθεριών. Όλα αυτά συνοδεύονται με την έξαρση του πιο χυδαίου αντικομμουνισμού που γίνεται νόμος και «θεσμός» από την ΕΕ και σε μια σειρά χώρες που βρίσκονται σε αυτήν. Η «κοιτίδα της δημοκρατίας» αποκαλύπτει διαρκώς τον αντιδημοκρατικό και βίαιο χαρακτήρα της, το αποτρόπαιο ιμπεριαλιστικό-καπιταλιστικό πρόσωπό της.
  3. Ως συνασπισμός των Ευρωπαίων ιμπεριαλιστών, η ΕΕ πρωτοστατεί διαχρονικά στις πολεμικές επεμβάσεις, στις σφαγές λαών, στο κομμάτιασμα χωρών. Αυτή είναι, εξάλλου, η «ιστορική ταυτότητα» των πυλώνων της που συνεχίζουν την αποικιοκρατική τους ιστορία. Είτε ως σύνολο είτε διχασμένοι στη βάση των στρατηγικών συμφερόντων τους, ως στρατηγικό συμπλήρωμα του αμερικάνικου ιμπεριαλισμού, οι ευρωπαίοι ιμπεριαλιστές και το εγχείρημά τους, η ΕΕ, αναδείχνονται μεγάλοι εχθροί της ανεξαρτησίας και της ίδιας της ζωής των λαών. Συνέβαλαν και συμβάλλουν στην τροφοδότηση του άδικου πολέμου στην Ουκρανία, στις εκατόμβες νεκρών και σακατεμένων, στην καταστροφή της χώρας αυτής. Στηρίζουν και υποθάλπουν τη σιωνιστική σφαγή, την εξελισσόμενη γενοκτονία του παλαιστινιακού λαού, κηρύσσοντας ταυτόχρονα απαγορευμένη εντός των μητροπόλεών τους τη σημαία ενός λαού που μάχεται ενάντια στον κατακτητή, για λεύτερη πατρίδα. Οργανώνουν και καθοδηγούν αδιανόητα μαζικά εγκλήματα μεταναστών και προσφύγων, ξεριζωμένων από χώρες και περιοχές που και οι ίδιοι οι ευρωπαίοι ιμπεριαλιστές έχουν λεηλατήσει και βομβαρδίσει.
  4. Στη σημερινή φάση των μεγάλων ιμπεριαλιστικών ανταγωνισμών που προετοιμάζουν έως και παγκόσμιο μακελειό, οι εκβιασμοί μεταξύ Γαλλίας-Γερμανίας (με τα πυρηνικά της η πρώτη, με την οικονομική πρωτοκαθεδρία της η δεύτερη) εναλλάσσονται με τις επιδιώξεις κοινών συμφωνιών. Συμφωνίες που θα τους επιτρέψουν να αντιμετωπίσουν τα κρίσιμα προβλήματά τους σε ενέργεια και πρώτες ύλες, καθώς βρίσκονται υπό την αμερικάνικη στρατηγική κηδεμονία, αλλά και σε μεγάλη πίεση από τη διείσδυση της Κίνας. Η όποια εξέλιξη προκύψει από αυτές τις αντιφατικές τακτικές και επιλογές των ιμπεριαλιστικών πυλώνων της ΕΕ στρέφεται ενάντια στους λαούς! Είτε με αναβαθμισμένη τη συνεργασία Παρισιού-Βερολίνου (και άρα με πιο συγκροτημένο το οικοδόμημα της ΕΕ), είτε με αναπαραγωγή και διεύρυνση των τωρινών διχασμών τους και την ΕΕ χωρισμένη σε «παλιά» και «νέα» (αμερικάνικη) Ευρώπη, οι λαοί μόνο χειρότερα δεινά έχουν να περιμένουν: άγρια εκμετάλλευση, καταπίεση και καταστολή, εκτόξευση των πολεμικών δαπανών και στρατιωτικοποίηση των οικονομιών, μεγαλύτερα βήματα προς τον παγκόσμιο πόλεμο!
  5. Όλα τα παραπάνω αποτυπώνονται ήδη στα πολιτικά συστήματα όλων των χωρών της ΕΕ, που αντιμετωπίζουν την απαξίωση των εργατικών-λαϊκών μαζών και μετατοπίζονται σε αντιδραστική κατεύθυνση, και με την ανάδειξη (ακόμα και σε κυβερνητικούς ρόλους) ακροδεξιών δυνάμεων. Δυνάμεων που τροφοδοτούνται από τη γενικευμένη επίθεση ενάντια στο προλεταριάτο και τους λαούς, από την κλιμάκωση της πολιτικής που καταπνίγει ελευθερίες και δημοκρατικά δικαιώματα, της πολιτικής των πολέμων και των κηρυγμάτων εθνικισμού, μίσους και διχασμού των λαών. Ταυτόχρονα, στις ιμπεριαλιστικές χώρες (Γαλλία, Γερμανία, αλλά και Ιταλία) η ανάδειξη αυτών των ακροδεξιών δυνάμεων αποτελεί και έκφραση δυσαρέσκειας τμημάτων της μεγαλοαστικής τάξης που συμπιέζονται από τους ιμπεριαλιστικούς ανταγωνισμούς και αναζητούν απαντήσεις προβάλλοντας τον πιο επιθετικό εθνικισμό, τον ιμπεριαλιστικό.

Η «μεγάλη αναστάτωση» ενόψει των ευρωεκλογών του Ιουνίου και η κρισιμότητα που τους αποδίδουν οι ιμπεριαλιστές και οι αστικές δυνάμεις, στην πραγματικότητα αναφέρονται σε όλα τα παραπάνω ζητήματα. Οι κυρίαρχες δυνάμεις επιδιώκουν να αξιοποιηθούν οι ευρωκάλπες ως εργαλείο, αφενός για την αναστύλωση της –ξεφτισμένης συνολικά στις συνειδήσεις των λαών– «ιδέας» της ΕΕ, και αφετέρου για την αντιμετώπιση των προβλημάτων στα πολιτικά συστήματα της κάθε χώρας. Είναι πολύ χαρακτηριστικό ότι όλες οι ακροδεξιές δυνάμεις επιδίδονται με ζέση στην προεκλογική εκστρατεία και στηρίζουν την «ιδέα» της ΕΕ, χωρίς ίχνος «απομονωτιστικών» διαθέσεων. Αποδείχνουν έτσι ξανά την πλήρη υπόκλισή τους και στο ιμπεριαλιστικό πλαίσιο και στις ανάγκες της αστικής τάξης που η κάθε μια αναφέρεται.

  1. Στη χώρα μας, πίσω από την παραρτηματοποίηση της οικονομίας, την αποβιομηχάνιση και τη συρρίκνωση του πρωτογενή τομέα, πίσω από τη διαρκώς μεγαλύτερη ενεργειακή και διατροφική εξάρτηση βρίσκονται τα συμφέροντα των ευρωπαϊκών μονοπωλίων. Αυτά καθοδήγησαν μια ολόκληρη πορεία (44 χρόνων από την ένταξη στην τότε ΕΟΚ) καταστροφής παραγωγικών δυνάμεων και δυνατοτήτων, καταλήστευσης του πλούτου και των υποδομών της χώρας. Οι πολιτικές της ΕΕ βρίσκονται πίσω από το έγκλημα στα Τέμπη, πίσω από τον πνιγμό και την καταστροφή της Θεσσαλίας. Ταυτόχρονα, αυτές οι πολιτικές αποτέλεσαν και την πολιτική πλάτη στην πολύχρονη επίθεση που σαρώνει κατακτήσεις και γκρεμίζει εργασιακά, κοινωνικά και δημοκρατικά δικαιώματα της εργατικής τάξης, του λαού και της νεολαίας. Στο όνομα της «ευρωπαϊκής ιδέας», των «απαιτούμενων δημοσιονομικών προσαρμογών» και του «εναρμονισμού με το ενωσιακό δίκαιο», η άρχουσα τάξη και οι κυβερνήσεις στη χώρα προωθούν και επιβάλλουν χρόνια τώρα τον «εργασιακό μεσαίωνα», τη συντριβή της δωρεάν περίθαλψης και των δωρεάν σπουδών, το ξεκλήρισμα της φτωχομεσαίας αγροτιάς, τους μαζικούς πλειστηριασμούς των λαϊκών σπιτιών. Στον ίδιο «λογαριασμό», και στο πλαίσιο της διπλής εξάρτησης από ΗΠΑ και Ευρωπαίους ιμπεριαλιστές, βρίσκονται και τα θηριώδη εξοπλιστικά προγράμματα από Γερμανία και Γαλλία, καθώς και η συμφωνία με τη Γαλλία για στρατιωτική συνδρομή της Ελλάδας στις ανάγκες της ακόμα και στη ζώνη του Σαχέλ!
  2. Η άρχουσα τάξη της χώρας έχει κάθε λόγο να παρουσιάζει στον λαό αυτόν τον πραγματικό απολογισμό αντεστραμμένο, να επιδιώκει σταθερά να παρουσιάσει την ΕΕ ως μια προοδευτική νομοτέλεια για τον λαό και τη χώρα. Γιατί είναι δεμένη και εξαρτημένη με χίλια νήματα από τους ευρωπαίους ιμπεριαλιστές και τής είναι αδιανόητη η αναπαραγωγή της έξω από αυτό το πλαίσιο. Γιατί με το να είναι μέλος της ΕΕ/ΟΝΕ αντλεί πολιτική ισχύ έναντι της εργατικής τάξης και του λαού. Γιατί τα μεταπρατικά μεγαλοαστικά τζάκια θησαυρίζουν ξεπουλώντας τον πλούτο και τις υποδομές της χώρας, παίρνοντας ποσοστά στα μεγάλα έργα, κάνοντας μεσιτείες και εισαγωγές-εξαγωγές στο πλευρό και ως παράρτημα των ευρωπαϊκών μονοπωλίων. Γιατί τα ίδια τζάκια παρασιτούν με τις δόσεις των δισ. ευρώ του «Ευρωπαϊκού Ταμείου Ανάκαμψης», που πληρώνεται στο πολλαπλάσιο από τον ιδρώτα και τα δικαιώματα των εργατών και του λαού. Γιατί συνολικά το ντόπιο κεφάλαιο αυξάνει τη λεηλασία της εργατικής δύναμης και των λαϊκών εισοδημάτων καθώς οι πλάτες των προστατών στηρίζουν την άγρια καπιταλιστική επίθεση.

Γι’ αυτό όλα τα κόμματα του συστήματος (από τα ακροδεξιά ως τα λεγόμενα κεντροαριστερά) βομβαρδίζουν τον λαό απαιτώντας να ξεχάσει, να αγνοήσει τα δεινά που συσσώρευσε και συσσωρεύει από την ένταξη της χώρας στην ΕΕ/ΟΝΕ, και να αναζητήσει (με αυτές ή τις άλλες διαπραγματεύσεις) μέσα σε αυτήν το μέλλον του! Γι’ αυτό και στο όνομα της «συνεργασίας των λαών» που τάχα η ΕΕ εκπροσωπεί, η χώρα και οι θάλασσές της μετατρέπονται σε τάφο και σε φυλακή των ξεριζωμένων κομματιών των λαών, ώστε να προστατεύονται τα ευρωπαϊκά σύνορα από τους κατατρεγμένους. Με την ίδια επίκληση (της «συνεργασίας των λαών») η χώρα διατάσσεται σε θέση πολέμου και έχθρας με τους λαούς της περιοχής, ώστε να υπηρετηθούν οι ευρωατλαντικοί προστάτες της!

  1. Όλες αυτές οι πολιτικές της ΕΕ διαμορφώνονται και αποφασίζονται σε μυστικές και φανερές συσκέψεις των ιμπεριαλιστικών επιτελείων της, μέσα από τις αντιθέσεις και τους συμβιβασμούς τους και την πάγια επιδίωξή τους να σύρουν με «καρότα» και εκβιασμούς και τις εξαρτημένες αστικές τάξεις του οικοδομήματός τους. Ακόμα και το «τυπικό» των κανονισμών και των διαδικασιών λήψης αποφάσεων προσαρμόζεται όλο και περισσότερο σε αυτήν την πραγματικότητα, καθώς οι επείγουσες ιμπεριαλιστικές ανάγκες απαιτούν μια όλο και πιο ευπροσάρμοστη στα συμφέροντά τους ΕΕ. Πάνω σε αυτή την πραγματικότητα έχει στηθεί η απάτη του λεγόμενου Ευρωκοινοβουλίου, που έχει ρόλο δημοκρατικής διακόσμησης του ιμπεριαλιστικού συνασπισμού. Ωστόσο, ούτε αυτό δεν (θα μπορούσε να) είναι απλώς μια αθώα φάρσα. Τα πρόσφατα (π.χ. Καϊλή) και παλιότερα «σκάνδαλα» αναδείχνουν πως –ως φυτώριο παραγωγής και ανάδειξης στελεχών του μηχανισμού της γραφειοκρατίας των Βρυξελλών– είναι ταυτόχρονα και πεδίο διαμόρφωσης των χρυσοπληρωμένων λόμπι του ευρωπαϊκού κεφαλαίου για την προώθηση των κάθε είδους συμφερόντων του εντός της ΕΕ, αλλά και σε Αφρική, Μ. Ανατολή, Βαλκάνια.
  2. Με βάση όλα τα παραπάνω, είναι πιο φανερό και από τον ήλιο πως οι μεγάλοι αγώνες, τα αιτήματα και τα συμφέροντα των εργατικών-λαϊκών μαζών της Ευρώπης δεν μπορούν να «συναντηθούν» –και πολύ περισσότερο να δικαιωθούν– μέσα στη φυλακή των λαών που οι ευρωπαίοι ιμπεριαλιστές συγκρότησαν και ακούει στο όνομα ΕΕ! Τα ταξικά δικαιώματα και η επαναστατική προοπτική των μαζών δεν μπορούν να εκφραστούν σε ένα όργανο όπως το Ευρωκοινοβούλιο, που δεν είναι κατάκτηση των λαών, αλλά ιμπεριαλιστική κατασκευή. Στην καταγγελία αυτής της κατασκευής και στην πάλη ενάντια στην ΕΕ βρίσκεται ο δρόμος της «συνάντησης» των αγώνων, της διεθνιστικής αλληλεγγύης, της ανάπτυξης της μαζικής πάλης των εργατών και των λαών. Η πάλη αυτή διαμορφώνει όρους επαναστατικής προοπτικής στο βαθμό που χειραφετείται από το πολιτικό πλαίσιο που ορίζει το καπιταλιστικό-ιμπεριαλιστικό σύστημα, στο βαθμό που αρνείται να καναλιζαριστεί σε αυτό το πολιτικό πλαίσιο και ανοίγει τους δικούς της δρόμους.
  3. Στη χώρα μας, η παρατεταμένη προεκλογική εκστρατεία ενόψει της 9ης του Ιούνη όλων των κομμάτων του επίσημου πολιτικού συστήματος, από τη μια απηχεί την ανάγκη υπεράσπισης της «ευρωπαϊκής ιδέας». Όμως, το ερώτημα «ποια Ευρώπη θέλουμε», που προβάλλουν τα κόμματα του συστήματος και οι συνοδοιπόροι τους, θα ήταν φάρσα αν ο λαός μας δεν ζούσε μια εξελισσόμενη τραγωδία σε βάρος όλων των στοιχειωδών δικαιωμάτων του. Από την άλλη, η παρατεταμένη προεκλογική ένταση απηχεί την επιχείρηση αναστύλωσης του απαξιωμένου στον λαό πολιτικού συστήματος σε ακόμα πιο αντιδραστική βάση. Οι δυνάμεις του συμβιβασμού –όπως η ηγεσία του ΚΚΕ– συμβάλλουν σε αυτή τη δεξιά πορεία, ακόμα και στην πολιτική νομιμοποίηση της ιμπεριαλιστικής εξάρτησης και της απάτης που λέγεται Ευρωκοινοβούλιο, ενώ υποτίθεται ότι καταγγέλλουν την ΕΕ και τις πολιτικές της. Η ηγεσία αυτή έφτασε στο σημείο να ανακαλύψει τον «αριστερό ευρωμονόδρομο»: Χρησιμοποιεί το «ορόσημο» της ευρωκάλπης ως λόγο να ανακοπούν οι μαζικοί αγώνες νεολαίας, αγροτών, εργαζομένων για να δοθεί η «πολιτική μάχη των ευρωεκλογών»!
  4. Η πλατιά λαϊκή αποστροφή και δυσαρέσκεια απέναντι στην πολιτική της κυβέρνησης της ΝΔ, την πολιτική του συστήματος και όλων των κομμάτων που τη στηρίζουν –από τη λεγόμενη κεντροαριστερά (ΣΥΡΙΖΑ, ΠΑΣΟΚ, Πλεύση, Νέα Αριστερά) και από ακροδεξιά (Βελόπουλος, Νίκη, Σπαρτιάτες)– δεν χωράει στο «επίσημο γκάλοπ» των ευρωεκλογών. Δεν πρέπει να διαστραφεί με τον εκβιασμό της αποδοχής της ιμπεριαλιστικής εξάρτησης από την ΕΕ. Ο λαός δεν έχει κανένα λόγο να συμμεριστεί την αναστάτωση και τις αντιδραστικές διεργασίες του πολιτικού συστήματος. Έχει κάθε λόγο να συνεχίσει στο δρόμο των μαζικών αγώνων και κάθε λόγο να αρνηθεί την ευρωκάλπη, να απέχει από αυτήν. Γιατί αυτή η εκλογική στάση αντιστοιχεί στην προβολή της αναγκαίας θέσης «ΕΞΩ Η ΕΛΛΑΔΑ ΑΠΌ ΤΗΝ ΕΕ». Γιατί αυτή η εκλογική στάση αναδείχνει τη συνολική άρνηση της ιμπεριαλιστικής εξάρτησης από ΗΠΑ και ευρωπαίους ιμπεριαλιστές, την άρνηση του «μονόδρομου» της φτώχειας, της εξαθλίωσης, της εκμετάλλευσης και των πολέμων, τον οποίο διασφαλίζει το πλαίσιο της εξάρτησης της χώρας.
  5. Με βάση τη θέση για Αποχή από τις ευρωεκλογές επιδιώκουμε συντονισμό με αγωνιστικές, αριστερές, επαναστατικές δυνάμεις στην Ευρώπη. Στην ίδια βάση, επιδιώκουμε και στη χώρα μας την πιο πλατιά ανάδειξη αυτής της κατεύθυνσης, τον συντονισμό, τη συμπόρευση και την από κοινού διαμόρφωση πολιτικής καμπάνιας για την προβολή της θέσης «ΕΞΩ Η ΕΛΛΑΔΑ ΑΠΟ ΤΗΝ ΕΕ», για την άρνηση και την εναντίωση στην ευρωκάλπη και τις αντιδραστικές επιδιώξεις των κομμάτων και των δυνάμεων του συστήματος.

[Previous Article]#[Next]

Πόσες πιστοποιήσεις κάνουν έναν απόφοιτο λυκείου; - ΚΚΕ(μ-λ) (KKE m l)


Συνεχίζονται οι αντιδραστικές μεθοδεύσεις της κυβέρνησης της ΝΔ στον χώρο της εκπαίδευσης, προχωρώντας το υπουργείο Παιδείας σε νέες εισηγήσεις που αφορούν τις προϋποθέσεις για την απόκτηση του Εθνικού Απολυτηρίου στα Λύκεια. Στο πλαίσιο του διαλόγου που διεξάγεται για τη «μεγάλη μεταρρύθμιση στην Πρωτοβάθμια και τη Δευτεροβάθμια Εκπαίδευση», έρχεται να προστεθεί στο προαναγγελμένο -από την κυβέρνηση- εξεταστικό κάτεργο του νέου λυκείου η προϋπόθεση της πιστοποίησης γνώσης των αγγλικών και της πληροφορικής για την απόκτηση του Εθνικού Απολυτηρίου. Δεν πρόκειται για «φετινή έμπνευση» του Κυριάκου Πιερρακάκη, καθώς ήδη από το 2017 το Ινστιτούτο Εκπαιδευτικής Πολιτικής, ως αρμόδιος φορέας του Υπουργείου Παιδείας για τον σχεδιασμό των αντιδραστικών μεθοδεύσεων στην εκπαίδευση, έκανε λόγο για πλάνο ενσωμάτωσης της πιστοποίησης της αγγλικής γλώσσας, ως πρώτης ξένης γλώσσας στο σχολείο από την Α’ Λυκείου. Η επίθεση των κυβερνήσεων στην εκπαίδευση κλιμακώνεται και είναι σίγουρο πως για την απόκτηση των εν λόγω πιστοποιήσεων οι μαθητές θα αναγκάζονται να στραφούν σε περισσότερα φροντιστήρια για να μπορέσουν να ανταπεξέλθουν, αφήνοντας στο περιθώριο όλους εκείνους που δεν θα έχουν την οικονομική δυνατότητα να ξεπεράσουν ακόμη έναν ταξικό φραγμό.

Τα εμπόδια για τους μαθητές των φτωχών και λαϊκών στρωμάτων πολλαπλασιάζονται. Η κυβέρνηση προσπαθεί με γοργούς ρυθμούς να ξεδιπλώσει την ατζέντα της επίθεσης στα σχολεία. Αναφέρεται πως το Εθνικό Απολυτήριο θα «εγκαινιαστεί» από τους μαθητές που θα φοιτήσουν στην Α’ Λυκείου το επόμενο σχολικό έτος, οι οποίοι θα πρέπει να αντιμετωπίσουν και στις τρεις τάξεις του λυκείου ένα εξεταστικό κάτεργο αντίστοιχο των πανελλαδικών, με θέματα από την Τράπεζα Θεμάτων και ειδικό συντελεστή βαρύτητας ανά τάξη (μεγαλύτερος στη Γ’ και μικρότερος στην Α’ Λυκείου), ενώ παράλληλα προβλέπεται ο προσδιορισμός του αριθμού των εισακτέων στην τριτοβάθμια από τα τμήματα των Πανεπιστημίων. Με ψηφισμένο πλέον τον νόμο για τα Ιδιωτικά Πανεπιστήμια, συνεχίζεται να εφαρμόζεται το σκληρά ταξικό πλαίσιο, μέσα στο οποίο τα παιδιά των λαϊκών οικογενειών όχι απλά θα πετιούνται εκτός των Πανεπιστημίων, αλλά και από τα Γενικά Λύκεια, προβάλλοντας η κυβέρνηση σαν εναλλακτική τη διοχέτευση προς την επαγγελματική εκπαίδευση και τη μαθητεία.

Η αντίσταση των μαθητών για να μην περάσουν τα νέα μέτρα και για να ανατραπούν όλοι οι αντιλαϊκοί ψηφισμένοι νόμοι στην εκπαίδευση αποτελεί αναγκαιότητα. Μέσα από τα 5μελή και τα 15μελή συνδικαλιστικά τους όργανα, με όπλα τις γενικές συνελεύσεις, τις καταλήψεις και τις διαδηλώσεις, πρέπει να πάρουν αποφάσεις για τη συνέχιση του αγώνα! Πλάι στους φοιτητές που επί μήνες έδωσαν έναν μαζικό και μαχητικό αγώνα για να μην περάσει ο νόμος Πιερρακάκη. Δίπλα στους εκπαιδευτικούς που τρομοκρατούνται επειδή διεκδικούν εργασιακά δικαιώματα και σέρνονται σε δίκες για τη συνδικαλιστική τους δράση. Ο αγώνας ενάντια στην παιδεία των λίγων και εκλεκτών είναι υπόθεση πάλης όλου του λαού.


[Previous Article]#[Next]

Η ένταση της καταστολής δεν μπορεί να «πείσει» τη νεολαία να υποταχθεί - ΚΚΕ(μ-λ) (KKE m l)


Η εισβολή αστυνομικών δυνάμεων στη Σχολή Θετικών Επιστημών (ΣΘΕ) του ΑΠΘ, το μεσημέρι του Σαββάτου 16/3 για την εκκένωση των καταλήψεων που τελούνταν σε τμήματα εντός της και η σύλληψη 49 φοιτητών αποτελεί σοβαρό δείγμα του ρεβανσισμού του συστήματος απέναντι στο φοιτητικό κίνημα.

Χρησιμοποιώντας σαν αφορμή φθορές έξω από τη «βιβλιοθήκη» στο πρώην στέκι του Βιολογικού (που εδώ και 2 χρόνια από όταν εκκενώθηκε, ακόμα… γίνεται βιβλιοθήκη), αστυνομικές δυνάμεις εισέβαλαν στον χώρο της ΣΘΕ την ώρα που πραγματοποιούνταν δράση στα πλαίσια της κατάληψης του Σ.Φ. Γεωλογίας, συλλαμβάνοντας μαζικά φοιτητές, στους οποίους απέδωσαν κατηγορίες για διατάραξη κοινής ειρήνης και απείθεια. Μάλιστα, οι συλληφθέντες φοιτητές κρατήθηκαν στη ΓΑΔΘ μέχρι και τη Δευτέρα 18/3, λέγοντάς τους ότι «μπροστά στους 2 μήνες που κρατάνε την κατάληψη, οι 2 μέρες κράτησης δεν είναι τίποτα». Είναι σαφές ότι ο πραγματικός λόγος αυτής της επιχείρησης καταστολής δεν είναι καμία φθορά κτηρίου ή «παράνομη ενέργεια». Έψαχναν μόνο μια αφορμή, μέχρι και αυτή του… «πυρηνικού ριφιφί», ή ό,τι άλλο μπορούσαν να σκαρφιστούν, για να δικαιολογήσουν την εισβολή και την άγρια καταστολή.

Το χρονικό της εκκένωσης και του οργίου συλλήψεων στη ΣΘΕ δεν είναι τυχαίο. Σε μια φάση όπου το φοιτητικό κίνημα βρίσκεται σε υποχώρηση, το σύστημα βρήκε την ευκαιρία να πάρει τη «ρεβάνς», να χτυπήσει όποια ψεγάδια καταλήψεων και αντιστάσεων έχουν παραμείνει στις σχολές. Δεν είναι, άλλωστε, η πρώτη εκκένωση κατάληψης που έχει δει το φοιτητικό κίνημα στον δίμηνο αγώνα του ενάντια στον, πλέον ψηφισμένο, νόμο Πιερρακάκη. Η εκκένωση της κατάληψης της Νομικής στην Κομοτηνή, της Νομικής του ΑΠΘ, αλλά και της Πρυτανείας, πριν από λίγες εβδομάδες έδειξαν τις κυβερνητικές διαθέσεις. Μέχρι και στις Φοιτητικές Εστίες του Πανεπιστημίου Αθηνών (ΦΕΠΑ) εισέβαλαν, συλλαμβάνοντας 3 φοιτητές και αποδίδοντάς τους 3 κατηγορίες. Το σύστημα φοβάται τη φοιτητική νεολαία που, εδώ και 2 μήνες, βρίσκεται στους δρόμους και αγωνίζεται. Ιδιαιτέρως, δεν ανέχεται τους φοιτητές που, ακόμη και μετά την ψήφιση του νόμου, επιμένουν να βγαίνουν στον δρόμο για να τον ανατρέψουν.

Το φοιτητικό κίνημα, λοιπόν, καλείται να τα βάλει με θεούς και δαίμονες. Πρώτα και κύρια, καλείται να τα βάλει με το σύστημα, που όλο και οξύνει τις μεθόδους καταστολής του. Η άμεση καταστολή και το σπάσιμο των καταλήψεων αποτελεί συνέχεια όλων των υπόλοιπων μεθόδων καταστολής, με πρώτη και κύρια την αξιοποίηση των τηλε-εξετάσεων και των τηλε-μαθημάτων, που αποτέλεσε έναν ύπουλο τρόπο να απομαζικοποιηθούν και να σπάσουν οι καταλήψεις χωρίς γάτα και ζημιά. Η καταστολή των διαδηλώσεων με άγριο τρόπο, τα χημικά και το «κυνηγητό» φοιτητών μέσα στο Άσυλο δεν αρκούν στο σύστημα. Τώρα βρίσκει την ευκαιρία για την ενεργοποίηση και την αξιοποίηση των πειθαρχικών διώξεων του νόμου Κεραμέως-Χρυσοχοΐδη (4777). Ήδη η κυβέρνηση, δια στόματος Μητσοτάκη, και η ΠτΔ, Κ. Σακελλαροπούλου, ζήτησαν την εφαρμογή για πρώτη φορά των έσχατων πειθαρχικών διώξεων που προβλέπει ο Νόμος Κεραμέως, δηλαδή της διαγραφής (μεταξύ μιας σειράς άλλων ποινών) στην περίπτωση των 49 συλληφθέντων φοιτητών, αλλά και σε μελλοντικές αντίστοιχες περιπτώσεις «παράνομων» ενεργειών. Το φοιτητικό κίνημα, λοιπόν, στον αγώνα του ενάντια στον νόμο Πιερρακάκη, θα κληθεί να αντιπαρατεθεί και με τις διατάξεις του νόμου 4777 (που ήδη κομμάτια του, όπως αυτό της ΕΒΕ, εφαρμόζονται), με τις διαγραφές και τα πειθαρχικά, αλλά και με όλο το κατασταλτικό οπλοστάσιο που έχει το σύστημα στα χέρια του.

Καλείται, από την άλλη, να τα βάλει και με τους ψεύτικους φίλους του. Με ευθύνη των κύριων ρεφορμιστικών δυνάμεων (ΚΝΕ-ΑΡΙΣ) που κήρυξαν παύση του κινήματος, αλλά και όλων των υπόλοιπων που βλέπουν την πάλη για την ανατροπή του νόμου ως κάτι το «ουτοπικό», οι φοιτητές, που κινητοποιήθηκαν με επιμονή όλο το προηγούμενο διάστημα, έμειναν ξεκρέμαστοι. Από τη μία ΚΝΕ-ΑΡΙΣ κάνουν λόγο για «πολύμορφες δράσεις πέραν της κατάληψης», οι οποίες από ό,τι φαίνεται δεν συμπεριλαμβάνουν καν… τη διαδήλωση. Μάλιστα, στην πλειοψηφία των συλλόγων πανελλαδικά, αυτές οι δυνάμεις είναι που συσπειρώνουν πλέον τα πλαίσια «αντι-κατάληψης», ενώ με το ζόρι (έως καθόλου) στήριξαν τις κινητοποιήσεις αλληλεγγύης στους συλληφθέντες φοιτητές. Από την άλλη, η ΑΡΑΣ και μια σειρά άλλες δυνάμεις βγαίνουν με τη σημαία του «να μείνει ο νόμος στα χαρτιά». Λες και δεν είδαμε με την Ελάχιστη Βάση Εισαγωγής τι συμβαίνει με τους νόμους που «έμειναν στα χαρτιά». Κάποια στιγμή το σύστημα τους εφαρμόζει!

Κόντρα, λοιπόν, σε αυτές τις λογικές, το φοιτητικό κίνημα πρέπει να στυλώσει τα πόδια του και να συνεχίσει τον αγώνα για την ανατροπή του νόμου Πιερρακάκη. Να συνεχίσει με εκ νέου γενικές συνελεύσεις, που θα παίρνουν αποφάσεις συνέχισης του αγώνα με νέες καταλήψεις και διαδηλώσεις. Το φοιτητικό κίνημα έχει δείξει ότι μπορεί να ανατρέψει μέχρι και ψηφισμένους νόμους, και καμία δύναμη -συστημική ή ρεφορμιστική- δεν μπορεί να το διαψεύσει αυτό!

Και αυτή είναι που θα αποτελέσει και την πραγματική απάντηση στην τρομοκρατία και την καταστολή. Αυτή είναι που θα αποτελέσει την πραγματική απάντηση στις ανυπόστατες κατηγορίες των 49 συλληφθέντων της ΣΘΕ και στις απειλές για πειθαρχικές διώξεις και διαγραφές φοιτητών. Το φοιτητικό κίνημα μόνο με τις μαζικές του διαδικασίες μπορεί να «προστατευτεί» και να απαντήσει την τρομοκρατία! Με μαζικές γενικές συνελεύσεις που θα παίρνουν αποφάσεις αλληλεγγύης στους συλληφθέντες, θα απαιτούν την αθώωσή τους και που θα παίρνουν αποφάσεις συνέχισης του αγώνα μέχρι τη νίκη!


[Previous Article]#[Next]

Το Κίεβο σε απόγνωση, η Ευρώπη σε σύγχυση, ο Πούτιν… ενισχυμένος - ΚΚΕ(μ-λ) (KKE m l)


Η πιθανή ήττα της Ουκρανίας θα αναδείξει τις αδυναμίες των δυτικών μηχανισμών. Και αυτό είναι κάτι που επιτείνει το αίσθημα στρατηγικού αδιεξόδου, ιδιαίτερα για τους ευρωπαίους ιμπεριαλιστές.

Η κατάσταση στο ουκρανικό μέτωπο είναι τέτοια που πλέον δεν υπαγορεύει σενάρια για την εξελισσόμενη σύγκρουση, αλλά για την επόμενη μέρα. Έχοντας η Μόσχα την πρωτοβουλία κινήσεων, το αγωνιώδες ερώτημα είναι όχι πού θα σταματήσει, αλλά πού θέλει να σταματήσει. Τα κέντρα της Δύσης εκτιμούν, και βάσιμα, πως οι στόχοι της πλέον δεν περιορίζονται στα σύνορα των τεσσάρων επαρχιών που προσαρτήθηκαν.

Η ευρωπαϊκή (αν)ασφάλεια έχει πολλές εκδοχές και ποικίλες εκδηλώσεις. Το τελευταίο διάστημα η επικαιρότητα μονοπωλείται από τις απειλές (λεονταρισμούς) του Μακρόν, που ξεκινούν με τη δήλωση «βόμβα» ότι δεν θα πρέπει να αποκλειστεί η αποστολή ΝΑΤΟϊκών δυνάμεων στην Ουκρανία.

Δεν πέρασε πολύς χρόνος από τον Ιούνιο του 2022, όταν ο Μακρόν δήλωνε: «είμαι πεπεισμένος ότι ο ρόλος της Γαλλίας είναι αυτός μιας διαμεσολαβητικής δύναμης»! Σήμερα, παρά τις ασάφειες και τις παλινωδίες του, ρίχνει συνεχώς λάδι στη φωτιά... «Δεν είμαστε σε ευθεία σύρραξη με τη Ρωσία, αλλά δεν μπορούμε να την αφήσουμε να κερδίσει», «Δεν είμαστε σε πόλεμο με τη Ρωσία, αλλά αυτή διεξάγει πόλεμο σε βάρος μας», «Αν η Ρωσία κερδίσει αυτόν τον πόλεμο, η αξιοπιστία της Ευρώπης θα μειωθεί στο μηδέν» κ.λπ. Για τη Μόσχα μια τέτοια επίδειξη δύναμης (έστω και ρητορική) από τον επικεφαλής του γαλλικού κράτους, εκτός από ένα είδος μπλόφας, μπορεί να θεωρηθεί και «τροχιοδεικτικό» των δυτικών προθέσεων.

Ωστόσο η αντιρωσική πλειοδοσία του Μακρόν ίσως έχει και άλλες προεκτάσεις. Η αστική γαλλική τάξη βλέπει την «αξιοπιστία» της να μειώνεται τα τελευταία χρόνια σε μια παραδοσιακή σφαίρα επιρροής της: τη Δυτική Αφρική. Το αν η ανατολική άκρη της Ευρώπης μπορεί να αποτελέσει αντισταθμιστικό πεδίο δράσης του γαλλικού ιμπεριαλισμού είναι πολύ αμφίβολο. Πάντως, λίγο - πολύ, ο Μακρόν διαμηνύει στις χώρες της Α. Ευρώπης ότι η Γαλλία δεν έχει τις αναστολές της Γερμανίας και είναι πρόθυμη (και ικανή;) να αντικαταστήσει τις εγγυήσεις των ΗΠΑ σε εθνικό ή και σε ευρωπαϊκό επίπεδο! Η πρόθεση αυτή επικαιροποιήθηκε στην πρόσφατη τριμερή διάσκεψη κορυφής Γερμανίας, Γαλλίας και Πολωνίας στο Βερολίνο.

Από τη μεριά του ο γερμανός καγκελάριος Σολτς, αφού διευκρίνισε ότι οι χώρες που υποστηρίζουν την Ουκρανία δεν βρίσκονται σε πόλεμο με τη Ρωσία, αρκέστηκε στις διακηρύξεις τω Βρυξελλών σχετικά με την αρωγή της Ευρώπης προς την Ουκρανία. Το ζήτημα είναι σε ποιο βαθμό ελέγχει την τρικομματική του κυβέρνηση; Στις ακραίες φιλονατοϊκές και αντιρωσικές δηλώσεις της ΥΠΕΞ Μπέρμποκ (Πράσινοι), προστέθηκε η υπουργός Παιδείας της Γερμανίας Βάτσινγκερ (Φιλελεύθεροι), που, σε συνέντευξη που παραχώρησε στις εφημερίδες του ομίλου Funke, προτείνει προετοιμασία των μαθητών (στο πλαίσιο της πολιτικής προστασίας) για το ενδεχόμενο πολέμου… Το φαντάζεται μάλιστα ως κομμάτι της καθημερινής ζωής!

Τα ενδεχόμενα δεν είναι πολλά. Ή η Δύση θα κινηθεί προς την κατεύθυνση μιας πλήρους σύγκρουσης με τη Ρωσία ή θα προσπαθήσει να την ανακόψει με διαπραγματεύσεις, μετριάζοντας το όποιο κόστος. Αν ισχύσει το δεύτερο (πράγμα που δεν σημαίνει και τον άμεσο τερματισμό του πολέμου), οι όροι κατά βάση θα υπαγορεύονται από τη Μόσχα. Είναι φανερό πως οι δύο πλευρές δεν προσεγγίζουν με τον ίδιο τρόπο μια κατάπαυση του πυρός στην Ουκρανία. Δεν είναι μόνο ότι αυτή θα πρέπει να ξεκινήσει από την αποδοχή των νέων συνόρων και την παγίωση των όποιων κεκτημένων τους, αλλά θα πρέπει να απαντά και στους μακροπρόθεσμους στρατηγικούς τους στόχους. Σε ένα τέτοιο σενάριο εκτιμάται πως η ρωσική αντιπροσωπεία θα προσεγγίσει το τραπέζι με μια αίσθηση στρατηγικού πλεονεκτήματος. Για το Κρεμλίνο είναι βασικός όρος ότι οι διαπραγματεύσεις δεν θα ορίσουν μια νέα «παγωμένη σύγκρουση» ή «ένα διάλειμμα για επανεξοπλισμό της Ουκρανίας».

Ο Ρώσος πρόεδρος (που δεν αγωνιούσε ιδιαίτερα για την επανεκλογή του) δεν φαίνεται να βάζει σε πρώτο πλάνο τις διαβουλεύσεις. Σε δημόσια πανηγυρική ομιλία του (για την εκλογική του νίκη και την επέτειο προσάρτησης της Κριμαίας), επανέλαβε τις προειδοποιήσεις προς τη Δύση για χρήση πυρηνικών σε τυχόν «επίσημη» ανάπτυξη δυτικών στρατευμάτων στα ουκρανικά εδάφη. Αυτές οι προειδοποιήσεις Πούτιν δεν γίνονται στο κενό. Το φόντο είναι μακροχρόνιο και τα επίδικα ξεπερνούν τα σύνορα της Ουκρανίας. Έγινε καθαρό από τη Ρωσία πως μια πιθανή διαπραγμάτευση Δύσης- Ρωσίας δεν θα περιοριστεί τόσο στο «εδαφικό» όσο στη μελλοντική ουδετερότητα και αποστρατιωτικοποίησή της. Και ενδεχομένως να απαιτηθούν διασφαλίσεις που να αφορούν όλη την Α. Ευρώπη

Κατά την εκτίμηση δυτικών αναλυτών, φαίνεται ότι οι ΗΠΑ θα αρκούνταν να αποχωρήσει η Ρωσία από την Ουκρανία χωρίς άλλες εδαφικές κατακτήσεις. Ως ένδειξη κατευνασμού του Πούτιν θεωρείται η απόλυση της Νούλαντ, νούμερο 3 στο Στέιτ Ντιπάρτμεντ, με πεδίο ευθύνης την Ουκρανία εδώ και τουλάχιστον δέκα χρόνια. Ωστόσο η ενέργεια αυτή θα μπορούσε να θεωρηθεί και έμμεση παραδοχή των επιτευγμάτων της Ρωσίας στην Ουκρανία!

Οι εξελίξεις στο ουκρανικό μέτωπο ρίχνουν βαριά σκιά ήδη στο προεκλογικό τοπίο των ευρωεκλογών του Ιουνίου και των αμερικανικών εκλογών του Νοεμβρίου. Στην άλλη πλευρά του Ατλαντικού και στο φόντο της άγριας προεκλογικής κόντρας, ο Μπάιντεν εκφώνησε μια από τις πιο πολιτικές -και σημαντικές- ομιλίες για την κατάσταση της Ένωσης, παρουσιάζοντας με δραματικό τρόπο τα διακυβεύματα των επικείμενων εκλογών. Το πιο εντυπωσιακό στην ομιλία του ήταν (αν και οι ΗΠΑ δεν απειλούνται άμεσα με πόλεμο) ότι την ξεκίνησε επικαλούμενος την κατάσταση της Ένωσης επί Ρούσβελτ τον Ιανουάριο του 1941, πριν από την είσοδο της Αμερικής στον Β' Παγκόσμιο Πόλεμο. Στο ρόλο του Χίτλερ και των Ναζί έβαλε τον πρώην Πρόεδρο Τραμπ και το κίνημά του: «Make America Great Again» (MAGA). Ο Μπάιντεν επανερχόταν επανειλημμένα στο θέμα της συνδυασμένης εσωτερικής και εξωτερικής απειλής, με έμφαση στην εσωτερική! Μάλιστα έφτασε να ταυτίζει τον Τραμπ με τους Συνομοσπονδιακούς που αποσχίστηκαν από την Ενωση στον αμερικανικό εμφύλιο.

Όλα αυτά αντανακλούν φόβους για τους συσχετισμούς που πάνε να διαμορφωθούν, όπως δείχνουν άλλωστε οι εξελίξεις, και το αβέβαιο της κατάληξής τους τόσο στα πεδία των μαχών σε Ουκρανία αλλά και Γάζα όσο και σε ολόκληρη τη Μέση Ανατολή. Αναδεικνύονται αστάθμητοι παράμετροι που διαμορφώνουν μια πρωτοφανή κατάσταση, θέτοντας γενικότερα ζητήματα επαναξιολόγησης των ιμπεριαλιστικών σχέσεων. Μια κατάσταση λεπτών ισορροπιών, που αντανακλά τη διακύβευση των συμφερόντων των κυρίαρχων ιμπεριαλιστών τόσο περιφερειακά όσο και συνολικά στην παγκόσμια σκηνή.

Μια κατάσταση που, αναδεικνύοντας την πολύπλευρη δυναμική της, ενδέχεται να αποτελέσει την αιτία για αναπόφευκτη όσο και βίαιη αναπροσαρμογή των στρατηγικών και των προτεραιοτήτων του ιμπεριαλισμού των ΗΠΑ. Μια κατάσταση όπου η «συνέχιση της πολιτικής με άλλα μέσα» θα τείνει να γίνει κανόνας.

ΧΒ


[Previous Article]#[Next]

pc 22 marzo - 23 marzo 1944 - 23 marzo 2024: 80 anni dall’eroica azione dei Gap di via Rasella (proletari comunisti)


Dopo la caduta del regime fascista e la formazione del governo Badoglio a Roma erano confluite alcune divisioni dell’esercito regio: l’8 settembre viene firmato l’armistizio, all’alba del 9 settembre il re, Badoglio e le alte cariche militari abbandonarono la capitale e l’esercito si trovò senza direttive. Una parte di soldati cercò di contrastare l’esercito tedesco e, insieme a civili organizzati dai partiti antifascisti, si attesta a Porta S. Paolo dove si resiste finchè la soperchiante forza militare tedesca ha ragione dei resistenti.

Roma cade sotto il controllo degli occupanti nazisti  che fra il 1943 e il 1944 sottoposero la popolazione a terrore, massacri, torture.

È in questo contesto che si inserisce l’azione di via Rasella: in quell’occasione, i Gruppi di Azione Patriottica riuscirono in una coraggiosa operazione militare che vide l’assalto a un battaglione nazista che marciava nelle strade del centro, portando all’uccisione di 33 soldati delle SS. La rappresaglia nazista a questo evento fu, come tristemente noto, il massacro delle Fosse Ardeatine in cui trucidarono 335 prigionieri. 

Negli anni diversi sono stati i tentativi di criminalizzare l’azione di via Rasella da parte dei revisionisti storici - fino all’ “esternazione” di La Russa dello scorso anno: «Via Rasella è stata una pagina tutt’altro che nobile della resistenza, quelli uccisi furono una banda musicale di semi-pensionati e non nazisti delle SS, sapendo benissimo il rischio di rappresaglia su cittadini romani, antifascisti e non».

Sempre, coraggiosamente e coerentemente i gappisti protagonisti dell’azione hanno difeso la Resistenza partigiana e contrastato i tentativi di criminalizzarli. Essi ci hanno lasciato delle pagine memorabili sulla Resistenza romana.

Riprendiamo qui le note biografiche tratte dal sito dell’ANPI di alcuni dei protagonisti:

Rosario Bentivegna

Medaglia d'Argento al Valor Militare

Nato a Roma il 22 giugno 1922, medico, morto a Roma il 2 aprile 2012. Medaglia d'argento al valor militare.

Già negli anni del liceo fu un attivo antifascista. Con Leonardo Jannaccone, Corrado Nourian e Nino Baldini costituì, infatti, nel 1939, un gruppo detto di "unificazione marxista", che attirò presto l'attenzione della polizia fascista. Arrestato nel 1941, dopo la scarcerazione Bentivegna aderì nel 1943 al Partito comunista. Con l'armistizio e la formazione dei Gruppi di azione patriottica, fu tra i più valorosi protagonisti della Resistenza, sia a Roma (assalto a militari tedeschi in piazza Barberini, attacco ad un corteo fascista in via Tomacelli) che nella zona della Casilina, dove comandò formazioni partigiane.
Il 23 marzo del 1944 con Carla Capponi (che sarebbe poi stata sua moglie), fu tra gli autori dell'azione di via Rasella, che mise fuori combattimento 33 soldati delle SS e che fu il pretesto per la strage delle Fosse Ardeatine. Pochi mesi dopo la liberazione della Capitale, Bentivegna decise di continuare la sua lotta contro i nazifascisti in Jugoslavia e in Montenegro.
Rientrato in Italia dopo la conclusione del conflitto, questo valoroso combattente (che per un paio d'anni fu anche redattore del giornale l'Unità, prima di riprendere gli studi e di dedicarsi alla professione di medico), è stato sottoposto per le sue imprese di partigiano a numerosi processi, dai quali è uscito sempre assolto per la legittimità delle sue azioni.

Mario Fiorentini

Medaglia d'Argento al Valor Militare

Nato a Roma il 7 novembre 1918, morto a Roma il 9 agosto 2022. Matematico e docente universitario, pluridecorato al valor militare.

Era ancora studente delle Commerciali quando aveva cominciato a svolgere attività clandestina in "Giustizia e Libertà" e nel Partito comunista. Dopo il 25 luglio del '43, diede vita, con altri antifascisti romani, alla formazione "Arditi del Popolo". Il 9 settembre Fiorentini prese parte ai combattimenti contro i tedeschi a Porta San Paolo e nell'ottobre del '43 formò e diresse i Gap centrali "A. Gramsci" e "Carlo Pisacane", con il nome di battaglia di "Giovanni", operando nella IV Zona di Roma. In questo ruolo partecipò, nella Capitale, a numerose azioni, tra cui quelle di via Rasella e al carcere di Regina Coeli. Dopo la liberazione di Roma, si fece paracadutare al Nord. Col nome di battaglia di "Dino" operò in Liguria, Emilia, Lombardia e Piemonte, come ufficiale di collegamento dell'OSS, il servizio segreto americano. È stato decorato con tre medaglie d'argento al valor militare e tre croci di guerra al merito, e con la medaglia della Special Force (GB) e la medaglia Donovan dell'OSS (Usa). Autodidatta, nel dopoguerra ha iniziato, sostenuto dalla moglie (Lucia Ottobrini, un'antifascista conosciuta durante la clandestinità), gli studi liceali e poi quelli universitari. Fiorentini è così diventato docente di Geometria superiore all'Università di Ferrara. I suoi studi di matematica sono stati ripresi e approfonditi in tutto il mondo ed hanno fatto dell'ex gappista un matematico di fama internazionale.

Carla Capponi

Medaglia d'Oro al Valor Militare

Nata a Roma il 7 dicembre 1921, deceduta a Zagarolo (Roma), il 23 novembre 2000, Medaglia d'Oro al Valor militare.

Studentessa di Legge, subito dopo l'8 settembre 1943 partecipò coraggiosamente alla Resistenza romana, divenendo presto vice comandante di una formazione operante a Roma e in provincia. Nell'ottobre del 1943 per procurarsi un'arma (i suoi compagni dei GAP gliela negavano, perché preferivano riservare alle donne funzioni di appoggio), non trova di meglio che rubare la pistola a un milite della Gnr, che si trovava vicino a lei in un autobus superaffollato. Nella primavera del 1944 è tra gli organizzatori e gli esecutori dell'azione gappista di via Rasella contro un contingente dell'esercito tedesco. L'azione fu poi presa dai nazisti a pretesto per la feroce strage delle Fosse Ardeatine. Riconosciuta partigiana combattente con il grado di capitano, è stata decorata di Medaglia d'Oro al valore militare per aver partecipato, si legge tra l'altro nella motivazione, "alle più eroiche imprese nella caccia senza quartiere che il suo gruppo di avanguardia dava al nemico annidato nella cerchia abitata della città di Roma". Più volte parlamentare del PCI, membro della Commissione Giustizia nei primi anni settanta, ha fatto parte sino alla morte del Comitato di presidenza dell'ANPI. Poco prima della scomparsa di Carla Capponi, "il Saggiatore" ha pubblicato un suo volume sull'attività dei GAP a Roma. Si intitola Cuore di donna. 


[Previous Article]#[Next]

pc 22 marzo - Migranti sfruttati - Al Jazeera ha ragione... mentre la stampa italiana spesso tace (proletari comunisti)


L'inchiesta di Al Jazeera: «Migranti sfruttati e maltrattati nelle terre di Barolo e Barbaresco»

Nell'inchiesta si racconta, tra le altre, la storia di Sajo, un 36enne del Gambia. Secondo la sua testimonianza sarebbero diversi i lavoratori privi di documenti che lavorano nei vigneti di Barolo e Barbaresco

Lavoratori migranti sfruttati e maltrattati nei vigneti piemontesi dedicati al vino pregiato. La denuncia arriva direttamente da Al Jazeera, la rete con sede in Qatar. Più nello specifico nell’articolo intitolato “Migrant workers exploited, abused in Italy’s prized fine wine vineyards”, dove si racconta, tra le altre, la storia di Sajo, un 36enne del Gambia. Secondo la sua testimonianza sarebbero diversi i lavoratori privi di documenti che lavorano per 12 ore nei vigneti di Barolo e Barbaresco (dove un ettaro fino a 1,5 milioni il prezzo di un ettaro), per una paga che va dai 3 ai 4 euro l’ora. Non solo. L’uomo denuncia anche diversi episodi di razzismo, oltre a condizioni di lavoro definite “disumane”.

Sajo afferma di aver trovato lavoro ad Alba, durante la stagione dell’uva, quando occorre nuova forza lavoro. Appena sceso dal treno venne avvicinato da un uomo, che gli offrì un lavoro nei vigneti con una paga di 3 euro l’ora. Accettò e si stabilì in un piccolo accampamento improvvisato che altri

vignaioli africani avevano costruito nel bosco, sulla riva del fiume. Non avevano servizi igienici, né acqua corrente o elettricità. Quando non potevano permettersi l’acqua in bottiglia, usavano quella fangosa del fiume per lavarsi e cucinare.


«È stato il momento più difficile da quando ho lasciato il Gambia – ricorda Sajo - non riuscivo nemmeno a ricaricare il telefono per chiamare casa». Ogni giorno si svegliava prima dell'alba e andava alla stazione dei treni, dove un caporale caricava lui e gli altri su un furgone e li portava sulle colline fino ai vigneti. Gli operai erano costantemente sorvegliati e «non potevamo fare pause per andare in bagno o bere acqua. Ci minacciavano di licenziarci se avessimo rallentato o avessimo parlato». 


[Previous Article]#[Next]

pc 22 marzo - Iniziative per la Palestina (proletari comunisti)



[Previous Article]#[Next]

Celebrate historic 23rd March as Anti-Imperialist Day in the immortal revolutionaries' memories of Comrades Bhagat Singh, Sukdev, and Rajguru. _ Communist Party of India (Maoist) (maoistroad)



Let us defeat Imperialism. Let us smash Brahmanical Hindutva Fascism.
Let us continue our struggle to fulfill the dreams of all great martyrs of freedom
movement and let us fight for a New Democratic India.


 
In our long history of people's democratic struggle, 23rd March hold a specific revolutionary place in the
history of class struggle for all those hearts that beats for a just - equitable society, and at the same time that
despises Imperialism vehemently. On 23rd March, Comrades Bhagat Singh, Sukdev, and Rajguru were hanged by the
British colonial power in order to crush the ongoing anti-colonial freedom movement. They were influenced by the
success of Bolshevik revolution that had left overwhelming impact on these three Indian revolutionaries that led to
the formation of HSRA (Hindustan Socialist Revolutionary Association). In the formation of HSRA Comrade Baghat
Singh played a fundamental role, and he clearly stated that ruling classes whether of white skin or black skin, we
have to continue our struggle against the loot and plunder of all exploiters. But the same exploiters who colluded
with the imperialists forces are today celebrating their martyrdom and particularly the leadership of RSS who bitterly
opposed Bhagat Singh and his cause. Today BJP the political organ of RSS is upholding all freedom fighters including
Com. Bhagat Singh and his comrades. They have no moral right to even speak about freedom fighters and to hijack
the freedom movement and now they are distorting it. Our Party CPI (Maoist) pays its revolutionary homage to them
and will fight for the fulfillment of their revolutionary dreams.
After the formal independence in 1947 India became a semi-colonial country, and the Indian ruling classes:
comprador big bourgeois and big landlord continued to serve their imperial masters without any hesitation. Entire
economic policies of the Indian ruling classes after 1947, was designed to serve the interest of imperialism and
native elites. Comprador bourgeois and landlord classes as the owners of the significant number of means of
production of the country implemented distorted development industrial policy that benefits them, and their
Imperialist bosses. Emphasis on industrial policy was to assist the needs of the 1 percent of elite population of India.
With the entry of finance capital (both in the form of loans and investments) vast scale of dispossession and
displacement of the oppressed people happened on an unprecedented manner. Toiling masses of India continued to
face unbridled exploitation in more intense manner than before. After 1990s, under the dictates of imperialist forces,
Indian ruling classes implemented Liberalization, globalization, and Privatization policies in the country. This measure
was a cakewalk for the foreign imperialist capital to loot and plunder the Indian resources, and to accumulate more
and more profits. All parliamentary mainstream political parties, irrespective of their party flags have flawlessly
implemented LPG policies. This has broken the backbone of Indian economy and has caused unspeakable misery to
the toiling masses.
After BJP came to power in 2014 under the leadership of Narendra Modi, it has turned India into an open
field for the loot and plunder of the country by the foreign capital under the flagship programs of Make in India,
Digital India, One Nation-One Tax, Start- UP India, and many other flagship programs. BJP has enacted several pro-
imperialist policies that are against the interest of the board masses of the country. At one hand it is handing over
the resources of the country to foreign MNCs, and at the same time it is spreading religious enmity in the country
through its agenda of Hindu Rashtra. Com. Bhagat Singh was absolutely against all pro-imperialist policies and
communal ideology from which RSS and BJP orginated. Bhagat Singh was totally against Hindu-Rashtra or the idea ofnation based on religion or race. He upholds the idea of scientific reasoning, secularism, and socialism. But, today
the Brahmanical Hindutva forces are distorting com. Bhagat Singh ideas to fulfill its agenda of Hindu Rashtra.
Development in India happens by the usurpation of the lands from the oppressed people. Imperialism to come out
from the general crisis look for cheap natural resources that are available in the third world countries. India has
abundant deposits of natural resources that mainly lie in the tribal belts of central and Eastern India. To plunder the
resources of India, Imperialism has backed every fascist onslaught of its pliant state on the indigenous people of
India. To crush the revolutionary Maoist movement in India, the Indian ruling classes in collaboration with the
imperialist carried out several fascist counter-insurgency programs like Salwa Judum, Sendera, Operation Green-
Hunt, Operation Samadhan, and now it has unleashed Operation Kagaar. All these fascist genocide of indigenous
people was funded, directed and aspired by the global finance and Comprador bureaucratic Capital. In its crisis
ridden state, Imperialism has become ferocious, and has given rise to fascist political system in India. Massive
deployments of military forces are going on in Central India to expedite the plunder of the natural resources from
the Adivasi region. People's resistance to corporatization and militarization of their villages, lands, and forest are
being brutally crushed by the Indian state under the BJP'S rule. Every day newspapers in Chhattisgarh carry horrific
news of killings of Adivasi by the police forces. It is not happening for the first time, and neither is going to stop until
and unless this moribund system of loot and plunder is uprooted from India. The very foundation of capitalism is laid
on the massacre of the indigenous population in Africa and in Latin-America. Imperialism in 21st century has
developed more brutal machines and deadly weapons to unleash massacres on the struggling masses. Today, the
people of India (especially in Central and Eastern India) under the leadership of CPI (Maoist) are fighting against this
enemy's machines and methods.
Central Committee of CPI (Maoist) gives a call to all democratic, patriotic, working- class, peasantry, dalits, and
women's organizations, well- wishers of the adivasi, students, writers, teachers, lawyers and human rights activists
to celebrate 23rd March as an Anti-Imperialism with revolutionary spirit and enthusiasm. It also appeals to conduct
seminars, meetings, rallies upholding the ideas of comrades Bhagat Singh, Sukdev and Rajguru in order to expose the
treacherous design of the hindutva forces to saffronize Bhagat Singh and his comrades.


Down with Imperialism!
Down with Brahmanical Hindutva Fascism!
Long Live Marxism-Leninism-Maoism!
Long Live Comrade Bhagat Singh, Comrade Sukdev, and Comrade Rajguru!
Inquilab Zindabad!

 
With Revolutionary Greetings,
Pratap
Spokes person
Central Regional Bureau
Communist Party of India (Maoist)


[Previous Article]#[Next]

La revista Lucha de Dos Lineas N° 3 in castellano finalmente salió! (maoistroad)



 





[Previous Article]#[Next]

CDMx acciones por Dr. Sernas García (Association New Democracy)


 



Nuestros compañeros de la Ciudad de México han realizado algunas acciones en exigencia de presentación con vida del Dr. Ernesto Sernas García, desaparecido desde el 10 de mayo de 2018 en San Agustín de las Juntas, Oaxaca.

Desde el 30 de agosto de 2018 Corriente del Pueblo Sol Rojo ha lanzado una campaña internacional, de carácter permanente, hasta encontrar con vida a nuestro compañero.

De esta manera #DrSernasPresentaciónConVida recorre calles, comunidades y ciudades, saltando de México a otros países. 

 


 

El próximo mes de mayo se cumplirán 6 años de desaparición forzada del Dr. Sernas y nuestra organización democrática estará realizando acciones en distintos puntos, acompañada de la solidaridad clasista y el internacionalismo proletario de otras voces que en México y el mundo se unirán a la nuestra:

 

¡Ernesto Sernas García, presentación con vida!

¡Porque vivo se lo llevaron, vivo lo queremos!

#DrSernasPresentaciónConVida

 


 



[Previous Article]#[Next]

pc 22 marzo - Bologna. Studenti caricati dalla polizia,... ormai il governo Meloni/Salvini/Piantedosi ha dichiarato guerra agli studenti che protestano (proletari comunisti)


contestavano la ministra Bernini e gli accordi tra università e Israele

Nella centralissima via Indipendenza di Bologna la polizia oggi ha caricato e spintonato gli studenti universitari da giorni in mobilitazione.

Ieri a Bologna gli studenti universitari avevano protestato davanti al Senato Accademico per chiedere la fine della censura nei confronti di chi si mobilita contro la guerra in Palestina, per pretendere il boicottaggio degli accordi con Israele ed il comparto militare industriale.

Il Senato Accademico si è rifiutato di rescindere gli accordi in ambito militare e bellico, esprimendosi invece con l’ennesima formula vaga e fumosa, ribadendo sostanzialmente la necessità di rispettare le normative ed il codice etico che, per quanto riguarda il dual use, si limita a “minimizzare eventuali danni”…

Vogliamo e pretendiamo un impegno concreto dell’Università che vada a rescindere tutti gli accordi con il Gruppo Leonardo, con la NATO e con i partner del governo sionista di Israele” hanno scritto in un comunicato gli studenti di Cambiare Rotta dell’ateneo bolognese.

Le mobilitazioni nel nostro Paese dimostrano che ottenere il boicottaggio è possibile e possiamo farlo solo tramite la lotta, come è successo ieri al Senato Accademico dell’Università di Torino, dove grazie alla mobilitazione si è riusciti ad ottenere la non partecipazione dell’Ateneo torinese al nuovo bando MAECI di cooperazione tra Italia e Israele”.

Ma oggi a Bologna è arrivata la Ministra Bernini per l’inaugurazione dell’anno accademico e gli studenti si sono mobilitati per farsi sentire, anche a luce delle dichiarazioni della ministra contro studenti e docenti dell’Università di Torino che hanno deciso di interrompere la collaborazione con le istituzioni israeliane.

Il corteo degli studenti arrivato a via Indipendenza ha cercato di raggiungere la sede del Teatro Manzoni dove si svolgeva la cerimonia con la ministra Bernini, ma ha trovato a fronteggiarlo uno schieramento della polizia che ben presto è passato alle vie di fatto caricando e spintonando gli studenti. Il corteo ha ricompattato le file e si è diretto in zona universitaria.

La protesta si è palesata anche all’interno del teatro dove era presente un gruppo di studenti con la bandiera della Palestina. Francesca rappresentante del Consiglio studentesco, è intervenuta poco prima dell’intervento della ministro dell’università, Anna Maria Bernini, con la kefiah al collo. “Da mesi assistiamo alla censura sistemica delle voci provenienti dalla comunità palestinese e di quelle che sono le richieste delle mobilitazioni studentesche” ha denunciato la studentessa.


[Previous Article]#[Next]

Povodom 25 godina od NATO bombradovanja – Rezolucija Partije Rada iz 1997. godine - Partija rada (PARTIJA RADA)


Trupe NATO pakta, zajedno sa svojim političkim štabovima nalaze se na teritoriji Jugoslavije, rasporedjene u BiH, Hrvatskoj i Makedoniji.

NATO pakt su stvorili američki imperijalisti u saradnji sa imperijalistima Zapadne Evrope 1947. godine. Zabrinuti zbog velikih pobeda Sovjetskog Saveza, stvaranja socijalističkog tabora, pobeda Crvene armije u Kini i sve moćnijeg antikolonijalnog i antiimperijalističkog pokreta u zemljama Trećeg sveta, stvorili su NATO pakt kao agresivni vojni blok protiv Sovjetskog Saveza, Kine i oslobodilačkih pokreta u kolonijama. Od samog početka svog stvaranja on se formirao kao udarna vojna pesnica koja je trebalo da vojnički pobedi Sovjetski Saveza i druge socijalističke zemlje i da u njima restaurira kapitalizam. Poznate su direktne intervencije NATO­-a u Vijetnamu, Latinskoj Americi i Africi.

Krajem osamdesetih godina raspao se Sovjetski Savez i raspušten je Varšavski pakt, a zemlje u sastavu Sovjetskog Saveza, kao i zemlje Istočne Evrope likvidirale su socijalizam i pošle putem restauracije kapitalizma.

Kada je nestao glavni protivnik NATO pakta – Varšavski pakt, izgledalo je da bi bilo normalno da se raspusti i NATO pakt. Umesto toga, NATO pakt je još više pojačan, preoružan novim, najsavršenijim vrstama oružja i povećani su vojni budžeti članica NATO pakta. Upotrebljavajući ekonomski, diplomatski, politički i vojni pritisak čini sve da se proširi, ne samo na sve zemlje Istočne Evrope, nego i na sve države bivšeg Sovjetskog Saveza i tako dopre do granica Rusije. Cilj im je da na taj način Rusiju potpuno izoluju, stave je na kolena i od nje i zemalja bivšeg Sovjetskog Saveza stvore neku vrstu polukolonija, da nesmetano koriste njihova ogromna prirodna bogatstva, da steknu obilje jeftine radne snage i prostrano tržište. Očigledno je da je NATO pakt ostao i dalje agresivna vojna sila imperijalizma i da čini sve kako bi, ne samo ekonomskim i finansijskim sredstvima, već i vojnom silom NATO­-a osigurao vladavinu imperijalizma u čitavom svetu.

NATO pakt je reakcionarna vojna sila američkog imperijalizma, najopasniji neprijatelj socijalizma i naroda zemalja Trećeg sveta.

Zašto su došle trupe NATO pakta u Jugoslaviju?

SAD i NATO pakt su posle propasti Sovjetskog Saveza ostale jedina supersila, jedina globalna sila u svetu. Jedan od strateških ciljeva SAD i NATO pakta je da ne dozvole da dogadjaji u svetu izmaknu njihovoj kontroli i da počnu da se razvijaju mimo njihovog uticaja ili protiv njih. Oni su nekoliko godina mirno posmatrali rat u Sloveniji, Hrvatskoj, a pogotovo u BiH i nisu smatrali za potrebu da intervenišu. Medjutim, oni su zaključili da bi nastavak rata u BiH neminovno vodio njegovom proširenju na Kosovo, Makedoniju i čitav Balkan i da bi u njega ušle Turska i Grčka,dve važne clanice NATO-­a jedna protiv druge. NATO pakt je tada rešio da pošalje trupe i da zaustavi rat u BiH. Prisilili su Miloševića i Tudjmana da potpisu Dejtonski sporazum.

Jedan drugi elemenat je ozbiljno uticao da požure sa primenom Dejtonskog sporazuma, kao i namera da reše pitanje Kosova i omoguće duži i stabilniji mir na Balkanu. Žurba SAD i NATO je izazvana mogućnošću da uskoro “eksplodira” Turska, a sa njom čitav Bliski Istok, pa da se, eventualno, nadju u ratu sa čitavim muslimanskim svetom koji sada broji oko milijardu i sto miliona ljudi.

Kakav je stav Partije rada u vezi sa prisustvom NATO­a na teritoriji Jugoslavije?

Partija rada smatra da ovo treba razmatrati bez emocija i oceniti da li u sadasnjoj situaciji prisustvo NATO­a koristi ili šteti narodima Jugoslavije. Tim pre što je bilo slučajeva u istoriji kada su se interesi imperijalista, ukoliko se radilo o zajedničkom neprijatelju, mogli podudarati sa interesima naroda. To se desilo u drugom svetskom ratu kada je Sovjetski Savez zaključio pakt sa dve najveće imperijalističke sile tog vremena – SAD i Engleskom radi borbe protiv zajedničkog neprijatelja ­Hitlerove Nemačke.

U Jugoslaviji je, na žalost, nacionalizam zahvatio široke mase. Velikosrpski i velikohrvatski šovinisti su, u stvari, svojom politikom rata i ugrožavanjem globalnih interesa SAD i NATO-­a prizvali dolazak NATO u Jugoslaviju. Činjenica je da se u Jugoslaviji, baš zbog te široko rasprostranjene nacionalističke svesti, nisu mogle organizovati snage koje bi se suprotstavile pogubnoj, šovinistickoj politici Miloševica i Tudjmana. Činjenica je da nisu stigle trupe NATO-­a i silom svog oružja zaustavile rat, verovatno bi u toku ove dve godine bilo još stotine hiljada mrtvih, novih razaranja i novih zločina.

Sam čin zaustavljanja rata bio je pozitivan. Nastojanje da se primeni Dejtonski sporazum, osigura jedinstvena BiH, vrate sve izbeglice u svoje domove i da se kazne ratni zločinci, PR smatra interesom naroda Jugoslavije. Primena Dejtonskog sporazuma i rešavanje pitanja Kosova zadaće odsudni udarac velikosrpskoj osvajačkoj ratnoj politici, a i nacionalizmu u Jugoslaviji, koji je bio glavna podloga te politike. Zato PR u ovoj i ovakvoj situaciji za sada nije protiv prisustva NATO-­a, jer je u ovom momentu to u interesu naroda Jugoslavije.

Ali, ako i posle uspostavljanja mira u BiH i rešavanja ovih osnovnih problema, trupe NATO-­a budu ostale u Jugoslaviji, Partija rada će ih smatrati za okupatore, što će oni stvarno i biti. Tada će PR kao istinski patriotska partija organizovati političku i drugu borbu protiv prisustva NATO­-a, sve do oružane borbe za oslobodjenje zemlje od okupatora.


[Previous Article]#[Next]

Una muestra más de la necesidad de conquistar la independencia de clase en el movimiento sindical | Revolución Obrera (Revolucion Obrera)


Una muestra más de la necesidad de conquistar la independencia de clase en el movimiento sindical 1
Congreso de la CUT del 26 de febrero al 1 de marzo del 2024

Hace unas semanas se realizó el VIII Congreso de la CUT en la ciudad de Bogotá, previo a este, se llevó a cabo el Congreso de Jóvenes y el de Mujeres CUT.

Pero ambos eventos, tanto el de los jóvenes como el de mujeres, no tuvo un carácter decisorio sino deliberativo, tuvieron además el común denominador de impedir la libre expresión a los trabajadores, sobre todo a los compañeros críticos que venían de otras ciudades y se atrevieron a cuestionar la asistencia de la viceministra de la Igualdad. La intervención de algunos jóvenes fue en el sentido de que ellos pensaban que el Congreso era para hablar de los problemas de los trabajadores y no para hacer politiquería con los funcionarios del Estado. Por esta razón fueron vetados, no solo en la plenaria, sino en las comisiones en las que trabajaron. De igual forma, en el Congreso de la Mujer, no aprobaron la resolución respecto a la defensa del pueblo palestino presentada por la compañera de Van Camps. Es decir, mientras los representantes del Estado burgués, como la viceministra de la Igualdad, sí tuvieron la palabra, a los obreros enviados por los sindicatos que cotizan y mantienen a esa burocracia no les permitieron la palabra.

Entre tanto, al Congreso de la CUT sí le dieron carácter decisorio y por delegados, con el agravante que llegaron los documentos ya hechos y maquinando para mostrar una mayoría que los aprobaba. Igualmente invitaron a la Ministra del Trabajo y al Viceministro, a pesar de ser criticados por los obreros de base, porque aunque fueron sindicalistas, ahora hacen parte de la las instituciones del Estado que están al servicio de los capitalistas independientemente de sus intenciones.

Es obvio que, si no le permiten hablar a los que se atreven a criticar, no se está ejerciendo la democracia sindical, y una supuesta mayoría aprueba las conclusiones que ya están maquinadas desde arriba. De esta manera, los nuevos delegados, sobre todo de otras ciudades, creen que esa es la forma de trabajar en el movimiento sindical, desconociendo que la democracia sindical dista demasiado de ser eso, pues a la minoría hay que permitirle defender sus posiciones.

Es por eso que el sindicalismo, maniatado por la ideología burguesa no le sirve a los intereses colectivos de la clase obrera, hasta ahora solo ha servido para promover a esos burócratas en puestos del Estado, ha servido para que muchos dirigentes conviertan el sindicato en su caja menor, mientras los trabajadores quedan huérfanos y a merced de lo que quieran hacer los patrones con ellos.

Es por ello que desde estas páginas venimos denunciando esa política burguesa de conciliación y concertación de clases, que precisamente son los fundamentos de la CUT.

En la declaración política que presentaron como conclusión final del VIII Congreso, se afirma que el aumento salarial aprobado para este año fue un logro. Seguramente ninguno de esos burócratas gana un salario mínimo, ni les toca aguantar el infierno que viven los obreros en la fabricas, ni las afugias y persecuciones que viven los maestros en manos de los rectores reaccionarios, y los empleados de las alcaldías y gobernaciones que sufren la persecución más brutal por los jefes, la mayoría de la burocracia de la CUT ya no siente lo que es vivir con un pírrico salario mínimo. Es decir, estas burocracias no representan a la mayoría como lo hacen saber, y sí engañan y maniatan a los obreros impidiéndoles organizarse con independencia de clase y construir sus propias organizaciones.

La declaración política de la CUT es solo un discurso más, pero lo que defienden allí es pura demagogia; esa burocracia se ha convertido en una maquinaria que no permite que desde adentro se pueda cambiar, es parecido a un Estado pequeñito, imposible de cambiar porque el Estado desde que se creó tiene como función garantizar los privilegios de las clases que poseen el poder económico, y en el caso de la CUT, desde su nacimiento quedó amarrada por la ideología y política de la burguesía, lo que la convirtió en el engendro que es hoy.

Es una necesidad inmediata que las organizaciones sindicales dejen de estar detrás de un oficio que pueden hacer las burocracias de las centrales sindicales. El movimiento sindical debe luchar por su organización con independencia de clase y desde las calles, con la denuncia y la protesta arrancarle a la burguesía las reivindicaciones del pueblo; pero es indispensable actuar organizada y centralizadamente, bajo unos principios que representen a su clase, que se vuelva a las huelgas de solidaridad.

Pero esto hay que trabajarlo a consciencia y con mucho compromiso comprendiendo que las reivindicaciones se resuelven colectivamente, organizados de verdad en federaciones independientes, que sean los cimientos de una verdadera Central Independiente por su ideología y política al servicio de los trabajadores y no de los patronos, una Central que dirija la lucha de los trabajadores en la mejora de sus condiciones, pero no para mantenerse como esclavos asalariados, sino para tener las fuerzas para luchar contra el capitalismo, contra la explotación asalariada y la construcción de una nueva sociedad, el socialismo.

¡Avanzar a la reestructuración del movimiento sindical!


[Previous Article]#[Next]

No más guerra contra el pueblo indígena | Revolución Obrera (Revolucion Obrera)


No más guerra contra el pueblo indígena 1
Sepelio de la mayora Carmelina Yule Paví – 20 de marzo 2024

El día que yo muera, el día que yo no esté en el territorio, ustedes no se queden ahí, no les dé miedo a morir. Después de que estén luchando con sus manos, con su bastón, es el orgullo más grande que pueden tener, no como ellos, que son cobardes que empuñan un arma y con esa arma nos quieren intimidar, pero no, no se dejen doblegar, sean valientes, hablen«, dijo María Teresa sobre el legado que les dejó su madre Carmelina.

Desde el sábado 16 de marzo se han presentado varios hechos de violencia contra la comunidad nasa en la zona rural del municipio de Toribío (Cauca), allí fue asesinada la dirigente indígena Carmelina Yule Paví, de 52 años de edad, fue herida cuando acompañaba a integrantes de la Guardia Indígena para rescatar a un menor quien había sido reclutado forzadamente por el Frente Dagoberto Ramos del Estado Mayor Central (EMC) de las disidencias de las FARC. Posteriormente la comunidad y la guardia indígena rescataron 2 niñas que habían sido secuestradas. Durante el funeral de la mayora Carmelina, fueron nuevamente víctimas de hostigamiento armado por parte del mismo grupo armado.

Canción de las mujeres nasa contra el reclutamiento forzado

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/YEi66peN3qHcAjYZ/?mibextid=oFDknk

El conflicto armado genera masacres, reclutamiento forzado, es favorecido por la falta de oportunidades en la educación y en lo laboral. El abandono del campo por parte del Estado, lleva a las comunidades rurales a la pobreza; en particular los niños y jóvenes se convierten en carne de cañón, debido a la guerra por la disputa de la ganancia de los cultivos de coca, amapola y marihuana.

Esta guerra reaccionaria, realizada por los diferentes grupos armados como, los paramilitares, las fuerzas armadas del Estado, las disidencias de las FARC, el ELN y grupos de delincuencia común, ha costado la vida de miles de jóvenes durante décadas y aunque en el nuevo gobierno se promueva el discurso de «Paz Total», la guerra sigue en el campo, apuntando al exterminio de las comunidades.

Con este accionar queda demostrada la descomposición de las disidencias ya que no cuentan con una base política ennoblecida por el socialismo, que oriente su causa contra los enemigos del pueblo; por el contrario, se han convertido en un cartel más que masacra a su propio pueblo.

De ahí que sea justa la exigencia a que el gobierno cumpla sus promesas de generar fuentes de empleo, entregar tierras a las comunidades, brindar las condiciones para la educación gratuita y de calidad para primaria, secundaria y universidad.

Las exigencias más urgentes ante dicha situación al gobierno de Petro:

  • Que el gobierno proteja la vida de las comunidades dentro de los territorios.
  • Tras la suspensión del Acuerdo de Cese al Fuego Bilateral y Temporal en los departamentos del Cauca, Nariño y Valle del Cauca. Lo que significa que el gobierno reanuda las acciones militares contra la disidencia de las FARC, es necesario que se dé un reconocimiento a la guardia indígena como gobierno de control territorial de todas las regiones con los derechos jurídicos, políticos estructurales y legislativos.
  • Cambiar los cultivos ilícitos por lícitos: que se legalice la producción de los cultivos de coca y marihuana ya que se han convertido en una industria donde las ganancias se la llevan los inversionistas locales y extranjeros y son las comunidades las que ponen los muertos.
  • Que se promueva la formación académica universitaria construyendo universidades en los 10 departamentos del Sur Occidente.
  • Que se generen fuentes de empleo partiendo de la producción agrícola y minera tecnificada para cuidar el medio ambiente, situación que evitaría la migración de los jóvenes a las ciudades en busca de empleo y sobre todo a no hacer parte de los grupos armados convirtiéndose en victimarios de sus propias comunidades.
Rechazamos el asesinato de Carmelina.
No más secuestro de jóvenes, ni reclutamiento forzado.
Abajo la guerra contra el pueblo.
Ni el Estado, ni los politiqueros, Solo el Pueblo Salva al Pueblo.



[Previous Article]#[Next]

Ministro do STF ordena prisão de Mauro Cid após vazamento de áudios; defesa de Bolsonaro comemora - A Nova Democracia (A Nova Democracia)


O ministro do Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF), Alexandre de Moraes, ordenou, na tarde de 22 de março, a prisão preventiva do tenente-coronel do Exército, Mauro Cid, após o vazamento de um áudio em que o tenente-coronel lança criticas contra o ministro, o STF e a Polícia Federal (PF). Os áudios foram publicados na íntegra na manhã de hoje pela revista do monopólio de comunicação, Veja. Pela tarde, Mauro Cid foi chamado a depor no STF e foi preso por “descumprimento de medida cautelar”. O STF ameaça ainda cancelar o acordo de delação premiada, mas deve manter a validade das provas oferecidas por Cid.

A ordem de prisão de Cid foi cumprida logo após a sessão de delação premiada no dia 22 de março, que durou 1h30. Cid foi acusado de “obstrução de justiça” e de “descumprimento das medidas cautelares”. 

O que dizem os áudios vazados do delator

Nos áudios, o tenente-coronel acusa a PF de distorcer suas palavras, tirar as frases de contexto e ocultar alguns conteúdos das declarações intencionalmente. Ele afirma que o STF e a PF tem uma “narrativa pronta” e só querem comprová-la a qualquer custo, e que inclusive foi coagido a falar coisas que não sabia. “Eles são a lei agora. A lei acabou. O Alexandre de Moraes é a lei. Ele prende, ele solta, quando ele quiser, como ele quiser. Com Ministério Público, sem Ministério Público, com acusação, sem acusação”. 

Em outro momento do áudio vazado, Cid afirma que “o Alexandre de Moraes já tem a sentença dele pronta, acho que essa é que é a grande verdade. Ele já tem a sentença dele pronta. Só tá esperando passar um tempo. O momento que ele achar conveniente, denuncia todo mundo, o PGR [procurador-geral da República] acata, aceita e ele prende todo mundo”. Por fim, o tenente-coronel ainda deu a entender que Moraes esconde episódios de 2022: “Eu falei daquele encontro do Alexandre de Moraes com o presidente, eles ficaram desconcertados, desconcertados. Eu falei: ‘Quer que eu fale?’”

No áudio, o tenente-coronel fez questão também de falar como foi o que mais se prejudicou por conta da articulação golpista de 2022, quase como o que mais se arriscou pela “causa”: “Quem mais se fodeu fui eu. Quem mais perdeu coisa fui eu. Ninguém perdeu carreira, ninguém perdeu vida financeira como eu perdi. Todo mundo já era quatro estrelas, já tinha atingido o topo, né? O presidente teve Pix de milhões, ficou milionário, né?”, disse.

Mauro Cid sai perdendo, Bolsonaro sai ganhando

O vazamento dos áudios, nos quais o delator alegar ter sido pressionado pelos investigadores e que as perguntas eram tendenciosas, objetivamente reforçou a posição da extrema-direita e dos aliados direitistas de Bolsonaro. Estes buscam “queimar” o ministro do STF, Alexandre de Moraes, como “parcial” para conduzir o inquérito. Sendo ou não verdade o que disse Mauro Cid, o fato é que a suspeição já está plantada. Isso não significa que juridicamente as provas sejam anuladas agora, mas, politicamente, fica fragilizado um possível mandado de prisão no curto prazo.

Chama a atenção, no entanto, que Mauro Cid não ganhou absolutamente nada com esse vazamento. O tenente-coronel chegou a passar mal e desmaiar ao receber a voz de prisão. Ao contrário, Bolsonaro sai ganhando. Aliados e a defesa jurídica de Bolsonaro comemoraram o acontecimento, chamando-o inclusive de “gol de placa”.

É impressionante como, entre os golpistas e fascistas, a deslealdade e a traição florescem como bambus após as chuvas: Mauro Cid, o delator, a que tudo indica, foi traído por seu interlocutor, que vazou o áudio que o prejudicou seriamente. Cid, porém, não pode reclamar: havia entregado informações que incriminavam Bolsonaro para se livrar da prisão. Essa gente entregam-se uns aos outros, sem se importar se eram antigos aliados. Mauro Cid traiu e foi traído. Como escreveu Shakespeare, em Júlio Cesar: um traidor morre muitas vezes antes de morrer.


[Previous Article]#[Next]

Ex-comandante e Luiz Inácio impediram prisão de 'galinhas verdes' no 8/1 para proteger família do general Villas-Bôas - A Nova Democracia (A Nova Democracia)


Segundo informações reveladas pela jornalista Denise Assis, do portal Brasil 247, o propósito do ex-comandante do Exército, Júlio César Arruda, ao posicionar tanques em frente ao acampamento bolsonarista no QG do Exército na noite do dia 8 de janeiro – impedindo, assim, a prisão dos “galinhas verdes” – foi proteger a filha e a esposa do ex-comandante, Eduardo Villas-Bôas. A decisão contou com o aceite de Luiz Inácio, que prevaricou junto de Arruda. 

Já era suspeito há tempos que o acampamento em frente ao QG foi usado de base temporária para militares reacionários e familiares que tomaram parte na bolsonarada do 8/1, e que os tanques serviram como proteção para sua saída antes da entrada das tropas da Polícia Militar (PM). Na época, a justificativa oficial e que mais repercutiu na imprensa foi que a entrada da PM foi adiada para evitar um “banho de sangue”, uma vez que haviam “galinhas verdes” armados no acampamento que poderiam reagir. No entanto, essa não é a versão real dos fatos.

A verdade é que o comandante do Exército, Júlio Cesar Arruda, descobriu a presença de Maria Aparecida e Ticiana Villas-Bôas no acampamento e que as mesmas haviam participado da invasão à praça dos Três Poderes. O então comandante do Exército entrou em contato com Gustavo Henrique Dutra, comandante militar do Planalto, para armar o enfileiramento dos blindados na entrada do quartel e impedir a entrada da PM. Dutra recebeu ainda a tarefa de falar com Luiz Inácio, informá-lo e convencê-lo a suspender a ordem. Dutra falou primeiro com o general Gonçalves Dias, então ministro do GSI, e o convenceu a passar para o mandatário. Na conversa, Dutra relatou para Luiz Inácio a presença de Maria Aparecida e Ticiana, alertou o presidente de que havia risco de sublevação caso a prisão das mesmas fosse efetuada, uma vez que a figura de Villas-Bôas é unanimidade na caserna. Luiz Inácio, assim, acatou a ordem. 

Maria Aparecida Villas-Bôas, esposa do ex-comandante, foi uma figura extremamente ativa nas articulações pela ruptura institucional. Ela visitou acampamentos com frequência, chegando a dar a entender em uma das visitas que Villas-Bôas estava com ela e foi até mesmo em uma das reuniões da cúpula militar para discutir o golpe.

Os fatos revelados explicitam o grau da crise militar na qual ainda está mergulhada a Nação. Afinal, se a simples prisão de familiares de um ex-comandante poderia desatar um processo de ruptura da hierarquia e disciplina na caserna, a única certeza que podemos ter é de que essa mesma hierarquia e disciplina estão extremamente fragilizadas. E, de fato, estão: as tropas não mudaram, tampouco o essencial do comando delas. Quem pode crer que o Brasil está mesmo a salvo de uma ruptura institucional, como sugerem os liberais e oportunistas?


[Previous Article]#[Next]

RJ: Manifestação exige fim de processo contra mototaxista acusado injustamente (veja o vídeo) - A Nova Democracia (A Nova Democracia)


Na tarde do dia 20 de março, uma manifestação aconteceu no Tribunal de Justiça do Rio de Janeiro (TJRJ). Nesse dia seria realizado o julgamento em primeira instância de Diego Felipe, mototaxista e maqueiro do Hospital Universitário de UFRJ, preso injustamente em julho de 2023 pela PM sob a falsa acusação de transportar um fuzil desmontado, que estava com um passageiro transportado por Diego.

Leia também: RJ: Familiares exigem liberdade para Diego, mototaxista preso injustamente

Na ocasião, o trabalhador ficou dois meses encarcerado em um presídio no município de São Gonçalo e atualmente se encontra em liberdade provisória. Os colegas e familiares de Diego exigem o fim do julgamento contra o mototaxista e denunciando a criminalização do povo preto, pobre e periférico promovida pelo velho Estado. 

A manifestação teve início ao meio-dia e contou com a presença de amigos e familiares de Diego, bem como de organizações democráticas como o Centro Brasileiro de Solidariedade aos Povos (Cebraspo). Na ocasião, os manifestantes ergueram cartazes e ecoaram frases como Justiça para Diego, Mototáxi não é bandido, mexeu com ele mexeu comigo Trabalhador não é bandido, foi a PM que matou o Amarildo.

Durante as intervenções, os familiares denunciaram o caráter racista das polícias nas constantes prisões e operações arbitrárias contra os trabalhadores moradores de favela, apontando que o caso de Diego não é uma exceção, e sim uma regra em um país onde 44,5% dos presos ainda não foram julgados, segundo dados do Conselho Nacional de Justiça (CNJ) em 2022.  

Os manifestantes denunciaram também os dois pesos e duas medidas utilizados pela justiça do velho Estado. Enquanto processa, prende e criminaliza milhares de trabalhadores inocentes, absolve e deixa em liberdade os policiais militares que matam o povo nas favelas, como ocorreu recentemente com a absolvição dos policiais que assassinaram a trabalhadora Cláudia Ferreira. 

O julgamento do caso de Diego foi adiado para o dia 1 de abril às 14h em decorrência do não comparecimento dos policiais que fazem parte da acusação. A família convida a todos para participarem de outro ato que ocorrerá neste dia às 12h em frente ao Tribunal de Justiça.


[Previous Article]#[Next]

Brazil: The 23 persecuted activists from 2013/14 were acquitted – The Red Herald (Red Herald)


A Nova Democracia reports that on Tuesday, March 19, the trial of the request for acquittal of the 23 political activists persecuted for their participation in the 2013 and 2014 demonstrations took place at the Court in Rio de Janeiro.

The trial lasted around 20 minutes and unanimously approved the acquittal of the activists. Outside the court, popular class movements, democratic entities and associations gathered to denounce the political persecution and demand the acquittal of the 23 activists persecuted by the old State for 10 years.

At the event, in addition to celebrating the result of the trial, speeches were also made against the criminalization of the popular struggle currently underway, defending the people’s right to struggle for their rights.

The case against the 23 began in 2014, with accusations of “gang formation” and “corruption of minors”. The activists were sentenced to sentences ranging from 5 to 7 years in prison. The accusations and arrests linked to this process are part of the campaign of persecution and criminalization of the popular struggle.

It is worth highlighting that the criminalization of activists and young people who took to the streets to protest also included the participation of the press monopoly, which painted the young fighters as “terrorists” and “vandals”.

Igor Mendes, among others was imprisoned. He served almost 7 months. Several other people had to remain underground to escape the waves of arrests that were taking place.

During these 10 years of struggling against the absurd process, the people’s lawyers managed to completely prove the complete farce behind the accusations, which was not supported by evidence but by “testimonies” from undercover agents and other illegalities. that made up a process full of gross flaws.

The acquittal represents a political victory not only for the activists directly affected but also for all those who struggle, especially the youth, who dared to stand up in the heroic days of 2013 and 2014 against oppression and exploitation of the people. The outcome is also important due to the given current national situation, marked by a profound reactionarization of the State, which has been creating new laws and legal mechanisms to criminalize popular struggle and the right to demonstrate.

PDF Content:



The text of the Rome Statute reproduced herein was originally circulated as document A/CONF.183/9 of 17 J uly 1 998 and corrected by procès-verbaux of 10 November 1998, 12 July 1999, 30 November 1999, 8 May 2000, 17 January 2001 and 16 January 2002. The amendments to article 8 reproduce the text contained in depositary notification C.N.651.2010 Treaties-6, while the amendments regarding articles 8 bis, 15 bis and 15 ter replicate the text contained in depositary notification C.N.651.2010 Treaties-8; both depositary communications are dated 29 November 2010. The table of contents is not part of the text of the Rome Statute adopted by the United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court on 17 July 1998. It has been included in this publication for ease of reference. Done at Rome on 17 July 1998, in force on 1 July 2002, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2187, No. 38544, Depositary: Secretary-General of the United Nations, http://treaties.un.org .Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPublished by the International Criminal Court ISBN No. 92-9227-232-2 ICC-PIOS-LT-03-002/15_Eng Copyright © International Criminal Court 2011 All rights reserved International Criminal Court | Po Box 19519 | 2500 CM | The Hague | The Netherlands | www.icc-cpi.int
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Table of Contents PREAMBLE 1 PART 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COURT 2 Article 1 The Court 2 Article 2 Relationship of the Court with the United Nations 2 Article 3 Seat of the Court 2 Article 4 Legal status and powers of the Court 2 PART 2. JURISDICTION, ADMISSIBILITY AND APPLICABLE LAW 3 Article 5 Crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court 3 Article 6 Genocide 3 Article 7 Crimes against humanity 3 Article 8 War crimes 4 Article 8 bis Crime of aggression 7 Article 9 Elements of Crimes 8 Article 10 8 Article 11 Jurisdiction ratione temporis 8 Article 12 Preconditions to the exercise of jurisdiction 8 Article 13 Exercise of jurisdiction 9 Article 14 Referral of a situation by a State Party 9 Article 15 Prosecutor 9 Article 15 bis Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (State referral, proprio motu ) 9 Article 15 ter Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (Security Council referral) 10 Article 16 Deferral of investigation or prosecution 10 Article 17 Issues of admissibility 10 Article 18 Preliminary rulings regarding admissibility 11 Article 19 Challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court or the admissibility of a case 12 Article 20 Ne bis in idem 1 3 Article 21 Applicable law 13 PART 3. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW 14 Article 22 Nullum crimen sine lege 14 Article 23 Nulla poena sine lege 14 Article 24 Non-retroactivity ratione personae 14 Article 25 Individual criminal responsibility 14 Article 26 Exclusion of jurisdiction over persons under eighteen 15 Article 27 Irrelevance of official capacity 15 Article 28 Responsibility of commanders and other superiors 15 Article 29 Non-applicability of statute of limitations 15 Article 30 Mental element 15 Article 31 Grounds for excluding criminal responsibility 16 Article 32 Mistake of fact or mistake of law 16 Article 33 Superior orders and prescription of law 16 PART 4. COMPOSITION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE COURT 17 Article 34 Organs of the Court 17 Article 35 Service of judges 17 Article 36 Qualifications, nomination and election of judges 17 Article 37 Judicial vacancies 19 Article 38 The Presidency 19 Article 39 Chambers 19 Article 40 Independence of the judges 20
Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 41 Excusing and disqualification of judges 20 Article 42 The Office of the Prosecutor 20 Article 44 Staff 21 Article 45 Solemn undertaking 21 Article 46 Removal from office 22 Article 47 Disciplinary measures 22 Article 48 Privileges and immunities 22 Article 49 Salaries, allowances and expenses 23 Article 50 Official and working languages 23 Article 51 Rules of Procedure and Evidence 23 Article 52 Regulations of the Court 23 PART 5. INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION 24 Article 53 Initiation of an investigation 24 Article 54 Duties and powers of the Prosecutor with respect to investigations 24 Article 55 Rights of persons during an investigation 25 Article 56 Role of the Pre-Trial Chamber in relation to a unique investigative opportunity 25 Article 57 Functions and powers of the Pre-Trial Chamber 26 Article 58 Issuance by the Pre-Trial Chamber of a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear 27 Article 59 Arrest proceedings in the custodial State 28 Article 60 Initial proceedings before the Court 28 Article 61 Confirmation of the charges before trial 28 PART 6. THE TRIAL 31 Article 62 Place of trial 31 Article 63 Trial in the presence of the accused 31 Article 64 Functions and powers of the Trial Chamber 31 Article 65 Proceedings on an admission of guilt 32 Article 66 Presumption of innocence 32 Article 67 Rights of the accused 33 Article 68 Protection of the victims and witnesses and their participation in the proceedings 33 Article 69 Evidence 34 Article 70 Offences against the administration of justice 34 Article 71 Sanctions for misconduct before the Court 35 Article 72 Protection of national security information 35 Article 73 Third-party information or documents 36 Article 74 Requirements for the decision 36 Article 75 Reparations to victims 36 Article 76 Sentencing 37 PART 7. PENALTIES 38 Article 77 Applicable penalties 38 Article 78 Determination of the sentence 38 Article 79 Trust Fund 38 Article 80 Non-prejudice to national application of penalties and national laws 38 PART 8. APPEAL AND REVISION 39 Article 81 Appeal against decision of acquittal or conviction or against sentence 39 Article 82 Appeal against other decisions 39 Article 83 Proceedings on appeal 40 Article 84 Revision of conviction or sentence 40 Article 85 Compensation to an arrested or convicted person 41
Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 9. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AND JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE 42 Article 86 General obligation to cooperate 42 Article 87 Requests for cooperation: general provisions 42 Article 88 Availability of procedures under national law 42 Article 89 Surrender of persons to the Court 42 Article 90 Competing requests 43 Article 91 Contents of request for arrest and surrender 44 Article 92 Provisional arrest 45 Article 93 Other forms of cooperation 45 Article 94 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of ongoing investigation or prosecution 47 Article 95 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of an admissibility challenge 47 Article 96 Contents of request for other forms of assistance under article 93 47 Article 97 Consultations 48 Article 98 Cooperation with respect to waiver of immunity and consent to surrender 48 Article 99 Execution of requests under articles 93 and 96 48 Article 100 Costs 49 Article 101 Rule of speciality 49 Article 102 Use of terms 49 PART 10. ENFORCEMENT 50 Article 103 Role of States in enforcement of sentences of imprisonment 50 Article 104 Change in designation of State of enforcement 50 Article 105 Enforcement of the sentence 50 Article 106 Supervision of enforcement of sentences and conditions of imprisonment 50 Article 107 Transfer of the person upon completion of sentence 51 Article 108 Limitation on the prosecution or punishment of other offences 51 Article 109 Enforcement of fines and forfeiture measures 51 Article 110 Review by the Court concerning reduction of sentence 51 Article 111 Escape 52 PART 11. ASSEMBLY OF STATES PARTIES 53 Article 112 Assembly of States Parties 53 PART 12. FINANCING 54 Article 113 Financial Regulations 54 Article 114 Payment of expenses 54 Article 115 Funds of the Court and of the Assembly of States Parties 54 Article 116 Voluntary contributions 54 Article 117 Assessment of contributions 54 Article 118 Annual audit 54 PART 13. FINAL CLAUSES 55 Article 119 Settlement of disputes 55 Article 120 Reservations 55 Article 121 Amendments 55 Article 122 Amendments to provisions of an institutional nature 55 Article 123 Review of the Statute 56 Article 124 Transitional Provision 56 Article 125 Signature, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession 56 Article 126 Entry into force 56 Article 127 Withdrawal 56 Article 128 Authentic texts 57
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
1 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPREAMBLE The States Parties to this Statute, Conscious that all peoples are united by common bonds, their cultures pieced together in a shared heritage, and concerned that this delicate mosaic may be shattered at any time, Mindful that during this century millions of children, women and men have been victims of unimaginable atrocities that deeply shock the conscience of humanity, Recognizing that such grave crimes threaten the peace, security and well-being of the world, Affirming that the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole must not go unpunished and that their effective prosecution must be ensured by taking measures at the national level and by enhancing international cooperation, Determined to put an end to impunity for the perpetrators of these crimes and thus to contribute to the prevention of such crimes, Recalling that it is the duty of every State to exercise its criminal jurisdiction over those responsible for international crimes, Reaffirming the Purposes and Principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and in particular that all States shall refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations, Emphasizing in this connection that nothing in this Statute shall be taken as authorizing any State Party to intervene in an armed conflict or in the internal affairs of any State, Determined to these ends and for the sake of present and future generations, to establish an independent permanent International Criminal Court in relationship with the United Nations system, with jurisdiction over the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole, Emphasizing that the International Criminal Court established under this Statute shall be complementary to national criminal jurisdictions, Resolved to guarantee lasting respect for and the enforcement of international justice, Have agreed as follows:
2 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COURT Article 1 The Court An International Criminal Court ("the Court") is hereby established. It shall be a permanent institution and shall have the power to exercise its jurisdiction over persons for the most serious crimes of international concern, as referred to in this Statute, and shall be complementary to national criminal jurisdictions. The jurisdiction and functioning of the Court shall be governed by the provisions of this Statute. Article 2 Relationship of the Court with the United Nations The Court shall be brought into relationship with the United Nations through an agreement to be approved by the Assembly of States Parties to this Statute and thereafter concluded by the President of the Court on its behalf. Article 3 Seat of the Court 1. The seat of the Court shall be established at The Hague in the Netherlands ("the host State"). 2. The Court shall enter into a headquarters agreement with the host State, to be approved by the Assembly of States Parties and thereafter concluded by the President of the Court on its behalf. 3. The Court may sit elsewhere, whenever it considers it desirable, as provided in this Statute. Article 4 Legal status and powers of the Court 1. The Court shall have international legal personality. It shall also have such legal capacity as may be necessary for the exercise of its functions and the fulfilment of its purposes. 2. The Court may exercise its functions and powers, as provided in this Statute, on the territory of any State Party and, by special agreement, on the territory of any other State.
3 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 2. JURISDICTION, ADMISSIBILITY AND APPLICABLE LAW Article 51 Crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court The jurisdiction of the Court shall be limited to the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole. The Court has jurisdiction in accordance with this Statute with respect to the following crimes: (a) The crime of genocide; (b) Crimes against humanity; (c) War crimes; (d) The crime of aggression. Article 6 Genocide For the purpose of this Statute, "genocide" means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. Article 7 Crimes against humanity 1. For the purpose of this Statute, "crime against humanity" means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack: (a) Murder; (b) Extermination; (c) Enslavement; (d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population; (e) Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law; (f) Torture; (g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity; (h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; (i) Enforced disappearance of persons; (j) The crime of apartheid; (k) Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health. 1 Paragraph 2 of article 5 (“The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression once a provision is adopted in accordance with articles 121 and 123 defining the crime and setting out the conditions under which the Court shall exercise jurisdiction with respect to this crime. Such a provision shall be consistent with the relevant provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.”) was deleted in accordance with RC/Res.6, annex I, of 11 June 2010.
4 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. For the purpose of paragraph 1: (a) "Attack directed against any civilian population" means a course of conduct involving the multiple commission of acts referred to in paragraph 1 against any civilian population, pursuant to or in furtherance of a State or organizational policy to commit such attack; (b) "Extermination" includes the intentional infliction of conditions of life, inter alia the deprivation of access to food and medicine, calculated to bring about the destruction of part of a population; (c) "Enslavement" means the exercise of any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership over a person and includes the exercise of such power in the course of trafficking in persons, in particular women and children; (d) "Deportation or forcible transfer of population" means forced displacement of the persons concerned by expulsion or other coercive acts from the area in which they are lawfully present, without grounds permitted under international law; (e) "Torture" means the intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, upon a person in the custody or under the control of the accused; except that torture shall not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions; (f) "Forced pregnancy" means the unlawful confinement of a woman forcibly made pregnant, with the intent of affecting the ethnic composition of any population or carrying out other grave violations of international law. This definition shall not in any way be interpreted as affecting national laws relating to pregnancy; (g) "Persecution" means the intentional and severe deprivation of fundamental rights contrary to international law by reason of the identity of the group or collectivity; (h) "The crime of apartheid" means inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime; (i) "Enforced disappearance of persons" means the arrest, detention or abduction of persons by, or with the authorization, support or acquiescence of, a State or a political organization, followed by a refusal to acknowledge that deprivation of freedom or to give information on the fate or whereabouts of those persons, with the intention of removing them from the protection of the law for a prolonged period of time. 3. For the purpose of this Statute, it is understood that the term "gender" refers to the two sexes, male and female, within the context of society. The term "gender" does not indicate any meaning different from the above. Article 82 War crimes 1. The Court shall have jurisdiction in respect of war crimes in particular when committed as part of a plan or policy or as part of a large-scale commission of such crimes. 2. For the purpose of this Statute, "war crimes" means: (a) Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention: (i) Wilful killing; (ii) Torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments; (iii) Wilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health; (iv) Extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly; (v) Compelling a prisoner of war or other protected person to serve in the forces of a hostile Power; (vi) Wilfully depriving a prisoner of war or other protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial; 2 Paragraphs 2 (e) (xiii) to 2 (e) (xv) were amended by resolution RC/Res.5 of 11 June 2010 (adding paragraphs 2 (e) (xiii) to 2 (e) (xv)).
5 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(vii) Unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement; (viii) Taking of hostages. (b) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts: (i) Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities; (ii) Intentionally directing attacks against civilian objects, that is, objects which are not military objectives; (iii) Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict; (iv) Intentionally launching an attack in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated; (v) Attacking or bombarding, by whatever means, towns, villages, dwellings or buildings which are undefended and which are not military objectives; (vi) Killing or wounding a combatant who, having laid down his arms or having no longer means of defence, has surrendered at discretion; (vii) Making improper use of a flag of truce, of the flag or of the military insignia and uniform of the enemy or of the United Nations, as well as of the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions, resulting in death or serious personal injury; (viii) The transfer, directly or indirectly, by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies, or the deportation or transfer of all or parts of the population of the occupied territory within or outside this territory; (ix) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military objectives; (x) Subjecting persons who are in the power of an adverse party to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons; (xi) Killing or wounding treacherously individuals belonging to the hostile nation or army; (xii) Declaring that no quarter will be given; (xiii) Destroying or seizing the enemy's property unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war; (xiv) Declaring abolished, suspended or inadmissible in a court of law the rights and actions of the nationals of the hostile party; (xv) Compelling the nationals of the hostile party to take part in the operations of war directed against their own country, even if they were in the belligerent's service before the commencement of the war; (xvi) Pillaging a town or place, even when taken by assault; (xvii) Employing poison or poisoned weapons; (xviii) Employing asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and all analogous liquids, materials or devices;
6 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(xix) Employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions; (xx) Employing weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare which are of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering or which are inherently indiscriminate in violation of the international law of armed conflict, provided that such weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare are the subject of a comprehensive prohibition and are included in an annex to this Statute, by an amendment in accordance with the relevant provisions set forth in articles 121 and 123; (xxi) Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (xxii) Committing rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, as defined in article 7, paragraph 2 (f), enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence also constituting a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions; (xxiii) Utilizing the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas or military forces immune from military operations; (xxiv) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings, material, medical units and transport, and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions in conformity with international law; (xxv) Intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions; (xxvi) Conscripting or enlisting children under the age of fifteen years into the national armed forces or using them to participate actively in hostilities. (c) In the case of an armed conflict not of an international character, serious violations of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts committed against persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention or any other cause: (i) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; (ii) Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (iii) Taking of hostages; (iv) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgement pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all judicial guarantees which are generally recognized as indispensable. (d) Paragraph 2 (c) applies to armed conflicts not of an international character and thus does not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence or other acts of a similar nature. (e) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in armed conflicts not of an international character, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts: (i) Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities; (ii) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings, material, medical units and transport, and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions in conformity with international law; (iii) Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict; (iv) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military objectives; (v) Pillaging a town or place, even when taken by assault;
7 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(vi) Committing rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, as defined in article 7, paragraph 2 (f), enforced sterilization, and any other form of sexual violence also constituting a serious violation of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions; (vii) Conscripting or enlisting children under the age of fifteen years into armed forces or groups or using them to participate actively in hostilities; (viii) Ordering the displacement of the civilian population for reasons related to the conflict, unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand; (ix) Killing or wounding treacherously a combatant adversary; (x) Declaring that no quarter will be given; (xi) Subjecting persons who are in the power of another party to the conflict to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons; (xii) Destroying or seizing the property of an adversary unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of the conflict; (xiii) Employing poison or poisoned weapons; (xiv) Employing asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and all analogous liquids, materials or devices; (xv) Employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions. (f) Paragraph 2 (e) applies to armed conflicts not of an international character and thus does not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence or other acts of a similar nature. It applies to armed conflicts that take place in the territory of a State when there is protracted armed conflict between governmental authorities and organized armed groups or between such groups. 3. Nothing in paragraph 2 (c) and (e) shall affect the responsibility of a Government to maintain or re- establish law and order in the State or to defend the unity and territorial integrity of the State, by all legitimate means. Article 8 bis3 Crime of aggression 1. For the purpose of this Statute, “crime of aggression” means the planning, preparation, initiation or execution, by a person in a position effectively to exercise control over or to direct the political or military action of a State, of an act of aggression which, by its character, gravity and scale, constitutes a manifest violation of the Charter of the United Nations. 2. For the purpose of paragraph 1, “act of aggression” means the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations. Any of the following acts, regardless of a declaration of war, shall, in accordance with United Nations General Assembly resolution 3314 (XXIX) of 14 December 1974, qualify as an act of aggression: (a) The invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another State, or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such invasion or attack, or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State or part thereof; (b) Bombardment by the armed forces of a State against the territory of another State or the use of any weapons by a State against the territory of another State; (c) The blockade of the ports or coasts of a State by the armed forces of another State; (d) An attack by the armed forces of a State on the land, sea or air forces, or marine and air fleets of another State; 3 Inserted by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010.
8 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(e) The use of armed forces of one State which are within the territory of another State with the agreement of the receiving State, in contravention of the conditions provided for in the agreement or any extension of their presence in such territory beyond the termination of the agreement; (f) The action of a State in allowing its territory, which it has placed at the disposal of another State, to be used by that other State for perpetrating an act of aggression against a third State; (g) The sending by or on behalf of a State of armed bands, groups, irregulars or mercenaries, which carry out acts of armed force against another State of such gravity as to amount to the acts listed above, or its substantial involvement therein. Article 94 Elements of Crimes 1. Elements of Crimes shall assist the Court in the interpretation and application of articles 6, 7, 8 and 8 bis. They shall be adopted by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 2. Amendments to the Elements of Crimes may be proposed by: (a) Any State Party; (b) The judges acting by an absolute majority; (c) The Prosecutor. Such amendments shall be adopted by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 3. The Elements of Crimes and amendments thereto shall be consistent with this Statute. Article 10 Nothing in this Part shall be interpreted as limiting or prejudicing in any way existing or developing rules of international law for purposes other than this Statute. Article 11 Jurisdiction ratione temporis 1. The Court has jurisdiction only with respect to crimes committed after the entry into force of this Statute. 2. If a State becomes a Party to this Statute after its entry into force, the Court may exercise its jurisdiction only with respect to crimes committed after the entry into force of this Statute for that State, unless that State has made a declaration under article 12, paragraph 3. Article 12 Preconditions to the exercise of jurisdiction 1. A State which becomes a Party to this Statute thereby accepts the jurisdiction of the Court with respect to the crimes referred to in article 5. 2. In the case of article 13, paragraph (a) or (c), the Court may exercise its jurisdiction if one or more of the following States are Parties to this Statute or have accepted the jurisdiction of the Court in accordance with paragraph 3: (a) The State on the territory of which the conduct in question occurred or, if the crime was committed on board a vessel or aircraft, the State of registration of that vessel or aircraft; (b) The State of which the person accused of the crime is a national. 3. If the acceptance of a State which is not a Party to this Statute is required under paragraph 2, that State may, by declaration lodged with the Registrar, accept the exercise of jurisdiction by the Court with respect to the crime in question. The accepting State shall cooperate with the Court without any delay or exception in accordance with Part 9. 4 As amended by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010 (inserting the reference to article 8 bis).
9 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 13 Exercise of jurisdiction The Court may exercise its jurisdiction with respect to a crime referred to in article 5 in accordance with the provisions of this Statute if: (a) A situation in which one or more of such crimes appears to have been committed is referred to the Prosecutor by a State Party in accordance with article 14; (b) A situation in which one or more of such crimes appears to have been committed is referred to the Prosecutor by the Security Council acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations; or (c) The Prosecutor has initiated an investigation in respect of such a crime in accordance with article 15. Article 14 Referral of a situation by a State Party 1. A State Party may refer to the Prosecutor a situation in which one or more crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court appear to have been committed requesting the Prosecutor to investigate the situation for the purpose of determining whether one or more specific persons should be charged with the commission of such crimes. 2. As far as possible, a referral shall specify the relevant circumstances and be accompanied by such supporting documentation as is available to the State referring the situation. Article 15 Prosecutor 1. The Prosecutor may initiate investigations proprio motu on the basis of information on crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. 2. The Prosecutor shall analyse the seriousness of the information received. For this purpose, he or she may seek additional information from States, organs of the United Nations, intergovernmental or non- governmental organizations, or other reliable sources that he or she deems appropriate, and may receive written or oral testimony at the seat of the Court. 3. If the Prosecutor concludes that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation, he or she shall submit to the Pre-Trial Chamber a request for authorization of an investigation, together with any supporting material collected. Victims may make representations to the Pre-Trial Chamber, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. If the Pre-Trial Chamber, upon examination of the request and the supporting material, considers that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation, and that the case appears to fall within the jurisdiction of the Court, it shall authorize the commencement of the investigation, without prejudice to subsequent determinations by the Court with regard to the jurisdiction and admissibility of a case. 5. The refusal of the Pre-Trial Chamber to authorize the investigation shall not preclude the presentation of a subsequent request by the Prosecutor based on new facts or evidence regarding the same situation. 6. If, after the preliminary examination referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, the Prosecutor concludes that the information provided does not constitute a reasonable basis for an investigation, he or she shall inform those who provided the information. This shall not preclude the Prosecutor from considering further information submitted to him or her regarding the same situation in the light of new facts or evidence. Article 15 bis5 Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (State referral, proprio motu ) 1. The Court may exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with article 13, paragraphs (a) and (c), subject to the provisions of this article. 2. The Court may exercise jurisdiction only with respect to crimes of aggression committed one year after the ratification or acceptance of the amendments by thirty States Parties. 3. The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with this article, subject to a decision to be taken after 1 January 2017 by the same majority of States Parties as is required for the adoption of an amendment to the Statute. 5 Inserted by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010.
10 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court4. The Court may, in accordance with article 12, exercise jurisdiction over a crime of aggression, arising from an act of aggression committed by a State Party, unless that State Party has previously declared that it does not accept such jurisdiction by lodging a declaration with the Registrar. The withdrawal of such a declaration may be effected at any time and shall be considered by the State Party within three years. 5. In respect of a State that is not a party to this Statute, the Court shall not exercise its jurisdiction over the crime of aggression when committed by that State’s nationals or on its territory. 6. Where the Prosecutor concludes that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation in respect of a crime of aggression, he or she shall first ascertain whether the Security Council has made a determination of an act of aggression committed by the State concerned. The Prosecutor shall notify the Secretary-General of the United Nations of the situation before the Court, including any relevant information and documents. 7. Where the Security Council has made such a determination, the Prosecutor may proceed with the investigation in respect of a crime of aggression. 8. Where no such determination is made within six months after the date of notification, the Prosecutor may proceed with the investigation in respect of a crime of aggression, provided that the Pre-Trial Division has authorized the commencement of the investigation in respect of a crime of aggression in accordance with the procedure contained in article 15, and the Security Council has not decided otherwise in accordance with article16. 9. A determination of an act of aggression by an organ outside the Court shall be without prejudice to the Court’s own findings under this Statute. 10. This article is without prejudice to the provisions relating to the exercise of jurisdiction with respect to other crimes referred to in article 5. Article 15 ter6 Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (Security Council referral) 1. The Court may exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with article 13, paragraph (b), subject to the provisions of this article. 2. The Court may exercise jurisdiction only with respect to crimes of aggression committed one year after the ratification or acceptance of the amendments by thirty States Parties. 3. The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with this article, subject to a decision to be taken after 1 January 2017 by the same majority of States Parties as is required for the adoption of an amendment to the Statute. 4. A determination of an act of aggression by an organ outside the Court shall be without prejudice to the Court’s own findings under this Statute. 5. This article is without prejudice to the provisions relating to the exercise of jurisdiction with respect to other crimes referred to in article 5. Article 16 Deferral of investigation or prosecution No investigation or prosecution may be commenced or proceeded with under this Statute for a period of 12 months after the Security Council, in a resolution adopted under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, has requested the Court to that effect; that request may be renewed by the Council under the same conditions. Article 17 Issues of admissibility 1. Having regard to paragraph 10 of the Preamble and article 1, the Court shall determine that a case is inadmissible where: (a) The case is being investigated or prosecuted by a State which has jurisdiction over it, unless the State is unwilling or unable genuinely to carry out the investigation or prosecution; 6 Inserted by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010.
11 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) The case has been investigated by a State which has jurisdiction over it and the State has decided not to prosecute the person concerned, unless the decision resulted from the unwillingness or inability of the State genuinely to prosecute; (c) The person concerned has already been tried for conduct which is the subject of the complaint, and a trial by the Court is not permitted under article 20, paragraph 3; (d) The case is not of sufficient gravity to justify further action by the Court. 2. In order to determine unwillingness in a particular case, the Court shall consider, having regard to the principles of due process recognized by international law, whether one or more of the following exist, as applicable: (a) The proceedings were or are being undertaken or the national decision was made for the purpose of shielding the person concerned from criminal responsibility for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court referred to in article 5; (b) There has been an unjustified delay in the proceedings which in the circumstances is inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice; (c) The proceedings were not or are not being conducted independently or impartially, and they were or are being conducted in a manner which, in the circumstances, is inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice. 3. In order to determine inability in a particular case, the Court shall consider whether, due to a total or substantial collapse or unavailability of its national judicial system, the State is unable to obtain the accused or the necessary evidence and testimony or otherwise unable to carry out its proceedings. Article 18 Preliminary rulings regarding admissibility 1. When a situation has been referred to the Court pursuant to article 13 (a) and the Prosecutor has determined that there would be a reasonable basis to commence an investigation, or the Prosecutor initiates an investigation pursuant to articles 13 (c) and 15, the Prosecutor shall notify all States Parties and those States which, taking into account the information available, would normally exercise jurisdiction over the crimes concerned. The Prosecutor may notify such States on a confidential basis and, where the Prosecutor believes it necessary to protect persons, prevent destruction of evidence or prevent the absconding of persons, may limit the scope of the information provided to States. 2. Within one month of receipt of that notification, a State may inform the Court that it is investigating or has investigated its nationals or others within its jurisdiction with respect to criminal acts which may constitute crimes referred to in article 5 and which relate to the information provided in the notification to States. At the request of that State, the Prosecutor shall defer to the State's investigation of those persons unless the Pre-Trial Chamber, on the application of the Prosecutor, decides to authorize the investigation. 3. The Prosecutor's deferral to a State's investigation shall be open to review by the Prosecutor six months after the date of deferral or at any time when there has been a significant change of circumstances based on the State's unwillingness or inability genuinely to carry out the investigation. 4. The State concerned or the Prosecutor may appeal to the Appeals Chamber against a ruling of the Pre-Trial Chamber, in accordance with article 82. The appeal may be heard on an expedited basis. 5. When the Prosecutor has deferred an investigation in accordance with paragraph 2, the Prosecutor may request that the State concerned periodically inform the Prosecutor of the progress of its investigations and any subsequent prosecutions. States Parties shall respond to such requests without undue delay. 6. Pending a ruling by the Pre-Trial Chamber, or at any time when the Prosecutor has deferred an investigation under this article, the Prosecutor may, on an exceptional basis, seek authority from the Pre-Trial Chamber to pursue necessary investigative steps for the purpose of preserving evidence where there is a unique opportunity to obtain important evidence or there is a significant risk that such evidence may not be subsequently available. 7. A State which has challenged a ruling of the Pre-Trial Chamber under this article may challenge the admissibility of a case under article 19 on the grounds of additional significant facts or significant change of circumstances.
12 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 19 Challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court or the admissibility of a case 1. The Court shall satisfy itself that it has jurisdiction in any case brought before it. The Court may, on its own motion, determine the admissibility of a case in accordance with article 17. 2. Challenges to the admissibility of a case on the grounds referred to in article 17 or challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court may be made by: (a) An accused or a person for whom a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear has been issued under article 58; (b) A State which has jurisdiction over a case, on the ground that it is investigating or prosecuting the case or has investigated or prosecuted; or (c) A State from which acceptance of jurisdiction is required under article 12. 3. The Prosecutor may seek a ruling from the Court regarding a question of jurisdiction or admissibility. In proceedings with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility, those who have referred the situation under article 13, as well as victims, may also submit observations to the Court. 4. The admissibility of a case or the jurisdiction of the Court may be challenged only once by any person or State referred to in paragraph 2. The challenge shall take place prior to or at the commencement of the trial. In exceptional circumstances, the Court may grant leave for a challenge to be brought more than once or at a time later than the commencement of the trial. Challenges to the admissibility of a case, at the commencement of a trial, or subsequently with the leave of the Court, may be based only on article 17, paragraph 1 (c). 5. A State referred to in paragraph 2 (b) and (c) shall make a challenge at the earliest opportunity. 6. Prior to the confirmation of the charges, challenges to the admissibility of a case or challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court shall be referred to the Pre-Trial Chamber. After confirmation of the charges, they shall be referred to the Trial Chamber. Decisions with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility may be appealed to the Appeals Chamber in accordance with article 82. 7. If a challenge is made by a State referred to in paragraph 2 (b) or (c), the Prosecutor shall suspend the investigation until such time as the Court makes a determination in accordance with article 17. 8. Pending a ruling by the Court, the Prosecutor may seek authority from the Court: (a) To pursue necessary investigative steps of the kind referred to in article 18, paragraph 6; (b) To take a statement or testimony from a witness or complete the collection and examination of evidence which had begun prior to the making of the challenge; and (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. 9. The making of a challenge shall not affect the validity of any act performed by the Prosecutor or any order or warrant issued by the Court prior to the making of the challenge. 10. If the Court has decided that a case is inadmissible under article 17, the Prosecutor may submit a request for a review of the decision when he or she is fully satisfied that new facts have arisen which negate the basis on which the case had previously been found inadmissible under article 17. 11. If the Prosecutor, having regard to the matters referred to in article 17, defers an investigation, the Prosecutor may request that the relevant State make available to the Prosecutor information on the proceedings. That information shall, at the request of the State concerned, be confidential. If the Prosecutor thereafter decides to proceed with an investigation, he or she shall notify the State to which deferral of the proceedings has taken place.
13 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 207 Ne bis in idem 1. Except as provided in this Statute, no person shall be tried before the Court with respect to conduct which formed the basis of crimes for which the person has been convicted or acquitted by the Court. 2. No person shall be tried by another court for a crime referred to in article 5 for which that person has already been convicted or acquitted by the Court. 3. No person who has been tried by another court for conduct also proscribed under article 6, 7, 8 or 8 bis shall be tried by the Court with respect to the same conduct unless the proceedings in the other court: (a) Were for the purpose of shielding the person concerned from criminal responsibility for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court; or (b) Otherwise were not conducted independently or impartially in accordance with the norms of due process recognized by international law and were conducted in a manner which, in the circumstances, was inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice. Article 21 Applicable law 1. The Court shall apply: (a) In the first place, this Statute, Elements of Crimes and its Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (b) In the second place, where appropriate, applicable treaties and the principles and rules of international law, including the established principles of the international law of armed conflict; (c) Failing that, general principles of law derived by the Court from national laws of legal systems of the world including, as appropriate, the national laws of States that would normally exercise jurisdiction over the crime, provided that those principles are not inconsistent with this Statute and with international law and internationally recognized norms and standards. 2. The Court may apply principles and rules of law as interpreted in its previous decisions. 3. The application and interpretation of law pursuant to this article must be consistent with internationally recognized human rights, and be without any adverse distinction founded on grounds such as gender as defined in article 7, paragraph 3, age, race, colour, language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, wealth, birth or other status. 7 As amended by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010 (inserting the reference to article 8 bis).
14 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 3. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW Article 22 Nullum crimen sine lege 1. A person shall not be criminally responsible under this Statute unless the conduct in question constitutes, at the time it takes place, a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court. 2. The definition of a crime shall be strictly construed and shall not be extended by analogy. In case of ambiguity, the definition shall be interpreted in favour of the person being investigated, prosecuted or convicted. 3. This article shall not affect the characterization of any conduct as criminal under international law independently of this Statute. Article 23 Nulla poena sine leg e A person convicted by the Court may be punished only in accordance with this Statute. Article 24 Non-retroactivity ratione personae 1. No person shall be criminally responsible under this Statute for conduct prior to the entry into force of the Statute. 2. In the event of a change in the law applicable to a given case prior to a final judgement, the law more favourable to the person being investigated, prosecuted or convicted shall apply. Article 258 Individual criminal responsibility 1. The Court shall have jurisdiction over natural persons pursuant to this Statute. 2. A person who commits a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court shall be individually responsible and liable for punishment in accordance with this Statute. 3. In accordance with this Statute, a person shall be criminally responsible and liable for punishment for a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court if that person: (a) Commits such a crime, whether as an individual, jointly with another or through another person, regardless of whether that other person is criminally responsible; (b) Orders, solicits or induces the commission of such a crime which in fact occurs or is attempted; (c) For the purpose of facilitating the commission of such a crime, aids, abets or otherwise assists in its commission or its attempted commission, including providing the means for its commission; (d) In any other way contributes to the commission or attempted commission of such a crime by a group of persons acting with a common purpose. Such contribution shall be intentional and shall either: (i) Be made with the aim of furthering the criminal activity or criminal purpose of the group, where such activity or purpose involves the commission of a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; or (ii) Be made in the knowledge of the intention of the group to commit the crime; (e) In respect of the crime of genocide, directly and publicly incites others to commit genocide; (f) Attempts to commit such a crime by taking action that commences its execution by means of a substantial step, but the crime does not occur because of circumstances independent of the person's intentions. However, a person who abandons the effort to commit the crime or otherwise prevents the completion of the crime shall not be liable for punishment under this Statute for the attempt to commit that crime if that person completely and voluntarily gave up the criminal purpose. 8 As amended by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010 (adding paragraph 3 bis).
15 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3 bis. In respect of the crime of aggression, the provisions of this article shall apply only to persons in a position effectively to exercise control over or to direct the political or military action of a State. 4. No provision in this Statute relating to individual criminal responsibility shall affect the responsibility of States under international law. Article 26 Exclusion of jurisdiction over persons under eighteen The Court shall have no jurisdiction over any person who was under the age of 18 at the time of the alleged commission of a crime. Article 27 Irrelevance of official capacity 1. This Statute shall apply equally to all persons without any distinction based on official capacity. In particular, official capacity as a Head of State or Government, a member of a Government or parliament, an elected representative or a government official shall in no case exempt a person from criminal responsibility under this Statute, nor shall it, in and of itself, constitute a ground for reduction of sentence. 2. Immunities or special procedural rules which may attach to the official capacity of a person, whether under national or international law, shall not bar the Court from exercising its jurisdiction over such a person. Article 28 Responsibility of commanders and other superiors In addition to other grounds of criminal responsibility under this Statute for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court: (a) A military commander or person effectively acting as a military commander shall be criminally responsible for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court committed by forces under his or her effective command and control, or effective authority and control as the case may be, as a result of his or her failure to exercise control properly over such forces, where: (i) That military commander or person either knew or, owing to the circumstances at the time, should have known that the forces were committing or about to commit such crimes; and (ii) That military commander or person failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power to prevent or repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecution. (b) With respect to superior and subordinate relationships not described in paragraph (a), a superior shall be criminally responsible for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court committed by subordinates under his or her effective authority and control, as a result of his or her failure to exercise control properly over such subordinates, where: (i) The superior either knew, or consciously disregarded information which clearly indicated, that the subordinates were committing or about to commit such crimes; (ii) The crimes concerned activities that were within the effective responsibility and control of the superior; and (iii) The superior failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power to prevent or repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecution. Article 29 Non-applicability of statute of limitations The crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court shall not be subject to any statute of limitations. Article 30 Mental element 1. Unless otherwise provided, a person shall be criminally responsible and liable for punishment for a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court only if the material elements are committed with intent and knowledge. 2. For the purposes of this article, a person has intent where: (a) In relation to conduct, that person means to engage in the conduct;
16 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) In relation to a consequence, that person means to cause that consequence or is aware that it will occur in the ordinary course of events. 3. For the purposes of this article, "knowledge" means awareness that a circumstance exists or a consequence will occur in the ordinary course of events. "Know" and "knowingly" shall be construed accordingly. Article 31 Grounds for excluding criminal responsibility 1. In addition to other grounds for excluding criminal responsibility provided for in this Statute, a person shall not be criminally responsible if, at the time of that person's conduct: (a) The person suffers from a mental disease or defect that destroys that person's capacity to appreciate the unlawfulness or nature of his or her conduct, or capacity to control his or her conduct to conform to the requirements of law; (b) The person is in a state of intoxication that destroys that person's capacity to appreciate the unlawfulness or nature of his or her conduct, or capacity to control his or her conduct to conform to the requirements of law, unless the person has become voluntarily intoxicated under such circumstances that the person knew, or disregarded the risk, that, as a result of the intoxication, he or she was likely to engage in conduct constituting a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; (c) The person acts reasonably to defend himself or herself or another person or, in the case of war crimes, property which is essential for the survival of the person or another person or property which is essential for accomplishing a military mission, against an imminent and unlawful use of force in a manner proportionate to the degree of danger to the person or the other person or property protected. The fact that the person was involved in a defensive operation conducted by forces shall not in itself constitute a ground for excluding criminal responsibility under this subparagraph; (d) The conduct which is alleged to constitute a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been caused by duress resulting from a threat of imminent death or of continuing or imminent serious bodily harm against that person or another person, and the person acts necessarily and reasonably to avoid this threat, provided that the person does not intend to cause a greater harm than the one sought to be avoided. Such a threat may either be: (i) Made by other persons; or (ii) Constituted by other circumstances beyond that person's control. 2. The Court shall determine the applicability of the grounds for excluding criminal responsibility provided for in this Statute to the case before it. 3. At trial, the Court may consider a ground for excluding criminal responsibility other than those referred to in paragraph 1 where such a ground is derived from applicable law as set forth in article 21. The procedures relating to the consideration of such a ground shall be provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 32 Mistake of fact or mistake of law 1. A mistake of fact shall be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility only if it negates the mental element required by the crime. 2. A mistake of law as to whether a particular type of conduct is a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court shall not be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility. A mistake of law may, however, be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility if it negates the mental element required by such a crime, or as provided for in article 33. Article 33 Superior orders and prescription of law 1. The fact that a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been committed by a person pursuant to an order of a Government or of a superior, whether military or civilian, shall not relieve that person of criminal responsibility unless: (a) The person was under a legal obligation to obey orders of the Government or the superior in question; (b) The person did not know that the order was unlawful; and (c) The order was not manifestly unlawful. 2. For the purposes of this article, orders to commit genocide or crimes against humanity are manifestly unlawful.
17 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 4. COMPOSITION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE COURT Article 34 Organs of the Court The Court shall be composed of the following organs: (a) The Presidency; (b) An Appeals Division, a Trial Division and a Pre-Trial Division; (c) The Office of the Prosecutor; (d) The Registry. Article 35 Service of judges 1. All judges shall be elected as full-time members of the Court and shall be available to serve on that basis from the commencement of their terms of office. 2. The judges composing the Presidency shall serve on a full-time basis as soon as they are elected. 3. The Presidency may, on the basis of the workload of the Court and in consultation with its members, decide from time to time to what extent the remaining judges shall be required to serve on a full-time basis. Any such arrangement shall be without prejudice to the provisions of article 40. 4. The financial arrangements for judges not required to serve on a full-time basis shall be made in accordance with article 49. Article 36 Qualifications, nomination and election of judges 1. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2, there shall be 18 judges of the Court. 2. (a) The Presidency, acting on behalf of the Court, may propose an increase in the number of judges specified in paragraph 1, indicating the reasons why this is considered necessary and appropriate The Registrar shall promptly circulate any such proposal to all States Parties. (b) Any such proposal shall then be considered at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties to be convened in accordance with article 112. The proposal shall be considered adopted if approved at the meeting by a vote of two thirds of the members of the Assembly of States Parties and shall enter into force at such time as decided by the Assembly of States Parties. (c) (i) Once a proposal for an increase in the number of judges has been adopted under subparagraph (b), the election of the additional judges shall take place at the next session of the Assembly of States Parties in accordance with paragraphs 3 to 8, and article 37, paragraph 2; (ii) Once a proposal for an increase in the number of judges has been adopted and brought into effect under subparagraphs (b) and (c) (i), it shall be open to the Presidency at any time thereafter, if the workload of the Court justifies it, to propose a reduction in the number of judges, provided that the number of judges shall not be reduced below that specified in paragraph 1. The proposal shall be dealt with in accordance with the procedure laid down in subparagraphs (a) and (b). In the event that the proposal is adopted, the number of judges shall be progressively decreased as the terms of office of serving judges expire, until the necessary number has been reached. 3. (a) The judges shall be chosen from among persons of high moral character, impartiality and integrity who possess the qualifications required in their respective States for appointment to the highest judicial offices. (b) Every candidate for election to the Court shall: (i) Have established competence in criminal law and procedure, and the necessary relevant experience, whether as judge, prosecutor, advocate or in other similar capacity, in criminal proceedings; or (ii) Have established competence in relevant areas of international law such as international humanitarian law and the law of human rights, and extensive experience in a professional legal capacity which is of relevance to the judicial work of the Court;
18 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(c) Every candidate for election to the Court shall have an excellent knowledge of and be fluent in at least one of the working languages of the Court. 4. (a) Nominations of candidates for election to the Court may be made by any State Party to this Statute, and shall be made either: (i) By the procedure for the nomination of candidates for appointment to the highest judicial offices in the State in question; or (ii) By the procedure provided for the nomination of candidates for the International Court of Justice in the Statute of that Court. Nominations shall be accompanied by a statement in the necessary detail specifying how the candidate fulfils the requirements of paragraph 3. (b) Each State Party may put forward one candidate for any given election who need not necessarily be a national of that State Party but shall in any case be a national of a State Party. (c) The Assembly of States Parties may decide to establish, if appropriate, an Advisory Committee on nominations. In that event, the Committee's composition and mandate shall be established by the Assembly of States Parties. 5. For the purposes of the election, there shall be two lists of candidates: List A containing the names of candidates with the qualifications specified in paragraph 3 (b) (i); and List B containing the names of candidates with the qualifications specified in paragraph 3 (b) (ii). A candidate with sufficient qualifications for both lists may choose on which list to appear. At the first election to the Court, at least nine judges shall be elected from list A and at least five judges from list B. Subsequent elections shall be so organized as to maintain the equivalent proportion on the Court of judges qualified on the two lists. 6. (a) The judges shall be elected by secret ballot at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties convened for that purpose under article 112. Subject to paragraph 7, the persons elected to the Court shall be the 18 candidates who obtain the highest number of votes and a two-thirds majority of the States Parties present and voting. (b) In the event that a sufficient number of judges is not elected on the first ballot, successive ballots shall be held in accordance with the procedures laid down in subparagraph (a) until the remaining places have been filled. 7. No two judges may be nationals of the same State. A person who, for the purposes of membership of the Court, could be regarded as a national of more than one State shall be deemed to be a national of the State in which that person ordinarily exercises civil and political rights. 8. (a) The States Parties shall, in the selection of judges, take into account the need, within the membership of the Court, for: (i) The representation of the principal legal systems of the world; (ii) Equitable geographical representation; and (iii) A fair representation of female and male judges. (b) States Parties shall also take into account the need to include judges with legal expertise on specific issues, including, but not limited to, violence against women or children. 9. (a) Subject to subparagraph (b), judges shall hold office for a term of nine years and, subject to subparagraph (c) and to article 37, paragraph 2, shall not be eligible for re-election. (b) At the first election, one third of the judges elected shall be selected by lot to serve for a term of three years; one third of the judges elected shall be selected by lot to serve for a term of six years; and the remainder shall serve for a term of nine years. (c) A judge who is selected to serve for a term of three years under subparagraph (b) shall be eligible for re-election for a full term. 10. Notwithstanding paragraph 9, a judge assigned to a Trial or Appeals Chamber in accordance with article 39 shall continue in office to complete any trial or appeal the hearing of which has already commenced before that Chamber.
19 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 37 Judicial vacancies 1. In the event of a vacancy, an election shall be held in accordance with article 36 to fill the vacancy. 2. A judge elected to fill a vacancy shall serve for the remainder of the predecessor's term and, if that period is three years or less, shall be eligible for re-election for a full term under article 36. Article 38 The Presidency 1. The President and the First and Second Vice-Presidents shall be elected by an absolute majority of the judges. They shall each serve for a term of three years or until the end of their respective terms of office as judges, whichever expires earlier. They shall be eligible for re-election once. 2. The First Vice-President shall act in place of the President in the event that the President is unavailable or disqualified. The Second Vice-President shall act in place of the President in the event that both the President and the First Vice-President are unavailable or disqualified. 3. The President, together with the First and Second Vice-Presidents, shall constitute the Presidency, which shall be responsible for: (a) The proper administration of the Court, with the exception of the Office of the Prosecutor; and (b) The other functions conferred upon it in accordance with this Statute. 4. In discharging its responsibility under paragraph 3 (a), the Presidency shall coordinate with and seek the concurrence of the Prosecutor on all matters of mutual concern. Article 39 Chambers 1. As soon as possible after the election of the judges, the Court shall organize itself into the divisions specified in article 34, paragraph (b). The Appeals Division shall be composed of the President and four other judges, the Trial Division of not less than six judges and the Pre-Trial Division of not less than six judges. The assignment of judges to divisions shall be based on the nature of the functions to be performed by each division and the qualifications and experience of the judges elected to the Court, in such a way that each division shall contain an appropriate combination of expertise in criminal law and procedure and in international law. The Trial and Pre-Trial Divisions shall be composed predominantly of judges with criminal trial experience. 2. (a) The judicial functions of the Court shall be carried out in each division by Chambers. (b) (i) The Appeals Chamber shall be composed of all the judges of the Appeals Division; (ii) The functions of the Trial Chamber shall be carried out by three judges of the Trial Division; (iii) The functions of the Pre-Trial Chamber shall be carried out either by three judges of the Pre- Trial Division or by a single judge of that division in accordance with this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (c) Nothing in this paragraph shall preclude the simultaneous constitution of more than one Trial Chamber or Pre-Trial Chamber when the efficient management of the Court's workload so requires. 3. (a) Judges assigned to the Trial and Pre-Trial Divisions shall serve in those divisions for a period of three years, and thereafter until the completion of any case the hearing of which has already commenced in the division concerned. (b) Judges assigned to the Appeals Division shall serve in that division for their entire term of office. 4. Judges assigned to the Appeals Division shall serve only in that division. Nothing in this article shall, however, preclude the temporary attachment of judges from the Trial Division to the Pre-Trial Division or vice versa, if the Presidency considers that the efficient management of the Court's workload so requires, provided that under no circumstances shall a judge who has participated in the pre-trial phase of a case be eligible to sit on the Trial Chamber hearing that case.
20 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 40 Independence of the judges 1. The judges shall be independent in the performance of their functions. 2. Judges shall not engage in any activity which is likely to interfere with their judicial functions or to affect confidence in their independence. 3. Judges required to serve on a full-time basis at the seat of the Court shall not engage in any other occupation of a professional nature. 4. Any question regarding the application of paragraphs 2 and 3 shall be decided by an absolute majority of the judges. Where any such question concerns an individual judge, that judge shall not take part in the decision. Article 41 Excusing and disqualification of judges 1. The Presidency may, at the request of a judge, excuse that judge from the exercise of a function under this Statute, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 2. (a) A judge shall not participate in any case in which his or her impartiality might reasonably be doubted onany ground. A judge shall be disqualified from a case in accordance with this paragraph if, inter alia, that judge has previously been involved in any capacity in that case beforethe Court or in a related criminal case at the national level involving the person being investigated or prosecuted. A judge shall also be disqualified on such other grounds as may be provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. (b) The Prosecutor or the person being investigated or prosecuted may request the disqualification of a judge under this paragraph. (c) Any question as to the disqualification of a judge shall be decided by an absolute majority of the judges. The challenged judge shall be entitled to present his or her comments on the matter, but shall not take part in the decision. Article 42 The Office of the Prosecutor 1. The Office of the Prosecutor shall act independently as a separate organ of the Court. It shall be responsible for receiving referrals and any substantiated information on crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court, for examining them and for conducting investigations and prosecutions before the Court. A member of the Office shall not seek or act on instructions from any external source. 2. The Office shall be headed by the Prosecutor. The Prosecutor shall have full authority over the management and administration of the Office, including the staff, facilities and other resources thereof. The Prosecutor shall be assisted by one or more Deputy Prosecutors, who shall be entitled to carry out any of the acts required of the Prosecutor under this Statute. The Prosecutor and the Deputy Prosecutors shall be of different nationalities. They shall serve on a full-time basis. 3. The Prosecutor and the Deputy Prosecutors shall be persons of high moral character, be highly competent in and have extensive practical experience in the prosecution or trial of criminal cases. They shall have an excellent knowledge of and be fluent in at least one of the working languages of the Court. 4. The Prosecutor shall be elected by secret ballot by an absolute majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. The Deputy Prosecutors shall be elected in the same way from a list of candidates provided by the Prosecutor. The Prosecutor shall nominate three candidates for each position of Deputy Prosecutor to be filled. Unless a shorter term is decided upon at the time of their election, the Prosecutor and the Deputy Prosecutors shall hold office for a term of nine years and shall not be eligible for re-election. 5. Neither the Prosecutor nor a Deputy Prosecutor shall engage in any activity which is likely to interfere with his or her prosecutorial functions or to affect confidence in his or her independence. They shall not engage in any other occupation of a professional nature. 6. The Presidency may excuse the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor, at his or her request, from acting in a particular case.
21 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court7. Neither the Prosecutor nor a Deputy Prosecutor shall participate in any matter in which their impartiality might reasonably be doubted on any ground. They shall be disqualified from a case in accordance with this paragraph if, inter alia , they have previously been involved in any capacity in that case before the Court or in a related criminal case at the national level involving the person being investigated or prosecuted. 8. Any question as to the disqualification of the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor shall be decided by the Appeals Chamber. (a) The person being investigated or prosecuted may at any time request the disqualification of the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor on the grounds set out in this article; (b) The Prosecutor or the Deputy Prosecutor, as appropriate, shall be entitled to present his or her comments on the matter; 9. The Prosecutor shall appoint advisers with legal expertise on specific issues, including, but not limited to, sexual and gender violence and violence against children. Article 43 The Registry 1. The Registry shall be responsible for the non-judicial aspects of the administration and servicing of the Court, without prejudice to the functions and powers of the Prosecutor in accordance with article 42. 2. The Registry shall be headed by the Registrar, who shall be the principal administrative officer of the Court. The Registrar shall exercise his or her functions under the authority of the President of the Court. 3. The Registrar and the Deputy Registrar shall be persons of high moral character, be highly competent and have an excellent knowledge of and be fluent in at least one of the working languages of the Court. 4. The judges shall elect the Registrar by an absolute majority by secret ballot, taking into account any recommendation by the Assembly of States Parties. If the need arises and upon the recommendation of the Registrar, the judges shall elect, in the same manner, a Deputy Registrar. 5. The Registrar shall hold office for a term of five years, shall be eligible for re-election once and shall serve on a full-time basis. The Deputy Registrar shall hold office for a term of five years or such shorter term as may be decided upon by an absolute majority of the judges, and may be elected on the basis that the Deputy Registrar shall be called upon to serve as required. 6. The Registrar shall set up a Victims and Witnesses Unit within the Registry. This Unit shall provide, in consultation with the Office of the Prosecutor, protective measures and security arrangements, counseling and other appropriate assistance for witnesses, victims who appear before the Court, and others who are at risk on account of testimony given by such witnesses. The Unit shall include staff with expertise in trauma, including trauma related to crimes of sexual violence. Article 44 Staff 1. The Prosecutor and the Registrar shall appoint such qualified staff as may be required to their respective offices. In the case of the Prosecutor, this shall include the appointment of investigators. 2. In the employment of staff, the Prosecutor and the Registrar shall ensure the highest standards of efficiency, competency and integrity, and shall have regard, mutatis mutandis , to the criteria set forth in article 36, paragraph 8. 3. The Registrar, with the agreement of the Presidency and the Prosecutor, shall propose Staff Regulations which include the terms and conditions upon which the staff of the Court shall be appointed, remunerated and dismissed. The Staff Regulations shall be approved by the Assembly of States Parties. 4. The Court may, in exceptional circumstances, employ the expertise of gratis personnel offered by States Parties, intergovernmental organizations or non-governmental organizations to assist with the work of any of the organs of the Court. The Prosecutor may accept any such offer on behalf of the Office of the Prosecutor. Such gratis personnel shall be employed in accordance with guidelines to be established by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 45 Solemn undertaking Before taking up their respective duties under this Statute, the judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors, the Registrar and the Deputy Registrar shall each make a solemn undertaking in open court to exercise his or her respective functions impartially and conscientiously.
22 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 46 Removal from office 1. A judge, the Prosecutor, a Deputy Prosecutor, the Registrar or the Deputy Registrar shall be removed from office if a decision to this effect is made in accordance with paragraph 2, in cases where that person: (a) Is found to have committed serious misconduct or a serious breach of his or her duties under this Statute, as provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; or (b) Is unable to exercise the functions required by this Statute. 2. A decision as to the removal from office of a judge, the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor under paragraph 1 shall be made by the Assembly of States Parties, by secret ballot: (a) In the case of a judge, by a two-thirds majority of the States Parties upon a recommendation adopted by a two-thirds majority of the other judges; (b) In the case of the Prosecutor, by an absolute majority of the States Parties; (c) In the case of a Deputy Prosecutor, by an absolute majority of the States Parties upon the recommendation of the Prosecutor. 3. A decision as to the removal from office of the Registrar or Deputy Registrar shall be made by an absolute majority of the judges. 4. A judge, Prosecutor, Deputy Prosecutor, Registrar or Deputy Registrar whose conduct or ability to exercise the functions of the office as required by this Statute is challenged under this article shall have full opportunity to present and receive evidence and to make submissions in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The person in question shall not otherwise participate in the consideration of the matter. Article 47 Disciplinary measures A judge, Prosecutor, Deputy Prosecutor, Registrar or Deputy Registrar who has committed misconduct of a less serious nature than that set out in article 46, paragraph 1, shall be subject to disciplinary measures, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 48 Privileges and immunities 1. The Court shall enjoy in the territory of each State Party such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the fulfilment of its purposes. 2. The judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors and the Registrar shall, when engaged on or with respect to the business of the Court, enjoy the same privileges and immunities as are accorded to heads of diplomatic missions and shall, after the expiry of their terms of office, continue to be accorded immunity from legal process of every kind in respect of words spoken or written and acts performed by them in their official capacity. 3. The Deputy Registrar, the staff of the Office of the Prosecutor and the staff of the Registry shall enjoy the privileges and immunities and facilities necessary for the performance of their functions, in accordance with the agreement on the privileges and immunities of the Court. 4. Counsel, experts, witnesses or any other person required to be present at the seat of the Court shall be accorded such treatment as is necessary for the proper functioning of the Court, in accordance with the agreement on the privileges and immunities of the Court. 5. The privileges and immunities of: (a) A judge or the Prosecutor may be waived by an absolute majority of the judges; (b) The Registrar may be waived by the Presidency; (c) The Deputy Prosecutors and staff of the Office of the Prosecutor may be waived by the Prosecutor; (d) The Deputy Registrar and staff of the Registry may be waived by the Registrar.
23 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 49 Salaries, allowances and expenses The judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors, the Registrar and the Deputy Registrar shall receive such salaries, allowances and expenses as may be decided upon by the Assembly of States Parties. These salaries and allowances shall not be reduced during their terms of office. Article 50 Official and working languages 1. The official languages of the Court shall be Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish. The judgements of the Court, as well as other decisions resolving fundamental issues before the Court, shall be published in the official languages. The Presidency shall, in accordance with the criteria established by the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, determine which decisions may be considered as resolving fundamental issues for the purposes of this paragraph. 2. The working languages of the Court shall be English and French. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence shall determine the cases in which other official languages may be used as working languages. 3. At the request of any party to a proceeding or a State allowed to intervene in a proceeding, the Court shall authorize a language other than English or French to be used by such a party or State, provided that the Court considers such authorization to be adequately justified. Article 51 Rules of Procedure and Evidence 1. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence shall enter into force upon adoption by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 2. Amendments to the Rules of Procedure and Evidence may be proposed by: (a) Any State Party; (b) The judges acting by an absolute majority; or (c) The Prosecutor. Such amendments shall enter into force upon adoption by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 3. After the adoption of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, in urgent cases where the Rules do not provide for a specific situation before the Court, the judges may, by a two-thirds majority, draw up provisional Rules to be applied until adopted, amended or rejected at the next ordinary or special session of the Assembly of States Parties. 4. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence, amendments thereto and any provisional Rule shall be consistent with this Statute. Amendments to the Rules of Procedure and Evidence as well as provisional Rules shall not be applied retroactively to the detriment of the person who is being investigated or prosecuted or who has been convicted. 5. In the event of conflict between the Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, the Statute shall prevail. Article 52 Regulations of the Court 1. The judges shall, in accordance with this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, adopt, by an absolute majority, the Regulations of the Court necessary for its routine functioning. 2. The Prosecutor and the Registrar shall be consulted in the elaboration of the Regulations and any amendments thereto. 3. The Regulations and any amendments thereto shall take effect upon adoption unless otherwise decided by the judges. Immediately upon adoption, they shall be circulated to States Parties for comments. If within six months there are no objections from a majority of States Parties, they shall remain in force.
24 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 5. INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION Article 53 Initiation of an investigation 1. The Prosecutor shall, having evaluated the information made available to him or her, initiate an investigation unless he or she determines that there is no reasonable basis to proceed under this Statute. In deciding whether to initiate an investigation, the Prosecutor shall consider whether: (a) The information available to the Prosecutor provides a reasonable basis to believe that a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been or is being committed; (b) The case is or would be admissible under article 17; and (c) Taking into account the gravity of the crime and the interests of victims, there are nonetheless substantial reasons to believe that an investigation would not serve the interests of justice. If the Prosecutor determines that there is no reasonable basis to proceed and his or her determination is based solely on subparagraph (c) above, he or she shall inform the Pre-Trial Chamber. 2. If, upon investigation, the Prosecutor concludes that there is not a sufficient basis for a prosecution because: (a) There is not a sufficient legal or factual basis to seek a warrant or summons under article 58; (b) The case is inadmissible under article 17; or (c) A prosecution is not in the interests of justice, taking into account all the circumstances, including the gravity of the crime, the interests of victims and the age or infirmity of the alleged perpetrator, and his or her role in the alleged crime; the Prosecutor shall inform the Pre-Trial Chamber and the State making a referral under article 14 or the Security Council in a case under article 13, paragraph (b), of his or her conclusion and the reasons for the conclusion. 3. (a) At the request of the State making a referral under article 14 or the Security Council under article 13, paragraph (b), the Pre-Trial Chamber may review a decision of the Prosecutor under paragraph 1 or 2 not to proceed and mayrequest the Prosecutor to reconsider that decision. (b) In addition, the Pre-Trial Chamber may, on its own initiative, review a decision of the Prosecutor not to proceed if it is based solely on paragraph 1 (c) or 2 (c). In such a case, the decision of the Prosecutor shall be effective only if confirmed by the Pre-Trial Chamber. 4. The Prosecutor may, at any time, reconsider a decision whether to initiate an investigation or prosecution based on new facts or information. Article 54 Duties and powers of the Prosecutor with respect to investigations 1. The Prosecutor shall: (a) In order to establish the truth, extend the investigation to cover all facts and evidence relevant to an assessment of whether there is criminal responsibility under this Statute, and, in doing so, investigate incriminating and exonerating circumstances equally; (b) Take appropriate measures to ensure the effective investigation and prosecution of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court, and in doing so, respect the interests and personal circumstances of victims and witnesses, including age, gender as defined in article 7, paragraph 3, and health, and take into account the nature of the crime, in particular where it involves sexual violence, gender violence or violence against children; and (c) Fully respect the rights of persons arising under this Statute. 2. The Prosecutor may conduct investigations on the territory of a State: (a) In accordance with the provisions of Part 9; or (b) As authorized by the Pre-Trial Chamber under article 57, paragraph 3 (d).
25 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3. The Prosecutor may: (a) Collect and examine evidence; (b) Request the presence of and question persons being investigated, victims and witnesses; (c) Seek the cooperation of any State or intergovernmental organization or arrangement in accordance with its respective competence and/or mandate; (d) Enter into such arrangements or agreements, not inconsistent with this Statute, as may be necessary to facilitate the cooperation of a State, intergovernmental organization or person; (e) Agree not to disclose, at any stage of the proceedings, documents or information that the Prosecutor obtains on the condition of confidentiality and solely for the purpose of generating new evidence, unless the provider of the information consents; and (f) Take necessary measures, or request that necessary measures be taken, to ensure the confidentiality of information, the protection of any person or the preservation of evidence. Article 55 Rights of persons during an investigation 1. In respect of an investigation under this Statute, a person: (a) Shall not be compelled to incriminate himself or herself or to confess guilt; (b) Shall not be subjected to any form of coercion, duress or threat, to torture or to any other form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; (c) Shall, if questioned in a language other than a language the person fully understands and speaks, have, free of any cost, the assistance of a competent interpreter and such translations as are necessary to meet the requirements of fairness; and (d) Shall not be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention, and shall not be deprived of his or her liberty except on such grounds and in accordance with such procedures as are established in this Statute. 2. Where there are grounds to believe that a person has committed a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court and that person is about to be questioned either by the Prosecutor, or by national authorities pursuant to a request made under Part 9, that person shall also have the following rights of which he or she shall be informed prior to being questioned: (a) To be informed, prior to being questioned, that there are grounds to believe that he or she has committed a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; (b) To remain silent, without such silence being a consideration in the determination of guilt or innocence; (c) To have legal assistance of the person's choosing, or, if the person does not have legal assistance, to have legal assistance assigned to him or her, in any case where the interests of justice so require, and without payment by the person in any such case if the person does not have sufficient means to pay for it; and (d) To be questioned in the presence of counsel unless the person has voluntarily waived his or her right to counsel. Article 56 Role of the Pre-Trial Chamber in relation to a unique investigative opportunity 1. (a) Where the Prosecutor considers an investigation to present a unique opportunity to take testimony or a statement from a witness or to examine, collect or test evidence, which may not be available subsequently for the purposes of a trial, the Prosecutor shall so inform the Pre-Trial Chamber. (b) In that case, the Pre-Trial Chamber may, upon request of the Prosecutor, take such measures as may be necessary to ensure the efficiency and integrity of the proceedings and, in particular, to protect the rights of the defence. (c) Unless the Pre-Trial Chamber orders otherwise, the Prosecutor shall provide the relevant information to the person who has been arrested or appeared in response to a summons in connection with the investigation referred to in subparagraph (a), in order that he or she may be heard on the matter.
26 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The measures referred to in paragraph 1 (b) may include: (a) Making recommendations or orders regarding procedures to be followed; (b) Directing that a record be made of the proceedings; (c) Appointing an expert to assist; (d) Authorizing counsel for a person who has been arrested, or appeared before the Court in response to a summons, to participate, or where there has not yet been such an arrest or appearance or counsel has not been designated, appointing another counsel to attend and represent the interests of the defence; (e) Naming one of its members or, if necessary, another available judge of the Pre-Trial or Trial Division to observe and make recommendations or orders regarding the collection and preservation of evidence and the questioning of persons; (f) Taking such other action as may be necessary to collect or preserve evidence. 3. (a) Where the Prosecutor has not sought measures pursuant to this article but the Pre-Trial Chamberconsiders that such measures are required to preserve evidence that it deems would be essential for the defence at trial, it shall consult with the Prosecutor as to whether there is good reason for the Prosecutor's failure to request the measures. If upon consultation, the Pre-Trial Chamber concludes that the Prosecutor's failure to request such measures is unjustified, the Pre-Trial Chamber may take such measures on its own initiative. (b) A decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber to act on its own initiative under this paragraph may be appealedby the Prosecutor. The appeal shall be heard on an expedited basis. 4. The admissibility of evidence preserved or collected for trial pursuant to this article, or the record thereof, shall be governed at trial by article 69, and given such weight as determined by the Trial Chamber. Article 57 Functions and powers of the Pre-Trial Chamber 1. Unless otherwise provided in this Statute, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall exercise its functions in accordance with the provisions of this article. 2. (a) Orders or rulings of the Pre-Trial Chamber issued under articles 15, 18, 19, 54, paragraph 2, 61, paragraph 7, and 72 must be concurred in by a majority of its judges. (b) In all other cases, a single judge of the Pre-Trial Chamber may exercise the functions provided for in this Statute, unless otherwise provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence or by a majority of the Pre-Trial Chamber. 3. In addition to its other functions under this Statute, the Pre-Trial Chamber may: (a) At the request of the Prosecutor, issue such orders and warrants as may be required for the purposes of an investigation; (b) Upon the request of a person who has been arrested or has appeared pursuant to a summons under article 58, issue such orders, including measures such as those described in article 56, or seek such cooperation pursuant to Part 9 as may be necessary to assist the person in the preparation of his or her defence; (c) Where necessary, provide for the protection and privacy of victims and witnesses, the preservation of evidence, the protection of persons who have been arrested or appeared in response to a summons, and the protection of national security information; (d) Authorize the Prosecutor to take specific investigative steps within the territory of a State Party without having secured the cooperation of that State under Part 9 if, whenever possible having regard to the views of the State concerned, the Pre-Trial Chamber has determined in that case that the State is clearly unable to execute a request for cooperation due to the unavailability of any authority or any component of its judicial system competent to execute the request for cooperation under Part 9; (e) Where a warrant of arrest or a summons has been issued under article 58, and having due regard to the strength of the evidence and the rights of the parties concerned, as provided for in this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, seek the cooperation of States pursuant to article 93, paragraph 1 (k), to take protective measures for the purpose of forfeiture, in particular for the ultimate benefit of victims.
27 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 58 Issuance by the Pre-Trial Chamber of a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear 1. At any time after the initiation of an investigation, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall, on the application of the Prosecutor, issue a warrant of arrest of a person if, having examined the application and the evidence or other information submitted by the Prosecutor, it is satisfied that: (a) There are reasonable grounds to believe that the person has committed a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; and (b) The arrest of the person appears necessary: (i) To ensure the person's appearance at trial; (ii) To ensure that the person does not obstruct or endanger the investigation or the court proceedings; or (iii) Where applicable, to prevent the person from continuing with the commission of that crime or a related crime which is within the jurisdiction of the Court and which arises out of the same circumstances. 2. The application of the Prosecutor shall contain: (a) The name of the person and any other relevant identifying information; (b) A specific reference to the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court which the person is alleged to have committed; (c) A concise statement of the facts which are alleged to constitute those crimes; (d) A summary of the evidence and any other information which establish reasonable grounds to believe that the person committed those crimes; and (e) The reason why the Prosecutor believes that the arrest of the person is necessary. 3. The warrant of arrest shall contain: (a) The name of the person and any other relevant identifying information; (b) A specific reference to the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court for which the person's arrest is sought; and (c) A concise statement of the facts which are alleged to constitute those crimes. 4. The warrant of arrest shall remain in effect until otherwise ordered by the Court. 5. On the basis of the warrant of arrest, the Court may request the provisional arrest or the arrest and surrender of the person under Part 9. 6. The Prosecutor may request the Pre-Trial Chamber to amend the warrant of arrest by modifying or adding to the crimes specified therein. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall so amend the warrant if it is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the person committed the modified or additional crimes. 7. As an alternative to seeking a warrant of arrest, the Prosecutor may submit an application requesting that the Pre-Trial Chamber issue a summons for the person to appear. If the Pre-Trial Chamber is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the person committed the crime alleged and that a summons is sufficient to ensure the person's appearance, it shall issue the summons, with or without conditions restricting liberty (other than detention) if provided for by national law, for the person to appear. The summons shall contain: (a) The name of the person and any other relevant identifying information; (b) The specified date on which the person is to appear; (c) A specific reference to the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court which the person is alleged to have committed; and (d) A concise statement of the facts which are alleged to constitute the crime. The summons shall be served on the person.
28 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 59 Arrest proceedings in the custodial State 1. A State Party which has received a request for provisional arrest or for arrest and surrender shall immediately take steps to arrest the person in question in accordance with its laws and the provisions of Part 9. 2. A person arrested shall be brought promptly before the competent judicial authority in the custodial State which shall determine, in accordance with the law of that State, that: (a) The warrant applies to that person; (b) The person has been arrested in accordance with the proper process; and (c) The person's rights have been respected. 3. The person arrested shall have the right to apply to the competent authority in the custodial State for interim release pending surrender. 4. In reaching a decision on any such application, the competent authority in the custodial State shall consider whether, given the gravity of the alleged crimes, there are urgent and exceptional circumstances to justify interim release and whether necessary safeguards exist to ensure that the custodial State can fulfil its duty to surrender the person to the Court. It shall not be open to the competent authority of the custodial State to consider whether the warrant of arrest was properly issued in accordance with article 58, paragraph 1 (a) and (b). 5. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall be notified of any request for interim release and shall make recommendations to the competent authority in the custodial State. The competent authority in the custodial State shall give full consideration to such recommendations, including any recommendations on measures to prevent the escape of the person, before rendering its decision. 6. If the person is granted interim release, the Pre-Trial Chamber may request periodic reports on the status of the interim release. 7. Once ordered to be surrendered by the custodial State, the person shall be delivered to the Court as soon as possible. Article 60 Initial proceedings before the Court 1. Upon the surrender of the person to the Court, or the person's appearance before the Court voluntarily or pursuant to a summons, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall satisfy itself that the person has been informed of the crimes which he or she is alleged to have committed, and of his or her rights under this Statute, including the right to apply for interim release pending trial. 2. A person subject to a warrant of arrest may apply for interim release pending trial. If the Pre-Trial Chamber is satisfied that the conditions set forth in article 58, paragraph 1, are met, the person shall continue to be detained. If it is not so satisfied, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall release the person, with or without conditions. 3. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall periodically review its ruling on the release or detention of the person, and may do so at any time on the request of the Prosecutor or the person. Upon such review, it may modify its ruling as to detention, release or conditions of release, if it is satisfied that changed circumstances so require. 4. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall ensure that a person is not detained for an unreasonable period prior to trial due to inexcusable delay by the Prosecutor. If such delay occurs, the Court shall consider releasing the person, with or without conditions. 5. If necessary, the Pre-Trial Chamber may issue a warrant of arrest to secure the presence of a person who has been released. Article 61 Confirmation of the charges before trial 1. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2, within a reasonable time after the person's surrender or voluntary appearance before the Court, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall hold a hearing to confirm the charges on which the Prosecutor intends to seek trial. The hearing shall be held in the presence of the Prosecutor and the person charged, as well as his or her counsel.
29 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The Pre-Trial Chamber may, upon request of the Prosecutor or on its own motion, hold a hearing in the absence of the person charged to confirm the charges on which the Prosecutor intends to seek trial when the person has: (a) Waived his or her right to be present; or (b) Fled or cannot be found and all reasonable steps have been taken to secure his or her appearance before the Court and to inform the person of the charges and that a hearing to confirm those charges will be held. In that case, the person shall be represented by counsel where the Pre-Trial Chamber determines that it is in the interests of justice. 3. Within a reasonable time before the hearing, the person shall: (a) Be provided with a copy of the document containing the charges on which the Prosecutor intends to bring the person to trial; and (b) Be informed of the evidence on which the Prosecutor intends to rely at the hearing. The Pre-Trial Chamber may issue orders regarding the disclosure of information for the purposes of the hearing. 4. Before the hearing, the Prosecutor may continue the investigation and may amend or withdraw any charges. The person shall be given reasonable notice before the hearing of any amendment to or withdrawal of charges. In case of a withdrawal of charges, the Prosecutor shall notify the Pre-Trial Chamber of the reasons for the withdrawal. 5. At the hearing, the Prosecutor shall support each charge with sufficient evidence to establish substantial grounds to believe that the person committed the crime charged. The Prosecutor may rely on documentary or summary evidence and need not call the witnesses expected to testify at the trial. 6. At the hearing, the person may: (a) Object to the charges; (b) Challenge the evidence presented by the Prosecutor; and (c) Present evidence. 7. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall, on the basis of the hearing, determine whether there is sufficient evidence to establish substantial grounds to believe that the person committed each of the crimes charged. Based on its determination, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall: (a) Confirm those charges in relation to which it has determined that there is sufficient evidence, and commit the person to a Trial Chamber for trial on the charges as confirmed; (b) Decline to confirm those charges in relation to which it has determined that there is insufficient evidence; (c) Adjourn the hearing and request the Prosecutor to consider: (i) Providing further evidence or conducting further investigation with respect to a particular charge; or (ii) Amending a charge because the evidence submitted appears to establish a different crime within the jurisdiction of the Court. 8. Where the Pre-Trial Chamber declines to confirm a charge, the Prosecutor shall not be precluded from subsequently requesting its confirmation if the request is supported by additional evidence. 9. After the charges are confirmed and before the trial has begun, the Prosecutor may, with the permission of the Pre-Trial Chamber and after notice to the accused, amend the charges. If the Prosecutor seeks to add additional charges or to substitute more serious charges, a hearing under this article to confirm those charges must be held. After commencement of the trial, the Prosecutor may, with the permission of the Trial Chamber, withdraw the charges. 10. Any warrant previously issued shall cease to have effect with respect to any charges which have not been confirmed by the Pre-Trial Chamber or which have been withdrawn by the Prosecutor.
30 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court11. Once the charges have been confirmed in accordance with this article, the Presidency shall constitute a Trial Chamber which, subject to paragraph 9 and to article 64, paragraph 4, shall be responsible for the conduct of subsequent proceedings and may exercise any function of the Pre-Trial Chamber that is relevant and capable of application in those proceedings.
31 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 6. THE TRIAL Article 62 Place of trial Unless otherwise decided, the place of the trial shall be the seat of the Court. Article 63 Trial in the presence of the accused 1. The accused shall be present during the trial. 2. If the accused, being present before the Court, continues to disrupt the trial, the Trial Chamber may remove the accused and shall make provision for him or her to observe the trial and instruct counsel from outside the courtroom, through the use of communications technology, if required. Such measures shall be taken only in exceptional circumstances after other reasonable alternatives have proved inadequate, and only for such duration as is strictly required. Article 64 Functions and powers of the Trial Chamber 1. The functions and powers of the Trial Chamber set out in this article shall be exercised in accordance with this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 2. The Trial Chamber shall ensure that a trial is fair and expeditious and is conducted with full respect for the rights of the accused and due regard for the protection of victims and witnesses. 3. Upon assignment of a case for trial in accordance with this Statute, the Trial Chamber assigned to deal with the case shall: (a) Confer with the parties and adopt such procedures as are necessary to facilitate the fair and expeditious conduct of the proceedings; (b) Determine the language or languages to be used at trial; and (c) Subject to any other relevant provisions of this Statute, provide for disclosure of documents or information not previously disclosed, sufficiently in advance of the commencement of the trial to enable adequate preparation for trial. 4. The Trial Chamber may, if necessary for its effective and fair functioning, refer preliminary issues to the Pre- Trial Chamber or, if necessary, to another available judge of the Pre-Trial Division. 5. Upon notice to the parties, the Trial Chamber may, as appropriate, direct that there be joinder or severance in respect of charges against more than one accused. 6. In performing its functions prior to trial or during the course of a trial, the Trial Chamber may, as necessary: (a) Exercise any functions of the Pre-Trial Chamber referred to in article 61, paragraph 11; (b) Require the attendance and testimony of witnesses and production of documents and other evidence by obtaining, if necessary, the assistance of States as provided in this Statute; (c) Provide for the protection of confidential information; (d) Order the production of evidence in addition to that already collected prior to the trial or presented during the trial by the parties; (e) Provide for the protection of the accused, witnesses and victims; and (f) Rule on any other relevant matters. 7. The trial shall be held in public. The Trial Chamber may, however, determine that special circumstances require that certain proceedings be in closed session for the purposes set forth in article 68, or to protect confidential or sensitive information to be given in evidence. 8. (a) At the commencement of the trial, the Trial Chamber shall have read to the accused the charges previously confirmed by the Pre-Trial Chamber. The Trial Chamber shall satisfy itself that the accused understands the nature of the charges. It shall afford him or her the opportunity to make an admission of guilt in accordance with article 65 or to plead not guilty.
32 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) At the trial, the presiding judge may give directions for the conduct of proceedings, including to ensure that they are conducted in a fair and impartial manner. Subject to any directions of the presiding judge, the parties may submit evidence in accordance with the provisions of this Statute. 9. The Trial Chamber shall have, inter alia , the power on application of a party or on its own motion to: (a) Rule on the admissibility or relevance of evidence; and (b) Take all necessary steps to maintain order in the course of a hearing. 10. The Trial Chamber shall ensure that a complete record of the trial, which accurately reflects the proceedings, is made and that it is maintained and preserved by the Registrar. Article 65 Proceedings on an admission of guilt 1. Where the accused makes an admission of guilt pursuant to article 64, paragraph 8 (a), the Trial Chamber shall determine whether: (a) The accused understands the nature and consequences of the admission of guilt; (b) The admission is voluntarily made by the accused after sufficient consultation with defence counsel; and (c) The admission of guilt is supported by the facts of the case that are contained in: (i) The charges brought by the Prosecutor and admitted by the accused; (ii) Any materials presented by the Prosecutor which supplement the charges and which the accused accepts; and (iii) Any other evidence, such as the testimony of witnesses, presented by the Prosecutor or the accused. 2. Where the Trial Chamber is satisfied that the matters referred to in paragraph 1 are established, it shall consider the admission of guilt, together with any additional evidence presented, as establishing all the essential facts that are required to prove the crime to which the admission of guilt relates, and may convict the accused of that crime. 3. Where the Trial Chamber is not satisfied that the matters referred to in paragraph 1 are established, it shall consider the admission of guilt as not having been made, in which case it shall order that the trial be continued under the ordinary trial procedures provided by this Statute and may remit the case to another Trial Chamber. 4. Where the Trial Chamber is of the opinion that a more complete presentation of the facts of the case is required in the interests of justice, in particular the interests of the victims, the Trial Chamber may: (a) Request the Prosecutor to present additional evidence, including the testimony of witnesses; or (b) Order that the trial be continued under the ordinary trial procedures provided by this Statute, in which case it shall consider the admission of guilt as not having been made and may remit the case to another Trial Chamber. 5. Any discussions between the Prosecutor and the defence regarding modification of the charges, the admission of guilt or the penalty to be imposed shall not be binding on the Court. Article 66 Presumption of innocence 1. Everyone shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty before the Court in accordance with the applicable law. 2. The onus is on the Prosecutor to prove the guilt of the accused. 3. In order to convict the accused, the Court must be convinced of the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
33 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 67 Rights of the accused 1. In the determination of any charge, the accused shall be entitled to a public hearing, having regard to the provisions of this Statute, to a fair hearing conducted impartially, and to the following minimum guarantees, in full equality: (a) To be informed promptly and in detail of the nature, cause and content of the charge, in a language which the accused fully understands and speaks; (b) To have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of the defence and to communicate freely with counsel of the accused's choosing in confidence; (c) To be tried without undue delay; (d) Subject to article 63, paragraph 2, to be present at the trial, to conduct the defence in person or through legal assistance of the accused's choosing, to be informed, if the accused does not have legal assistance, of this right and to have legal assistance assigned by the Court in any case where the interests of justice so require, and without payment if the accused lacks sufficient means to pay for it; (e) To examine, or have examined, the witnesses against him or her and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his or her behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him or her. The accused shall also be entitled to raise defences and to present other evidence admissible under this Statute; (f) To have, free of any cost, the assistance of a competent interpreter and such translations as are necessary to meet the requirements of fairness, if any of the proceedings of or documents presented to the Court are not in a language which the accused fully understands and speaks; (g) Not to be compelled to testify or to confess guilt and to remain silent, without such silence being a consideration in the determination of guilt or innocence; (h) To make an unsworn oral or written statement in his or her defence; and (i) Not to have imposed on him or her any reversal of the burden of proof or any onus of rebuttal. 2. In addition to any other disclosure provided for in this Statute, the Prosecutor shall, as soon as practicable, disclose to the defence evidence in the Prosecutor's possession or control which he or she believes shows or tends to show the innocence of the accused, or to mitigate the guilt of the accused, or which may affect the credibility of prosecution evidence. In case of doubt as to the application of this paragraph, the Court shall decide. Article 68 Protection of the victims and witnesses and their participation in the proceedings 1. The Court shall take appropriate measures to protect the safety, physical and psychological well-being, dignity and privacy of victims and witnesses. In so doing, the Court shall have regard to all relevant factors, including age, gender as defined in article 7, paragraph 3, and health, and the nature of the crime, in particular, but not limited to, where the crime involves sexual or gender violence or violence against children. The Prosecutor shall take such measures particularly during the investigation and prosecution of such crimes. These measures shall not be prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial. 2. As an exception to the principle of public hearings provided for in article 67, the Chambers of the Court may, to protect victims and witnesses or an accused, conduct any part of the proceedings in camera or allow the presentation of evidence by electronic or other special means. In particular, such measures shall be implemented in the case of a victim of sexual violence or a child who is a victim or a witness, unless otherwise ordered by the Court, having regard to all the circumstances, particularly the views of the victim or witness. 3. Where the personal interests of the victims are affected, the Court shall permit their views and concerns to be presented and considered at stages of the proceedings determined to be appropriate by the Court and in a manner which is not prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial. Such views and concerns may be presented by the legal representatives of the victims where the Court considers it appropriate, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. The Victims and Witnesses Unit may advise the Prosecutor and the Court on appropriate protective measures, security arrangements, counselling and assistance as referred to in article 43, paragraph 6.
34 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court5. Where the disclosure of evidence or information pursuant to this Statute may lead to the grave endangerment of the security of a witness or his or her family, the Prosecutor may, for the purposes of any proceedings conducted prior to the commencement of the trial, withhold such evidence or information and instead submit a summary thereof. Such measures shall be exercised in a manner which is not prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial. 6. A State may make an application for necessary measures to be taken in respect of the protection of its servants or agents and the protection of confidential or sensitive information. Article 69 Evidence 1. Before testifying, each witness shall, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, give an undertaking as to the truthfulness of the evidence to be given by that witness. 2. The testimony of a witness at trial shall be given in person, except to the extent provided by the measures set forth in article 68 or in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The Court may also permit the giving of viva voce (oral) or recorded testimony of a witness by means of video or audio technology, as well as the introduction of documents or written transcripts, subject to this Statute and in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. These measures shall not be prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused. 3. The parties may submit evidence relevant to the case, in accordance with article 64. The Court shall have the authority to request the submission of all evidence that it considers necessary for the determination of the truth. 4. The Court may rule on the relevance or admissibility of any evidence, taking into account, inter alia , the probative value of the evidence and any prejudice that such evidence may cause to a fair trial or to a fair evaluation of the testimony of a witness, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 5. The Court shall respect and observe privileges on confidentiality as provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 6. The Court shall not require proof of facts of common knowledge but may take judicial notice of them. 7. Evidence obtained by means of a violation of this Statute or internationally recognized human rights shall not be admissible if: (a) The violation casts substantial doubt on the reliability of the evidence; or (b) The admission of the evidence would be antithetical to and would seriously damage the integrity of the proceedings. 8. When deciding on the relevance or admissibility of evidence collected by a State, the Court shall not rule on the application of the State's national law. Article 70 Offences against the administration of justice 1. The Court shall have jurisdiction over the following offences against its administration of justice when committed intentionally: (a) Giving false testimony when under an obligation pursuant to article 69, paragraph 1, to tell the truth; (b) Presenting evidence that the party knows is false or forged; (c) Corruptly influencing a witness, obstructing or interfering with the attendance or testimony of a witness, retaliating against a witness for giving testimony or destroying, tampering with or interfering with the collection of evidence; (d) Impeding, intimidating or corruptly influencing an official of the Court for the purpose of forcing or persuading the official not to perform, or to perform improperly, his or her duties; (e) Retaliating against an official of the Court on account of duties performed by that or another official; (f) Soliciting or accepting a bribe as an official of the Court in connection with his or her official duties. 2. The principles and procedures governing the Court's exercise of jurisdiction over offences under this article shall be those provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The conditions for providing international cooperation to the Court with respect to its proceedings under this article shall be governed by the domestic laws of the requested State.
35 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3. In the event of conviction, the Court may impose a term of imprisonment not exceeding five years, or a fine in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, or both. 4. (a) Each State Party shall extend its criminal laws penalizing offences against the integrity of its own investigative or judicial process to offences against the administration of justice referred to in this article, committed on its territory, or by one of its nationals; (b) Upon request by the Court, whenever it deems it proper, the State Party shall submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution. Those authorities shall treat such cases with diligence and devote sufficient resources to enable them to be conducted effectively. Article 71 Sanctions for misconduct before the Court 1. The Court may sanction persons present before it who commit misconduct, including disruption of its proceedings or deliberate refusal to comply with its directions, by administrative measures other than imprisonment, such as temporary or permanent removal from the courtroom, a fine or other similar measures provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 2. The procedures governing the imposition of the measures set forth in paragraph 1 shall be those provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 72 Protection of national security information 1. This article applies in any case where the disclosure of the information or documents of a State would, in the opinion of that State, prejudice its national security interests. Such cases include those falling within the scope of article 56, paragraphs 2 and 3, article 61, paragraph 3, article 64, paragraph 3, article 67, paragraph 2, article 68, paragraph 6, article 87, paragraph 6 and article 93, as well as cases arising at any other stage of the proceedings where such disclosure may be at issue. 2. This article shall also apply when a person who has been requested to give information or evidence has refused to do so or has referred the matter to the State on the ground that disclosure would prejudice the national security interests of a State and the State concerned confirms that it is of the opinion that disclosure would prejudice its national security interests. 3. Nothing in this article shall prejudice the requirements of confidentiality applicable under article 54, paragraph 3 (e) and (f), or the application of article 73. 4. If a State learns that information or documents of the State are being, or are likely to be, disclosed at any stage of the proceedings, and it is of the opinion that disclosure would prejudice its national security interests, that State shall have the right to intervene in order to obtain resolution of the issue in accordance with this article. 5. If, in the opinion of a State, disclosure of information would prejudice its national security interests, all reasonable steps will be taken by the State, acting in conjunction with the Prosecutor, the defence or the Pre-Trial Chamber or Trial Chamber, as the case may be, to seek to resolve the matter by cooperative means. Such steps may include: (a) Modification or clarification of the request; (b) A determination by the Court regarding the relevance of the information or evidence sought, or a determination as to whether the evidence, though relevant, could be or has been obtained from a source other than the requested State; (c) Obtaining the information or evidence from a different source or in a different form; or (d) Agreement on conditions under which the assistance could be provided including, among other things, providing summaries or redactions, limitations on disclosure, use of in camera or ex parte proceedings, or other protective measures permissible under the Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 6. Once all reasonable steps have been taken to resolve the matter through cooperative means, and if the State considers that there are no means or conditions under which the information or documents could be provided or disclosed without prejudice to its national security interests, it shall so notify the Prosecutor or the Court of the specific reasons for its decision, unless a specific description of the reasons would itself necessarily result in such prejudice to the State's national security interests.
36 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court7. Thereafter, if the Court determines that the evidence is relevant and necessary for the establishment of the guilt or innocence of the accused, the Court may undertake the following actions: (a) Where disclosure of the information or document is sought pursuant to a request for cooperation under Part 9 or the circumstances described in paragraph 2, and the State has invoked the ground for refusal referred to in article 93, paragraph 4: (i) The Court may, before making any conclusion referred to in subparagraph 7 (a) (ii), request further consultations for the purpose of considering the State's representations, which may include, as appropriate, hearings in camera and ex parte ; (ii) If the Court concludes that, by invoking the ground for refusal under article 93, paragraph 4, in the circumstances of the case, the requested State is not acting in accordance with its obligations under this Statute, the Court may refer the matter in accordance with article 87, paragraph 7, specifying the reasons for its conclusion; and (iii) The Court may make such inference in the trial of the accused as to the existence or non- existence of a fact, as may be appropriate in the circumstances; or (b) In all other circumstances: (i) Order disclosure; or (ii) To the extent it does not order disclosure, make such inference in the trial of the accused as to the existence or non-existence of a fact, as may be appropriate in the circumstances. Article 73 Third-party information or documents If a State Party is requested by the Court to provide a document or information in its custody, possession or control, which was disclosed to it in confidence by a State, intergovernmental organization or international organization, it shall seek the consent of the originator to disclose that document or information. If the originator is a State Party, it shall either consent to disclosure of the information or document or undertake to resolve the issue of disclosure with the Court, subject to the provisions of article 72. If the originator is not a State Party and refuses to consent to disclosure, the requested State shall inform the Court that it is unable to provide the document or information because of a pre-existing obligation of confidentiality to the originator. Article 74 Requirements for the decision 1. All the judges of the Trial Chamber shall be present at each stage of the trial and throughout their deliberations. The Presidency may, on a case-by-case basis, designate, as available, one or more alternate judges to be present at each stage of the trial and to replace a member of the Trial Chamber if that member is unable to continue attending. 2. The Trial Chamber's decision shall be based on its evaluation of the evidence and the entire proceedings. The decision shall not exceed the facts and circumstances described in the charges and any amendments to the charges. The Court may base its decision only on evidence submitted and discussed before it at the trial. 3. The judges shall attempt to achieve unanimity in their decision, failing which the decision shall be taken by a majority of the judges. 4. The deliberations of the Trial Chamber shall remain secret. 5. The decision shall be in writing and shall contain a full and reasoned statement of the Trial Chamber's findings on the evidence and conclusions. The Trial Chamber shall issue one decision. When there is no unanimity, the Trial Chamber's decision shall contain the views of the majority and the minority. The decision or a summary thereof shall be delivered in open court. Article 75 Reparations to victims 1. The Court shall establish principles relating to reparations to, or in respect of, victims, including restitution, compensation and rehabilitation. On this basis, in its decision the Court may, either upon request or on its own motion in exceptional circumstances, determine the scope and extent of any damage, loss and injury to, or in respect of, victims and will state the principles on which it is acting.
37 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The Court may make an order directly against a convicted person specifying appropriate reparations to, or in respect of, victims, including restitution, compensation and rehabilitation. Where appropriate, the Court may order that the award for reparations be made through the Trust Fund provided for in article 79. 3. Before making an order under this article, the Court may invite and shall take account of representations from or on behalf of the convicted person, victims, other interested persons or interested States. 4. In exercising its power under this article, the Court may, after a person is convicted of a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court, determine whether, in order to give effect to an order which it may make under this article, it is necessary to seek measures under article 93, paragraph 1. 5. A State Party shall give effect to a decision under this article as if the provisions of article 109 were applicable to this article. 6. Nothing in this article shall be interpreted as prejudicing the rights of victims under national or international law. Article 76 Sentencing 1. In the event of a conviction, the Trial Chamber shall consider the appropriate sentence to be imposed and shall take into account the evidence presented and submissions made during the trial that are relevant to the sentence. 2. Except where article 65 applies and before the completion of the trial, the Trial Chamber may on its own motion and shall, at the request of the Prosecutor or the accused, hold a further hearing to hear any additional evidence or submissions relevant to the sentence, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 3. Where paragraph 2 applies, any representations under article 75 shall be heard during the further hearing referred to in paragraph 2 and, if necessary, during any additional hearing. 4. The sentence shall be pronounced in public and, wherever possible, in the presence of the accused.
38 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 7. PENALTIES Article 77 Applicable penalties 1. Subject to article 110, the Court may impose one of the following penalties on a person convicted of a crime referred to in article 5 of this Statute: (a) Imprisonment for a specified number of years, which may not exceed a maximum of 30 years; or (b) A term of life imprisonment when justified by the extreme gravity of the crime and the individual circumstances of the convicted person. 2. In addition to imprisonment, the Court may order: (a) A fine under the criteria provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (b) A forfeiture of proceeds, property and assets derived directly or indirectly from that crime, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties. Article 78 Determination of the sentence 1. In determining the sentence, the Court shall, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, take into account such factors as the gravity of the crime and the individual circumstances of the convicted person. 2. In imposing a sentence of imprisonment, the Court shall deduct the time, if any, previously spent in detention in accordance with an order of the Court. The Court may deduct any time otherwise spent in detention in connection with conduct underlying the crime. 3. When a person has been convicted of more than one crime, the Court shall pronounce a sentence for each crime and a joint sentence specifying the total period of imprisonment. This period shall be no less than the highest individual sentence pronounced and shall not exceed 30 years imprisonment or a sentence of life imprisonment in conformity with article 77, paragraph 1 (b). Article 79 Trust Fund 1. A Trust Fund shall be established by decision of the Assembly of States Parties for the benefit of victims of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court, and of the families of such victims. 2. The Court may order money and other property collected through fines or forfeiture to be transferred, by order of the Court, to the Trust Fund. 3. The Trust Fund shall be managed according to criteria to be determined by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 80 Non-prejudice to national application of penalties and national laws Nothing in this Part affects the application by States of penalties prescribed by their national law, nor the law of States which do not provide for penalties prescribed in this Part.
39 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 8. APPEAL AND REVISION Article 81 Appeal against decision of acquittal or conviction or against sentence 1. A decision under article 74 may be appealed in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence as follows: (a) The Prosecutor may make an appeal on any of the following grounds: (i) Procedural error, (ii) Error of fact, or (iii) Error of law; (b) The convicted person, or the Prosecutor on that person's behalf, may make an appeal on any of the following grounds: (i) Procedural error, (ii) Error of fact, (iii) Error of law, or (iv) Any other ground that affects the fairness or reliability of the proceedings or decision. 2. (a) A sentence may be appealed, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, by the Prosecutor or the convicted person on the ground of disproportion between the crime and the sentence; (b) If on an appeal against sentence the Court considers that there are grounds on which the conviction might be set aside, wholly or in part, it may invite the Prosecutor and the convicted person to submit grounds under article 81, paragraph 1 (a) or (b), and may render a decision on conviction in accordance with article 83; (c) The same procedure applies when the Court, on an appeal against conviction only, considers that there are grounds to reduce the sentence under paragraph 2 (a). 3. (a) Unless the Trial Chamber orders otherwise, a convicted person shall remain in custody pending an appeal; (b) When a convicted person's time in custody exceeds the sentence of imprisonment imposed, that person shall be released, except that if the Prosecutor is also appealing, the release may be subject to the conditions under subparagraph (c) below; (c) In case of an acquittal, the accused shall be released immediately, subject to the following: (i) Under exceptional circumstances, and having regard, inter alia , to the concrete risk of flight, the seriousness of the offence charged and the probability of success on appeal, the Trial Chamber, at the request of the Prosecutor, may maintain the detention of the person pending appeal; (ii) A decision by the Trial Chamber under subparagraph (c) (i) may be appealed in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 3 (a) and (b), execution of the decision or sentence shall be suspended during the period allowed for appeal and for the duration of the appeal proceedings. Article 82 Appeal against other decisions 1. Either party may appeal any of the following decisions in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence: (a) A decision with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility; (b) A decision granting or denying release of the person being investigated or prosecuted; (c) A decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber to act on its own initiative under article 56, paragraph 3; (d) A decision that involves an issue that would significantly affect the fair and expeditious conduct of the proceedings or the outcome of the trial, and for which, in the opinion of the Pre-Trial or Trial Chamber, an immediate resolution by the Appeals Chamber may materially advance the proceedings.
40 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. A decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber under article 57, paragraph 3 (d), may be appealed against by the State concerned or by the Prosecutor, with the leave of the Pre-Trial Chamber. The appeal shall be heard on an expedited basis. 3. An appeal shall not of itself have suspensive effect unless the Appeals Chamber so orders, upon request, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. A legal representative of the victims, the convicted person or a bona fide owner of property adversely affected by an order under article 75 may appeal against the order for reparations, as provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 83 Proceedings on appeal 1. For the purposes of proceedings under article 81 and this article, the Appeals Chamber shall have all the powers of the Trial Chamber. 2. If the Appeals Chamber finds that the proceedings appealed from were unfair in a way that affected the reliability of the decision or sentence, or that the decision or sentence appealed from was materially affected by error of fact or law or procedural error, it may: (a) Reverse or amend the decision or sentence; or (b) Order a new trial before a different Trial Chamber. For these purposes, the Appeals Chamber may remand a factual issue to the original Trial Chamber for it to determine the issue and to report back accordingly, or may itself call evidence to determine the issue. When the decision or sentence has been appealed only by the person convicted, or the Prosecutor on that person's behalf, it cannot be amended to his or her detriment. 3. If in an appeal against sentence the Appeals Chamber finds that the sentence is disproportionate to the crime, it may vary the sentence in accordance with Part 7. 4. The judgement of the Appeals Chamber shall be taken by a majority of the judges and shall be delivered in open court. The judgement shall state the reasons on which it is based. When there is no unanimity, the judgement of the Appeals Chamber shall contain the views of the majority and the minority, but a judge may deliver a separate or dissenting opinion on a question of law. 5. The Appeals Chamber may deliver its judgement in the absence of the person acquitted or convicted. Article 84 Revision of conviction or sentence 1. The convicted person or, after death, spouses, children, parents or one person alive at the time of the accused's death who has been given express written instructions from the accused to bring such a claim, or the Prosecutor on the person's behalf, may apply to the Appeals Chamber to revise the final judgement of conviction or sentence on the grounds that: (a) New evidence has been discovered that: (i) Was not available at the time of trial, and such unavailability was not wholly or partially attributable to the party making application; and (ii) Is sufficiently important that had it been proved at trial it would have been likely to have resulted in a different verdict; (b) It has been newly discovered that decisive evidence, taken into account at trial and upon which the conviction depends, was false, forged or falsified; (c) One or more of the judges who participated in conviction or confirmation of the charges has committed, in that case, an act of serious misconduct or serious breach of duty of sufficient gravity to justify the removal of that judge or those judges from office under article 46. 2. The Appeals Chamber shall reject the application if it considers it to be unfounded. If it determines that the application is meritorious, it may, as appropriate: (a) Reconvene the original Trial Chamber; (b) Constitute a new Trial Chamber; or
41 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(c) Retain jurisdiction over the matter, with a view to, after hearing the parties in the manner set forth in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, arriving at a determination on whether the judgement should be revised. Article 85 Compensation to an arrested or convicted person 1. Anyone who has been the victim of unlawful arrest or detention shall have an enforceable right to compensation. 2. When a person has by a final decision been convicted of a criminal offence, and when subsequently his or her conviction has been reversed on the ground that a new or newly discovered fact shows conclusively that there has been a miscarriage of justice, the person who has suffered punishment as a result of such conviction shall be compensated according to law, unless it is proved that the non-disclosure of the unknown fact in time is wholly or partly attributable to him or her. 3. In exceptional circumstances, where the Court finds conclusive facts showing that there has been a grave and manifest miscarriage of justice, it may in its discretion award compensation, according to the criteria provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, to a person who has been released from detention following a final decision of acquittal or a termination of the proceedings for that reason.
42 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 9. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AND JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE Article 86 General obligation to cooperate States Parties shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Statute, cooperate fully with the Court in its investigation and prosecution of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. Article 87 Requests for cooperation: general provisions 1. (a) The Court shall have the authority to make requests to States Parties for cooperation. The requestsshall be transmitted through the diplomatic channel or any other appropriate channel as may be designated by each State Party upon ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Subsequent changes to the designation shall be made by each State Party in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. (b) When appropriate, without prejudice to the provisions of subparagraph (a), requests may also be transmitted through the International Criminal Police Organization or any appropriate regional organization. 2. Requests for cooperation and any documents supporting the request shall either be in or be accompanied by a translation into an official language of the requested State or one of the working languages of the Court, in accordance with the choice made by that State upon ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Subsequent changes to this choice shall be made in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 3. The requested State shall keep confidential a request for cooperation and any documents supporting the request, except to the extent that the disclosure is necessary for execution of the request. 4. In relation to any request for assistance presented under this Part, the Court may take such measures, including measures related to the protection of information, as may be necessary to ensure the safety or physical or psychological well-being of any victims, potential witnesses and their families. The Court may request that any information that is made available under this Part shall be provided and handled in a manner that protects the safety and physical or psychological well-being of any victims, potential witnesses and their families. 5. (a) The Court may invite any State not party to this Statute to provide assistance under this Part on the basis of an ad hoc arrangement, an agreement with such State or any other appropriate basis. (b) Where a State not party to this Statute, which has entered into an ad hoc arrangement or an agreement with the Court, fails to cooperate with requests pursuant to any such arrangement or agreement, the Court may so inform the Assembly of States Parties or, where the Security Council referred the matter to the Court, the Security Council. 6. The Court may ask any intergovernmental organization to provide information or documents. The Court may also ask for other forms of cooperation and assistance which may be agreed upon with such an organization and which are in accordance with its competence or mandate. 7. Where a State Party fails to comply with a request to cooperate by the Court contrary to the provisions of this Statute, thereby preventing the Court from exercising its functions and powers under this Statute, the Court may make a finding to that effect and refer the matter to the Assembly of States Parties or, where the Security Council referred the matter to the Court, to the Security Council. Article 88 Availability of procedures under national law States Parties shall ensure that there are procedures available under their national law for all of the forms of cooperation which are specified under this Part. Article 89 Surrender of persons to the Court 1. The Court may transmit a request for the arrest and surrender of a person, together with the material supporting the request outlined in article 91, to any State on the territory of which that person may be found and shall request the cooperation of that State in the arrest and surrender of such a person. States Parties shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Part and the procedure under their national law, comply with requests for arrest and surrender.
43 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. Where the person sought for surrender brings a challenge before a national court on the basis of the principle of ne bis in idem as provided in article 20, the requested State shall immediately consult with the Court to determine if there has been a relevant ruling on admissibility. If the case is admissible, the requested State shall proceed with the execution of the request. If an admissibility ruling is pending, the requested State may postpone the execution of the request for surrender of the person until the Court makes a determination on admissibility. 3. (a) A State Party shall authorize, in accordance with its national procedural law, transportation through its territory of a person being surrendered to the Court by another State, except where transit through that State would impede or delay the surrender. (b) A request by the Court for transit shall be transmitted in accordance with article 87. The request for transit shall contain: (i) A description of the person being transported; (ii) A brief statement of the facts of the case and their legal characterization; and (iii) The warrant for arrest and surrender; (c) A person being transported shall be detained in custody during the period of transit; (d) No authorization is required if the person is transported by air and no landing is scheduled on the territory of the transit State; (e) If an unscheduled landing occurs on the territory of the transit State, that State may require a request for transit from the Court as provided for in subparagraph (b). The transit State shall detain the person being transported until the request for transit is received and the transit is effected, provided that detention for purposes of this subparagraph may not be extended beyond 96 hours from the unscheduled landing unless the request is received within that time. 4. If the person sought is being proceeded against or is serving a sentence in the requested State for a crime different from that for which surrender to the Court is sought, the requested State, after making its decision to grant the request, shall consult with the Court. Article 90 Competing requests 1. A State Party which receives a request from the Court for the surrender of a person under article 89 shall, if it also receives a request from any other State for the extradition of the same person for the same conduct which forms the basis of the crime for which the Court seeks the person's surrender, notify the Court and the requesting State of that fact. 2. Where the requesting State is a State Party, the requested State shall give priority to the request from the Court if: (a) The Court has, pursuant to article 18 or 19, made a determination that the case in respect of which surrender is sought is admissible and that determination takes into account the investigation or prosecution conducted by the requesting State in respect of its request for extradition; or (b) The Court makes the determination described in subparagraph (a) pursuant to the requested State's notification under paragraph 1. 3. Where a determination under paragraph 2 (a) has not been made, the requested State may, at its discretion, pending the determination of the Court under paragraph 2 (b), proceed to deal with the request for extradition from the requesting State but shall not extradite the person until the Court has determined that the case is inadmissible. The Court's determination shall be made on an expedited basis. 4. If the requesting State is a State not Party to this Statute the requested State, if it is not under an international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State, shall give priority to the request for surrender from the Court, if the Court has determined that the case is admissible. 5. Where a case under paragraph 4 has not been determined to be admissible by the Court, the requested State may, at its discretion, proceed to deal with the request for extradition from the requesting State. 6. In cases where paragraph 4 applies except that the requested State is under an existing international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State not Party to this Statute, the requested State shall determine whether to surrender the person to the Court or extradite the person to the requesting State. In making its decision, the requested State shall consider all the relevant factors, including but not limited to:
44 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(a) The respective dates of the requests; (b) The interests of the requesting State including, where relevant, whether the crime was committed in its territory and the nationality of the victims and of the person sought; and (c) The possibility of subsequent surrender between the Court and the requesting State. 7. Where a State Party which receives a request from the Court for the surrender of a person also receives a request from any State for the extradition of the same person for conduct other than that which constitutes the crime for which the Court seeks the person's surrender: (a) The requested State shall, if it is not under an existing international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State, give priority to the request from the Court; (b) The requested State shall, if it is under an existing international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State, determine whether to surrender the person to the Court or to extradite the person to the requesting State. In making its decision, the requested State shall consider all the relevant factors, including but not limited to those set out in paragraph 6, but shall give special consideration to the relative nature and gravity of the conduct in question. 8. Where pursuant to a notification under this article, the Court has determined a case to be inadmissible, and subsequently extradition to the requesting State is refused, the requested State shall notify the Court of this decision. Article 91 Contents of request for arrest and surrender 1. A request for arrest and surrender shall be made in writing. In urgent cases, a request may be made by any medium capable of delivering a written record, provided that the request shall be confirmed through the channel provided for in article 87, paragraph 1 (a). 2. In the case of a request for the arrest and surrender of a person for whom a warrant of arrest has been issued by the Pre-Trial Chamber under article 58, the request shall contain or be supported by: (a) Information describing the person sought, sufficient to identify the person, and information as to that person's probable location; (b) A copy of the warrant of arrest; and (c) Such documents, statements or information as may be necessary to meet the requirements for the surrender process in the requested State, except that those requirements should not be more burdensome than those applicable to requests for extradition pursuant to treaties or arrangements between the requested State and other States and should, if possible, be less burdensome, taking into account the distinct nature of the Court. 3. In the case of a request for the arrest and surrender of a person already convicted, the request shall contain or be supported by: (a) A copy of any warrant of arrest for that person; (b) A copy of the judgement of conviction; (c) Information to demonstrate that the person sought is the one referred to in the judgement of conviction; and (d) If the person sought has been sentenced, a copy of the sentence imposed and, in the case of a sentence for imprisonment, a statement of any time already served and the time remaining to be served. 4. Upon the request of the Court, a State Party shall consult with the Court, either generally or with respect to a specific matter, regarding any requirements under its national law that may apply under paragraph 2 (c). During the consultations, the State Party shall advise the Court of the specific requirements of its national law.
45 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 92 Provisional arrest 1. In urgent cases, the Court may request the provisional arrest of the person sought, pending presentation of the request for surrender and the documents supporting the request as specified in article 91. 2. The request for provisional arrest shall be made by any medium capable of delivering a written record and shall contain: (a) Information describing the person sought, sufficient to identify the person, and information as to that person's probable location; (b) A concise statement of the crimes for which the person's arrest is sought and of the facts which are alleged to constitute those crimes, including, where possible, the date and location of the crime; (c) A statement of the existence of a warrant of arrest or a judgement of conviction against the person sought; and (d) A statement that a request for surrender of the person sought will follow. 3. A person who is provisionally arrested may be released from custody if the requested State has not received the request for surrender and the documents supporting the request as specified in article 91 within the time limits specified in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. However, the person may consent to surrender before the expiration of this period if permitted by the law of the requested State. In such a case, the requested State shall proceed to surrender the person to the Court as soon as possible. 4. The fact that the person sought has been released from custody pursuant to paragraph 3 shall not prejudice the subsequent arrest and surrender of that person if the request for surrender and the documents supporting the request are delivered at a later date. Article 93 Other forms of cooperation 1. States Parties shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Part and under procedures of national law, comply with requests by the Court to provide the following assistance in relation to investigations or prosecutions: (a) The identification and whereabouts of persons or the location of items; (b) The taking of evidence, including testimony under oath, and the production of evidence, including expert opinions and reports necessary to the Court; (c) The questioning of any person being investigated or prosecuted; (d) The service of documents, including judicial documents; (e) Facilitating the voluntary appearance of persons as witnesses or experts before the Court; (f) The temporary transfer of persons as provided in paragraph 7; (g) The examination of places or sites, including the exhumation and examination of grave sites; (h) The execution of searches and seizures; (i) The provision of records and documents, including official records and documents; (j) The protection of victims and witnesses and the preservation of evidence; (k) The identification, tracing and freezing or seizure of proceeds, property and assets and instrumentalities of crimes for the purpose of eventual forfeiture, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties; and (l) Any other type of assistance which is not prohibited by the law of the requested State, with a view to facilitating the investigation and prosecution of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. 2. The Court shall have the authority to provide an assurance to a witness or an expert appearing before the Court that he or she will not be prosecuted, detained or subjected to any restriction of personal freedom by the Court in respect of any act or omission that preceded the departure of that person from the requested State.
46 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3. Where execution of a particular measure of assistance detailed in a request presented under paragraph 1, is prohibited in the requested State on the basis of an existing fundamental legal principle of general application, the requested State shall promptly consult with the Court to try to resolve the matter. In the consultations, consideration should be given to whether the assistance can be rendered in another manner or subject to conditions. If after consultations the matter cannot be resolved, the Court shall modify the request as necessary. 4. In accordance with article 72, a State Party may deny a request for assistance, in whole or in part, only if the request concerns the production of any documents or disclosure of evidence which relates to its national security. 5. Before denying a request for assistance under paragraph 1 (l), the requested State shall consider whether the assistance can be provided subject to specified conditions, or whether the assistance can be provided at a later date or in an alternative manner, provided that if the Court or the Prosecutor accepts the assistance subject to conditions, the Court or the Prosecutor shall abide by them. 6. If a request for assistance is denied, the requested State Party shall promptly inform the Court or the Prosecutor of the reasons for such denial. 7. (a) The Court may request the temporary transfer of a person in custody for purposes of identification or for obtaining testimony or other assistance. The person may be transferred if the following conditions are fulfilled: (i) The person freely gives his or her informed consent to the transfer; and (ii) The requested State agrees to the transfer, subject to such conditions as that State and the Court may agree. (b) The person being transferred shall remain in custody. When the purposes of the transfer have been fulfilled, the Court shall return the person without delay to the requested State. 8. (a) The Court shall ensure the confidentiality of documents and information, except as required for the investigation and proceedings described in the request. (b) The requested State may, when necessary, transmit documents or information to the Prosecutor on a confidential basis. The Prosecutor may then use them solely for the purpose of generating new evidence. (c) The requested State may, on its own motion or at the request of the Prosecutor, subsequently consent to the disclosure of such documents or information. They may then be used as evidence pursuant to the provisions of Parts 5 and 6 and in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 9. (a) (i) In the event that a State Party receives competing requests, other than for surrender or extradition, from the Court and from another State pursuant to an international obligation, the State Party shall endeavour, in consultation with the Court and the other State, to meet both requests, if necessary by postponing or attaching conditions to one or the other request. (ii) Failing that, competing requests shall be resolved in accordance with the principles established in article 90. (b) Where, however, the request from the Court concerns information, property or persons which are subject to the control of a third State or an international organization by virtue of an international agreement, the requested States shall so inform the Court and the Court shall direct its request to the third State or international organization. 10. (a) The Court may, upon request, cooperate with and provide assistance to a State Party conducting an investigation into or trial in respect of conduct which constitutes a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court or which constitutes a serious crime under the national law of the requesting State. (b) (i) The assistance provided under subparagraph (a) shall include, inter alia : a. The transmission of statements, documents or other types of evidence obtained in the course of an investigation or a trial conducted by the Court; and b. The questioning of any person detained by order of the Court;
47 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(ii) In the case of assistance under subparagraph (b) (i) a: a. If the documents or other types of evidence have been obtained with the assistance of a State, such transmission shall require the consent of that State; b. If the statements, documents or other types of evidence have been provided by a witness or expert, such transmission shall be subject to the provisions of article 68. (c) The Court may, under the conditions set out in this paragraph, grant a request for assistance under this paragraph from a State which is not a Party to this Statute. Article 94 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of ongoing investigation or prosecution 1. If the immediate execution of a request would interfere with an ongoing investigation or prosecution of a case different from that to which the request relates, the requested State may postpone the execution of the request for a period of time agreed upon with the Court. However, the postponement shall be no longer than is necessary to complete the relevant investigation or prosecution in the requested State. Before making a decision to postpone, the requested State should consider whether the assistance may be immediately provided subject to certain conditions. 2. If a decision to postpone is taken pursuant to paragraph 1, the Prosecutor may, however, seek measures to preserve evidence, pursuant to article 93, paragraph 1 (j). Article 95 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of an admissibility challenge Where there is an admissibility challenge under consideration by the Court pursuant to article 18 or 19, the requested State may postpone the execution of a request under this Part pending a determination by the Court, unless the Court has specifically ordered that the Prosecutor may pursue the collection of such evidence pursuant to article 18 or 19. Article 96 Contents of request for other forms of assistance under article 93 1. A request for other forms of assistance referred to in article 93 shall be made in writing. In urgent cases, a request may be made by any medium capable of delivering a written record, provided that the request shall be confirmed through the channel provided for in article 87, paragraph 1 (a). 2. The request shall, as applicable, contain or be supported by the following: (a) A concise statement of the purpose of the request and the assistance sought, including the legal basis and the grounds for the request; (b) As much detailed information as possible about the location or identification of any person or place that must be found or identified in order for the assistance sought to be provided; (c) A concise statement of the essential facts underlying the request; (d) The reasons for and details of any procedure or requirement to be followed; (e) Such information as may be required under the law of the requested State in order to execute the request; and (f) Any other information relevant in order for the assistance sought to be provided. 3. Upon the request of the Court, a State Party shall consult with the Court, either generally or with respect to a specific matter, regarding any requirements under its national law that may apply under paragraph 2 (e). During the consultations, the State Party shall advise the Court of the specific requirements of its national law. 4. The provisions of this article shall, where applicable, also apply in respect of a request for assistance made to the Court.
48 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 97 Consultations Where a State Party receives a request under this Part in relation to which it identifies problems which may impede or prevent the execution of the request, that State shall consult with the Court without delay in order to resolve the matter. Such problems may include, inter alia : (a) Insufficient information to execute the request; (b) In the case of a request for surrender, the fact that despite best efforts, the person sought cannot be located or that the investigation conducted has determined that the person in the requested State is clearly not the person named in the warrant; or (c) The fact that execution of the request in its current form would require the requested State to breach a pre-existing treaty obligation undertaken with respect to another State. Article 98 Cooperation with respect to waiver of immunity and consent to surrender 1. The Court may not proceed with a request for surrender or assistance which would require the requested State to act inconsistently with its obligations under international law with respect to the State or diplomatic immunity of a person or property of a third State, unless the Court can first obtain the cooperation of that third State for the waiver of the immunity. 2. The Court may not proceed with a request for surrender which would require the requested State to act inconsistently with its obligations under international agreements pursuant to which the consent of a sending State is required to surrender a person of that State to the Court, unless the Court can first obtain the cooperation of the sending State for the giving of consent for the surrender. Article 99 Execution of requests under articles 93 and 96 1. Requests for assistance shall be executed in accordance with the relevant procedure under the law of the requested State and, unless prohibited by such law, in the manner specified in the request, including following any procedure outlined therein or permitting persons specified in the request to be present at and assist in the execution process. 2. In the case of an urgent request, the documents or evidence produced in response shall, at the request of the Court, be sent urgently. 3. Replies from the requested State shall be transmitted in their original language and form. 4. Without prejudice to other articles in this Part, where it is necessary for the successful execution of a request which can be executed without any compulsory measures, including specifically the interview of or taking evidence from a person on a voluntary basis, including doing so without the presence of the authorities of the requested State Party if it is essential for the request to be executed, and the examination without modification of a public site or other public place, the Prosecutor may execute such request directly on the territory of a State as follows: (a) When the State Party requested is a State on the territory of which the crime is alleged to have been committed, and there has been a determination of admissibility pursuant to article 18 or 19, the Prosecutor may directly execute such request following all possible consultations with the requested State Party; (b) In other cases, the Prosecutor may execute such request following consultations with the requested State Party and subject to any reasonable conditions or concerns raised by that State Party. Where the requested State Party identifies problems with the execution of a request pursuant to this subparagraph it shall, without delay, consult with the Court to resolve the matter. 5. Provisions allowing a person heard or examined by the Court under article 72 to invoke restrictions designed to prevent disclosure of confidential information connected with national security shall also apply to the execution of requests for assistance under this article.
49 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 100 Costs 1. The ordinary costs for execution of requests in the territory of the requested State shall be borne by that State, except for the following, which shall be borne by the Court: (a) Costs associated with the travel and security of witnesses and experts or the transfer under article 93 of persons in custody; (b) Costs of translation, interpretation and transcription; (c) Travel and subsistence costs of the judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors, the Registrar, the Deputy Registrar and staff of any organ of the Court; (d) Costs of any expert opinion or report requested by the Court; (e) Costs associated with the transport of a person being surrendered to the Court by a custodial State; and (f) Following consultations, any extraordinary costs that may result from the execution of a request. 2. The provisions of paragraph 1 shall, as appropriate, apply to requests from States Parties to the Court. In that case, the Court shall bear the ordinary costs of execution. Article 101 Rule of speciality 1. A person surrendered to the Court under this Statute shall not be proceeded against, punished or detained for any conduct committed prior to surrender, other than the conduct or course of conduct which forms the basis of the crimes for which that person has been surrendered. 2. The Court may request a waiver of the requirements of paragraph 1 from the State which surrendered the person to the Court and, if necessary, the Court shall provide additional information in accordance with article 91. States Parties shall have the authority to provide a waiver to the Court and should endeavour to do so. Article 102 Use of terms For the purposes of this Statute: (a) "surrender" means the delivering up of a person by a State to the Court, pursuant to this Statute. (b) "extradition" means the delivering up of a person by one State to another as provided by treaty, convention or national legislation.
50 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 10. ENFORCEMENT Article 103 Role of States in enforcement of sentences of imprisonment 1. (a) A sentence of imprisonment shall be served in a State designated by the Court from a list of States which have indicated to the Court their willingness to accept sentenced persons. (b) At the time of declaring its willingness to accept sentenced persons, a State may attach conditions to its acceptance as agreed by the Court and in accordance with this Part. (c) A State designated in a particular case shall promptly inform the Court whether it accepts the Court's designation. 2. (a) The State of enforcement shall notify the Court of any circumstances, including the exercise of any conditions agreed under paragraph 1, which could materially affect the terms or extent of the imprisonment. The Court shall be given at least 45 days' notice of any such known or foreseeable circumstances. During this period, the State of enforcement shall take no action that might prejudice its obligations under article 110. (b) Where the Court cannot agree to the circumstances referred to in subparagraph (a), it shall notify the State of enforcement and proceed in accordance with article 104, paragraph 1. 3. In exercising its discretion to make a designation under paragraph 1, the Court shall take into account the following: (a) The principle that States Parties should share the responsibility for enforcing sentences of imprisonment, in accordance with principles of equitable distribution, as provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (b) The application of widely accepted international treaty standards governing the treatment of prisoners; (c) The views of the sentenced person; (d) The nationality of the sentenced person; (e) Such other factors regarding the circumstances of the crime or the person sentenced, or the effective enforcement of the sentence, as may be appropriate in designating the State of enforcement. 4. If no State is designated under paragraph 1, the sentence of imprisonment shall be served in a prison facility made available by the host State, in accordance with the conditions set out in the headquarters agreement referred to in article 3, paragraph 2. In such a case, the costs arising out of the enforcement of a sentence of imprisonment shall be borne by the Court. Article 104 Change in designation of State of enforcement 1. The Court may, at any time, decide to transfer a sentenced person to a prison of another State. 2. A sentenced person may, at any time, apply to the Court to be transferred from the State of enforcement. Article 105 Enforcement of the sentence 1. Subject to conditions which a State may have specified in accordance with article 103, paragraph 1 (b), the sentence of imprisonment shall be binding on the States Parties, which shall in no case modify it. 2. The Court alone shall have the right to decide any application for appeal and revision. The State of enforcement shall not impede the making of any such application by a sentenced person. Article 106 Supervision of enforcement of sentences and conditions of imprisonment 1. The enforcement of a sentence of imprisonment shall be subject to the supervision of the Court and shall be consistent with widely accepted international treaty standards governing treatment of prisoners.
51 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The conditions of imprisonment shall be governed by the law of the State of enforcement and shall be consistent with widely accepted international treaty standards governing treatment of prisoners; in no case shall such conditions be more or less favourable than those available to prisoners convicted of similar offences in the State of enforcement. 3. Communications between a sentenced person and the Court shall be unimpeded and confidential. Article 107 Transfer of the person upon completion of sentence 1. Following completion of the sentence, a person who is not a national of the State of enforcement may, in accordance with the law of the State of enforcement, be transferred to a State which is obliged to receive him or her, or to another State which agrees to receive him or her, taking into account any wishes of the person to be transferred to that State, unless the State of enforcement authorizes the person to remain in its territory. 2. If no State bears the costs arising out of transferring the person to another State pursuant to paragraph 1, such costs shall be borne by the Court. 3. Subject to the provisions of article 108, the State of enforcement may also, in accordance with its national law, extradite or otherwise surrender the person to a State which has requested the extradition or surrender of the person for purposes of trial or enforcement of a sentence. Article 108 Limitation on the prosecution or punishment of other offences 1. A sentenced person in the custody of the State of enforcement shall not be subject to prosecution or punishment or to extradition to a third State for any conduct engaged in prior to that person's delivery to the State of enforcement, unless such prosecution, punishment or extradition has been approved by the Court at the request of the State of enforcement. 2. The Court shall decide the matter after having heard the views of the sentenced person. 3. Paragraph 1 shall cease to apply if the sentenced person remains voluntarily for more than 30 days in the territory of the State of enforcement after having served the full sentence imposed by the Court, or returns to the territory of that State after having left it. Article 109 Enforcement of fines and forfeiture measures 1. States Parties shall give effect to fines or forfeitures ordered by the Court under Part 7, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties, and in accordance with the procedure of their national law. 2. If a State Party is unable to give effect to an order for forfeiture, it shall take measures to recover the value of the proceeds, property or assets ordered by the Court to be forfeited, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties. 3. Property, or the proceeds of the sale of real property or, where appropriate, the sale of other property, which is obtained by a State Party as a result of its enforcement of a judgement of the Court shall be transferred to the Court. Article 110 Review by the Court concerning reduction of sentence 1. The State of enforcement shall not release the person before expiry of the sentence pronounced by the Court. 2. The Court alone shall have the right to decide any reduction of sentence, and shall rule on the matter after having heard the person. 3. When the person has served two thirds of the sentence, or 25 years in the case of life imprisonment, the Court shall review the sentence to determine whether it should be reduced. Such a review shall not be conducted before that time. 4. In its review under paragraph 3, the Court may reduce the sentence if it finds that one or more of the following factors are present: (a) The early and continuing willingness of the person to cooperate with the Court in its investigations and prosecutions;
52 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) The voluntary assistance of the person in enabling the enforcement of the judgements and orders of the Court in other cases, and in particular providing assistance in locating assets subject to orders of fine, forfeiture or reparation which may be used for the benefit of victims; or (c) Other factors establishing a clear and significant change of circumstances sufficient to justify the reduction of sentence, as provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 5. If the Court determines in its initial review under paragraph 3 that it is not appropriate to reduce the sentence, it shall thereafter review the question of reduction of sentence at such intervals and applying such criteria as provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 111 Escape If a convicted person escapes from custody and flees the State of enforcement, that State may, after consultation with the Court, request the person's surrender from the State in which the person is located pursuant to existing bilateral or multilateral arrangements, or may request that the Court seek the person's surrender, in accordance with Part 9. It may direct that the person be delivered to the State in which he or she was serving the sentence or to another State designated by the Court.
53 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 11. ASSEMBLY OF STATES PARTIES Article 112 Assembly of States Parties 1. An Assembly of States Parties to this Statute is hereby established. Each State Party shall have one representative in the Assembly who may be accompanied by alternates and advisers. Other States which have signed this Statute or the Final Act may be observers in the Assembly. 2. The Assembly shall: (a) Consider and adopt, as appropriate, recommendations of the Preparatory Commission; (b) Provide management oversight to the Presidency, the Prosecutor and the Registrar regarding the administration of the Court; (c) Consider the reports and activities of the Bureau established under paragraph 3 and take appropriate action in regard thereto; (d) Consider and decide the budget for the Court; (e) Decide whether to alter, in accordance with article 36, the number of judges; (f) Consider pursuant to article 87, paragraphs 5 and 7, any question relating to non-cooperation; (g) Perform any other function consistent with this Statute or the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 3. (a) The Assembly shall have a Bureau consisting of a President, two Vice-Presidents and 18 members elected by the Assembly for three-year terms. (b) The Bureau shall have a representative character, taking into account, in particular, equitable geographical distribution and the adequate representation of the principal legal systems of the world. (c) The Bureau shall meet as often as necessary, but at least once a year. It shall assist the Assembly in the discharge of its responsibilities. 4. The Assembly may establish such subsidiary bodies as may be necessary, including an independent oversight mechanism for inspection, evaluation and investigation of the Court, in order to enhance its efficiency and economy. 5. The President of the Court, the Prosecutor and the Registrar or their representatives may participate, as appropriate, in meetings of the Assembly and of the Bureau. 6. The Assembly shall meet at the seat of the Court or at the Headquarters of the United Nations once a year and, when circumstances so require, hold special sessions. Except as otherwise specified in this Statute, special sessions shall be convened by the Bureau on its own initiative or at the request of one third of the States Parties. 7. Each State Party shall have one vote. Every effort shall be made to reach decisions by consensus in the Assembly and in the Bureau. If consensus cannot be reached, except as otherwise provided in the Statute: (a) Decisions on matters of substance must be approved by a two-thirds majority of those present and voting provided that an absolute majority of States Parties constitutes the quorum for voting; (b) Decisions on matters of procedure shall be taken by a simple majority of States Parties present and voting. 8. A State Party which is in arrears in the payment of its financial contributions towards the costs of the Court shall have no vote in the Assembly and in the Bureau if the amount of its arrears equals or exceeds the amount of the contributions due from it for the preceding two full years. The Assembly may, nevertheless, permit such a State Party to vote in the Assembly and in the Bureau if it is satisfied that the failure to pay is due to conditions beyond the control of the State Party. 9. The Assembly shall adopt its own rules of procedure. 10. The official and working languages of the Assembly shall be those of the General Assembly of the United Nations.
54 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 12. FINANCING Article 113 Financial Regulations Except as otherwise specifically provided, all financial matters related to the Court and the meetings of the Assembly of States Parties, including its Bureau and subsidiary bodies, shall be governed by this Statute and the Financial Regulations and Rules adopted by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 114 Payment of expenses Expenses of the Court and the Assembly of States Parties, including its Bureau and subsidiary bodies, shall be paid from the funds of the Court. Article 115 Funds of the Court and of the Assembly of States Parties The expenses of the Court and the Assembly of States Parties, including its Bureau and subsidiary bodies, as provided for in the budget decided by the Assembly of States Parties, shall be provided by the following sources: (a) Assessed contributions made by States Parties; (b) Funds provided by the United Nations, subject to the approval of the General Assembly, in particular in relation to the expenses incurred due to referrals by the Security Council. Article 116 Voluntary contributions Without prejudice to article 115, the Court may receive and utilize, as additional funds, voluntary contributions from Governments, international organizations, individuals, corporations and other entities, in accordance with relevant criteria adopted by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 117 Assessment of contributions The contributions of States Parties shall be assessed in accordance with an agreed scale of assessment, based on the scale adopted by the United Nations for its regular budget and adjusted in accordance with the principles on which that scale is based. Article 118 Annual audit The records, books and accounts of the Court, including its annual financial statements, shall be audited annually by an independent auditor.
55 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 13. FINAL CLAUSES Article 119 Settlement of disputes 1. Any dispute concerning the judicial functions of the Court shall be settled by the decision of the Court. 2. Any other dispute between two or more States Parties relating to the interpretation or application of this Statute which is not settled through negotiations within three months of their commencement shall be referred to the Assembly of States Parties. The Assembly may itself seek to settle the dispute or may make recommendations on further means of settlement of the dispute, including referral to the International Court of Justice in conformity with the Statute of that Court. Article 120 Reservations No reservations may be made to this Statute. Article 121 Amendments 1. After the expiry of seven years from the entry into force of this Statute, any State Party may propose amendments thereto. The text of any proposed amendment shall be submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall promptly circulate it to all States Parties. 2. No sooner than three months from the date of notification, the Assembly of States Parties, at its next meeting, shall, by a majority of those present and voting, decide whether to take up the proposal. The Assembly may deal with the proposal directly or convene a Review Conference if the issue involved so warrants. 3. The adoption of an amendment at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties or at a Review Conference on which consensus cannot be reached shall require a two-thirds majority of States Parties. 4. Except as provided in paragraph 5, an amendment shall enter into force for all States Parties one year after instruments of ratification or acceptance have been deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations by seven-eighths of them. 5. Any amendment to articles 5, 6, 7 and 8 of this Statute shall enter into force for those States Parties which have accepted the amendment one year after the deposit of their instruments of ratification or acceptance. In respect of a State Party which has not accepted the amendment, the Court shall not exercise its jurisdiction regarding a crime covered by the amendment when committed by that State Party's nationals or on its territory. 6. If an amendment has been accepted by seven-eighths of States Parties in accordance with paragraph 4, any State Party which has not accepted the amendment may withdraw from this Statute with immediate effect, notwithstanding article 127, paragraph 1, but subject to article 127, paragraph 2, by giving notice no later than one year after the entry into force of such amendment. 7. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall circulate to all States Parties any amendment adopted at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties or at a Review Conference. Article 122 Amendments to provisions of an institutional nature 1. Amendments to provisions of this Statute which are of an exclusively institutional nature, namely, article 35, article 36, paragraphs 8 and 9, article 37, article 38, article 39, paragraphs 1 (first two sentences), 2 and 4, article 42, paragraphs 4 to 9, article 43, paragraphs 2 and 3, and articles 44, 46, 47 and 49, may be proposed at any time, notwithstanding article 121, paragraph 1, by any State Party. The text of any proposed amendment shall be submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations or such other person designated by the Assembly of States Parties who shall promptly circulate it to all States Parties and to others participating in the Assembly. 2. Amendments under this article on which consensus cannot be reached shall be adopted by the Assembly of States Parties or by a Review Conference, by a two-thirds majority of States Parties. Such amendments shall enter into force for all States Parties six months after their adoption by the Assembly or, as the case may be, by the Conference.
56 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 123 Review of the Statute 1. Seven years after the entry into force of this Statute the Secretary-General of the United Nations shall convene a Review Conference to consider any amendments to this Statute. Such review may include, but is not limited to, the list of crimes contained in article 5. The Conference shall be open to those participating in the Assembly of States Parties and on the same conditions. 2. At any time thereafter, at the request of a State Party and for the purposes set out in paragraph 1, the Secretary-General of the United Nations shall, upon approval by a majority of States Parties, convene a Review Conference. 3. The provisions of article 121, paragraphs 3 to 7, shall apply to the adoption and entry into force of any amendment to the Statute considered at a Review Conference. Article 124 Transitional Provision Notwithstanding article 12, paragraphs 1 and 2, a State, on becoming a party to this Statute, may declare that, for a period of seven years after the entry into force of this Statute for the State concerned, it does not accept the jurisdiction of the Court with respect to the category of crimes referred to in article 8 when a crime is alleged to have been committed by its nationals or on its territory. A declaration under this article may be withdrawn at any time. The provisions of this article shall be reviewed at the Review Conference convened in accordance with article 123, paragraph 1. Article 125 Signature, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession 1. This Statute shall be open for signature by all States in Rome, at the headquarters of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, on 17 July 1998. Thereafter, it shall remain open for signature in Rome at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Italy until 17 October 1998. After that date, the Statute shall remain open for signature in New Y ork, at United Nations Headquarters, until 31 December 2000. 2. This Statute is subject to ratification, acceptance or approval by signatory States. Instruments of ratification, acceptance or approval shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. 3. This Statute shall be open to accession by all States. Instruments of accession shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Article 126 Entry into force 1. This Statute shall enter into force on the first day of the month after the 60th day following the date of the deposit of the 60th instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. 2. For each State ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to this Statute after the deposit of the 60th instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, the Statute shall enter into force on the first day of the month after the 60th day following the deposit by such State of its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Article 127 Withdrawal 1. A State Party may, by written notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, withdraw from this Statute. The withdrawal shall take effect one year after the date of receipt of the notification, unless the notification specifies a later date. 2. A State shall not be discharged, by reason of its withdrawal, from the obligations arising from this Statute while it was a Party to the Statute, including any financial obligations which may have accrued. Its withdrawal shall not affect any cooperation with the Court in connection with criminal investigations and proceedings in relation to which the withdrawing State had a duty to cooperate and which were commenced prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective, nor shall it prejudice in any way the continued consideration of any matter which was already under consideration by the Court prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective.
57 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 128 Authentic texts The original of this Statute, of which the Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish texts are equally authentic, shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall send certified copies thereof to all States. In W Itness W hereof , the undersigned, being duly authorized thereto by their respective Governments, have signed this Statute. Done at Rome, this 17th day of July 1998.
58 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court

[Previous Article]#[Next]

Nigeria: The Wrath of the Masses – The Red Herald (Red Herald)


Featured image: map of Nigeria and the Delta State

On Thursday, last week, a dispute on land between people from Okuama, Ughelli South, and Okoloba, Bomadi, in Nigeria’s southern state of Delta, took place. The armed forces of the old State tried to intervene but received what they did not expect.

The soldiers were responding to a call during fighting between some people connected to two rival factions of the feudal landownership. According to local media reports, there have been clashes repeatedly over land ownership in recent weeks, leaving several people dead. One man was abducted during that fighting, with the Nigerian military unable to get the man released.

It is not unusual that soldiers are sent to resolve conflicts in countryside, which often erupt over land or compensation for oil spills by energy companies in many Delta state communities.

But this time things went somehow different than usual. It is reported that when the soldiers from the 181 Amphibious Battalion, responded to a distress call and appeared at the scene, they were surrounded by the local youth and killed at the spot. Among the dead were a commanding officer, two majors, one captain and 12 soldiers.

An investigation has been opened and “a few arrests have been made while steps [are] in place to unravel the motive behind the attack,” Defense Headquarters spokesman Brigadier General Tukur Gusau said in a statement.

It has been reported, that the masses have now fled the area when the army was sent in to recover the mutilated corpses and to take revenge – houses were set ablaze.

This incident shows once more the hatred the masses feel towards the ruling big-landlord-bureaucratic system and their repressive forces and on the other hand the impotence of these to prevail the old order, as an expression of the deep crisis imperialism is sinking in.

PDF Content:



The text of the Rome Statute reproduced herein was originally circulated as document A/CONF.183/9 of 17 J uly 1 998 and corrected by procès-verbaux of 10 November 1998, 12 July 1999, 30 November 1999, 8 May 2000, 17 January 2001 and 16 January 2002. The amendments to article 8 reproduce the text contained in depositary notification C.N.651.2010 Treaties-6, while the amendments regarding articles 8 bis, 15 bis and 15 ter replicate the text contained in depositary notification C.N.651.2010 Treaties-8; both depositary communications are dated 29 November 2010. The table of contents is not part of the text of the Rome Statute adopted by the United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court on 17 July 1998. It has been included in this publication for ease of reference. Done at Rome on 17 July 1998, in force on 1 July 2002, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2187, No. 38544, Depositary: Secretary-General of the United Nations, http://treaties.un.org .Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPublished by the International Criminal Court ISBN No. 92-9227-232-2 ICC-PIOS-LT-03-002/15_Eng Copyright © International Criminal Court 2011 All rights reserved International Criminal Court | Po Box 19519 | 2500 CM | The Hague | The Netherlands | www.icc-cpi.int
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Table of Contents PREAMBLE 1 PART 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COURT 2 Article 1 The Court 2 Article 2 Relationship of the Court with the United Nations 2 Article 3 Seat of the Court 2 Article 4 Legal status and powers of the Court 2 PART 2. JURISDICTION, ADMISSIBILITY AND APPLICABLE LAW 3 Article 5 Crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court 3 Article 6 Genocide 3 Article 7 Crimes against humanity 3 Article 8 War crimes 4 Article 8 bis Crime of aggression 7 Article 9 Elements of Crimes 8 Article 10 8 Article 11 Jurisdiction ratione temporis 8 Article 12 Preconditions to the exercise of jurisdiction 8 Article 13 Exercise of jurisdiction 9 Article 14 Referral of a situation by a State Party 9 Article 15 Prosecutor 9 Article 15 bis Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (State referral, proprio motu ) 9 Article 15 ter Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (Security Council referral) 10 Article 16 Deferral of investigation or prosecution 10 Article 17 Issues of admissibility 10 Article 18 Preliminary rulings regarding admissibility 11 Article 19 Challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court or the admissibility of a case 12 Article 20 Ne bis in idem 1 3 Article 21 Applicable law 13 PART 3. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW 14 Article 22 Nullum crimen sine lege 14 Article 23 Nulla poena sine lege 14 Article 24 Non-retroactivity ratione personae 14 Article 25 Individual criminal responsibility 14 Article 26 Exclusion of jurisdiction over persons under eighteen 15 Article 27 Irrelevance of official capacity 15 Article 28 Responsibility of commanders and other superiors 15 Article 29 Non-applicability of statute of limitations 15 Article 30 Mental element 15 Article 31 Grounds for excluding criminal responsibility 16 Article 32 Mistake of fact or mistake of law 16 Article 33 Superior orders and prescription of law 16 PART 4. COMPOSITION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE COURT 17 Article 34 Organs of the Court 17 Article 35 Service of judges 17 Article 36 Qualifications, nomination and election of judges 17 Article 37 Judicial vacancies 19 Article 38 The Presidency 19 Article 39 Chambers 19 Article 40 Independence of the judges 20
Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 41 Excusing and disqualification of judges 20 Article 42 The Office of the Prosecutor 20 Article 44 Staff 21 Article 45 Solemn undertaking 21 Article 46 Removal from office 22 Article 47 Disciplinary measures 22 Article 48 Privileges and immunities 22 Article 49 Salaries, allowances and expenses 23 Article 50 Official and working languages 23 Article 51 Rules of Procedure and Evidence 23 Article 52 Regulations of the Court 23 PART 5. INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION 24 Article 53 Initiation of an investigation 24 Article 54 Duties and powers of the Prosecutor with respect to investigations 24 Article 55 Rights of persons during an investigation 25 Article 56 Role of the Pre-Trial Chamber in relation to a unique investigative opportunity 25 Article 57 Functions and powers of the Pre-Trial Chamber 26 Article 58 Issuance by the Pre-Trial Chamber of a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear 27 Article 59 Arrest proceedings in the custodial State 28 Article 60 Initial proceedings before the Court 28 Article 61 Confirmation of the charges before trial 28 PART 6. THE TRIAL 31 Article 62 Place of trial 31 Article 63 Trial in the presence of the accused 31 Article 64 Functions and powers of the Trial Chamber 31 Article 65 Proceedings on an admission of guilt 32 Article 66 Presumption of innocence 32 Article 67 Rights of the accused 33 Article 68 Protection of the victims and witnesses and their participation in the proceedings 33 Article 69 Evidence 34 Article 70 Offences against the administration of justice 34 Article 71 Sanctions for misconduct before the Court 35 Article 72 Protection of national security information 35 Article 73 Third-party information or documents 36 Article 74 Requirements for the decision 36 Article 75 Reparations to victims 36 Article 76 Sentencing 37 PART 7. PENALTIES 38 Article 77 Applicable penalties 38 Article 78 Determination of the sentence 38 Article 79 Trust Fund 38 Article 80 Non-prejudice to national application of penalties and national laws 38 PART 8. APPEAL AND REVISION 39 Article 81 Appeal against decision of acquittal or conviction or against sentence 39 Article 82 Appeal against other decisions 39 Article 83 Proceedings on appeal 40 Article 84 Revision of conviction or sentence 40 Article 85 Compensation to an arrested or convicted person 41
Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 9. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AND JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE 42 Article 86 General obligation to cooperate 42 Article 87 Requests for cooperation: general provisions 42 Article 88 Availability of procedures under national law 42 Article 89 Surrender of persons to the Court 42 Article 90 Competing requests 43 Article 91 Contents of request for arrest and surrender 44 Article 92 Provisional arrest 45 Article 93 Other forms of cooperation 45 Article 94 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of ongoing investigation or prosecution 47 Article 95 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of an admissibility challenge 47 Article 96 Contents of request for other forms of assistance under article 93 47 Article 97 Consultations 48 Article 98 Cooperation with respect to waiver of immunity and consent to surrender 48 Article 99 Execution of requests under articles 93 and 96 48 Article 100 Costs 49 Article 101 Rule of speciality 49 Article 102 Use of terms 49 PART 10. ENFORCEMENT 50 Article 103 Role of States in enforcement of sentences of imprisonment 50 Article 104 Change in designation of State of enforcement 50 Article 105 Enforcement of the sentence 50 Article 106 Supervision of enforcement of sentences and conditions of imprisonment 50 Article 107 Transfer of the person upon completion of sentence 51 Article 108 Limitation on the prosecution or punishment of other offences 51 Article 109 Enforcement of fines and forfeiture measures 51 Article 110 Review by the Court concerning reduction of sentence 51 Article 111 Escape 52 PART 11. ASSEMBLY OF STATES PARTIES 53 Article 112 Assembly of States Parties 53 PART 12. FINANCING 54 Article 113 Financial Regulations 54 Article 114 Payment of expenses 54 Article 115 Funds of the Court and of the Assembly of States Parties 54 Article 116 Voluntary contributions 54 Article 117 Assessment of contributions 54 Article 118 Annual audit 54 PART 13. FINAL CLAUSES 55 Article 119 Settlement of disputes 55 Article 120 Reservations 55 Article 121 Amendments 55 Article 122 Amendments to provisions of an institutional nature 55 Article 123 Review of the Statute 56 Article 124 Transitional Provision 56 Article 125 Signature, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession 56 Article 126 Entry into force 56 Article 127 Withdrawal 56 Article 128 Authentic texts 57
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
1 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPREAMBLE The States Parties to this Statute, Conscious that all peoples are united by common bonds, their cultures pieced together in a shared heritage, and concerned that this delicate mosaic may be shattered at any time, Mindful that during this century millions of children, women and men have been victims of unimaginable atrocities that deeply shock the conscience of humanity, Recognizing that such grave crimes threaten the peace, security and well-being of the world, Affirming that the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole must not go unpunished and that their effective prosecution must be ensured by taking measures at the national level and by enhancing international cooperation, Determined to put an end to impunity for the perpetrators of these crimes and thus to contribute to the prevention of such crimes, Recalling that it is the duty of every State to exercise its criminal jurisdiction over those responsible for international crimes, Reaffirming the Purposes and Principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and in particular that all States shall refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations, Emphasizing in this connection that nothing in this Statute shall be taken as authorizing any State Party to intervene in an armed conflict or in the internal affairs of any State, Determined to these ends and for the sake of present and future generations, to establish an independent permanent International Criminal Court in relationship with the United Nations system, with jurisdiction over the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole, Emphasizing that the International Criminal Court established under this Statute shall be complementary to national criminal jurisdictions, Resolved to guarantee lasting respect for and the enforcement of international justice, Have agreed as follows:
2 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COURT Article 1 The Court An International Criminal Court ("the Court") is hereby established. It shall be a permanent institution and shall have the power to exercise its jurisdiction over persons for the most serious crimes of international concern, as referred to in this Statute, and shall be complementary to national criminal jurisdictions. The jurisdiction and functioning of the Court shall be governed by the provisions of this Statute. Article 2 Relationship of the Court with the United Nations The Court shall be brought into relationship with the United Nations through an agreement to be approved by the Assembly of States Parties to this Statute and thereafter concluded by the President of the Court on its behalf. Article 3 Seat of the Court 1. The seat of the Court shall be established at The Hague in the Netherlands ("the host State"). 2. The Court shall enter into a headquarters agreement with the host State, to be approved by the Assembly of States Parties and thereafter concluded by the President of the Court on its behalf. 3. The Court may sit elsewhere, whenever it considers it desirable, as provided in this Statute. Article 4 Legal status and powers of the Court 1. The Court shall have international legal personality. It shall also have such legal capacity as may be necessary for the exercise of its functions and the fulfilment of its purposes. 2. The Court may exercise its functions and powers, as provided in this Statute, on the territory of any State Party and, by special agreement, on the territory of any other State.
3 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 2. JURISDICTION, ADMISSIBILITY AND APPLICABLE LAW Article 51 Crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court The jurisdiction of the Court shall be limited to the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole. The Court has jurisdiction in accordance with this Statute with respect to the following crimes: (a) The crime of genocide; (b) Crimes against humanity; (c) War crimes; (d) The crime of aggression. Article 6 Genocide For the purpose of this Statute, "genocide" means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. Article 7 Crimes against humanity 1. For the purpose of this Statute, "crime against humanity" means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack: (a) Murder; (b) Extermination; (c) Enslavement; (d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population; (e) Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law; (f) Torture; (g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity; (h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; (i) Enforced disappearance of persons; (j) The crime of apartheid; (k) Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health. 1 Paragraph 2 of article 5 (“The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression once a provision is adopted in accordance with articles 121 and 123 defining the crime and setting out the conditions under which the Court shall exercise jurisdiction with respect to this crime. Such a provision shall be consistent with the relevant provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.”) was deleted in accordance with RC/Res.6, annex I, of 11 June 2010.
4 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. For the purpose of paragraph 1: (a) "Attack directed against any civilian population" means a course of conduct involving the multiple commission of acts referred to in paragraph 1 against any civilian population, pursuant to or in furtherance of a State or organizational policy to commit such attack; (b) "Extermination" includes the intentional infliction of conditions of life, inter alia the deprivation of access to food and medicine, calculated to bring about the destruction of part of a population; (c) "Enslavement" means the exercise of any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership over a person and includes the exercise of such power in the course of trafficking in persons, in particular women and children; (d) "Deportation or forcible transfer of population" means forced displacement of the persons concerned by expulsion or other coercive acts from the area in which they are lawfully present, without grounds permitted under international law; (e) "Torture" means the intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, upon a person in the custody or under the control of the accused; except that torture shall not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions; (f) "Forced pregnancy" means the unlawful confinement of a woman forcibly made pregnant, with the intent of affecting the ethnic composition of any population or carrying out other grave violations of international law. This definition shall not in any way be interpreted as affecting national laws relating to pregnancy; (g) "Persecution" means the intentional and severe deprivation of fundamental rights contrary to international law by reason of the identity of the group or collectivity; (h) "The crime of apartheid" means inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime; (i) "Enforced disappearance of persons" means the arrest, detention or abduction of persons by, or with the authorization, support or acquiescence of, a State or a political organization, followed by a refusal to acknowledge that deprivation of freedom or to give information on the fate or whereabouts of those persons, with the intention of removing them from the protection of the law for a prolonged period of time. 3. For the purpose of this Statute, it is understood that the term "gender" refers to the two sexes, male and female, within the context of society. The term "gender" does not indicate any meaning different from the above. Article 82 War crimes 1. The Court shall have jurisdiction in respect of war crimes in particular when committed as part of a plan or policy or as part of a large-scale commission of such crimes. 2. For the purpose of this Statute, "war crimes" means: (a) Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention: (i) Wilful killing; (ii) Torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments; (iii) Wilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health; (iv) Extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly; (v) Compelling a prisoner of war or other protected person to serve in the forces of a hostile Power; (vi) Wilfully depriving a prisoner of war or other protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial; 2 Paragraphs 2 (e) (xiii) to 2 (e) (xv) were amended by resolution RC/Res.5 of 11 June 2010 (adding paragraphs 2 (e) (xiii) to 2 (e) (xv)).
5 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(vii) Unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement; (viii) Taking of hostages. (b) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts: (i) Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities; (ii) Intentionally directing attacks against civilian objects, that is, objects which are not military objectives; (iii) Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict; (iv) Intentionally launching an attack in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated; (v) Attacking or bombarding, by whatever means, towns, villages, dwellings or buildings which are undefended and which are not military objectives; (vi) Killing or wounding a combatant who, having laid down his arms or having no longer means of defence, has surrendered at discretion; (vii) Making improper use of a flag of truce, of the flag or of the military insignia and uniform of the enemy or of the United Nations, as well as of the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions, resulting in death or serious personal injury; (viii) The transfer, directly or indirectly, by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies, or the deportation or transfer of all or parts of the population of the occupied territory within or outside this territory; (ix) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military objectives; (x) Subjecting persons who are in the power of an adverse party to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons; (xi) Killing or wounding treacherously individuals belonging to the hostile nation or army; (xii) Declaring that no quarter will be given; (xiii) Destroying or seizing the enemy's property unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war; (xiv) Declaring abolished, suspended or inadmissible in a court of law the rights and actions of the nationals of the hostile party; (xv) Compelling the nationals of the hostile party to take part in the operations of war directed against their own country, even if they were in the belligerent's service before the commencement of the war; (xvi) Pillaging a town or place, even when taken by assault; (xvii) Employing poison or poisoned weapons; (xviii) Employing asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and all analogous liquids, materials or devices;
6 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(xix) Employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions; (xx) Employing weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare which are of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering or which are inherently indiscriminate in violation of the international law of armed conflict, provided that such weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare are the subject of a comprehensive prohibition and are included in an annex to this Statute, by an amendment in accordance with the relevant provisions set forth in articles 121 and 123; (xxi) Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (xxii) Committing rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, as defined in article 7, paragraph 2 (f), enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence also constituting a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions; (xxiii) Utilizing the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas or military forces immune from military operations; (xxiv) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings, material, medical units and transport, and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions in conformity with international law; (xxv) Intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions; (xxvi) Conscripting or enlisting children under the age of fifteen years into the national armed forces or using them to participate actively in hostilities. (c) In the case of an armed conflict not of an international character, serious violations of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts committed against persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention or any other cause: (i) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; (ii) Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (iii) Taking of hostages; (iv) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgement pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all judicial guarantees which are generally recognized as indispensable. (d) Paragraph 2 (c) applies to armed conflicts not of an international character and thus does not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence or other acts of a similar nature. (e) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in armed conflicts not of an international character, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts: (i) Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities; (ii) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings, material, medical units and transport, and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions in conformity with international law; (iii) Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict; (iv) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military objectives; (v) Pillaging a town or place, even when taken by assault;
7 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(vi) Committing rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, as defined in article 7, paragraph 2 (f), enforced sterilization, and any other form of sexual violence also constituting a serious violation of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions; (vii) Conscripting or enlisting children under the age of fifteen years into armed forces or groups or using them to participate actively in hostilities; (viii) Ordering the displacement of the civilian population for reasons related to the conflict, unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand; (ix) Killing or wounding treacherously a combatant adversary; (x) Declaring that no quarter will be given; (xi) Subjecting persons who are in the power of another party to the conflict to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons; (xii) Destroying or seizing the property of an adversary unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of the conflict; (xiii) Employing poison or poisoned weapons; (xiv) Employing asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and all analogous liquids, materials or devices; (xv) Employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions. (f) Paragraph 2 (e) applies to armed conflicts not of an international character and thus does not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence or other acts of a similar nature. It applies to armed conflicts that take place in the territory of a State when there is protracted armed conflict between governmental authorities and organized armed groups or between such groups. 3. Nothing in paragraph 2 (c) and (e) shall affect the responsibility of a Government to maintain or re- establish law and order in the State or to defend the unity and territorial integrity of the State, by all legitimate means. Article 8 bis3 Crime of aggression 1. For the purpose of this Statute, “crime of aggression” means the planning, preparation, initiation or execution, by a person in a position effectively to exercise control over or to direct the political or military action of a State, of an act of aggression which, by its character, gravity and scale, constitutes a manifest violation of the Charter of the United Nations. 2. For the purpose of paragraph 1, “act of aggression” means the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations. Any of the following acts, regardless of a declaration of war, shall, in accordance with United Nations General Assembly resolution 3314 (XXIX) of 14 December 1974, qualify as an act of aggression: (a) The invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another State, or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such invasion or attack, or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State or part thereof; (b) Bombardment by the armed forces of a State against the territory of another State or the use of any weapons by a State against the territory of another State; (c) The blockade of the ports or coasts of a State by the armed forces of another State; (d) An attack by the armed forces of a State on the land, sea or air forces, or marine and air fleets of another State; 3 Inserted by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010.
8 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(e) The use of armed forces of one State which are within the territory of another State with the agreement of the receiving State, in contravention of the conditions provided for in the agreement or any extension of their presence in such territory beyond the termination of the agreement; (f) The action of a State in allowing its territory, which it has placed at the disposal of another State, to be used by that other State for perpetrating an act of aggression against a third State; (g) The sending by or on behalf of a State of armed bands, groups, irregulars or mercenaries, which carry out acts of armed force against another State of such gravity as to amount to the acts listed above, or its substantial involvement therein. Article 94 Elements of Crimes 1. Elements of Crimes shall assist the Court in the interpretation and application of articles 6, 7, 8 and 8 bis. They shall be adopted by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 2. Amendments to the Elements of Crimes may be proposed by: (a) Any State Party; (b) The judges acting by an absolute majority; (c) The Prosecutor. Such amendments shall be adopted by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 3. The Elements of Crimes and amendments thereto shall be consistent with this Statute. Article 10 Nothing in this Part shall be interpreted as limiting or prejudicing in any way existing or developing rules of international law for purposes other than this Statute. Article 11 Jurisdiction ratione temporis 1. The Court has jurisdiction only with respect to crimes committed after the entry into force of this Statute. 2. If a State becomes a Party to this Statute after its entry into force, the Court may exercise its jurisdiction only with respect to crimes committed after the entry into force of this Statute for that State, unless that State has made a declaration under article 12, paragraph 3. Article 12 Preconditions to the exercise of jurisdiction 1. A State which becomes a Party to this Statute thereby accepts the jurisdiction of the Court with respect to the crimes referred to in article 5. 2. In the case of article 13, paragraph (a) or (c), the Court may exercise its jurisdiction if one or more of the following States are Parties to this Statute or have accepted the jurisdiction of the Court in accordance with paragraph 3: (a) The State on the territory of which the conduct in question occurred or, if the crime was committed on board a vessel or aircraft, the State of registration of that vessel or aircraft; (b) The State of which the person accused of the crime is a national. 3. If the acceptance of a State which is not a Party to this Statute is required under paragraph 2, that State may, by declaration lodged with the Registrar, accept the exercise of jurisdiction by the Court with respect to the crime in question. The accepting State shall cooperate with the Court without any delay or exception in accordance with Part 9. 4 As amended by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010 (inserting the reference to article 8 bis).
9 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 13 Exercise of jurisdiction The Court may exercise its jurisdiction with respect to a crime referred to in article 5 in accordance with the provisions of this Statute if: (a) A situation in which one or more of such crimes appears to have been committed is referred to the Prosecutor by a State Party in accordance with article 14; (b) A situation in which one or more of such crimes appears to have been committed is referred to the Prosecutor by the Security Council acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations; or (c) The Prosecutor has initiated an investigation in respect of such a crime in accordance with article 15. Article 14 Referral of a situation by a State Party 1. A State Party may refer to the Prosecutor a situation in which one or more crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court appear to have been committed requesting the Prosecutor to investigate the situation for the purpose of determining whether one or more specific persons should be charged with the commission of such crimes. 2. As far as possible, a referral shall specify the relevant circumstances and be accompanied by such supporting documentation as is available to the State referring the situation. Article 15 Prosecutor 1. The Prosecutor may initiate investigations proprio motu on the basis of information on crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. 2. The Prosecutor shall analyse the seriousness of the information received. For this purpose, he or she may seek additional information from States, organs of the United Nations, intergovernmental or non- governmental organizations, or other reliable sources that he or she deems appropriate, and may receive written or oral testimony at the seat of the Court. 3. If the Prosecutor concludes that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation, he or she shall submit to the Pre-Trial Chamber a request for authorization of an investigation, together with any supporting material collected. Victims may make representations to the Pre-Trial Chamber, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. If the Pre-Trial Chamber, upon examination of the request and the supporting material, considers that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation, and that the case appears to fall within the jurisdiction of the Court, it shall authorize the commencement of the investigation, without prejudice to subsequent determinations by the Court with regard to the jurisdiction and admissibility of a case. 5. The refusal of the Pre-Trial Chamber to authorize the investigation shall not preclude the presentation of a subsequent request by the Prosecutor based on new facts or evidence regarding the same situation. 6. If, after the preliminary examination referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, the Prosecutor concludes that the information provided does not constitute a reasonable basis for an investigation, he or she shall inform those who provided the information. This shall not preclude the Prosecutor from considering further information submitted to him or her regarding the same situation in the light of new facts or evidence. Article 15 bis5 Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (State referral, proprio motu ) 1. The Court may exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with article 13, paragraphs (a) and (c), subject to the provisions of this article. 2. The Court may exercise jurisdiction only with respect to crimes of aggression committed one year after the ratification or acceptance of the amendments by thirty States Parties. 3. The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with this article, subject to a decision to be taken after 1 January 2017 by the same majority of States Parties as is required for the adoption of an amendment to the Statute. 5 Inserted by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010.
10 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court4. The Court may, in accordance with article 12, exercise jurisdiction over a crime of aggression, arising from an act of aggression committed by a State Party, unless that State Party has previously declared that it does not accept such jurisdiction by lodging a declaration with the Registrar. The withdrawal of such a declaration may be effected at any time and shall be considered by the State Party within three years. 5. In respect of a State that is not a party to this Statute, the Court shall not exercise its jurisdiction over the crime of aggression when committed by that State’s nationals or on its territory. 6. Where the Prosecutor concludes that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation in respect of a crime of aggression, he or she shall first ascertain whether the Security Council has made a determination of an act of aggression committed by the State concerned. The Prosecutor shall notify the Secretary-General of the United Nations of the situation before the Court, including any relevant information and documents. 7. Where the Security Council has made such a determination, the Prosecutor may proceed with the investigation in respect of a crime of aggression. 8. Where no such determination is made within six months after the date of notification, the Prosecutor may proceed with the investigation in respect of a crime of aggression, provided that the Pre-Trial Division has authorized the commencement of the investigation in respect of a crime of aggression in accordance with the procedure contained in article 15, and the Security Council has not decided otherwise in accordance with article16. 9. A determination of an act of aggression by an organ outside the Court shall be without prejudice to the Court’s own findings under this Statute. 10. This article is without prejudice to the provisions relating to the exercise of jurisdiction with respect to other crimes referred to in article 5. Article 15 ter6 Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (Security Council referral) 1. The Court may exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with article 13, paragraph (b), subject to the provisions of this article. 2. The Court may exercise jurisdiction only with respect to crimes of aggression committed one year after the ratification or acceptance of the amendments by thirty States Parties. 3. The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with this article, subject to a decision to be taken after 1 January 2017 by the same majority of States Parties as is required for the adoption of an amendment to the Statute. 4. A determination of an act of aggression by an organ outside the Court shall be without prejudice to the Court’s own findings under this Statute. 5. This article is without prejudice to the provisions relating to the exercise of jurisdiction with respect to other crimes referred to in article 5. Article 16 Deferral of investigation or prosecution No investigation or prosecution may be commenced or proceeded with under this Statute for a period of 12 months after the Security Council, in a resolution adopted under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, has requested the Court to that effect; that request may be renewed by the Council under the same conditions. Article 17 Issues of admissibility 1. Having regard to paragraph 10 of the Preamble and article 1, the Court shall determine that a case is inadmissible where: (a) The case is being investigated or prosecuted by a State which has jurisdiction over it, unless the State is unwilling or unable genuinely to carry out the investigation or prosecution; 6 Inserted by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010.
11 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) The case has been investigated by a State which has jurisdiction over it and the State has decided not to prosecute the person concerned, unless the decision resulted from the unwillingness or inability of the State genuinely to prosecute; (c) The person concerned has already been tried for conduct which is the subject of the complaint, and a trial by the Court is not permitted under article 20, paragraph 3; (d) The case is not of sufficient gravity to justify further action by the Court. 2. In order to determine unwillingness in a particular case, the Court shall consider, having regard to the principles of due process recognized by international law, whether one or more of the following exist, as applicable: (a) The proceedings were or are being undertaken or the national decision was made for the purpose of shielding the person concerned from criminal responsibility for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court referred to in article 5; (b) There has been an unjustified delay in the proceedings which in the circumstances is inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice; (c) The proceedings were not or are not being conducted independently or impartially, and they were or are being conducted in a manner which, in the circumstances, is inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice. 3. In order to determine inability in a particular case, the Court shall consider whether, due to a total or substantial collapse or unavailability of its national judicial system, the State is unable to obtain the accused or the necessary evidence and testimony or otherwise unable to carry out its proceedings. Article 18 Preliminary rulings regarding admissibility 1. When a situation has been referred to the Court pursuant to article 13 (a) and the Prosecutor has determined that there would be a reasonable basis to commence an investigation, or the Prosecutor initiates an investigation pursuant to articles 13 (c) and 15, the Prosecutor shall notify all States Parties and those States which, taking into account the information available, would normally exercise jurisdiction over the crimes concerned. The Prosecutor may notify such States on a confidential basis and, where the Prosecutor believes it necessary to protect persons, prevent destruction of evidence or prevent the absconding of persons, may limit the scope of the information provided to States. 2. Within one month of receipt of that notification, a State may inform the Court that it is investigating or has investigated its nationals or others within its jurisdiction with respect to criminal acts which may constitute crimes referred to in article 5 and which relate to the information provided in the notification to States. At the request of that State, the Prosecutor shall defer to the State's investigation of those persons unless the Pre-Trial Chamber, on the application of the Prosecutor, decides to authorize the investigation. 3. The Prosecutor's deferral to a State's investigation shall be open to review by the Prosecutor six months after the date of deferral or at any time when there has been a significant change of circumstances based on the State's unwillingness or inability genuinely to carry out the investigation. 4. The State concerned or the Prosecutor may appeal to the Appeals Chamber against a ruling of the Pre-Trial Chamber, in accordance with article 82. The appeal may be heard on an expedited basis. 5. When the Prosecutor has deferred an investigation in accordance with paragraph 2, the Prosecutor may request that the State concerned periodically inform the Prosecutor of the progress of its investigations and any subsequent prosecutions. States Parties shall respond to such requests without undue delay. 6. Pending a ruling by the Pre-Trial Chamber, or at any time when the Prosecutor has deferred an investigation under this article, the Prosecutor may, on an exceptional basis, seek authority from the Pre-Trial Chamber to pursue necessary investigative steps for the purpose of preserving evidence where there is a unique opportunity to obtain important evidence or there is a significant risk that such evidence may not be subsequently available. 7. A State which has challenged a ruling of the Pre-Trial Chamber under this article may challenge the admissibility of a case under article 19 on the grounds of additional significant facts or significant change of circumstances.
12 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 19 Challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court or the admissibility of a case 1. The Court shall satisfy itself that it has jurisdiction in any case brought before it. The Court may, on its own motion, determine the admissibility of a case in accordance with article 17. 2. Challenges to the admissibility of a case on the grounds referred to in article 17 or challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court may be made by: (a) An accused or a person for whom a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear has been issued under article 58; (b) A State which has jurisdiction over a case, on the ground that it is investigating or prosecuting the case or has investigated or prosecuted; or (c) A State from which acceptance of jurisdiction is required under article 12. 3. The Prosecutor may seek a ruling from the Court regarding a question of jurisdiction or admissibility. In proceedings with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility, those who have referred the situation under article 13, as well as victims, may also submit observations to the Court. 4. The admissibility of a case or the jurisdiction of the Court may be challenged only once by any person or State referred to in paragraph 2. The challenge shall take place prior to or at the commencement of the trial. In exceptional circumstances, the Court may grant leave for a challenge to be brought more than once or at a time later than the commencement of the trial. Challenges to the admissibility of a case, at the commencement of a trial, or subsequently with the leave of the Court, may be based only on article 17, paragraph 1 (c). 5. A State referred to in paragraph 2 (b) and (c) shall make a challenge at the earliest opportunity. 6. Prior to the confirmation of the charges, challenges to the admissibility of a case or challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court shall be referred to the Pre-Trial Chamber. After confirmation of the charges, they shall be referred to the Trial Chamber. Decisions with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility may be appealed to the Appeals Chamber in accordance with article 82. 7. If a challenge is made by a State referred to in paragraph 2 (b) or (c), the Prosecutor shall suspend the investigation until such time as the Court makes a determination in accordance with article 17. 8. Pending a ruling by the Court, the Prosecutor may seek authority from the Court: (a) To pursue necessary investigative steps of the kind referred to in article 18, paragraph 6; (b) To take a statement or testimony from a witness or complete the collection and examination of evidence which had begun prior to the making of the challenge; and (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. 9. The making of a challenge shall not affect the validity of any act performed by the Prosecutor or any order or warrant issued by the Court prior to the making of the challenge. 10. If the Court has decided that a case is inadmissible under article 17, the Prosecutor may submit a request for a review of the decision when he or she is fully satisfied that new facts have arisen which negate the basis on which the case had previously been found inadmissible under article 17. 11. If the Prosecutor, having regard to the matters referred to in article 17, defers an investigation, the Prosecutor may request that the relevant State make available to the Prosecutor information on the proceedings. That information shall, at the request of the State concerned, be confidential. If the Prosecutor thereafter decides to proceed with an investigation, he or she shall notify the State to which deferral of the proceedings has taken place.
13 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 207 Ne bis in idem 1. Except as provided in this Statute, no person shall be tried before the Court with respect to conduct which formed the basis of crimes for which the person has been convicted or acquitted by the Court. 2. No person shall be tried by another court for a crime referred to in article 5 for which that person has already been convicted or acquitted by the Court. 3. No person who has been tried by another court for conduct also proscribed under article 6, 7, 8 or 8 bis shall be tried by the Court with respect to the same conduct unless the proceedings in the other court: (a) Were for the purpose of shielding the person concerned from criminal responsibility for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court; or (b) Otherwise were not conducted independently or impartially in accordance with the norms of due process recognized by international law and were conducted in a manner which, in the circumstances, was inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice. Article 21 Applicable law 1. The Court shall apply: (a) In the first place, this Statute, Elements of Crimes and its Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (b) In the second place, where appropriate, applicable treaties and the principles and rules of international law, including the established principles of the international law of armed conflict; (c) Failing that, general principles of law derived by the Court from national laws of legal systems of the world including, as appropriate, the national laws of States that would normally exercise jurisdiction over the crime, provided that those principles are not inconsistent with this Statute and with international law and internationally recognized norms and standards. 2. The Court may apply principles and rules of law as interpreted in its previous decisions. 3. The application and interpretation of law pursuant to this article must be consistent with internationally recognized human rights, and be without any adverse distinction founded on grounds such as gender as defined in article 7, paragraph 3, age, race, colour, language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, wealth, birth or other status. 7 As amended by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010 (inserting the reference to article 8 bis).
14 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 3. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW Article 22 Nullum crimen sine lege 1. A person shall not be criminally responsible under this Statute unless the conduct in question constitutes, at the time it takes place, a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court. 2. The definition of a crime shall be strictly construed and shall not be extended by analogy. In case of ambiguity, the definition shall be interpreted in favour of the person being investigated, prosecuted or convicted. 3. This article shall not affect the characterization of any conduct as criminal under international law independently of this Statute. Article 23 Nulla poena sine leg e A person convicted by the Court may be punished only in accordance with this Statute. Article 24 Non-retroactivity ratione personae 1. No person shall be criminally responsible under this Statute for conduct prior to the entry into force of the Statute. 2. In the event of a change in the law applicable to a given case prior to a final judgement, the law more favourable to the person being investigated, prosecuted or convicted shall apply. Article 258 Individual criminal responsibility 1. The Court shall have jurisdiction over natural persons pursuant to this Statute. 2. A person who commits a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court shall be individually responsible and liable for punishment in accordance with this Statute. 3. In accordance with this Statute, a person shall be criminally responsible and liable for punishment for a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court if that person: (a) Commits such a crime, whether as an individual, jointly with another or through another person, regardless of whether that other person is criminally responsible; (b) Orders, solicits or induces the commission of such a crime which in fact occurs or is attempted; (c) For the purpose of facilitating the commission of such a crime, aids, abets or otherwise assists in its commission or its attempted commission, including providing the means for its commission; (d) In any other way contributes to the commission or attempted commission of such a crime by a group of persons acting with a common purpose. Such contribution shall be intentional and shall either: (i) Be made with the aim of furthering the criminal activity or criminal purpose of the group, where such activity or purpose involves the commission of a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; or (ii) Be made in the knowledge of the intention of the group to commit the crime; (e) In respect of the crime of genocide, directly and publicly incites others to commit genocide; (f) Attempts to commit such a crime by taking action that commences its execution by means of a substantial step, but the crime does not occur because of circumstances independent of the person's intentions. However, a person who abandons the effort to commit the crime or otherwise prevents the completion of the crime shall not be liable for punishment under this Statute for the attempt to commit that crime if that person completely and voluntarily gave up the criminal purpose. 8 As amended by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010 (adding paragraph 3 bis).
15 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3 bis. In respect of the crime of aggression, the provisions of this article shall apply only to persons in a position effectively to exercise control over or to direct the political or military action of a State. 4. No provision in this Statute relating to individual criminal responsibility shall affect the responsibility of States under international law. Article 26 Exclusion of jurisdiction over persons under eighteen The Court shall have no jurisdiction over any person who was under the age of 18 at the time of the alleged commission of a crime. Article 27 Irrelevance of official capacity 1. This Statute shall apply equally to all persons without any distinction based on official capacity. In particular, official capacity as a Head of State or Government, a member of a Government or parliament, an elected representative or a government official shall in no case exempt a person from criminal responsibility under this Statute, nor shall it, in and of itself, constitute a ground for reduction of sentence. 2. Immunities or special procedural rules which may attach to the official capacity of a person, whether under national or international law, shall not bar the Court from exercising its jurisdiction over such a person. Article 28 Responsibility of commanders and other superiors In addition to other grounds of criminal responsibility under this Statute for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court: (a) A military commander or person effectively acting as a military commander shall be criminally responsible for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court committed by forces under his or her effective command and control, or effective authority and control as the case may be, as a result of his or her failure to exercise control properly over such forces, where: (i) That military commander or person either knew or, owing to the circumstances at the time, should have known that the forces were committing or about to commit such crimes; and (ii) That military commander or person failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power to prevent or repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecution. (b) With respect to superior and subordinate relationships not described in paragraph (a), a superior shall be criminally responsible for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court committed by subordinates under his or her effective authority and control, as a result of his or her failure to exercise control properly over such subordinates, where: (i) The superior either knew, or consciously disregarded information which clearly indicated, that the subordinates were committing or about to commit such crimes; (ii) The crimes concerned activities that were within the effective responsibility and control of the superior; and (iii) The superior failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power to prevent or repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecution. Article 29 Non-applicability of statute of limitations The crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court shall not be subject to any statute of limitations. Article 30 Mental element 1. Unless otherwise provided, a person shall be criminally responsible and liable for punishment for a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court only if the material elements are committed with intent and knowledge. 2. For the purposes of this article, a person has intent where: (a) In relation to conduct, that person means to engage in the conduct;
16 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) In relation to a consequence, that person means to cause that consequence or is aware that it will occur in the ordinary course of events. 3. For the purposes of this article, "knowledge" means awareness that a circumstance exists or a consequence will occur in the ordinary course of events. "Know" and "knowingly" shall be construed accordingly. Article 31 Grounds for excluding criminal responsibility 1. In addition to other grounds for excluding criminal responsibility provided for in this Statute, a person shall not be criminally responsible if, at the time of that person's conduct: (a) The person suffers from a mental disease or defect that destroys that person's capacity to appreciate the unlawfulness or nature of his or her conduct, or capacity to control his or her conduct to conform to the requirements of law; (b) The person is in a state of intoxication that destroys that person's capacity to appreciate the unlawfulness or nature of his or her conduct, or capacity to control his or her conduct to conform to the requirements of law, unless the person has become voluntarily intoxicated under such circumstances that the person knew, or disregarded the risk, that, as a result of the intoxication, he or she was likely to engage in conduct constituting a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; (c) The person acts reasonably to defend himself or herself or another person or, in the case of war crimes, property which is essential for the survival of the person or another person or property which is essential for accomplishing a military mission, against an imminent and unlawful use of force in a manner proportionate to the degree of danger to the person or the other person or property protected. The fact that the person was involved in a defensive operation conducted by forces shall not in itself constitute a ground for excluding criminal responsibility under this subparagraph; (d) The conduct which is alleged to constitute a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been caused by duress resulting from a threat of imminent death or of continuing or imminent serious bodily harm against that person or another person, and the person acts necessarily and reasonably to avoid this threat, provided that the person does not intend to cause a greater harm than the one sought to be avoided. Such a threat may either be: (i) Made by other persons; or (ii) Constituted by other circumstances beyond that person's control. 2. The Court shall determine the applicability of the grounds for excluding criminal responsibility provided for in this Statute to the case before it. 3. At trial, the Court may consider a ground for excluding criminal responsibility other than those referred to in paragraph 1 where such a ground is derived from applicable law as set forth in article 21. The procedures relating to the consideration of such a ground shall be provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 32 Mistake of fact or mistake of law 1. A mistake of fact shall be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility only if it negates the mental element required by the crime. 2. A mistake of law as to whether a particular type of conduct is a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court shall not be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility. A mistake of law may, however, be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility if it negates the mental element required by such a crime, or as provided for in article 33. Article 33 Superior orders and prescription of law 1. The fact that a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been committed by a person pursuant to an order of a Government or of a superior, whether military or civilian, shall not relieve that person of criminal responsibility unless: (a) The person was under a legal obligation to obey orders of the Government or the superior in question; (b) The person did not know that the order was unlawful; and (c) The order was not manifestly unlawful. 2. For the purposes of this article, orders to commit genocide or crimes against humanity are manifestly unlawful.
17 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 4. COMPOSITION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE COURT Article 34 Organs of the Court The Court shall be composed of the following organs: (a) The Presidency; (b) An Appeals Division, a Trial Division and a Pre-Trial Division; (c) The Office of the Prosecutor; (d) The Registry. Article 35 Service of judges 1. All judges shall be elected as full-time members of the Court and shall be available to serve on that basis from the commencement of their terms of office. 2. The judges composing the Presidency shall serve on a full-time basis as soon as they are elected. 3. The Presidency may, on the basis of the workload of the Court and in consultation with its members, decide from time to time to what extent the remaining judges shall be required to serve on a full-time basis. Any such arrangement shall be without prejudice to the provisions of article 40. 4. The financial arrangements for judges not required to serve on a full-time basis shall be made in accordance with article 49. Article 36 Qualifications, nomination and election of judges 1. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2, there shall be 18 judges of the Court. 2. (a) The Presidency, acting on behalf of the Court, may propose an increase in the number of judges specified in paragraph 1, indicating the reasons why this is considered necessary and appropriate The Registrar shall promptly circulate any such proposal to all States Parties. (b) Any such proposal shall then be considered at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties to be convened in accordance with article 112. The proposal shall be considered adopted if approved at the meeting by a vote of two thirds of the members of the Assembly of States Parties and shall enter into force at such time as decided by the Assembly of States Parties. (c) (i) Once a proposal for an increase in the number of judges has been adopted under subparagraph (b), the election of the additional judges shall take place at the next session of the Assembly of States Parties in accordance with paragraphs 3 to 8, and article 37, paragraph 2; (ii) Once a proposal for an increase in the number of judges has been adopted and brought into effect under subparagraphs (b) and (c) (i), it shall be open to the Presidency at any time thereafter, if the workload of the Court justifies it, to propose a reduction in the number of judges, provided that the number of judges shall not be reduced below that specified in paragraph 1. The proposal shall be dealt with in accordance with the procedure laid down in subparagraphs (a) and (b). In the event that the proposal is adopted, the number of judges shall be progressively decreased as the terms of office of serving judges expire, until the necessary number has been reached. 3. (a) The judges shall be chosen from among persons of high moral character, impartiality and integrity who possess the qualifications required in their respective States for appointment to the highest judicial offices. (b) Every candidate for election to the Court shall: (i) Have established competence in criminal law and procedure, and the necessary relevant experience, whether as judge, prosecutor, advocate or in other similar capacity, in criminal proceedings; or (ii) Have established competence in relevant areas of international law such as international humanitarian law and the law of human rights, and extensive experience in a professional legal capacity which is of relevance to the judicial work of the Court;
18 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(c) Every candidate for election to the Court shall have an excellent knowledge of and be fluent in at least one of the working languages of the Court. 4. (a) Nominations of candidates for election to the Court may be made by any State Party to this Statute, and shall be made either: (i) By the procedure for the nomination of candidates for appointment to the highest judicial offices in the State in question; or (ii) By the procedure provided for the nomination of candidates for the International Court of Justice in the Statute of that Court. Nominations shall be accompanied by a statement in the necessary detail specifying how the candidate fulfils the requirements of paragraph 3. (b) Each State Party may put forward one candidate for any given election who need not necessarily be a national of that State Party but shall in any case be a national of a State Party. (c) The Assembly of States Parties may decide to establish, if appropriate, an Advisory Committee on nominations. In that event, the Committee's composition and mandate shall be established by the Assembly of States Parties. 5. For the purposes of the election, there shall be two lists of candidates: List A containing the names of candidates with the qualifications specified in paragraph 3 (b) (i); and List B containing the names of candidates with the qualifications specified in paragraph 3 (b) (ii). A candidate with sufficient qualifications for both lists may choose on which list to appear. At the first election to the Court, at least nine judges shall be elected from list A and at least five judges from list B. Subsequent elections shall be so organized as to maintain the equivalent proportion on the Court of judges qualified on the two lists. 6. (a) The judges shall be elected by secret ballot at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties convened for that purpose under article 112. Subject to paragraph 7, the persons elected to the Court shall be the 18 candidates who obtain the highest number of votes and a two-thirds majority of the States Parties present and voting. (b) In the event that a sufficient number of judges is not elected on the first ballot, successive ballots shall be held in accordance with the procedures laid down in subparagraph (a) until the remaining places have been filled. 7. No two judges may be nationals of the same State. A person who, for the purposes of membership of the Court, could be regarded as a national of more than one State shall be deemed to be a national of the State in which that person ordinarily exercises civil and political rights. 8. (a) The States Parties shall, in the selection of judges, take into account the need, within the membership of the Court, for: (i) The representation of the principal legal systems of the world; (ii) Equitable geographical representation; and (iii) A fair representation of female and male judges. (b) States Parties shall also take into account the need to include judges with legal expertise on specific issues, including, but not limited to, violence against women or children. 9. (a) Subject to subparagraph (b), judges shall hold office for a term of nine years and, subject to subparagraph (c) and to article 37, paragraph 2, shall not be eligible for re-election. (b) At the first election, one third of the judges elected shall be selected by lot to serve for a term of three years; one third of the judges elected shall be selected by lot to serve for a term of six years; and the remainder shall serve for a term of nine years. (c) A judge who is selected to serve for a term of three years under subparagraph (b) shall be eligible for re-election for a full term. 10. Notwithstanding paragraph 9, a judge assigned to a Trial or Appeals Chamber in accordance with article 39 shall continue in office to complete any trial or appeal the hearing of which has already commenced before that Chamber.
19 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 37 Judicial vacancies 1. In the event of a vacancy, an election shall be held in accordance with article 36 to fill the vacancy. 2. A judge elected to fill a vacancy shall serve for the remainder of the predecessor's term and, if that period is three years or less, shall be eligible for re-election for a full term under article 36. Article 38 The Presidency 1. The President and the First and Second Vice-Presidents shall be elected by an absolute majority of the judges. They shall each serve for a term of three years or until the end of their respective terms of office as judges, whichever expires earlier. They shall be eligible for re-election once. 2. The First Vice-President shall act in place of the President in the event that the President is unavailable or disqualified. The Second Vice-President shall act in place of the President in the event that both the President and the First Vice-President are unavailable or disqualified. 3. The President, together with the First and Second Vice-Presidents, shall constitute the Presidency, which shall be responsible for: (a) The proper administration of the Court, with the exception of the Office of the Prosecutor; and (b) The other functions conferred upon it in accordance with this Statute. 4. In discharging its responsibility under paragraph 3 (a), the Presidency shall coordinate with and seek the concurrence of the Prosecutor on all matters of mutual concern. Article 39 Chambers 1. As soon as possible after the election of the judges, the Court shall organize itself into the divisions specified in article 34, paragraph (b). The Appeals Division shall be composed of the President and four other judges, the Trial Division of not less than six judges and the Pre-Trial Division of not less than six judges. The assignment of judges to divisions shall be based on the nature of the functions to be performed by each division and the qualifications and experience of the judges elected to the Court, in such a way that each division shall contain an appropriate combination of expertise in criminal law and procedure and in international law. The Trial and Pre-Trial Divisions shall be composed predominantly of judges with criminal trial experience. 2. (a) The judicial functions of the Court shall be carried out in each division by Chambers. (b) (i) The Appeals Chamber shall be composed of all the judges of the Appeals Division; (ii) The functions of the Trial Chamber shall be carried out by three judges of the Trial Division; (iii) The functions of the Pre-Trial Chamber shall be carried out either by three judges of the Pre- Trial Division or by a single judge of that division in accordance with this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (c) Nothing in this paragraph shall preclude the simultaneous constitution of more than one Trial Chamber or Pre-Trial Chamber when the efficient management of the Court's workload so requires. 3. (a) Judges assigned to the Trial and Pre-Trial Divisions shall serve in those divisions for a period of three years, and thereafter until the completion of any case the hearing of which has already commenced in the division concerned. (b) Judges assigned to the Appeals Division shall serve in that division for their entire term of office. 4. Judges assigned to the Appeals Division shall serve only in that division. Nothing in this article shall, however, preclude the temporary attachment of judges from the Trial Division to the Pre-Trial Division or vice versa, if the Presidency considers that the efficient management of the Court's workload so requires, provided that under no circumstances shall a judge who has participated in the pre-trial phase of a case be eligible to sit on the Trial Chamber hearing that case.
20 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 40 Independence of the judges 1. The judges shall be independent in the performance of their functions. 2. Judges shall not engage in any activity which is likely to interfere with their judicial functions or to affect confidence in their independence. 3. Judges required to serve on a full-time basis at the seat of the Court shall not engage in any other occupation of a professional nature. 4. Any question regarding the application of paragraphs 2 and 3 shall be decided by an absolute majority of the judges. Where any such question concerns an individual judge, that judge shall not take part in the decision. Article 41 Excusing and disqualification of judges 1. The Presidency may, at the request of a judge, excuse that judge from the exercise of a function under this Statute, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 2. (a) A judge shall not participate in any case in which his or her impartiality might reasonably be doubted onany ground. A judge shall be disqualified from a case in accordance with this paragraph if, inter alia, that judge has previously been involved in any capacity in that case beforethe Court or in a related criminal case at the national level involving the person being investigated or prosecuted. A judge shall also be disqualified on such other grounds as may be provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. (b) The Prosecutor or the person being investigated or prosecuted may request the disqualification of a judge under this paragraph. (c) Any question as to the disqualification of a judge shall be decided by an absolute majority of the judges. The challenged judge shall be entitled to present his or her comments on the matter, but shall not take part in the decision. Article 42 The Office of the Prosecutor 1. The Office of the Prosecutor shall act independently as a separate organ of the Court. It shall be responsible for receiving referrals and any substantiated information on crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court, for examining them and for conducting investigations and prosecutions before the Court. A member of the Office shall not seek or act on instructions from any external source. 2. The Office shall be headed by the Prosecutor. The Prosecutor shall have full authority over the management and administration of the Office, including the staff, facilities and other resources thereof. The Prosecutor shall be assisted by one or more Deputy Prosecutors, who shall be entitled to carry out any of the acts required of the Prosecutor under this Statute. The Prosecutor and the Deputy Prosecutors shall be of different nationalities. They shall serve on a full-time basis. 3. The Prosecutor and the Deputy Prosecutors shall be persons of high moral character, be highly competent in and have extensive practical experience in the prosecution or trial of criminal cases. They shall have an excellent knowledge of and be fluent in at least one of the working languages of the Court. 4. The Prosecutor shall be elected by secret ballot by an absolute majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. The Deputy Prosecutors shall be elected in the same way from a list of candidates provided by the Prosecutor. The Prosecutor shall nominate three candidates for each position of Deputy Prosecutor to be filled. Unless a shorter term is decided upon at the time of their election, the Prosecutor and the Deputy Prosecutors shall hold office for a term of nine years and shall not be eligible for re-election. 5. Neither the Prosecutor nor a Deputy Prosecutor shall engage in any activity which is likely to interfere with his or her prosecutorial functions or to affect confidence in his or her independence. They shall not engage in any other occupation of a professional nature. 6. The Presidency may excuse the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor, at his or her request, from acting in a particular case.
21 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court7. Neither the Prosecutor nor a Deputy Prosecutor shall participate in any matter in which their impartiality might reasonably be doubted on any ground. They shall be disqualified from a case in accordance with this paragraph if, inter alia , they have previously been involved in any capacity in that case before the Court or in a related criminal case at the national level involving the person being investigated or prosecuted. 8. Any question as to the disqualification of the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor shall be decided by the Appeals Chamber. (a) The person being investigated or prosecuted may at any time request the disqualification of the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor on the grounds set out in this article; (b) The Prosecutor or the Deputy Prosecutor, as appropriate, shall be entitled to present his or her comments on the matter; 9. The Prosecutor shall appoint advisers with legal expertise on specific issues, including, but not limited to, sexual and gender violence and violence against children. Article 43 The Registry 1. The Registry shall be responsible for the non-judicial aspects of the administration and servicing of the Court, without prejudice to the functions and powers of the Prosecutor in accordance with article 42. 2. The Registry shall be headed by the Registrar, who shall be the principal administrative officer of the Court. The Registrar shall exercise his or her functions under the authority of the President of the Court. 3. The Registrar and the Deputy Registrar shall be persons of high moral character, be highly competent and have an excellent knowledge of and be fluent in at least one of the working languages of the Court. 4. The judges shall elect the Registrar by an absolute majority by secret ballot, taking into account any recommendation by the Assembly of States Parties. If the need arises and upon the recommendation of the Registrar, the judges shall elect, in the same manner, a Deputy Registrar. 5. The Registrar shall hold office for a term of five years, shall be eligible for re-election once and shall serve on a full-time basis. The Deputy Registrar shall hold office for a term of five years or such shorter term as may be decided upon by an absolute majority of the judges, and may be elected on the basis that the Deputy Registrar shall be called upon to serve as required. 6. The Registrar shall set up a Victims and Witnesses Unit within the Registry. This Unit shall provide, in consultation with the Office of the Prosecutor, protective measures and security arrangements, counseling and other appropriate assistance for witnesses, victims who appear before the Court, and others who are at risk on account of testimony given by such witnesses. The Unit shall include staff with expertise in trauma, including trauma related to crimes of sexual violence. Article 44 Staff 1. The Prosecutor and the Registrar shall appoint such qualified staff as may be required to their respective offices. In the case of the Prosecutor, this shall include the appointment of investigators. 2. In the employment of staff, the Prosecutor and the Registrar shall ensure the highest standards of efficiency, competency and integrity, and shall have regard, mutatis mutandis , to the criteria set forth in article 36, paragraph 8. 3. The Registrar, with the agreement of the Presidency and the Prosecutor, shall propose Staff Regulations which include the terms and conditions upon which the staff of the Court shall be appointed, remunerated and dismissed. The Staff Regulations shall be approved by the Assembly of States Parties. 4. The Court may, in exceptional circumstances, employ the expertise of gratis personnel offered by States Parties, intergovernmental organizations or non-governmental organizations to assist with the work of any of the organs of the Court. The Prosecutor may accept any such offer on behalf of the Office of the Prosecutor. Such gratis personnel shall be employed in accordance with guidelines to be established by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 45 Solemn undertaking Before taking up their respective duties under this Statute, the judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors, the Registrar and the Deputy Registrar shall each make a solemn undertaking in open court to exercise his or her respective functions impartially and conscientiously.
22 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 46 Removal from office 1. A judge, the Prosecutor, a Deputy Prosecutor, the Registrar or the Deputy Registrar shall be removed from office if a decision to this effect is made in accordance with paragraph 2, in cases where that person: (a) Is found to have committed serious misconduct or a serious breach of his or her duties under this Statute, as provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; or (b) Is unable to exercise the functions required by this Statute. 2. A decision as to the removal from office of a judge, the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor under paragraph 1 shall be made by the Assembly of States Parties, by secret ballot: (a) In the case of a judge, by a two-thirds majority of the States Parties upon a recommendation adopted by a two-thirds majority of the other judges; (b) In the case of the Prosecutor, by an absolute majority of the States Parties; (c) In the case of a Deputy Prosecutor, by an absolute majority of the States Parties upon the recommendation of the Prosecutor. 3. A decision as to the removal from office of the Registrar or Deputy Registrar shall be made by an absolute majority of the judges. 4. A judge, Prosecutor, Deputy Prosecutor, Registrar or Deputy Registrar whose conduct or ability to exercise the functions of the office as required by this Statute is challenged under this article shall have full opportunity to present and receive evidence and to make submissions in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The person in question shall not otherwise participate in the consideration of the matter. Article 47 Disciplinary measures A judge, Prosecutor, Deputy Prosecutor, Registrar or Deputy Registrar who has committed misconduct of a less serious nature than that set out in article 46, paragraph 1, shall be subject to disciplinary measures, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 48 Privileges and immunities 1. The Court shall enjoy in the territory of each State Party such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the fulfilment of its purposes. 2. The judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors and the Registrar shall, when engaged on or with respect to the business of the Court, enjoy the same privileges and immunities as are accorded to heads of diplomatic missions and shall, after the expiry of their terms of office, continue to be accorded immunity from legal process of every kind in respect of words spoken or written and acts performed by them in their official capacity. 3. The Deputy Registrar, the staff of the Office of the Prosecutor and the staff of the Registry shall enjoy the privileges and immunities and facilities necessary for the performance of their functions, in accordance with the agreement on the privileges and immunities of the Court. 4. Counsel, experts, witnesses or any other person required to be present at the seat of the Court shall be accorded such treatment as is necessary for the proper functioning of the Court, in accordance with the agreement on the privileges and immunities of the Court. 5. The privileges and immunities of: (a) A judge or the Prosecutor may be waived by an absolute majority of the judges; (b) The Registrar may be waived by the Presidency; (c) The Deputy Prosecutors and staff of the Office of the Prosecutor may be waived by the Prosecutor; (d) The Deputy Registrar and staff of the Registry may be waived by the Registrar.
23 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 49 Salaries, allowances and expenses The judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors, the Registrar and the Deputy Registrar shall receive such salaries, allowances and expenses as may be decided upon by the Assembly of States Parties. These salaries and allowances shall not be reduced during their terms of office. Article 50 Official and working languages 1. The official languages of the Court shall be Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish. The judgements of the Court, as well as other decisions resolving fundamental issues before the Court, shall be published in the official languages. The Presidency shall, in accordance with the criteria established by the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, determine which decisions may be considered as resolving fundamental issues for the purposes of this paragraph. 2. The working languages of the Court shall be English and French. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence shall determine the cases in which other official languages may be used as working languages. 3. At the request of any party to a proceeding or a State allowed to intervene in a proceeding, the Court shall authorize a language other than English or French to be used by such a party or State, provided that the Court considers such authorization to be adequately justified. Article 51 Rules of Procedure and Evidence 1. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence shall enter into force upon adoption by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 2. Amendments to the Rules of Procedure and Evidence may be proposed by: (a) Any State Party; (b) The judges acting by an absolute majority; or (c) The Prosecutor. Such amendments shall enter into force upon adoption by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 3. After the adoption of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, in urgent cases where the Rules do not provide for a specific situation before the Court, the judges may, by a two-thirds majority, draw up provisional Rules to be applied until adopted, amended or rejected at the next ordinary or special session of the Assembly of States Parties. 4. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence, amendments thereto and any provisional Rule shall be consistent with this Statute. Amendments to the Rules of Procedure and Evidence as well as provisional Rules shall not be applied retroactively to the detriment of the person who is being investigated or prosecuted or who has been convicted. 5. In the event of conflict between the Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, the Statute shall prevail. Article 52 Regulations of the Court 1. The judges shall, in accordance with this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, adopt, by an absolute majority, the Regulations of the Court necessary for its routine functioning. 2. The Prosecutor and the Registrar shall be consulted in the elaboration of the Regulations and any amendments thereto. 3. The Regulations and any amendments thereto shall take effect upon adoption unless otherwise decided by the judges. Immediately upon adoption, they shall be circulated to States Parties for comments. If within six months there are no objections from a majority of States Parties, they shall remain in force.
24 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 5. INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION Article 53 Initiation of an investigation 1. The Prosecutor shall, having evaluated the information made available to him or her, initiate an investigation unless he or she determines that there is no reasonable basis to proceed under this Statute. In deciding whether to initiate an investigation, the Prosecutor shall consider whether: (a) The information available to the Prosecutor provides a reasonable basis to believe that a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been or is being committed; (b) The case is or would be admissible under article 17; and (c) Taking into account the gravity of the crime and the interests of victims, there are nonetheless substantial reasons to believe that an investigation would not serve the interests of justice. If the Prosecutor determines that there is no reasonable basis to proceed and his or her determination is based solely on subparagraph (c) above, he or she shall inform the Pre-Trial Chamber. 2. If, upon investigation, the Prosecutor concludes that there is not a sufficient basis for a prosecution because: (a) There is not a sufficient legal or factual basis to seek a warrant or summons under article 58; (b) The case is inadmissible under article 17; or (c) A prosecution is not in the interests of justice, taking into account all the circumstances, including the gravity of the crime, the interests of victims and the age or infirmity of the alleged perpetrator, and his or her role in the alleged crime; the Prosecutor shall inform the Pre-Trial Chamber and the State making a referral under article 14 or the Security Council in a case under article 13, paragraph (b), of his or her conclusion and the reasons for the conclusion. 3. (a) At the request of the State making a referral under article 14 or the Security Council under article 13, paragraph (b), the Pre-Trial Chamber may review a decision of the Prosecutor under paragraph 1 or 2 not to proceed and mayrequest the Prosecutor to reconsider that decision. (b) In addition, the Pre-Trial Chamber may, on its own initiative, review a decision of the Prosecutor not to proceed if it is based solely on paragraph 1 (c) or 2 (c). In such a case, the decision of the Prosecutor shall be effective only if confirmed by the Pre-Trial Chamber. 4. The Prosecutor may, at any time, reconsider a decision whether to initiate an investigation or prosecution based on new facts or information. Article 54 Duties and powers of the Prosecutor with respect to investigations 1. The Prosecutor shall: (a) In order to establish the truth, extend the investigation to cover all facts and evidence relevant to an assessment of whether there is criminal responsibility under this Statute, and, in doing so, investigate incriminating and exonerating circumstances equally; (b) Take appropriate measures to ensure the effective investigation and prosecution of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court, and in doing so, respect the interests and personal circumstances of victims and witnesses, including age, gender as defined in article 7, paragraph 3, and health, and take into account the nature of the crime, in particular where it involves sexual violence, gender violence or violence against children; and (c) Fully respect the rights of persons arising under this Statute. 2. The Prosecutor may conduct investigations on the territory of a State: (a) In accordance with the provisions of Part 9; or (b) As authorized by the Pre-Trial Chamber under article 57, paragraph 3 (d).
25 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3. The Prosecutor may: (a) Collect and examine evidence; (b) Request the presence of and question persons being investigated, victims and witnesses; (c) Seek the cooperation of any State or intergovernmental organization or arrangement in accordance with its respective competence and/or mandate; (d) Enter into such arrangements or agreements, not inconsistent with this Statute, as may be necessary to facilitate the cooperation of a State, intergovernmental organization or person; (e) Agree not to disclose, at any stage of the proceedings, documents or information that the Prosecutor obtains on the condition of confidentiality and solely for the purpose of generating new evidence, unless the provider of the information consents; and (f) Take necessary measures, or request that necessary measures be taken, to ensure the confidentiality of information, the protection of any person or the preservation of evidence. Article 55 Rights of persons during an investigation 1. In respect of an investigation under this Statute, a person: (a) Shall not be compelled to incriminate himself or herself or to confess guilt; (b) Shall not be subjected to any form of coercion, duress or threat, to torture or to any other form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; (c) Shall, if questioned in a language other than a language the person fully understands and speaks, have, free of any cost, the assistance of a competent interpreter and such translations as are necessary to meet the requirements of fairness; and (d) Shall not be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention, and shall not be deprived of his or her liberty except on such grounds and in accordance with such procedures as are established in this Statute. 2. Where there are grounds to believe that a person has committed a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court and that person is about to be questioned either by the Prosecutor, or by national authorities pursuant to a request made under Part 9, that person shall also have the following rights of which he or she shall be informed prior to being questioned: (a) To be informed, prior to being questioned, that there are grounds to believe that he or she has committed a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; (b) To remain silent, without such silence being a consideration in the determination of guilt or innocence; (c) To have legal assistance of the person's choosing, or, if the person does not have legal assistance, to have legal assistance assigned to him or her, in any case where the interests of justice so require, and without payment by the person in any such case if the person does not have sufficient means to pay for it; and (d) To be questioned in the presence of counsel unless the person has voluntarily waived his or her right to counsel. Article 56 Role of the Pre-Trial Chamber in relation to a unique investigative opportunity 1. (a) Where the Prosecutor considers an investigation to present a unique opportunity to take testimony or a statement from a witness or to examine, collect or test evidence, which may not be available subsequently for the purposes of a trial, the Prosecutor shall so inform the Pre-Trial Chamber. (b) In that case, the Pre-Trial Chamber may, upon request of the Prosecutor, take such measures as may be necessary to ensure the efficiency and integrity of the proceedings and, in particular, to protect the rights of the defence. (c) Unless the Pre-Trial Chamber orders otherwise, the Prosecutor shall provide the relevant information to the person who has been arrested or appeared in response to a summons in connection with the investigation referred to in subparagraph (a), in order that he or she may be heard on the matter.
26 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The measures referred to in paragraph 1 (b) may include: (a) Making recommendations or orders regarding procedures to be followed; (b) Directing that a record be made of the proceedings; (c) Appointing an expert to assist; (d) Authorizing counsel for a person who has been arrested, or appeared before the Court in response to a summons, to participate, or where there has not yet been such an arrest or appearance or counsel has not been designated, appointing another counsel to attend and represent the interests of the defence; (e) Naming one of its members or, if necessary, another available judge of the Pre-Trial or Trial Division to observe and make recommendations or orders regarding the collection and preservation of evidence and the questioning of persons; (f) Taking such other action as may be necessary to collect or preserve evidence. 3. (a) Where the Prosecutor has not sought measures pursuant to this article but the Pre-Trial Chamberconsiders that such measures are required to preserve evidence that it deems would be essential for the defence at trial, it shall consult with the Prosecutor as to whether there is good reason for the Prosecutor's failure to request the measures. If upon consultation, the Pre-Trial Chamber concludes that the Prosecutor's failure to request such measures is unjustified, the Pre-Trial Chamber may take such measures on its own initiative. (b) A decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber to act on its own initiative under this paragraph may be appealedby the Prosecutor. The appeal shall be heard on an expedited basis. 4. The admissibility of evidence preserved or collected for trial pursuant to this article, or the record thereof, shall be governed at trial by article 69, and given such weight as determined by the Trial Chamber. Article 57 Functions and powers of the Pre-Trial Chamber 1. Unless otherwise provided in this Statute, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall exercise its functions in accordance with the provisions of this article. 2. (a) Orders or rulings of the Pre-Trial Chamber issued under articles 15, 18, 19, 54, paragraph 2, 61, paragraph 7, and 72 must be concurred in by a majority of its judges. (b) In all other cases, a single judge of the Pre-Trial Chamber may exercise the functions provided for in this Statute, unless otherwise provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence or by a majority of the Pre-Trial Chamber. 3. In addition to its other functions under this Statute, the Pre-Trial Chamber may: (a) At the request of the Prosecutor, issue such orders and warrants as may be required for the purposes of an investigation; (b) Upon the request of a person who has been arrested or has appeared pursuant to a summons under article 58, issue such orders, including measures such as those described in article 56, or seek such cooperation pursuant to Part 9 as may be necessary to assist the person in the preparation of his or her defence; (c) Where necessary, provide for the protection and privacy of victims and witnesses, the preservation of evidence, the protection of persons who have been arrested or appeared in response to a summons, and the protection of national security information; (d) Authorize the Prosecutor to take specific investigative steps within the territory of a State Party without having secured the cooperation of that State under Part 9 if, whenever possible having regard to the views of the State concerned, the Pre-Trial Chamber has determined in that case that the State is clearly unable to execute a request for cooperation due to the unavailability of any authority or any component of its judicial system competent to execute the request for cooperation under Part 9; (e) Where a warrant of arrest or a summons has been issued under article 58, and having due regard to the strength of the evidence and the rights of the parties concerned, as provided for in this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, seek the cooperation of States pursuant to article 93, paragraph 1 (k), to take protective measures for the purpose of forfeiture, in particular for the ultimate benefit of victims.
27 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 58 Issuance by the Pre-Trial Chamber of a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear 1. At any time after the initiation of an investigation, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall, on the application of the Prosecutor, issue a warrant of arrest of a person if, having examined the application and the evidence or other information submitted by the Prosecutor, it is satisfied that: (a) There are reasonable grounds to believe that the person has committed a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; and (b) The arrest of the person appears necessary: (i) To ensure the person's appearance at trial; (ii) To ensure that the person does not obstruct or endanger the investigation or the court proceedings; or (iii) Where applicable, to prevent the person from continuing with the commission of that crime or a related crime which is within the jurisdiction of the Court and which arises out of the same circumstances. 2. The application of the Prosecutor shall contain: (a) The name of the person and any other relevant identifying information; (b) A specific reference to the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court which the person is alleged to have committed; (c) A concise statement of the facts which are alleged to constitute those crimes; (d) A summary of the evidence and any other information which establish reasonable grounds to believe that the person committed those crimes; and (e) The reason why the Prosecutor believes that the arrest of the person is necessary. 3. The warrant of arrest shall contain: (a) The name of the person and any other relevant identifying information; (b) A specific reference to the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court for which the person's arrest is sought; and (c) A concise statement of the facts which are alleged to constitute those crimes. 4. The warrant of arrest shall remain in effect until otherwise ordered by the Court. 5. On the basis of the warrant of arrest, the Court may request the provisional arrest or the arrest and surrender of the person under Part 9. 6. The Prosecutor may request the Pre-Trial Chamber to amend the warrant of arrest by modifying or adding to the crimes specified therein. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall so amend the warrant if it is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the person committed the modified or additional crimes. 7. As an alternative to seeking a warrant of arrest, the Prosecutor may submit an application requesting that the Pre-Trial Chamber issue a summons for the person to appear. If the Pre-Trial Chamber is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the person committed the crime alleged and that a summons is sufficient to ensure the person's appearance, it shall issue the summons, with or without conditions restricting liberty (other than detention) if provided for by national law, for the person to appear. The summons shall contain: (a) The name of the person and any other relevant identifying information; (b) The specified date on which the person is to appear; (c) A specific reference to the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court which the person is alleged to have committed; and (d) A concise statement of the facts which are alleged to constitute the crime. The summons shall be served on the person.
28 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 59 Arrest proceedings in the custodial State 1. A State Party which has received a request for provisional arrest or for arrest and surrender shall immediately take steps to arrest the person in question in accordance with its laws and the provisions of Part 9. 2. A person arrested shall be brought promptly before the competent judicial authority in the custodial State which shall determine, in accordance with the law of that State, that: (a) The warrant applies to that person; (b) The person has been arrested in accordance with the proper process; and (c) The person's rights have been respected. 3. The person arrested shall have the right to apply to the competent authority in the custodial State for interim release pending surrender. 4. In reaching a decision on any such application, the competent authority in the custodial State shall consider whether, given the gravity of the alleged crimes, there are urgent and exceptional circumstances to justify interim release and whether necessary safeguards exist to ensure that the custodial State can fulfil its duty to surrender the person to the Court. It shall not be open to the competent authority of the custodial State to consider whether the warrant of arrest was properly issued in accordance with article 58, paragraph 1 (a) and (b). 5. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall be notified of any request for interim release and shall make recommendations to the competent authority in the custodial State. The competent authority in the custodial State shall give full consideration to such recommendations, including any recommendations on measures to prevent the escape of the person, before rendering its decision. 6. If the person is granted interim release, the Pre-Trial Chamber may request periodic reports on the status of the interim release. 7. Once ordered to be surrendered by the custodial State, the person shall be delivered to the Court as soon as possible. Article 60 Initial proceedings before the Court 1. Upon the surrender of the person to the Court, or the person's appearance before the Court voluntarily or pursuant to a summons, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall satisfy itself that the person has been informed of the crimes which he or she is alleged to have committed, and of his or her rights under this Statute, including the right to apply for interim release pending trial. 2. A person subject to a warrant of arrest may apply for interim release pending trial. If the Pre-Trial Chamber is satisfied that the conditions set forth in article 58, paragraph 1, are met, the person shall continue to be detained. If it is not so satisfied, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall release the person, with or without conditions. 3. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall periodically review its ruling on the release or detention of the person, and may do so at any time on the request of the Prosecutor or the person. Upon such review, it may modify its ruling as to detention, release or conditions of release, if it is satisfied that changed circumstances so require. 4. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall ensure that a person is not detained for an unreasonable period prior to trial due to inexcusable delay by the Prosecutor. If such delay occurs, the Court shall consider releasing the person, with or without conditions. 5. If necessary, the Pre-Trial Chamber may issue a warrant of arrest to secure the presence of a person who has been released. Article 61 Confirmation of the charges before trial 1. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2, within a reasonable time after the person's surrender or voluntary appearance before the Court, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall hold a hearing to confirm the charges on which the Prosecutor intends to seek trial. The hearing shall be held in the presence of the Prosecutor and the person charged, as well as his or her counsel.
29 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The Pre-Trial Chamber may, upon request of the Prosecutor or on its own motion, hold a hearing in the absence of the person charged to confirm the charges on which the Prosecutor intends to seek trial when the person has: (a) Waived his or her right to be present; or (b) Fled or cannot be found and all reasonable steps have been taken to secure his or her appearance before the Court and to inform the person of the charges and that a hearing to confirm those charges will be held. In that case, the person shall be represented by counsel where the Pre-Trial Chamber determines that it is in the interests of justice. 3. Within a reasonable time before the hearing, the person shall: (a) Be provided with a copy of the document containing the charges on which the Prosecutor intends to bring the person to trial; and (b) Be informed of the evidence on which the Prosecutor intends to rely at the hearing. The Pre-Trial Chamber may issue orders regarding the disclosure of information for the purposes of the hearing. 4. Before the hearing, the Prosecutor may continue the investigation and may amend or withdraw any charges. The person shall be given reasonable notice before the hearing of any amendment to or withdrawal of charges. In case of a withdrawal of charges, the Prosecutor shall notify the Pre-Trial Chamber of the reasons for the withdrawal. 5. At the hearing, the Prosecutor shall support each charge with sufficient evidence to establish substantial grounds to believe that the person committed the crime charged. The Prosecutor may rely on documentary or summary evidence and need not call the witnesses expected to testify at the trial. 6. At the hearing, the person may: (a) Object to the charges; (b) Challenge the evidence presented by the Prosecutor; and (c) Present evidence. 7. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall, on the basis of the hearing, determine whether there is sufficient evidence to establish substantial grounds to believe that the person committed each of the crimes charged. Based on its determination, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall: (a) Confirm those charges in relation to which it has determined that there is sufficient evidence, and commit the person to a Trial Chamber for trial on the charges as confirmed; (b) Decline to confirm those charges in relation to which it has determined that there is insufficient evidence; (c) Adjourn the hearing and request the Prosecutor to consider: (i) Providing further evidence or conducting further investigation with respect to a particular charge; or (ii) Amending a charge because the evidence submitted appears to establish a different crime within the jurisdiction of the Court. 8. Where the Pre-Trial Chamber declines to confirm a charge, the Prosecutor shall not be precluded from subsequently requesting its confirmation if the request is supported by additional evidence. 9. After the charges are confirmed and before the trial has begun, the Prosecutor may, with the permission of the Pre-Trial Chamber and after notice to the accused, amend the charges. If the Prosecutor seeks to add additional charges or to substitute more serious charges, a hearing under this article to confirm those charges must be held. After commencement of the trial, the Prosecutor may, with the permission of the Trial Chamber, withdraw the charges. 10. Any warrant previously issued shall cease to have effect with respect to any charges which have not been confirmed by the Pre-Trial Chamber or which have been withdrawn by the Prosecutor.
30 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court11. Once the charges have been confirmed in accordance with this article, the Presidency shall constitute a Trial Chamber which, subject to paragraph 9 and to article 64, paragraph 4, shall be responsible for the conduct of subsequent proceedings and may exercise any function of the Pre-Trial Chamber that is relevant and capable of application in those proceedings.
31 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 6. THE TRIAL Article 62 Place of trial Unless otherwise decided, the place of the trial shall be the seat of the Court. Article 63 Trial in the presence of the accused 1. The accused shall be present during the trial. 2. If the accused, being present before the Court, continues to disrupt the trial, the Trial Chamber may remove the accused and shall make provision for him or her to observe the trial and instruct counsel from outside the courtroom, through the use of communications technology, if required. Such measures shall be taken only in exceptional circumstances after other reasonable alternatives have proved inadequate, and only for such duration as is strictly required. Article 64 Functions and powers of the Trial Chamber 1. The functions and powers of the Trial Chamber set out in this article shall be exercised in accordance with this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 2. The Trial Chamber shall ensure that a trial is fair and expeditious and is conducted with full respect for the rights of the accused and due regard for the protection of victims and witnesses. 3. Upon assignment of a case for trial in accordance with this Statute, the Trial Chamber assigned to deal with the case shall: (a) Confer with the parties and adopt such procedures as are necessary to facilitate the fair and expeditious conduct of the proceedings; (b) Determine the language or languages to be used at trial; and (c) Subject to any other relevant provisions of this Statute, provide for disclosure of documents or information not previously disclosed, sufficiently in advance of the commencement of the trial to enable adequate preparation for trial. 4. The Trial Chamber may, if necessary for its effective and fair functioning, refer preliminary issues to the Pre- Trial Chamber or, if necessary, to another available judge of the Pre-Trial Division. 5. Upon notice to the parties, the Trial Chamber may, as appropriate, direct that there be joinder or severance in respect of charges against more than one accused. 6. In performing its functions prior to trial or during the course of a trial, the Trial Chamber may, as necessary: (a) Exercise any functions of the Pre-Trial Chamber referred to in article 61, paragraph 11; (b) Require the attendance and testimony of witnesses and production of documents and other evidence by obtaining, if necessary, the assistance of States as provided in this Statute; (c) Provide for the protection of confidential information; (d) Order the production of evidence in addition to that already collected prior to the trial or presented during the trial by the parties; (e) Provide for the protection of the accused, witnesses and victims; and (f) Rule on any other relevant matters. 7. The trial shall be held in public. The Trial Chamber may, however, determine that special circumstances require that certain proceedings be in closed session for the purposes set forth in article 68, or to protect confidential or sensitive information to be given in evidence. 8. (a) At the commencement of the trial, the Trial Chamber shall have read to the accused the charges previously confirmed by the Pre-Trial Chamber. The Trial Chamber shall satisfy itself that the accused understands the nature of the charges. It shall afford him or her the opportunity to make an admission of guilt in accordance with article 65 or to plead not guilty.
32 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) At the trial, the presiding judge may give directions for the conduct of proceedings, including to ensure that they are conducted in a fair and impartial manner. Subject to any directions of the presiding judge, the parties may submit evidence in accordance with the provisions of this Statute. 9. The Trial Chamber shall have, inter alia , the power on application of a party or on its own motion to: (a) Rule on the admissibility or relevance of evidence; and (b) Take all necessary steps to maintain order in the course of a hearing. 10. The Trial Chamber shall ensure that a complete record of the trial, which accurately reflects the proceedings, is made and that it is maintained and preserved by the Registrar. Article 65 Proceedings on an admission of guilt 1. Where the accused makes an admission of guilt pursuant to article 64, paragraph 8 (a), the Trial Chamber shall determine whether: (a) The accused understands the nature and consequences of the admission of guilt; (b) The admission is voluntarily made by the accused after sufficient consultation with defence counsel; and (c) The admission of guilt is supported by the facts of the case that are contained in: (i) The charges brought by the Prosecutor and admitted by the accused; (ii) Any materials presented by the Prosecutor which supplement the charges and which the accused accepts; and (iii) Any other evidence, such as the testimony of witnesses, presented by the Prosecutor or the accused. 2. Where the Trial Chamber is satisfied that the matters referred to in paragraph 1 are established, it shall consider the admission of guilt, together with any additional evidence presented, as establishing all the essential facts that are required to prove the crime to which the admission of guilt relates, and may convict the accused of that crime. 3. Where the Trial Chamber is not satisfied that the matters referred to in paragraph 1 are established, it shall consider the admission of guilt as not having been made, in which case it shall order that the trial be continued under the ordinary trial procedures provided by this Statute and may remit the case to another Trial Chamber. 4. Where the Trial Chamber is of the opinion that a more complete presentation of the facts of the case is required in the interests of justice, in particular the interests of the victims, the Trial Chamber may: (a) Request the Prosecutor to present additional evidence, including the testimony of witnesses; or (b) Order that the trial be continued under the ordinary trial procedures provided by this Statute, in which case it shall consider the admission of guilt as not having been made and may remit the case to another Trial Chamber. 5. Any discussions between the Prosecutor and the defence regarding modification of the charges, the admission of guilt or the penalty to be imposed shall not be binding on the Court. Article 66 Presumption of innocence 1. Everyone shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty before the Court in accordance with the applicable law. 2. The onus is on the Prosecutor to prove the guilt of the accused. 3. In order to convict the accused, the Court must be convinced of the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
33 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 67 Rights of the accused 1. In the determination of any charge, the accused shall be entitled to a public hearing, having regard to the provisions of this Statute, to a fair hearing conducted impartially, and to the following minimum guarantees, in full equality: (a) To be informed promptly and in detail of the nature, cause and content of the charge, in a language which the accused fully understands and speaks; (b) To have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of the defence and to communicate freely with counsel of the accused's choosing in confidence; (c) To be tried without undue delay; (d) Subject to article 63, paragraph 2, to be present at the trial, to conduct the defence in person or through legal assistance of the accused's choosing, to be informed, if the accused does not have legal assistance, of this right and to have legal assistance assigned by the Court in any case where the interests of justice so require, and without payment if the accused lacks sufficient means to pay for it; (e) To examine, or have examined, the witnesses against him or her and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his or her behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him or her. The accused shall also be entitled to raise defences and to present other evidence admissible under this Statute; (f) To have, free of any cost, the assistance of a competent interpreter and such translations as are necessary to meet the requirements of fairness, if any of the proceedings of or documents presented to the Court are not in a language which the accused fully understands and speaks; (g) Not to be compelled to testify or to confess guilt and to remain silent, without such silence being a consideration in the determination of guilt or innocence; (h) To make an unsworn oral or written statement in his or her defence; and (i) Not to have imposed on him or her any reversal of the burden of proof or any onus of rebuttal. 2. In addition to any other disclosure provided for in this Statute, the Prosecutor shall, as soon as practicable, disclose to the defence evidence in the Prosecutor's possession or control which he or she believes shows or tends to show the innocence of the accused, or to mitigate the guilt of the accused, or which may affect the credibility of prosecution evidence. In case of doubt as to the application of this paragraph, the Court shall decide. Article 68 Protection of the victims and witnesses and their participation in the proceedings 1. The Court shall take appropriate measures to protect the safety, physical and psychological well-being, dignity and privacy of victims and witnesses. In so doing, the Court shall have regard to all relevant factors, including age, gender as defined in article 7, paragraph 3, and health, and the nature of the crime, in particular, but not limited to, where the crime involves sexual or gender violence or violence against children. The Prosecutor shall take such measures particularly during the investigation and prosecution of such crimes. These measures shall not be prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial. 2. As an exception to the principle of public hearings provided for in article 67, the Chambers of the Court may, to protect victims and witnesses or an accused, conduct any part of the proceedings in camera or allow the presentation of evidence by electronic or other special means. In particular, such measures shall be implemented in the case of a victim of sexual violence or a child who is a victim or a witness, unless otherwise ordered by the Court, having regard to all the circumstances, particularly the views of the victim or witness. 3. Where the personal interests of the victims are affected, the Court shall permit their views and concerns to be presented and considered at stages of the proceedings determined to be appropriate by the Court and in a manner which is not prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial. Such views and concerns may be presented by the legal representatives of the victims where the Court considers it appropriate, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. The Victims and Witnesses Unit may advise the Prosecutor and the Court on appropriate protective measures, security arrangements, counselling and assistance as referred to in article 43, paragraph 6.
34 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court5. Where the disclosure of evidence or information pursuant to this Statute may lead to the grave endangerment of the security of a witness or his or her family, the Prosecutor may, for the purposes of any proceedings conducted prior to the commencement of the trial, withhold such evidence or information and instead submit a summary thereof. Such measures shall be exercised in a manner which is not prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial. 6. A State may make an application for necessary measures to be taken in respect of the protection of its servants or agents and the protection of confidential or sensitive information. Article 69 Evidence 1. Before testifying, each witness shall, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, give an undertaking as to the truthfulness of the evidence to be given by that witness. 2. The testimony of a witness at trial shall be given in person, except to the extent provided by the measures set forth in article 68 or in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The Court may also permit the giving of viva voce (oral) or recorded testimony of a witness by means of video or audio technology, as well as the introduction of documents or written transcripts, subject to this Statute and in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. These measures shall not be prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused. 3. The parties may submit evidence relevant to the case, in accordance with article 64. The Court shall have the authority to request the submission of all evidence that it considers necessary for the determination of the truth. 4. The Court may rule on the relevance or admissibility of any evidence, taking into account, inter alia , the probative value of the evidence and any prejudice that such evidence may cause to a fair trial or to a fair evaluation of the testimony of a witness, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 5. The Court shall respect and observe privileges on confidentiality as provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 6. The Court shall not require proof of facts of common knowledge but may take judicial notice of them. 7. Evidence obtained by means of a violation of this Statute or internationally recognized human rights shall not be admissible if: (a) The violation casts substantial doubt on the reliability of the evidence; or (b) The admission of the evidence would be antithetical to and would seriously damage the integrity of the proceedings. 8. When deciding on the relevance or admissibility of evidence collected by a State, the Court shall not rule on the application of the State's national law. Article 70 Offences against the administration of justice 1. The Court shall have jurisdiction over the following offences against its administration of justice when committed intentionally: (a) Giving false testimony when under an obligation pursuant to article 69, paragraph 1, to tell the truth; (b) Presenting evidence that the party knows is false or forged; (c) Corruptly influencing a witness, obstructing or interfering with the attendance or testimony of a witness, retaliating against a witness for giving testimony or destroying, tampering with or interfering with the collection of evidence; (d) Impeding, intimidating or corruptly influencing an official of the Court for the purpose of forcing or persuading the official not to perform, or to perform improperly, his or her duties; (e) Retaliating against an official of the Court on account of duties performed by that or another official; (f) Soliciting or accepting a bribe as an official of the Court in connection with his or her official duties. 2. The principles and procedures governing the Court's exercise of jurisdiction over offences under this article shall be those provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The conditions for providing international cooperation to the Court with respect to its proceedings under this article shall be governed by the domestic laws of the requested State.
35 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3. In the event of conviction, the Court may impose a term of imprisonment not exceeding five years, or a fine in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, or both. 4. (a) Each State Party shall extend its criminal laws penalizing offences against the integrity of its own investigative or judicial process to offences against the administration of justice referred to in this article, committed on its territory, or by one of its nationals; (b) Upon request by the Court, whenever it deems it proper, the State Party shall submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution. Those authorities shall treat such cases with diligence and devote sufficient resources to enable them to be conducted effectively. Article 71 Sanctions for misconduct before the Court 1. The Court may sanction persons present before it who commit misconduct, including disruption of its proceedings or deliberate refusal to comply with its directions, by administrative measures other than imprisonment, such as temporary or permanent removal from the courtroom, a fine or other similar measures provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 2. The procedures governing the imposition of the measures set forth in paragraph 1 shall be those provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 72 Protection of national security information 1. This article applies in any case where the disclosure of the information or documents of a State would, in the opinion of that State, prejudice its national security interests. Such cases include those falling within the scope of article 56, paragraphs 2 and 3, article 61, paragraph 3, article 64, paragraph 3, article 67, paragraph 2, article 68, paragraph 6, article 87, paragraph 6 and article 93, as well as cases arising at any other stage of the proceedings where such disclosure may be at issue. 2. This article shall also apply when a person who has been requested to give information or evidence has refused to do so or has referred the matter to the State on the ground that disclosure would prejudice the national security interests of a State and the State concerned confirms that it is of the opinion that disclosure would prejudice its national security interests. 3. Nothing in this article shall prejudice the requirements of confidentiality applicable under article 54, paragraph 3 (e) and (f), or the application of article 73. 4. If a State learns that information or documents of the State are being, or are likely to be, disclosed at any stage of the proceedings, and it is of the opinion that disclosure would prejudice its national security interests, that State shall have the right to intervene in order to obtain resolution of the issue in accordance with this article. 5. If, in the opinion of a State, disclosure of information would prejudice its national security interests, all reasonable steps will be taken by the State, acting in conjunction with the Prosecutor, the defence or the Pre-Trial Chamber or Trial Chamber, as the case may be, to seek to resolve the matter by cooperative means. Such steps may include: (a) Modification or clarification of the request; (b) A determination by the Court regarding the relevance of the information or evidence sought, or a determination as to whether the evidence, though relevant, could be or has been obtained from a source other than the requested State; (c) Obtaining the information or evidence from a different source or in a different form; or (d) Agreement on conditions under which the assistance could be provided including, among other things, providing summaries or redactions, limitations on disclosure, use of in camera or ex parte proceedings, or other protective measures permissible under the Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 6. Once all reasonable steps have been taken to resolve the matter through cooperative means, and if the State considers that there are no means or conditions under which the information or documents could be provided or disclosed without prejudice to its national security interests, it shall so notify the Prosecutor or the Court of the specific reasons for its decision, unless a specific description of the reasons would itself necessarily result in such prejudice to the State's national security interests.
36 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court7. Thereafter, if the Court determines that the evidence is relevant and necessary for the establishment of the guilt or innocence of the accused, the Court may undertake the following actions: (a) Where disclosure of the information or document is sought pursuant to a request for cooperation under Part 9 or the circumstances described in paragraph 2, and the State has invoked the ground for refusal referred to in article 93, paragraph 4: (i) The Court may, before making any conclusion referred to in subparagraph 7 (a) (ii), request further consultations for the purpose of considering the State's representations, which may include, as appropriate, hearings in camera and ex parte ; (ii) If the Court concludes that, by invoking the ground for refusal under article 93, paragraph 4, in the circumstances of the case, the requested State is not acting in accordance with its obligations under this Statute, the Court may refer the matter in accordance with article 87, paragraph 7, specifying the reasons for its conclusion; and (iii) The Court may make such inference in the trial of the accused as to the existence or non- existence of a fact, as may be appropriate in the circumstances; or (b) In all other circumstances: (i) Order disclosure; or (ii) To the extent it does not order disclosure, make such inference in the trial of the accused as to the existence or non-existence of a fact, as may be appropriate in the circumstances. Article 73 Third-party information or documents If a State Party is requested by the Court to provide a document or information in its custody, possession or control, which was disclosed to it in confidence by a State, intergovernmental organization or international organization, it shall seek the consent of the originator to disclose that document or information. If the originator is a State Party, it shall either consent to disclosure of the information or document or undertake to resolve the issue of disclosure with the Court, subject to the provisions of article 72. If the originator is not a State Party and refuses to consent to disclosure, the requested State shall inform the Court that it is unable to provide the document or information because of a pre-existing obligation of confidentiality to the originator. Article 74 Requirements for the decision 1. All the judges of the Trial Chamber shall be present at each stage of the trial and throughout their deliberations. The Presidency may, on a case-by-case basis, designate, as available, one or more alternate judges to be present at each stage of the trial and to replace a member of the Trial Chamber if that member is unable to continue attending. 2. The Trial Chamber's decision shall be based on its evaluation of the evidence and the entire proceedings. The decision shall not exceed the facts and circumstances described in the charges and any amendments to the charges. The Court may base its decision only on evidence submitted and discussed before it at the trial. 3. The judges shall attempt to achieve unanimity in their decision, failing which the decision shall be taken by a majority of the judges. 4. The deliberations of the Trial Chamber shall remain secret. 5. The decision shall be in writing and shall contain a full and reasoned statement of the Trial Chamber's findings on the evidence and conclusions. The Trial Chamber shall issue one decision. When there is no unanimity, the Trial Chamber's decision shall contain the views of the majority and the minority. The decision or a summary thereof shall be delivered in open court. Article 75 Reparations to victims 1. The Court shall establish principles relating to reparations to, or in respect of, victims, including restitution, compensation and rehabilitation. On this basis, in its decision the Court may, either upon request or on its own motion in exceptional circumstances, determine the scope and extent of any damage, loss and injury to, or in respect of, victims and will state the principles on which it is acting.
37 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The Court may make an order directly against a convicted person specifying appropriate reparations to, or in respect of, victims, including restitution, compensation and rehabilitation. Where appropriate, the Court may order that the award for reparations be made through the Trust Fund provided for in article 79. 3. Before making an order under this article, the Court may invite and shall take account of representations from or on behalf of the convicted person, victims, other interested persons or interested States. 4. In exercising its power under this article, the Court may, after a person is convicted of a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court, determine whether, in order to give effect to an order which it may make under this article, it is necessary to seek measures under article 93, paragraph 1. 5. A State Party shall give effect to a decision under this article as if the provisions of article 109 were applicable to this article. 6. Nothing in this article shall be interpreted as prejudicing the rights of victims under national or international law. Article 76 Sentencing 1. In the event of a conviction, the Trial Chamber shall consider the appropriate sentence to be imposed and shall take into account the evidence presented and submissions made during the trial that are relevant to the sentence. 2. Except where article 65 applies and before the completion of the trial, the Trial Chamber may on its own motion and shall, at the request of the Prosecutor or the accused, hold a further hearing to hear any additional evidence or submissions relevant to the sentence, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 3. Where paragraph 2 applies, any representations under article 75 shall be heard during the further hearing referred to in paragraph 2 and, if necessary, during any additional hearing. 4. The sentence shall be pronounced in public and, wherever possible, in the presence of the accused.
38 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 7. PENALTIES Article 77 Applicable penalties 1. Subject to article 110, the Court may impose one of the following penalties on a person convicted of a crime referred to in article 5 of this Statute: (a) Imprisonment for a specified number of years, which may not exceed a maximum of 30 years; or (b) A term of life imprisonment when justified by the extreme gravity of the crime and the individual circumstances of the convicted person. 2. In addition to imprisonment, the Court may order: (a) A fine under the criteria provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (b) A forfeiture of proceeds, property and assets derived directly or indirectly from that crime, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties. Article 78 Determination of the sentence 1. In determining the sentence, the Court shall, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, take into account such factors as the gravity of the crime and the individual circumstances of the convicted person. 2. In imposing a sentence of imprisonment, the Court shall deduct the time, if any, previously spent in detention in accordance with an order of the Court. The Court may deduct any time otherwise spent in detention in connection with conduct underlying the crime. 3. When a person has been convicted of more than one crime, the Court shall pronounce a sentence for each crime and a joint sentence specifying the total period of imprisonment. This period shall be no less than the highest individual sentence pronounced and shall not exceed 30 years imprisonment or a sentence of life imprisonment in conformity with article 77, paragraph 1 (b). Article 79 Trust Fund 1. A Trust Fund shall be established by decision of the Assembly of States Parties for the benefit of victims of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court, and of the families of such victims. 2. The Court may order money and other property collected through fines or forfeiture to be transferred, by order of the Court, to the Trust Fund. 3. The Trust Fund shall be managed according to criteria to be determined by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 80 Non-prejudice to national application of penalties and national laws Nothing in this Part affects the application by States of penalties prescribed by their national law, nor the law of States which do not provide for penalties prescribed in this Part.
39 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 8. APPEAL AND REVISION Article 81 Appeal against decision of acquittal or conviction or against sentence 1. A decision under article 74 may be appealed in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence as follows: (a) The Prosecutor may make an appeal on any of the following grounds: (i) Procedural error, (ii) Error of fact, or (iii) Error of law; (b) The convicted person, or the Prosecutor on that person's behalf, may make an appeal on any of the following grounds: (i) Procedural error, (ii) Error of fact, (iii) Error of law, or (iv) Any other ground that affects the fairness or reliability of the proceedings or decision. 2. (a) A sentence may be appealed, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, by the Prosecutor or the convicted person on the ground of disproportion between the crime and the sentence; (b) If on an appeal against sentence the Court considers that there are grounds on which the conviction might be set aside, wholly or in part, it may invite the Prosecutor and the convicted person to submit grounds under article 81, paragraph 1 (a) or (b), and may render a decision on conviction in accordance with article 83; (c) The same procedure applies when the Court, on an appeal against conviction only, considers that there are grounds to reduce the sentence under paragraph 2 (a). 3. (a) Unless the Trial Chamber orders otherwise, a convicted person shall remain in custody pending an appeal; (b) When a convicted person's time in custody exceeds the sentence of imprisonment imposed, that person shall be released, except that if the Prosecutor is also appealing, the release may be subject to the conditions under subparagraph (c) below; (c) In case of an acquittal, the accused shall be released immediately, subject to the following: (i) Under exceptional circumstances, and having regard, inter alia , to the concrete risk of flight, the seriousness of the offence charged and the probability of success on appeal, the Trial Chamber, at the request of the Prosecutor, may maintain the detention of the person pending appeal; (ii) A decision by the Trial Chamber under subparagraph (c) (i) may be appealed in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 3 (a) and (b), execution of the decision or sentence shall be suspended during the period allowed for appeal and for the duration of the appeal proceedings. Article 82 Appeal against other decisions 1. Either party may appeal any of the following decisions in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence: (a) A decision with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility; (b) A decision granting or denying release of the person being investigated or prosecuted; (c) A decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber to act on its own initiative under article 56, paragraph 3; (d) A decision that involves an issue that would significantly affect the fair and expeditious conduct of the proceedings or the outcome of the trial, and for which, in the opinion of the Pre-Trial or Trial Chamber, an immediate resolution by the Appeals Chamber may materially advance the proceedings.
40 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. A decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber under article 57, paragraph 3 (d), may be appealed against by the State concerned or by the Prosecutor, with the leave of the Pre-Trial Chamber. The appeal shall be heard on an expedited basis. 3. An appeal shall not of itself have suspensive effect unless the Appeals Chamber so orders, upon request, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. A legal representative of the victims, the convicted person or a bona fide owner of property adversely affected by an order under article 75 may appeal against the order for reparations, as provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 83 Proceedings on appeal 1. For the purposes of proceedings under article 81 and this article, the Appeals Chamber shall have all the powers of the Trial Chamber. 2. If the Appeals Chamber finds that the proceedings appealed from were unfair in a way that affected the reliability of the decision or sentence, or that the decision or sentence appealed from was materially affected by error of fact or law or procedural error, it may: (a) Reverse or amend the decision or sentence; or (b) Order a new trial before a different Trial Chamber. For these purposes, the Appeals Chamber may remand a factual issue to the original Trial Chamber for it to determine the issue and to report back accordingly, or may itself call evidence to determine the issue. When the decision or sentence has been appealed only by the person convicted, or the Prosecutor on that person's behalf, it cannot be amended to his or her detriment. 3. If in an appeal against sentence the Appeals Chamber finds that the sentence is disproportionate to the crime, it may vary the sentence in accordance with Part 7. 4. The judgement of the Appeals Chamber shall be taken by a majority of the judges and shall be delivered in open court. The judgement shall state the reasons on which it is based. When there is no unanimity, the judgement of the Appeals Chamber shall contain the views of the majority and the minority, but a judge may deliver a separate or dissenting opinion on a question of law. 5. The Appeals Chamber may deliver its judgement in the absence of the person acquitted or convicted. Article 84 Revision of conviction or sentence 1. The convicted person or, after death, spouses, children, parents or one person alive at the time of the accused's death who has been given express written instructions from the accused to bring such a claim, or the Prosecutor on the person's behalf, may apply to the Appeals Chamber to revise the final judgement of conviction or sentence on the grounds that: (a) New evidence has been discovered that: (i) Was not available at the time of trial, and such unavailability was not wholly or partially attributable to the party making application; and (ii) Is sufficiently important that had it been proved at trial it would have been likely to have resulted in a different verdict; (b) It has been newly discovered that decisive evidence, taken into account at trial and upon which the conviction depends, was false, forged or falsified; (c) One or more of the judges who participated in conviction or confirmation of the charges has committed, in that case, an act of serious misconduct or serious breach of duty of sufficient gravity to justify the removal of that judge or those judges from office under article 46. 2. The Appeals Chamber shall reject the application if it considers it to be unfounded. If it determines that the application is meritorious, it may, as appropriate: (a) Reconvene the original Trial Chamber; (b) Constitute a new Trial Chamber; or
41 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(c) Retain jurisdiction over the matter, with a view to, after hearing the parties in the manner set forth in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, arriving at a determination on whether the judgement should be revised. Article 85 Compensation to an arrested or convicted person 1. Anyone who has been the victim of unlawful arrest or detention shall have an enforceable right to compensation. 2. When a person has by a final decision been convicted of a criminal offence, and when subsequently his or her conviction has been reversed on the ground that a new or newly discovered fact shows conclusively that there has been a miscarriage of justice, the person who has suffered punishment as a result of such conviction shall be compensated according to law, unless it is proved that the non-disclosure of the unknown fact in time is wholly or partly attributable to him or her. 3. In exceptional circumstances, where the Court finds conclusive facts showing that there has been a grave and manifest miscarriage of justice, it may in its discretion award compensation, according to the criteria provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, to a person who has been released from detention following a final decision of acquittal or a termination of the proceedings for that reason.
42 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 9. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AND JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE Article 86 General obligation to cooperate States Parties shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Statute, cooperate fully with the Court in its investigation and prosecution of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. Article 87 Requests for cooperation: general provisions 1. (a) The Court shall have the authority to make requests to States Parties for cooperation. The requestsshall be transmitted through the diplomatic channel or any other appropriate channel as may be designated by each State Party upon ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Subsequent changes to the designation shall be made by each State Party in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. (b) When appropriate, without prejudice to the provisions of subparagraph (a), requests may also be transmitted through the International Criminal Police Organization or any appropriate regional organization. 2. Requests for cooperation and any documents supporting the request shall either be in or be accompanied by a translation into an official language of the requested State or one of the working languages of the Court, in accordance with the choice made by that State upon ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Subsequent changes to this choice shall be made in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 3. The requested State shall keep confidential a request for cooperation and any documents supporting the request, except to the extent that the disclosure is necessary for execution of the request. 4. In relation to any request for assistance presented under this Part, the Court may take such measures, including measures related to the protection of information, as may be necessary to ensure the safety or physical or psychological well-being of any victims, potential witnesses and their families. The Court may request that any information that is made available under this Part shall be provided and handled in a manner that protects the safety and physical or psychological well-being of any victims, potential witnesses and their families. 5. (a) The Court may invite any State not party to this Statute to provide assistance under this Part on the basis of an ad hoc arrangement, an agreement with such State or any other appropriate basis. (b) Where a State not party to this Statute, which has entered into an ad hoc arrangement or an agreement with the Court, fails to cooperate with requests pursuant to any such arrangement or agreement, the Court may so inform the Assembly of States Parties or, where the Security Council referred the matter to the Court, the Security Council. 6. The Court may ask any intergovernmental organization to provide information or documents. The Court may also ask for other forms of cooperation and assistance which may be agreed upon with such an organization and which are in accordance with its competence or mandate. 7. Where a State Party fails to comply with a request to cooperate by the Court contrary to the provisions of this Statute, thereby preventing the Court from exercising its functions and powers under this Statute, the Court may make a finding to that effect and refer the matter to the Assembly of States Parties or, where the Security Council referred the matter to the Court, to the Security Council. Article 88 Availability of procedures under national law States Parties shall ensure that there are procedures available under their national law for all of the forms of cooperation which are specified under this Part. Article 89 Surrender of persons to the Court 1. The Court may transmit a request for the arrest and surrender of a person, together with the material supporting the request outlined in article 91, to any State on the territory of which that person may be found and shall request the cooperation of that State in the arrest and surrender of such a person. States Parties shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Part and the procedure under their national law, comply with requests for arrest and surrender.
43 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. Where the person sought for surrender brings a challenge before a national court on the basis of the principle of ne bis in idem as provided in article 20, the requested State shall immediately consult with the Court to determine if there has been a relevant ruling on admissibility. If the case is admissible, the requested State shall proceed with the execution of the request. If an admissibility ruling is pending, the requested State may postpone the execution of the request for surrender of the person until the Court makes a determination on admissibility. 3. (a) A State Party shall authorize, in accordance with its national procedural law, transportation through its territory of a person being surrendered to the Court by another State, except where transit through that State would impede or delay the surrender. (b) A request by the Court for transit shall be transmitted in accordance with article 87. The request for transit shall contain: (i) A description of the person being transported; (ii) A brief statement of the facts of the case and their legal characterization; and (iii) The warrant for arrest and surrender; (c) A person being transported shall be detained in custody during the period of transit; (d) No authorization is required if the person is transported by air and no landing is scheduled on the territory of the transit State; (e) If an unscheduled landing occurs on the territory of the transit State, that State may require a request for transit from the Court as provided for in subparagraph (b). The transit State shall detain the person being transported until the request for transit is received and the transit is effected, provided that detention for purposes of this subparagraph may not be extended beyond 96 hours from the unscheduled landing unless the request is received within that time. 4. If the person sought is being proceeded against or is serving a sentence in the requested State for a crime different from that for which surrender to the Court is sought, the requested State, after making its decision to grant the request, shall consult with the Court. Article 90 Competing requests 1. A State Party which receives a request from the Court for the surrender of a person under article 89 shall, if it also receives a request from any other State for the extradition of the same person for the same conduct which forms the basis of the crime for which the Court seeks the person's surrender, notify the Court and the requesting State of that fact. 2. Where the requesting State is a State Party, the requested State shall give priority to the request from the Court if: (a) The Court has, pursuant to article 18 or 19, made a determination that the case in respect of which surrender is sought is admissible and that determination takes into account the investigation or prosecution conducted by the requesting State in respect of its request for extradition; or (b) The Court makes the determination described in subparagraph (a) pursuant to the requested State's notification under paragraph 1. 3. Where a determination under paragraph 2 (a) has not been made, the requested State may, at its discretion, pending the determination of the Court under paragraph 2 (b), proceed to deal with the request for extradition from the requesting State but shall not extradite the person until the Court has determined that the case is inadmissible. The Court's determination shall be made on an expedited basis. 4. If the requesting State is a State not Party to this Statute the requested State, if it is not under an international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State, shall give priority to the request for surrender from the Court, if the Court has determined that the case is admissible. 5. Where a case under paragraph 4 has not been determined to be admissible by the Court, the requested State may, at its discretion, proceed to deal with the request for extradition from the requesting State. 6. In cases where paragraph 4 applies except that the requested State is under an existing international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State not Party to this Statute, the requested State shall determine whether to surrender the person to the Court or extradite the person to the requesting State. In making its decision, the requested State shall consider all the relevant factors, including but not limited to:
44 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(a) The respective dates of the requests; (b) The interests of the requesting State including, where relevant, whether the crime was committed in its territory and the nationality of the victims and of the person sought; and (c) The possibility of subsequent surrender between the Court and the requesting State. 7. Where a State Party which receives a request from the Court for the surrender of a person also receives a request from any State for the extradition of the same person for conduct other than that which constitutes the crime for which the Court seeks the person's surrender: (a) The requested State shall, if it is not under an existing international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State, give priority to the request from the Court; (b) The requested State shall, if it is under an existing international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State, determine whether to surrender the person to the Court or to extradite the person to the requesting State. In making its decision, the requested State shall consider all the relevant factors, including but not limited to those set out in paragraph 6, but shall give special consideration to the relative nature and gravity of the conduct in question. 8. Where pursuant to a notification under this article, the Court has determined a case to be inadmissible, and subsequently extradition to the requesting State is refused, the requested State shall notify the Court of this decision. Article 91 Contents of request for arrest and surrender 1. A request for arrest and surrender shall be made in writing. In urgent cases, a request may be made by any medium capable of delivering a written record, provided that the request shall be confirmed through the channel provided for in article 87, paragraph 1 (a). 2. In the case of a request for the arrest and surrender of a person for whom a warrant of arrest has been issued by the Pre-Trial Chamber under article 58, the request shall contain or be supported by: (a) Information describing the person sought, sufficient to identify the person, and information as to that person's probable location; (b) A copy of the warrant of arrest; and (c) Such documents, statements or information as may be necessary to meet the requirements for the surrender process in the requested State, except that those requirements should not be more burdensome than those applicable to requests for extradition pursuant to treaties or arrangements between the requested State and other States and should, if possible, be less burdensome, taking into account the distinct nature of the Court. 3. In the case of a request for the arrest and surrender of a person already convicted, the request shall contain or be supported by: (a) A copy of any warrant of arrest for that person; (b) A copy of the judgement of conviction; (c) Information to demonstrate that the person sought is the one referred to in the judgement of conviction; and (d) If the person sought has been sentenced, a copy of the sentence imposed and, in the case of a sentence for imprisonment, a statement of any time already served and the time remaining to be served. 4. Upon the request of the Court, a State Party shall consult with the Court, either generally or with respect to a specific matter, regarding any requirements under its national law that may apply under paragraph 2 (c). During the consultations, the State Party shall advise the Court of the specific requirements of its national law.
45 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 92 Provisional arrest 1. In urgent cases, the Court may request the provisional arrest of the person sought, pending presentation of the request for surrender and the documents supporting the request as specified in article 91. 2. The request for provisional arrest shall be made by any medium capable of delivering a written record and shall contain: (a) Information describing the person sought, sufficient to identify the person, and information as to that person's probable location; (b) A concise statement of the crimes for which the person's arrest is sought and of the facts which are alleged to constitute those crimes, including, where possible, the date and location of the crime; (c) A statement of the existence of a warrant of arrest or a judgement of conviction against the person sought; and (d) A statement that a request for surrender of the person sought will follow. 3. A person who is provisionally arrested may be released from custody if the requested State has not received the request for surrender and the documents supporting the request as specified in article 91 within the time limits specified in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. However, the person may consent to surrender before the expiration of this period if permitted by the law of the requested State. In such a case, the requested State shall proceed to surrender the person to the Court as soon as possible. 4. The fact that the person sought has been released from custody pursuant to paragraph 3 shall not prejudice the subsequent arrest and surrender of that person if the request for surrender and the documents supporting the request are delivered at a later date. Article 93 Other forms of cooperation 1. States Parties shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Part and under procedures of national law, comply with requests by the Court to provide the following assistance in relation to investigations or prosecutions: (a) The identification and whereabouts of persons or the location of items; (b) The taking of evidence, including testimony under oath, and the production of evidence, including expert opinions and reports necessary to the Court; (c) The questioning of any person being investigated or prosecuted; (d) The service of documents, including judicial documents; (e) Facilitating the voluntary appearance of persons as witnesses or experts before the Court; (f) The temporary transfer of persons as provided in paragraph 7; (g) The examination of places or sites, including the exhumation and examination of grave sites; (h) The execution of searches and seizures; (i) The provision of records and documents, including official records and documents; (j) The protection of victims and witnesses and the preservation of evidence; (k) The identification, tracing and freezing or seizure of proceeds, property and assets and instrumentalities of crimes for the purpose of eventual forfeiture, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties; and (l) Any other type of assistance which is not prohibited by the law of the requested State, with a view to facilitating the investigation and prosecution of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. 2. The Court shall have the authority to provide an assurance to a witness or an expert appearing before the Court that he or she will not be prosecuted, detained or subjected to any restriction of personal freedom by the Court in respect of any act or omission that preceded the departure of that person from the requested State.
46 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3. Where execution of a particular measure of assistance detailed in a request presented under paragraph 1, is prohibited in the requested State on the basis of an existing fundamental legal principle of general application, the requested State shall promptly consult with the Court to try to resolve the matter. In the consultations, consideration should be given to whether the assistance can be rendered in another manner or subject to conditions. If after consultations the matter cannot be resolved, the Court shall modify the request as necessary. 4. In accordance with article 72, a State Party may deny a request for assistance, in whole or in part, only if the request concerns the production of any documents or disclosure of evidence which relates to its national security. 5. Before denying a request for assistance under paragraph 1 (l), the requested State shall consider whether the assistance can be provided subject to specified conditions, or whether the assistance can be provided at a later date or in an alternative manner, provided that if the Court or the Prosecutor accepts the assistance subject to conditions, the Court or the Prosecutor shall abide by them. 6. If a request for assistance is denied, the requested State Party shall promptly inform the Court or the Prosecutor of the reasons for such denial. 7. (a) The Court may request the temporary transfer of a person in custody for purposes of identification or for obtaining testimony or other assistance. The person may be transferred if the following conditions are fulfilled: (i) The person freely gives his or her informed consent to the transfer; and (ii) The requested State agrees to the transfer, subject to such conditions as that State and the Court may agree. (b) The person being transferred shall remain in custody. When the purposes of the transfer have been fulfilled, the Court shall return the person without delay to the requested State. 8. (a) The Court shall ensure the confidentiality of documents and information, except as required for the investigation and proceedings described in the request. (b) The requested State may, when necessary, transmit documents or information to the Prosecutor on a confidential basis. The Prosecutor may then use them solely for the purpose of generating new evidence. (c) The requested State may, on its own motion or at the request of the Prosecutor, subsequently consent to the disclosure of such documents or information. They may then be used as evidence pursuant to the provisions of Parts 5 and 6 and in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 9. (a) (i) In the event that a State Party receives competing requests, other than for surrender or extradition, from the Court and from another State pursuant to an international obligation, the State Party shall endeavour, in consultation with the Court and the other State, to meet both requests, if necessary by postponing or attaching conditions to one or the other request. (ii) Failing that, competing requests shall be resolved in accordance with the principles established in article 90. (b) Where, however, the request from the Court concerns information, property or persons which are subject to the control of a third State or an international organization by virtue of an international agreement, the requested States shall so inform the Court and the Court shall direct its request to the third State or international organization. 10. (a) The Court may, upon request, cooperate with and provide assistance to a State Party conducting an investigation into or trial in respect of conduct which constitutes a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court or which constitutes a serious crime under the national law of the requesting State. (b) (i) The assistance provided under subparagraph (a) shall include, inter alia : a. The transmission of statements, documents or other types of evidence obtained in the course of an investigation or a trial conducted by the Court; and b. The questioning of any person detained by order of the Court;
47 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(ii) In the case of assistance under subparagraph (b) (i) a: a. If the documents or other types of evidence have been obtained with the assistance of a State, such transmission shall require the consent of that State; b. If the statements, documents or other types of evidence have been provided by a witness or expert, such transmission shall be subject to the provisions of article 68. (c) The Court may, under the conditions set out in this paragraph, grant a request for assistance under this paragraph from a State which is not a Party to this Statute. Article 94 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of ongoing investigation or prosecution 1. If the immediate execution of a request would interfere with an ongoing investigation or prosecution of a case different from that to which the request relates, the requested State may postpone the execution of the request for a period of time agreed upon with the Court. However, the postponement shall be no longer than is necessary to complete the relevant investigation or prosecution in the requested State. Before making a decision to postpone, the requested State should consider whether the assistance may be immediately provided subject to certain conditions. 2. If a decision to postpone is taken pursuant to paragraph 1, the Prosecutor may, however, seek measures to preserve evidence, pursuant to article 93, paragraph 1 (j). Article 95 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of an admissibility challenge Where there is an admissibility challenge under consideration by the Court pursuant to article 18 or 19, the requested State may postpone the execution of a request under this Part pending a determination by the Court, unless the Court has specifically ordered that the Prosecutor may pursue the collection of such evidence pursuant to article 18 or 19. Article 96 Contents of request for other forms of assistance under article 93 1. A request for other forms of assistance referred to in article 93 shall be made in writing. In urgent cases, a request may be made by any medium capable of delivering a written record, provided that the request shall be confirmed through the channel provided for in article 87, paragraph 1 (a). 2. The request shall, as applicable, contain or be supported by the following: (a) A concise statement of the purpose of the request and the assistance sought, including the legal basis and the grounds for the request; (b) As much detailed information as possible about the location or identification of any person or place that must be found or identified in order for the assistance sought to be provided; (c) A concise statement of the essential facts underlying the request; (d) The reasons for and details of any procedure or requirement to be followed; (e) Such information as may be required under the law of the requested State in order to execute the request; and (f) Any other information relevant in order for the assistance sought to be provided. 3. Upon the request of the Court, a State Party shall consult with the Court, either generally or with respect to a specific matter, regarding any requirements under its national law that may apply under paragraph 2 (e). During the consultations, the State Party shall advise the Court of the specific requirements of its national law. 4. The provisions of this article shall, where applicable, also apply in respect of a request for assistance made to the Court.
48 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 97 Consultations Where a State Party receives a request under this Part in relation to which it identifies problems which may impede or prevent the execution of the request, that State shall consult with the Court without delay in order to resolve the matter. Such problems may include, inter alia : (a) Insufficient information to execute the request; (b) In the case of a request for surrender, the fact that despite best efforts, the person sought cannot be located or that the investigation conducted has determined that the person in the requested State is clearly not the person named in the warrant; or (c) The fact that execution of the request in its current form would require the requested State to breach a pre-existing treaty obligation undertaken with respect to another State. Article 98 Cooperation with respect to waiver of immunity and consent to surrender 1. The Court may not proceed with a request for surrender or assistance which would require the requested State to act inconsistently with its obligations under international law with respect to the State or diplomatic immunity of a person or property of a third State, unless the Court can first obtain the cooperation of that third State for the waiver of the immunity. 2. The Court may not proceed with a request for surrender which would require the requested State to act inconsistently with its obligations under international agreements pursuant to which the consent of a sending State is required to surrender a person of that State to the Court, unless the Court can first obtain the cooperation of the sending State for the giving of consent for the surrender. Article 99 Execution of requests under articles 93 and 96 1. Requests for assistance shall be executed in accordance with the relevant procedure under the law of the requested State and, unless prohibited by such law, in the manner specified in the request, including following any procedure outlined therein or permitting persons specified in the request to be present at and assist in the execution process. 2. In the case of an urgent request, the documents or evidence produced in response shall, at the request of the Court, be sent urgently. 3. Replies from the requested State shall be transmitted in their original language and form. 4. Without prejudice to other articles in this Part, where it is necessary for the successful execution of a request which can be executed without any compulsory measures, including specifically the interview of or taking evidence from a person on a voluntary basis, including doing so without the presence of the authorities of the requested State Party if it is essential for the request to be executed, and the examination without modification of a public site or other public place, the Prosecutor may execute such request directly on the territory of a State as follows: (a) When the State Party requested is a State on the territory of which the crime is alleged to have been committed, and there has been a determination of admissibility pursuant to article 18 or 19, the Prosecutor may directly execute such request following all possible consultations with the requested State Party; (b) In other cases, the Prosecutor may execute such request following consultations with the requested State Party and subject to any reasonable conditions or concerns raised by that State Party. Where the requested State Party identifies problems with the execution of a request pursuant to this subparagraph it shall, without delay, consult with the Court to resolve the matter. 5. Provisions allowing a person heard or examined by the Court under article 72 to invoke restrictions designed to prevent disclosure of confidential information connected with national security shall also apply to the execution of requests for assistance under this article.
49 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 100 Costs 1. The ordinary costs for execution of requests in the territory of the requested State shall be borne by that State, except for the following, which shall be borne by the Court: (a) Costs associated with the travel and security of witnesses and experts or the transfer under article 93 of persons in custody; (b) Costs of translation, interpretation and transcription; (c) Travel and subsistence costs of the judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors, the Registrar, the Deputy Registrar and staff of any organ of the Court; (d) Costs of any expert opinion or report requested by the Court; (e) Costs associated with the transport of a person being surrendered to the Court by a custodial State; and (f) Following consultations, any extraordinary costs that may result from the execution of a request. 2. The provisions of paragraph 1 shall, as appropriate, apply to requests from States Parties to the Court. In that case, the Court shall bear the ordinary costs of execution. Article 101 Rule of speciality 1. A person surrendered to the Court under this Statute shall not be proceeded against, punished or detained for any conduct committed prior to surrender, other than the conduct or course of conduct which forms the basis of the crimes for which that person has been surrendered. 2. The Court may request a waiver of the requirements of paragraph 1 from the State which surrendered the person to the Court and, if necessary, the Court shall provide additional information in accordance with article 91. States Parties shall have the authority to provide a waiver to the Court and should endeavour to do so. Article 102 Use of terms For the purposes of this Statute: (a) "surrender" means the delivering up of a person by a State to the Court, pursuant to this Statute. (b) "extradition" means the delivering up of a person by one State to another as provided by treaty, convention or national legislation.
50 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 10. ENFORCEMENT Article 103 Role of States in enforcement of sentences of imprisonment 1. (a) A sentence of imprisonment shall be served in a State designated by the Court from a list of States which have indicated to the Court their willingness to accept sentenced persons. (b) At the time of declaring its willingness to accept sentenced persons, a State may attach conditions to its acceptance as agreed by the Court and in accordance with this Part. (c) A State designated in a particular case shall promptly inform the Court whether it accepts the Court's designation. 2. (a) The State of enforcement shall notify the Court of any circumstances, including the exercise of any conditions agreed under paragraph 1, which could materially affect the terms or extent of the imprisonment. The Court shall be given at least 45 days' notice of any such known or foreseeable circumstances. During this period, the State of enforcement shall take no action that might prejudice its obligations under article 110. (b) Where the Court cannot agree to the circumstances referred to in subparagraph (a), it shall notify the State of enforcement and proceed in accordance with article 104, paragraph 1. 3. In exercising its discretion to make a designation under paragraph 1, the Court shall take into account the following: (a) The principle that States Parties should share the responsibility for enforcing sentences of imprisonment, in accordance with principles of equitable distribution, as provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (b) The application of widely accepted international treaty standards governing the treatment of prisoners; (c) The views of the sentenced person; (d) The nationality of the sentenced person; (e) Such other factors regarding the circumstances of the crime or the person sentenced, or the effective enforcement of the sentence, as may be appropriate in designating the State of enforcement. 4. If no State is designated under paragraph 1, the sentence of imprisonment shall be served in a prison facility made available by the host State, in accordance with the conditions set out in the headquarters agreement referred to in article 3, paragraph 2. In such a case, the costs arising out of the enforcement of a sentence of imprisonment shall be borne by the Court. Article 104 Change in designation of State of enforcement 1. The Court may, at any time, decide to transfer a sentenced person to a prison of another State. 2. A sentenced person may, at any time, apply to the Court to be transferred from the State of enforcement. Article 105 Enforcement of the sentence 1. Subject to conditions which a State may have specified in accordance with article 103, paragraph 1 (b), the sentence of imprisonment shall be binding on the States Parties, which shall in no case modify it. 2. The Court alone shall have the right to decide any application for appeal and revision. The State of enforcement shall not impede the making of any such application by a sentenced person. Article 106 Supervision of enforcement of sentences and conditions of imprisonment 1. The enforcement of a sentence of imprisonment shall be subject to the supervision of the Court and shall be consistent with widely accepted international treaty standards governing treatment of prisoners.
51 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The conditions of imprisonment shall be governed by the law of the State of enforcement and shall be consistent with widely accepted international treaty standards governing treatment of prisoners; in no case shall such conditions be more or less favourable than those available to prisoners convicted of similar offences in the State of enforcement. 3. Communications between a sentenced person and the Court shall be unimpeded and confidential. Article 107 Transfer of the person upon completion of sentence 1. Following completion of the sentence, a person who is not a national of the State of enforcement may, in accordance with the law of the State of enforcement, be transferred to a State which is obliged to receive him or her, or to another State which agrees to receive him or her, taking into account any wishes of the person to be transferred to that State, unless the State of enforcement authorizes the person to remain in its territory. 2. If no State bears the costs arising out of transferring the person to another State pursuant to paragraph 1, such costs shall be borne by the Court. 3. Subject to the provisions of article 108, the State of enforcement may also, in accordance with its national law, extradite or otherwise surrender the person to a State which has requested the extradition or surrender of the person for purposes of trial or enforcement of a sentence. Article 108 Limitation on the prosecution or punishment of other offences 1. A sentenced person in the custody of the State of enforcement shall not be subject to prosecution or punishment or to extradition to a third State for any conduct engaged in prior to that person's delivery to the State of enforcement, unless such prosecution, punishment or extradition has been approved by the Court at the request of the State of enforcement. 2. The Court shall decide the matter after having heard the views of the sentenced person. 3. Paragraph 1 shall cease to apply if the sentenced person remains voluntarily for more than 30 days in the territory of the State of enforcement after having served the full sentence imposed by the Court, or returns to the territory of that State after having left it. Article 109 Enforcement of fines and forfeiture measures 1. States Parties shall give effect to fines or forfeitures ordered by the Court under Part 7, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties, and in accordance with the procedure of their national law. 2. If a State Party is unable to give effect to an order for forfeiture, it shall take measures to recover the value of the proceeds, property or assets ordered by the Court to be forfeited, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties. 3. Property, or the proceeds of the sale of real property or, where appropriate, the sale of other property, which is obtained by a State Party as a result of its enforcement of a judgement of the Court shall be transferred to the Court. Article 110 Review by the Court concerning reduction of sentence 1. The State of enforcement shall not release the person before expiry of the sentence pronounced by the Court. 2. The Court alone shall have the right to decide any reduction of sentence, and shall rule on the matter after having heard the person. 3. When the person has served two thirds of the sentence, or 25 years in the case of life imprisonment, the Court shall review the sentence to determine whether it should be reduced. Such a review shall not be conducted before that time. 4. In its review under paragraph 3, the Court may reduce the sentence if it finds that one or more of the following factors are present: (a) The early and continuing willingness of the person to cooperate with the Court in its investigations and prosecutions;
52 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) The voluntary assistance of the person in enabling the enforcement of the judgements and orders of the Court in other cases, and in particular providing assistance in locating assets subject to orders of fine, forfeiture or reparation which may be used for the benefit of victims; or (c) Other factors establishing a clear and significant change of circumstances sufficient to justify the reduction of sentence, as provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 5. If the Court determines in its initial review under paragraph 3 that it is not appropriate to reduce the sentence, it shall thereafter review the question of reduction of sentence at such intervals and applying such criteria as provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 111 Escape If a convicted person escapes from custody and flees the State of enforcement, that State may, after consultation with the Court, request the person's surrender from the State in which the person is located pursuant to existing bilateral or multilateral arrangements, or may request that the Court seek the person's surrender, in accordance with Part 9. It may direct that the person be delivered to the State in which he or she was serving the sentence or to another State designated by the Court.
53 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 11. ASSEMBLY OF STATES PARTIES Article 112 Assembly of States Parties 1. An Assembly of States Parties to this Statute is hereby established. Each State Party shall have one representative in the Assembly who may be accompanied by alternates and advisers. Other States which have signed this Statute or the Final Act may be observers in the Assembly. 2. The Assembly shall: (a) Consider and adopt, as appropriate, recommendations of the Preparatory Commission; (b) Provide management oversight to the Presidency, the Prosecutor and the Registrar regarding the administration of the Court; (c) Consider the reports and activities of the Bureau established under paragraph 3 and take appropriate action in regard thereto; (d) Consider and decide the budget for the Court; (e) Decide whether to alter, in accordance with article 36, the number of judges; (f) Consider pursuant to article 87, paragraphs 5 and 7, any question relating to non-cooperation; (g) Perform any other function consistent with this Statute or the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 3. (a) The Assembly shall have a Bureau consisting of a President, two Vice-Presidents and 18 members elected by the Assembly for three-year terms. (b) The Bureau shall have a representative character, taking into account, in particular, equitable geographical distribution and the adequate representation of the principal legal systems of the world. (c) The Bureau shall meet as often as necessary, but at least once a year. It shall assist the Assembly in the discharge of its responsibilities. 4. The Assembly may establish such subsidiary bodies as may be necessary, including an independent oversight mechanism for inspection, evaluation and investigation of the Court, in order to enhance its efficiency and economy. 5. The President of the Court, the Prosecutor and the Registrar or their representatives may participate, as appropriate, in meetings of the Assembly and of the Bureau. 6. The Assembly shall meet at the seat of the Court or at the Headquarters of the United Nations once a year and, when circumstances so require, hold special sessions. Except as otherwise specified in this Statute, special sessions shall be convened by the Bureau on its own initiative or at the request of one third of the States Parties. 7. Each State Party shall have one vote. Every effort shall be made to reach decisions by consensus in the Assembly and in the Bureau. If consensus cannot be reached, except as otherwise provided in the Statute: (a) Decisions on matters of substance must be approved by a two-thirds majority of those present and voting provided that an absolute majority of States Parties constitutes the quorum for voting; (b) Decisions on matters of procedure shall be taken by a simple majority of States Parties present and voting. 8. A State Party which is in arrears in the payment of its financial contributions towards the costs of the Court shall have no vote in the Assembly and in the Bureau if the amount of its arrears equals or exceeds the amount of the contributions due from it for the preceding two full years. The Assembly may, nevertheless, permit such a State Party to vote in the Assembly and in the Bureau if it is satisfied that the failure to pay is due to conditions beyond the control of the State Party. 9. The Assembly shall adopt its own rules of procedure. 10. The official and working languages of the Assembly shall be those of the General Assembly of the United Nations.
54 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 12. FINANCING Article 113 Financial Regulations Except as otherwise specifically provided, all financial matters related to the Court and the meetings of the Assembly of States Parties, including its Bureau and subsidiary bodies, shall be governed by this Statute and the Financial Regulations and Rules adopted by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 114 Payment of expenses Expenses of the Court and the Assembly of States Parties, including its Bureau and subsidiary bodies, shall be paid from the funds of the Court. Article 115 Funds of the Court and of the Assembly of States Parties The expenses of the Court and the Assembly of States Parties, including its Bureau and subsidiary bodies, as provided for in the budget decided by the Assembly of States Parties, shall be provided by the following sources: (a) Assessed contributions made by States Parties; (b) Funds provided by the United Nations, subject to the approval of the General Assembly, in particular in relation to the expenses incurred due to referrals by the Security Council. Article 116 Voluntary contributions Without prejudice to article 115, the Court may receive and utilize, as additional funds, voluntary contributions from Governments, international organizations, individuals, corporations and other entities, in accordance with relevant criteria adopted by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 117 Assessment of contributions The contributions of States Parties shall be assessed in accordance with an agreed scale of assessment, based on the scale adopted by the United Nations for its regular budget and adjusted in accordance with the principles on which that scale is based. Article 118 Annual audit The records, books and accounts of the Court, including its annual financial statements, shall be audited annually by an independent auditor.
55 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 13. FINAL CLAUSES Article 119 Settlement of disputes 1. Any dispute concerning the judicial functions of the Court shall be settled by the decision of the Court. 2. Any other dispute between two or more States Parties relating to the interpretation or application of this Statute which is not settled through negotiations within three months of their commencement shall be referred to the Assembly of States Parties. The Assembly may itself seek to settle the dispute or may make recommendations on further means of settlement of the dispute, including referral to the International Court of Justice in conformity with the Statute of that Court. Article 120 Reservations No reservations may be made to this Statute. Article 121 Amendments 1. After the expiry of seven years from the entry into force of this Statute, any State Party may propose amendments thereto. The text of any proposed amendment shall be submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall promptly circulate it to all States Parties. 2. No sooner than three months from the date of notification, the Assembly of States Parties, at its next meeting, shall, by a majority of those present and voting, decide whether to take up the proposal. The Assembly may deal with the proposal directly or convene a Review Conference if the issue involved so warrants. 3. The adoption of an amendment at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties or at a Review Conference on which consensus cannot be reached shall require a two-thirds majority of States Parties. 4. Except as provided in paragraph 5, an amendment shall enter into force for all States Parties one year after instruments of ratification or acceptance have been deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations by seven-eighths of them. 5. Any amendment to articles 5, 6, 7 and 8 of this Statute shall enter into force for those States Parties which have accepted the amendment one year after the deposit of their instruments of ratification or acceptance. In respect of a State Party which has not accepted the amendment, the Court shall not exercise its jurisdiction regarding a crime covered by the amendment when committed by that State Party's nationals or on its territory. 6. If an amendment has been accepted by seven-eighths of States Parties in accordance with paragraph 4, any State Party which has not accepted the amendment may withdraw from this Statute with immediate effect, notwithstanding article 127, paragraph 1, but subject to article 127, paragraph 2, by giving notice no later than one year after the entry into force of such amendment. 7. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall circulate to all States Parties any amendment adopted at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties or at a Review Conference. Article 122 Amendments to provisions of an institutional nature 1. Amendments to provisions of this Statute which are of an exclusively institutional nature, namely, article 35, article 36, paragraphs 8 and 9, article 37, article 38, article 39, paragraphs 1 (first two sentences), 2 and 4, article 42, paragraphs 4 to 9, article 43, paragraphs 2 and 3, and articles 44, 46, 47 and 49, may be proposed at any time, notwithstanding article 121, paragraph 1, by any State Party. The text of any proposed amendment shall be submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations or such other person designated by the Assembly of States Parties who shall promptly circulate it to all States Parties and to others participating in the Assembly. 2. Amendments under this article on which consensus cannot be reached shall be adopted by the Assembly of States Parties or by a Review Conference, by a two-thirds majority of States Parties. Such amendments shall enter into force for all States Parties six months after their adoption by the Assembly or, as the case may be, by the Conference.
56 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 123 Review of the Statute 1. Seven years after the entry into force of this Statute the Secretary-General of the United Nations shall convene a Review Conference to consider any amendments to this Statute. Such review may include, but is not limited to, the list of crimes contained in article 5. The Conference shall be open to those participating in the Assembly of States Parties and on the same conditions. 2. At any time thereafter, at the request of a State Party and for the purposes set out in paragraph 1, the Secretary-General of the United Nations shall, upon approval by a majority of States Parties, convene a Review Conference. 3. The provisions of article 121, paragraphs 3 to 7, shall apply to the adoption and entry into force of any amendment to the Statute considered at a Review Conference. Article 124 Transitional Provision Notwithstanding article 12, paragraphs 1 and 2, a State, on becoming a party to this Statute, may declare that, for a period of seven years after the entry into force of this Statute for the State concerned, it does not accept the jurisdiction of the Court with respect to the category of crimes referred to in article 8 when a crime is alleged to have been committed by its nationals or on its territory. A declaration under this article may be withdrawn at any time. The provisions of this article shall be reviewed at the Review Conference convened in accordance with article 123, paragraph 1. Article 125 Signature, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession 1. This Statute shall be open for signature by all States in Rome, at the headquarters of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, on 17 July 1998. Thereafter, it shall remain open for signature in Rome at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Italy until 17 October 1998. After that date, the Statute shall remain open for signature in New Y ork, at United Nations Headquarters, until 31 December 2000. 2. This Statute is subject to ratification, acceptance or approval by signatory States. Instruments of ratification, acceptance or approval shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. 3. This Statute shall be open to accession by all States. Instruments of accession shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Article 126 Entry into force 1. This Statute shall enter into force on the first day of the month after the 60th day following the date of the deposit of the 60th instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. 2. For each State ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to this Statute after the deposit of the 60th instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, the Statute shall enter into force on the first day of the month after the 60th day following the deposit by such State of its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Article 127 Withdrawal 1. A State Party may, by written notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, withdraw from this Statute. The withdrawal shall take effect one year after the date of receipt of the notification, unless the notification specifies a later date. 2. A State shall not be discharged, by reason of its withdrawal, from the obligations arising from this Statute while it was a Party to the Statute, including any financial obligations which may have accrued. Its withdrawal shall not affect any cooperation with the Court in connection with criminal investigations and proceedings in relation to which the withdrawing State had a duty to cooperate and which were commenced prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective, nor shall it prejudice in any way the continued consideration of any matter which was already under consideration by the Court prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective.
57 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 128 Authentic texts The original of this Statute, of which the Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish texts are equally authentic, shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall send certified copies thereof to all States. In W Itness W hereof , the undersigned, being duly authorized thereto by their respective Governments, have signed this Statute. Done at Rome, this 17th day of July 1998.
58 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court

[Previous Article]#[Next]

War-torn Sudan heading for disaster – The Red Herald (Red Herald)


Featured image: map of Sudan; source: Le Monde Diplomatique

We have previously reported on the war in Sudan portraying an initial analysis of the circumstances of the outbreak of the war.

Nearly one year afterwards the situation is sharpening. It is reported, that the war-actions dramatically increased, due to massive arming of the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) by the United Arab Emirates on the one hand and the “government’s” Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) by Egypt. It is said, that around eight million people are displaced inside the country as well as being forced to fled into neighboring countries additional to around 3 million refugees resulting from previous conflicts. Half the territory is controlled by either the RSF or the SAF. The government fled the capital Khartoum to Port Sudan.

Negotiation attempts failed or resulted in non-lasting cease-fires. Since these failures international organization focus on the supply with humanitarian aid.

Now the battle is for centered around El Fasher, the capital of the region North Darfur, after the RSF was able to conquer Nyala, al-Dshunaina and Zalingei three of five regional capitals in Darfur region. In El Fasher around 1.5 million people live, one third being internal refugees. The outcomes of the battle on El Fasher seems to become a turning point in the ongoing war.

While the burden lies on the masses of the peoples in Sudan, foreigners are profiting. In this aspects one can consider Egypt as the Yankees handyman, while the UAE seems to be a Russian proxy in Sudan, as most analysts do.

In this sense the development of “DP World” is noteworthy. It was founded 25 years ago by the UAE state monopoly “Dubai World” as a maritime transport company. DP World started in 2016 to construct and run ports in Eastern Africa. First in Somaliland and Puntland, then in Senegal, Angola and the Democratic Republic of Congo. In October 2023 DP World took over the port of Daressalam in Tanzania for 250 million US-Dollar.

The UAE via its DP World was heading for the same port as the Russians – Port Sudan. So the UAE and the Russian mercenaries of the Wagner Group made up a joint-venture. Wagner transported arms paid for by the UAE with its troops in the Central African Republic to the RSF in Sudan. Since the Prigozhin incident and the restructuring of Wagner – we reported – things became even more complicated. According to Le Mode Diplomatique today two different Russian groups are involved in arming the RSF. But the Kremlin is striving to overcome these issues by its new Africa Corps.

Due to the difficult situation with Wagner the UAE brought Libyan Chalifa Haftar in to play. Haftar organized air cargo from Bengasi to North-Western-Darfur. Additionally air-drops of weapons with parachutes were delivered.

Russian President Vladimir Putin lately said relations with the UAE were at an all-time high during his first visit to the Middle East since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine two years ago. Putin praised cooperation between the two countries as he met President Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan in Abu Dhabi in early December 2023, describing the UAE as “Russia’s main trading partner in the Arab world.” For the UAE, the strong ties with Russia is a “calculated risk” it is willing to take, a top UAE official told CNN in mid 2023. Representatives from the United States, the United Kingdom and the European Union failed in September 2023 to convince the Gulf nation for the implementation of sanctions against Russia.

On the other side the SAF are supplied via the sea to their residence in Port Sudan by Egypt. Egypt also directly intervened in the conflict, bombarding a Nile-River-Bridge in Khartoum in August 2023. Hundreds of Egyptian soldiers have been captured by the RSF and bombings of RSF positions by Egyptian fighter jets are reported, according to the Atlantic Council.

In this situation the scenario tends towards a complete collapse of central government, what will boost the current explosive situation at the Horn of Africa even more. On the 8th of March, the UN Security Council, aware of this situation, adopted a UK-drafted resolution calling for an immediate cessation of hostilities in Sudan during the month of Ramadan, a sustainable resolution to the conflict through dialogue, compliance with international humanitarian law and unhindered humanitarian access.

The UN Secretary-General, the UN Security Council, the African Union, and the League of Arab States joined forces to call for this Ramadan truce but Ramadan has started with further fierce fighting. Ali Karti, the Secretary-General of Sudan’s Islamic Movement has now announced that a truce with the RSF will never be accepted.

On top of the death and misery the war itself causes Sudan is on track to becoming the world’s largest hunger crisis, with around 18 million people already facing acute food insecurity, according to a report by the United Nations. 220,000 severely malnourished children could reportedly die in the upcoming months if they do not receive urgent assistance. A total of some 3.7 million children suffer from malnutrition in Sudan.

The perspective is quite horrible. The UN’s Humanitarian Response Plan for Sudan is only 4 per cent funded. Both RSF and SAF used hunger as a weapon of war. The RSF has looted humanitarian warehouses and besieged cities. The SAF-controlled Humanitarian Aid Commission has systematically banned movement of lifesaving aid to RSF-controlled areas.

The recent fighting is very likely to damage the spring harvest, which will increase the hunger even more. Also adequate medical treatment is seldom since prices of medics sky-rocketed by 600 per cent.

The armed conflict in Sudan, driven forward by the Imperialist puppeteers, will continue to great even more disorder in a region tarnished by war.

PDF Content:



The text of the Rome Statute reproduced herein was originally circulated as document A/CONF.183/9 of 17 J uly 1 998 and corrected by procès-verbaux of 10 November 1998, 12 July 1999, 30 November 1999, 8 May 2000, 17 January 2001 and 16 January 2002. The amendments to article 8 reproduce the text contained in depositary notification C.N.651.2010 Treaties-6, while the amendments regarding articles 8 bis, 15 bis and 15 ter replicate the text contained in depositary notification C.N.651.2010 Treaties-8; both depositary communications are dated 29 November 2010. The table of contents is not part of the text of the Rome Statute adopted by the United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court on 17 July 1998. It has been included in this publication for ease of reference. Done at Rome on 17 July 1998, in force on 1 July 2002, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2187, No. 38544, Depositary: Secretary-General of the United Nations, http://treaties.un.org .Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPublished by the International Criminal Court ISBN No. 92-9227-232-2 ICC-PIOS-LT-03-002/15_Eng Copyright © International Criminal Court 2011 All rights reserved International Criminal Court | Po Box 19519 | 2500 CM | The Hague | The Netherlands | www.icc-cpi.int
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Table of Contents PREAMBLE 1 PART 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COURT 2 Article 1 The Court 2 Article 2 Relationship of the Court with the United Nations 2 Article 3 Seat of the Court 2 Article 4 Legal status and powers of the Court 2 PART 2. JURISDICTION, ADMISSIBILITY AND APPLICABLE LAW 3 Article 5 Crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court 3 Article 6 Genocide 3 Article 7 Crimes against humanity 3 Article 8 War crimes 4 Article 8 bis Crime of aggression 7 Article 9 Elements of Crimes 8 Article 10 8 Article 11 Jurisdiction ratione temporis 8 Article 12 Preconditions to the exercise of jurisdiction 8 Article 13 Exercise of jurisdiction 9 Article 14 Referral of a situation by a State Party 9 Article 15 Prosecutor 9 Article 15 bis Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (State referral, proprio motu ) 9 Article 15 ter Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (Security Council referral) 10 Article 16 Deferral of investigation or prosecution 10 Article 17 Issues of admissibility 10 Article 18 Preliminary rulings regarding admissibility 11 Article 19 Challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court or the admissibility of a case 12 Article 20 Ne bis in idem 1 3 Article 21 Applicable law 13 PART 3. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW 14 Article 22 Nullum crimen sine lege 14 Article 23 Nulla poena sine lege 14 Article 24 Non-retroactivity ratione personae 14 Article 25 Individual criminal responsibility 14 Article 26 Exclusion of jurisdiction over persons under eighteen 15 Article 27 Irrelevance of official capacity 15 Article 28 Responsibility of commanders and other superiors 15 Article 29 Non-applicability of statute of limitations 15 Article 30 Mental element 15 Article 31 Grounds for excluding criminal responsibility 16 Article 32 Mistake of fact or mistake of law 16 Article 33 Superior orders and prescription of law 16 PART 4. COMPOSITION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE COURT 17 Article 34 Organs of the Court 17 Article 35 Service of judges 17 Article 36 Qualifications, nomination and election of judges 17 Article 37 Judicial vacancies 19 Article 38 The Presidency 19 Article 39 Chambers 19 Article 40 Independence of the judges 20
Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 41 Excusing and disqualification of judges 20 Article 42 The Office of the Prosecutor 20 Article 44 Staff 21 Article 45 Solemn undertaking 21 Article 46 Removal from office 22 Article 47 Disciplinary measures 22 Article 48 Privileges and immunities 22 Article 49 Salaries, allowances and expenses 23 Article 50 Official and working languages 23 Article 51 Rules of Procedure and Evidence 23 Article 52 Regulations of the Court 23 PART 5. INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION 24 Article 53 Initiation of an investigation 24 Article 54 Duties and powers of the Prosecutor with respect to investigations 24 Article 55 Rights of persons during an investigation 25 Article 56 Role of the Pre-Trial Chamber in relation to a unique investigative opportunity 25 Article 57 Functions and powers of the Pre-Trial Chamber 26 Article 58 Issuance by the Pre-Trial Chamber of a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear 27 Article 59 Arrest proceedings in the custodial State 28 Article 60 Initial proceedings before the Court 28 Article 61 Confirmation of the charges before trial 28 PART 6. THE TRIAL 31 Article 62 Place of trial 31 Article 63 Trial in the presence of the accused 31 Article 64 Functions and powers of the Trial Chamber 31 Article 65 Proceedings on an admission of guilt 32 Article 66 Presumption of innocence 32 Article 67 Rights of the accused 33 Article 68 Protection of the victims and witnesses and their participation in the proceedings 33 Article 69 Evidence 34 Article 70 Offences against the administration of justice 34 Article 71 Sanctions for misconduct before the Court 35 Article 72 Protection of national security information 35 Article 73 Third-party information or documents 36 Article 74 Requirements for the decision 36 Article 75 Reparations to victims 36 Article 76 Sentencing 37 PART 7. PENALTIES 38 Article 77 Applicable penalties 38 Article 78 Determination of the sentence 38 Article 79 Trust Fund 38 Article 80 Non-prejudice to national application of penalties and national laws 38 PART 8. APPEAL AND REVISION 39 Article 81 Appeal against decision of acquittal or conviction or against sentence 39 Article 82 Appeal against other decisions 39 Article 83 Proceedings on appeal 40 Article 84 Revision of conviction or sentence 40 Article 85 Compensation to an arrested or convicted person 41
Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 9. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AND JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE 42 Article 86 General obligation to cooperate 42 Article 87 Requests for cooperation: general provisions 42 Article 88 Availability of procedures under national law 42 Article 89 Surrender of persons to the Court 42 Article 90 Competing requests 43 Article 91 Contents of request for arrest and surrender 44 Article 92 Provisional arrest 45 Article 93 Other forms of cooperation 45 Article 94 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of ongoing investigation or prosecution 47 Article 95 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of an admissibility challenge 47 Article 96 Contents of request for other forms of assistance under article 93 47 Article 97 Consultations 48 Article 98 Cooperation with respect to waiver of immunity and consent to surrender 48 Article 99 Execution of requests under articles 93 and 96 48 Article 100 Costs 49 Article 101 Rule of speciality 49 Article 102 Use of terms 49 PART 10. ENFORCEMENT 50 Article 103 Role of States in enforcement of sentences of imprisonment 50 Article 104 Change in designation of State of enforcement 50 Article 105 Enforcement of the sentence 50 Article 106 Supervision of enforcement of sentences and conditions of imprisonment 50 Article 107 Transfer of the person upon completion of sentence 51 Article 108 Limitation on the prosecution or punishment of other offences 51 Article 109 Enforcement of fines and forfeiture measures 51 Article 110 Review by the Court concerning reduction of sentence 51 Article 111 Escape 52 PART 11. ASSEMBLY OF STATES PARTIES 53 Article 112 Assembly of States Parties 53 PART 12. FINANCING 54 Article 113 Financial Regulations 54 Article 114 Payment of expenses 54 Article 115 Funds of the Court and of the Assembly of States Parties 54 Article 116 Voluntary contributions 54 Article 117 Assessment of contributions 54 Article 118 Annual audit 54 PART 13. FINAL CLAUSES 55 Article 119 Settlement of disputes 55 Article 120 Reservations 55 Article 121 Amendments 55 Article 122 Amendments to provisions of an institutional nature 55 Article 123 Review of the Statute 56 Article 124 Transitional Provision 56 Article 125 Signature, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession 56 Article 126 Entry into force 56 Article 127 Withdrawal 56 Article 128 Authentic texts 57
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
1 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPREAMBLE The States Parties to this Statute, Conscious that all peoples are united by common bonds, their cultures pieced together in a shared heritage, and concerned that this delicate mosaic may be shattered at any time, Mindful that during this century millions of children, women and men have been victims of unimaginable atrocities that deeply shock the conscience of humanity, Recognizing that such grave crimes threaten the peace, security and well-being of the world, Affirming that the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole must not go unpunished and that their effective prosecution must be ensured by taking measures at the national level and by enhancing international cooperation, Determined to put an end to impunity for the perpetrators of these crimes and thus to contribute to the prevention of such crimes, Recalling that it is the duty of every State to exercise its criminal jurisdiction over those responsible for international crimes, Reaffirming the Purposes and Principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and in particular that all States shall refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations, Emphasizing in this connection that nothing in this Statute shall be taken as authorizing any State Party to intervene in an armed conflict or in the internal affairs of any State, Determined to these ends and for the sake of present and future generations, to establish an independent permanent International Criminal Court in relationship with the United Nations system, with jurisdiction over the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole, Emphasizing that the International Criminal Court established under this Statute shall be complementary to national criminal jurisdictions, Resolved to guarantee lasting respect for and the enforcement of international justice, Have agreed as follows:
2 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COURT Article 1 The Court An International Criminal Court ("the Court") is hereby established. It shall be a permanent institution and shall have the power to exercise its jurisdiction over persons for the most serious crimes of international concern, as referred to in this Statute, and shall be complementary to national criminal jurisdictions. The jurisdiction and functioning of the Court shall be governed by the provisions of this Statute. Article 2 Relationship of the Court with the United Nations The Court shall be brought into relationship with the United Nations through an agreement to be approved by the Assembly of States Parties to this Statute and thereafter concluded by the President of the Court on its behalf. Article 3 Seat of the Court 1. The seat of the Court shall be established at The Hague in the Netherlands ("the host State"). 2. The Court shall enter into a headquarters agreement with the host State, to be approved by the Assembly of States Parties and thereafter concluded by the President of the Court on its behalf. 3. The Court may sit elsewhere, whenever it considers it desirable, as provided in this Statute. Article 4 Legal status and powers of the Court 1. The Court shall have international legal personality. It shall also have such legal capacity as may be necessary for the exercise of its functions and the fulfilment of its purposes. 2. The Court may exercise its functions and powers, as provided in this Statute, on the territory of any State Party and, by special agreement, on the territory of any other State.
3 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 2. JURISDICTION, ADMISSIBILITY AND APPLICABLE LAW Article 51 Crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court The jurisdiction of the Court shall be limited to the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole. The Court has jurisdiction in accordance with this Statute with respect to the following crimes: (a) The crime of genocide; (b) Crimes against humanity; (c) War crimes; (d) The crime of aggression. Article 6 Genocide For the purpose of this Statute, "genocide" means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. Article 7 Crimes against humanity 1. For the purpose of this Statute, "crime against humanity" means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack: (a) Murder; (b) Extermination; (c) Enslavement; (d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population; (e) Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law; (f) Torture; (g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity; (h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; (i) Enforced disappearance of persons; (j) The crime of apartheid; (k) Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health. 1 Paragraph 2 of article 5 (“The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression once a provision is adopted in accordance with articles 121 and 123 defining the crime and setting out the conditions under which the Court shall exercise jurisdiction with respect to this crime. Such a provision shall be consistent with the relevant provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.”) was deleted in accordance with RC/Res.6, annex I, of 11 June 2010.
4 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. For the purpose of paragraph 1: (a) "Attack directed against any civilian population" means a course of conduct involving the multiple commission of acts referred to in paragraph 1 against any civilian population, pursuant to or in furtherance of a State or organizational policy to commit such attack; (b) "Extermination" includes the intentional infliction of conditions of life, inter alia the deprivation of access to food and medicine, calculated to bring about the destruction of part of a population; (c) "Enslavement" means the exercise of any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership over a person and includes the exercise of such power in the course of trafficking in persons, in particular women and children; (d) "Deportation or forcible transfer of population" means forced displacement of the persons concerned by expulsion or other coercive acts from the area in which they are lawfully present, without grounds permitted under international law; (e) "Torture" means the intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, upon a person in the custody or under the control of the accused; except that torture shall not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions; (f) "Forced pregnancy" means the unlawful confinement of a woman forcibly made pregnant, with the intent of affecting the ethnic composition of any population or carrying out other grave violations of international law. This definition shall not in any way be interpreted as affecting national laws relating to pregnancy; (g) "Persecution" means the intentional and severe deprivation of fundamental rights contrary to international law by reason of the identity of the group or collectivity; (h) "The crime of apartheid" means inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime; (i) "Enforced disappearance of persons" means the arrest, detention or abduction of persons by, or with the authorization, support or acquiescence of, a State or a political organization, followed by a refusal to acknowledge that deprivation of freedom or to give information on the fate or whereabouts of those persons, with the intention of removing them from the protection of the law for a prolonged period of time. 3. For the purpose of this Statute, it is understood that the term "gender" refers to the two sexes, male and female, within the context of society. The term "gender" does not indicate any meaning different from the above. Article 82 War crimes 1. The Court shall have jurisdiction in respect of war crimes in particular when committed as part of a plan or policy or as part of a large-scale commission of such crimes. 2. For the purpose of this Statute, "war crimes" means: (a) Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention: (i) Wilful killing; (ii) Torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments; (iii) Wilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health; (iv) Extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly; (v) Compelling a prisoner of war or other protected person to serve in the forces of a hostile Power; (vi) Wilfully depriving a prisoner of war or other protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial; 2 Paragraphs 2 (e) (xiii) to 2 (e) (xv) were amended by resolution RC/Res.5 of 11 June 2010 (adding paragraphs 2 (e) (xiii) to 2 (e) (xv)).
5 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(vii) Unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement; (viii) Taking of hostages. (b) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts: (i) Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities; (ii) Intentionally directing attacks against civilian objects, that is, objects which are not military objectives; (iii) Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict; (iv) Intentionally launching an attack in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated; (v) Attacking or bombarding, by whatever means, towns, villages, dwellings or buildings which are undefended and which are not military objectives; (vi) Killing or wounding a combatant who, having laid down his arms or having no longer means of defence, has surrendered at discretion; (vii) Making improper use of a flag of truce, of the flag or of the military insignia and uniform of the enemy or of the United Nations, as well as of the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions, resulting in death or serious personal injury; (viii) The transfer, directly or indirectly, by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies, or the deportation or transfer of all or parts of the population of the occupied territory within or outside this territory; (ix) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military objectives; (x) Subjecting persons who are in the power of an adverse party to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons; (xi) Killing or wounding treacherously individuals belonging to the hostile nation or army; (xii) Declaring that no quarter will be given; (xiii) Destroying or seizing the enemy's property unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war; (xiv) Declaring abolished, suspended or inadmissible in a court of law the rights and actions of the nationals of the hostile party; (xv) Compelling the nationals of the hostile party to take part in the operations of war directed against their own country, even if they were in the belligerent's service before the commencement of the war; (xvi) Pillaging a town or place, even when taken by assault; (xvii) Employing poison or poisoned weapons; (xviii) Employing asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and all analogous liquids, materials or devices;
6 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(xix) Employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions; (xx) Employing weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare which are of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering or which are inherently indiscriminate in violation of the international law of armed conflict, provided that such weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare are the subject of a comprehensive prohibition and are included in an annex to this Statute, by an amendment in accordance with the relevant provisions set forth in articles 121 and 123; (xxi) Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (xxii) Committing rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, as defined in article 7, paragraph 2 (f), enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence also constituting a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions; (xxiii) Utilizing the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas or military forces immune from military operations; (xxiv) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings, material, medical units and transport, and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions in conformity with international law; (xxv) Intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions; (xxvi) Conscripting or enlisting children under the age of fifteen years into the national armed forces or using them to participate actively in hostilities. (c) In the case of an armed conflict not of an international character, serious violations of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts committed against persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention or any other cause: (i) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; (ii) Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (iii) Taking of hostages; (iv) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgement pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all judicial guarantees which are generally recognized as indispensable. (d) Paragraph 2 (c) applies to armed conflicts not of an international character and thus does not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence or other acts of a similar nature. (e) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in armed conflicts not of an international character, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts: (i) Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities; (ii) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings, material, medical units and transport, and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions in conformity with international law; (iii) Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict; (iv) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military objectives; (v) Pillaging a town or place, even when taken by assault;
7 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(vi) Committing rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, as defined in article 7, paragraph 2 (f), enforced sterilization, and any other form of sexual violence also constituting a serious violation of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions; (vii) Conscripting or enlisting children under the age of fifteen years into armed forces or groups or using them to participate actively in hostilities; (viii) Ordering the displacement of the civilian population for reasons related to the conflict, unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand; (ix) Killing or wounding treacherously a combatant adversary; (x) Declaring that no quarter will be given; (xi) Subjecting persons who are in the power of another party to the conflict to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons; (xii) Destroying or seizing the property of an adversary unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of the conflict; (xiii) Employing poison or poisoned weapons; (xiv) Employing asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and all analogous liquids, materials or devices; (xv) Employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions. (f) Paragraph 2 (e) applies to armed conflicts not of an international character and thus does not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence or other acts of a similar nature. It applies to armed conflicts that take place in the territory of a State when there is protracted armed conflict between governmental authorities and organized armed groups or between such groups. 3. Nothing in paragraph 2 (c) and (e) shall affect the responsibility of a Government to maintain or re- establish law and order in the State or to defend the unity and territorial integrity of the State, by all legitimate means. Article 8 bis3 Crime of aggression 1. For the purpose of this Statute, “crime of aggression” means the planning, preparation, initiation or execution, by a person in a position effectively to exercise control over or to direct the political or military action of a State, of an act of aggression which, by its character, gravity and scale, constitutes a manifest violation of the Charter of the United Nations. 2. For the purpose of paragraph 1, “act of aggression” means the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations. Any of the following acts, regardless of a declaration of war, shall, in accordance with United Nations General Assembly resolution 3314 (XXIX) of 14 December 1974, qualify as an act of aggression: (a) The invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another State, or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such invasion or attack, or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State or part thereof; (b) Bombardment by the armed forces of a State against the territory of another State or the use of any weapons by a State against the territory of another State; (c) The blockade of the ports or coasts of a State by the armed forces of another State; (d) An attack by the armed forces of a State on the land, sea or air forces, or marine and air fleets of another State; 3 Inserted by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010.
8 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(e) The use of armed forces of one State which are within the territory of another State with the agreement of the receiving State, in contravention of the conditions provided for in the agreement or any extension of their presence in such territory beyond the termination of the agreement; (f) The action of a State in allowing its territory, which it has placed at the disposal of another State, to be used by that other State for perpetrating an act of aggression against a third State; (g) The sending by or on behalf of a State of armed bands, groups, irregulars or mercenaries, which carry out acts of armed force against another State of such gravity as to amount to the acts listed above, or its substantial involvement therein. Article 94 Elements of Crimes 1. Elements of Crimes shall assist the Court in the interpretation and application of articles 6, 7, 8 and 8 bis. They shall be adopted by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 2. Amendments to the Elements of Crimes may be proposed by: (a) Any State Party; (b) The judges acting by an absolute majority; (c) The Prosecutor. Such amendments shall be adopted by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 3. The Elements of Crimes and amendments thereto shall be consistent with this Statute. Article 10 Nothing in this Part shall be interpreted as limiting or prejudicing in any way existing or developing rules of international law for purposes other than this Statute. Article 11 Jurisdiction ratione temporis 1. The Court has jurisdiction only with respect to crimes committed after the entry into force of this Statute. 2. If a State becomes a Party to this Statute after its entry into force, the Court may exercise its jurisdiction only with respect to crimes committed after the entry into force of this Statute for that State, unless that State has made a declaration under article 12, paragraph 3. Article 12 Preconditions to the exercise of jurisdiction 1. A State which becomes a Party to this Statute thereby accepts the jurisdiction of the Court with respect to the crimes referred to in article 5. 2. In the case of article 13, paragraph (a) or (c), the Court may exercise its jurisdiction if one or more of the following States are Parties to this Statute or have accepted the jurisdiction of the Court in accordance with paragraph 3: (a) The State on the territory of which the conduct in question occurred or, if the crime was committed on board a vessel or aircraft, the State of registration of that vessel or aircraft; (b) The State of which the person accused of the crime is a national. 3. If the acceptance of a State which is not a Party to this Statute is required under paragraph 2, that State may, by declaration lodged with the Registrar, accept the exercise of jurisdiction by the Court with respect to the crime in question. The accepting State shall cooperate with the Court without any delay or exception in accordance with Part 9. 4 As amended by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010 (inserting the reference to article 8 bis).
9 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 13 Exercise of jurisdiction The Court may exercise its jurisdiction with respect to a crime referred to in article 5 in accordance with the provisions of this Statute if: (a) A situation in which one or more of such crimes appears to have been committed is referred to the Prosecutor by a State Party in accordance with article 14; (b) A situation in which one or more of such crimes appears to have been committed is referred to the Prosecutor by the Security Council acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations; or (c) The Prosecutor has initiated an investigation in respect of such a crime in accordance with article 15. Article 14 Referral of a situation by a State Party 1. A State Party may refer to the Prosecutor a situation in which one or more crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court appear to have been committed requesting the Prosecutor to investigate the situation for the purpose of determining whether one or more specific persons should be charged with the commission of such crimes. 2. As far as possible, a referral shall specify the relevant circumstances and be accompanied by such supporting documentation as is available to the State referring the situation. Article 15 Prosecutor 1. The Prosecutor may initiate investigations proprio motu on the basis of information on crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. 2. The Prosecutor shall analyse the seriousness of the information received. For this purpose, he or she may seek additional information from States, organs of the United Nations, intergovernmental or non- governmental organizations, or other reliable sources that he or she deems appropriate, and may receive written or oral testimony at the seat of the Court. 3. If the Prosecutor concludes that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation, he or she shall submit to the Pre-Trial Chamber a request for authorization of an investigation, together with any supporting material collected. Victims may make representations to the Pre-Trial Chamber, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. If the Pre-Trial Chamber, upon examination of the request and the supporting material, considers that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation, and that the case appears to fall within the jurisdiction of the Court, it shall authorize the commencement of the investigation, without prejudice to subsequent determinations by the Court with regard to the jurisdiction and admissibility of a case. 5. The refusal of the Pre-Trial Chamber to authorize the investigation shall not preclude the presentation of a subsequent request by the Prosecutor based on new facts or evidence regarding the same situation. 6. If, after the preliminary examination referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, the Prosecutor concludes that the information provided does not constitute a reasonable basis for an investigation, he or she shall inform those who provided the information. This shall not preclude the Prosecutor from considering further information submitted to him or her regarding the same situation in the light of new facts or evidence. Article 15 bis5 Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (State referral, proprio motu ) 1. The Court may exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with article 13, paragraphs (a) and (c), subject to the provisions of this article. 2. The Court may exercise jurisdiction only with respect to crimes of aggression committed one year after the ratification or acceptance of the amendments by thirty States Parties. 3. The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with this article, subject to a decision to be taken after 1 January 2017 by the same majority of States Parties as is required for the adoption of an amendment to the Statute. 5 Inserted by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010.
10 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court4. The Court may, in accordance with article 12, exercise jurisdiction over a crime of aggression, arising from an act of aggression committed by a State Party, unless that State Party has previously declared that it does not accept such jurisdiction by lodging a declaration with the Registrar. The withdrawal of such a declaration may be effected at any time and shall be considered by the State Party within three years. 5. In respect of a State that is not a party to this Statute, the Court shall not exercise its jurisdiction over the crime of aggression when committed by that State’s nationals or on its territory. 6. Where the Prosecutor concludes that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation in respect of a crime of aggression, he or she shall first ascertain whether the Security Council has made a determination of an act of aggression committed by the State concerned. The Prosecutor shall notify the Secretary-General of the United Nations of the situation before the Court, including any relevant information and documents. 7. Where the Security Council has made such a determination, the Prosecutor may proceed with the investigation in respect of a crime of aggression. 8. Where no such determination is made within six months after the date of notification, the Prosecutor may proceed with the investigation in respect of a crime of aggression, provided that the Pre-Trial Division has authorized the commencement of the investigation in respect of a crime of aggression in accordance with the procedure contained in article 15, and the Security Council has not decided otherwise in accordance with article16. 9. A determination of an act of aggression by an organ outside the Court shall be without prejudice to the Court’s own findings under this Statute. 10. This article is without prejudice to the provisions relating to the exercise of jurisdiction with respect to other crimes referred to in article 5. Article 15 ter6 Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (Security Council referral) 1. The Court may exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with article 13, paragraph (b), subject to the provisions of this article. 2. The Court may exercise jurisdiction only with respect to crimes of aggression committed one year after the ratification or acceptance of the amendments by thirty States Parties. 3. The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with this article, subject to a decision to be taken after 1 January 2017 by the same majority of States Parties as is required for the adoption of an amendment to the Statute. 4. A determination of an act of aggression by an organ outside the Court shall be without prejudice to the Court’s own findings under this Statute. 5. This article is without prejudice to the provisions relating to the exercise of jurisdiction with respect to other crimes referred to in article 5. Article 16 Deferral of investigation or prosecution No investigation or prosecution may be commenced or proceeded with under this Statute for a period of 12 months after the Security Council, in a resolution adopted under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, has requested the Court to that effect; that request may be renewed by the Council under the same conditions. Article 17 Issues of admissibility 1. Having regard to paragraph 10 of the Preamble and article 1, the Court shall determine that a case is inadmissible where: (a) The case is being investigated or prosecuted by a State which has jurisdiction over it, unless the State is unwilling or unable genuinely to carry out the investigation or prosecution; 6 Inserted by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010.
11 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) The case has been investigated by a State which has jurisdiction over it and the State has decided not to prosecute the person concerned, unless the decision resulted from the unwillingness or inability of the State genuinely to prosecute; (c) The person concerned has already been tried for conduct which is the subject of the complaint, and a trial by the Court is not permitted under article 20, paragraph 3; (d) The case is not of sufficient gravity to justify further action by the Court. 2. In order to determine unwillingness in a particular case, the Court shall consider, having regard to the principles of due process recognized by international law, whether one or more of the following exist, as applicable: (a) The proceedings were or are being undertaken or the national decision was made for the purpose of shielding the person concerned from criminal responsibility for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court referred to in article 5; (b) There has been an unjustified delay in the proceedings which in the circumstances is inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice; (c) The proceedings were not or are not being conducted independently or impartially, and they were or are being conducted in a manner which, in the circumstances, is inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice. 3. In order to determine inability in a particular case, the Court shall consider whether, due to a total or substantial collapse or unavailability of its national judicial system, the State is unable to obtain the accused or the necessary evidence and testimony or otherwise unable to carry out its proceedings. Article 18 Preliminary rulings regarding admissibility 1. When a situation has been referred to the Court pursuant to article 13 (a) and the Prosecutor has determined that there would be a reasonable basis to commence an investigation, or the Prosecutor initiates an investigation pursuant to articles 13 (c) and 15, the Prosecutor shall notify all States Parties and those States which, taking into account the information available, would normally exercise jurisdiction over the crimes concerned. The Prosecutor may notify such States on a confidential basis and, where the Prosecutor believes it necessary to protect persons, prevent destruction of evidence or prevent the absconding of persons, may limit the scope of the information provided to States. 2. Within one month of receipt of that notification, a State may inform the Court that it is investigating or has investigated its nationals or others within its jurisdiction with respect to criminal acts which may constitute crimes referred to in article 5 and which relate to the information provided in the notification to States. At the request of that State, the Prosecutor shall defer to the State's investigation of those persons unless the Pre-Trial Chamber, on the application of the Prosecutor, decides to authorize the investigation. 3. The Prosecutor's deferral to a State's investigation shall be open to review by the Prosecutor six months after the date of deferral or at any time when there has been a significant change of circumstances based on the State's unwillingness or inability genuinely to carry out the investigation. 4. The State concerned or the Prosecutor may appeal to the Appeals Chamber against a ruling of the Pre-Trial Chamber, in accordance with article 82. The appeal may be heard on an expedited basis. 5. When the Prosecutor has deferred an investigation in accordance with paragraph 2, the Prosecutor may request that the State concerned periodically inform the Prosecutor of the progress of its investigations and any subsequent prosecutions. States Parties shall respond to such requests without undue delay. 6. Pending a ruling by the Pre-Trial Chamber, or at any time when the Prosecutor has deferred an investigation under this article, the Prosecutor may, on an exceptional basis, seek authority from the Pre-Trial Chamber to pursue necessary investigative steps for the purpose of preserving evidence where there is a unique opportunity to obtain important evidence or there is a significant risk that such evidence may not be subsequently available. 7. A State which has challenged a ruling of the Pre-Trial Chamber under this article may challenge the admissibility of a case under article 19 on the grounds of additional significant facts or significant change of circumstances.
12 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 19 Challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court or the admissibility of a case 1. The Court shall satisfy itself that it has jurisdiction in any case brought before it. The Court may, on its own motion, determine the admissibility of a case in accordance with article 17. 2. Challenges to the admissibility of a case on the grounds referred to in article 17 or challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court may be made by: (a) An accused or a person for whom a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear has been issued under article 58; (b) A State which has jurisdiction over a case, on the ground that it is investigating or prosecuting the case or has investigated or prosecuted; or (c) A State from which acceptance of jurisdiction is required under article 12. 3. The Prosecutor may seek a ruling from the Court regarding a question of jurisdiction or admissibility. In proceedings with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility, those who have referred the situation under article 13, as well as victims, may also submit observations to the Court. 4. The admissibility of a case or the jurisdiction of the Court may be challenged only once by any person or State referred to in paragraph 2. The challenge shall take place prior to or at the commencement of the trial. In exceptional circumstances, the Court may grant leave for a challenge to be brought more than once or at a time later than the commencement of the trial. Challenges to the admissibility of a case, at the commencement of a trial, or subsequently with the leave of the Court, may be based only on article 17, paragraph 1 (c). 5. A State referred to in paragraph 2 (b) and (c) shall make a challenge at the earliest opportunity. 6. Prior to the confirmation of the charges, challenges to the admissibility of a case or challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court shall be referred to the Pre-Trial Chamber. After confirmation of the charges, they shall be referred to the Trial Chamber. Decisions with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility may be appealed to the Appeals Chamber in accordance with article 82. 7. If a challenge is made by a State referred to in paragraph 2 (b) or (c), the Prosecutor shall suspend the investigation until such time as the Court makes a determination in accordance with article 17. 8. Pending a ruling by the Court, the Prosecutor may seek authority from the Court: (a) To pursue necessary investigative steps of the kind referred to in article 18, paragraph 6; (b) To take a statement or testimony from a witness or complete the collection and examination of evidence which had begun prior to the making of the challenge; and (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. 9. The making of a challenge shall not affect the validity of any act performed by the Prosecutor or any order or warrant issued by the Court prior to the making of the challenge. 10. If the Court has decided that a case is inadmissible under article 17, the Prosecutor may submit a request for a review of the decision when he or she is fully satisfied that new facts have arisen which negate the basis on which the case had previously been found inadmissible under article 17. 11. If the Prosecutor, having regard to the matters referred to in article 17, defers an investigation, the Prosecutor may request that the relevant State make available to the Prosecutor information on the proceedings. That information shall, at the request of the State concerned, be confidential. If the Prosecutor thereafter decides to proceed with an investigation, he or she shall notify the State to which deferral of the proceedings has taken place.
13 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 207 Ne bis in idem 1. Except as provided in this Statute, no person shall be tried before the Court with respect to conduct which formed the basis of crimes for which the person has been convicted or acquitted by the Court. 2. No person shall be tried by another court for a crime referred to in article 5 for which that person has already been convicted or acquitted by the Court. 3. No person who has been tried by another court for conduct also proscribed under article 6, 7, 8 or 8 bis shall be tried by the Court with respect to the same conduct unless the proceedings in the other court: (a) Were for the purpose of shielding the person concerned from criminal responsibility for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court; or (b) Otherwise were not conducted independently or impartially in accordance with the norms of due process recognized by international law and were conducted in a manner which, in the circumstances, was inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice. Article 21 Applicable law 1. The Court shall apply: (a) In the first place, this Statute, Elements of Crimes and its Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (b) In the second place, where appropriate, applicable treaties and the principles and rules of international law, including the established principles of the international law of armed conflict; (c) Failing that, general principles of law derived by the Court from national laws of legal systems of the world including, as appropriate, the national laws of States that would normally exercise jurisdiction over the crime, provided that those principles are not inconsistent with this Statute and with international law and internationally recognized norms and standards. 2. The Court may apply principles and rules of law as interpreted in its previous decisions. 3. The application and interpretation of law pursuant to this article must be consistent with internationally recognized human rights, and be without any adverse distinction founded on grounds such as gender as defined in article 7, paragraph 3, age, race, colour, language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, wealth, birth or other status. 7 As amended by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010 (inserting the reference to article 8 bis).
14 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 3. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW Article 22 Nullum crimen sine lege 1. A person shall not be criminally responsible under this Statute unless the conduct in question constitutes, at the time it takes place, a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court. 2. The definition of a crime shall be strictly construed and shall not be extended by analogy. In case of ambiguity, the definition shall be interpreted in favour of the person being investigated, prosecuted or convicted. 3. This article shall not affect the characterization of any conduct as criminal under international law independently of this Statute. Article 23 Nulla poena sine leg e A person convicted by the Court may be punished only in accordance with this Statute. Article 24 Non-retroactivity ratione personae 1. No person shall be criminally responsible under this Statute for conduct prior to the entry into force of the Statute. 2. In the event of a change in the law applicable to a given case prior to a final judgement, the law more favourable to the person being investigated, prosecuted or convicted shall apply. Article 258 Individual criminal responsibility 1. The Court shall have jurisdiction over natural persons pursuant to this Statute. 2. A person who commits a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court shall be individually responsible and liable for punishment in accordance with this Statute. 3. In accordance with this Statute, a person shall be criminally responsible and liable for punishment for a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court if that person: (a) Commits such a crime, whether as an individual, jointly with another or through another person, regardless of whether that other person is criminally responsible; (b) Orders, solicits or induces the commission of such a crime which in fact occurs or is attempted; (c) For the purpose of facilitating the commission of such a crime, aids, abets or otherwise assists in its commission or its attempted commission, including providing the means for its commission; (d) In any other way contributes to the commission or attempted commission of such a crime by a group of persons acting with a common purpose. Such contribution shall be intentional and shall either: (i) Be made with the aim of furthering the criminal activity or criminal purpose of the group, where such activity or purpose involves the commission of a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; or (ii) Be made in the knowledge of the intention of the group to commit the crime; (e) In respect of the crime of genocide, directly and publicly incites others to commit genocide; (f) Attempts to commit such a crime by taking action that commences its execution by means of a substantial step, but the crime does not occur because of circumstances independent of the person's intentions. However, a person who abandons the effort to commit the crime or otherwise prevents the completion of the crime shall not be liable for punishment under this Statute for the attempt to commit that crime if that person completely and voluntarily gave up the criminal purpose. 8 As amended by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010 (adding paragraph 3 bis).
15 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3 bis. In respect of the crime of aggression, the provisions of this article shall apply only to persons in a position effectively to exercise control over or to direct the political or military action of a State. 4. No provision in this Statute relating to individual criminal responsibility shall affect the responsibility of States under international law. Article 26 Exclusion of jurisdiction over persons under eighteen The Court shall have no jurisdiction over any person who was under the age of 18 at the time of the alleged commission of a crime. Article 27 Irrelevance of official capacity 1. This Statute shall apply equally to all persons without any distinction based on official capacity. In particular, official capacity as a Head of State or Government, a member of a Government or parliament, an elected representative or a government official shall in no case exempt a person from criminal responsibility under this Statute, nor shall it, in and of itself, constitute a ground for reduction of sentence. 2. Immunities or special procedural rules which may attach to the official capacity of a person, whether under national or international law, shall not bar the Court from exercising its jurisdiction over such a person. Article 28 Responsibility of commanders and other superiors In addition to other grounds of criminal responsibility under this Statute for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court: (a) A military commander or person effectively acting as a military commander shall be criminally responsible for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court committed by forces under his or her effective command and control, or effective authority and control as the case may be, as a result of his or her failure to exercise control properly over such forces, where: (i) That military commander or person either knew or, owing to the circumstances at the time, should have known that the forces were committing or about to commit such crimes; and (ii) That military commander or person failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power to prevent or repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecution. (b) With respect to superior and subordinate relationships not described in paragraph (a), a superior shall be criminally responsible for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court committed by subordinates under his or her effective authority and control, as a result of his or her failure to exercise control properly over such subordinates, where: (i) The superior either knew, or consciously disregarded information which clearly indicated, that the subordinates were committing or about to commit such crimes; (ii) The crimes concerned activities that were within the effective responsibility and control of the superior; and (iii) The superior failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power to prevent or repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecution. Article 29 Non-applicability of statute of limitations The crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court shall not be subject to any statute of limitations. Article 30 Mental element 1. Unless otherwise provided, a person shall be criminally responsible and liable for punishment for a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court only if the material elements are committed with intent and knowledge. 2. For the purposes of this article, a person has intent where: (a) In relation to conduct, that person means to engage in the conduct;
16 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) In relation to a consequence, that person means to cause that consequence or is aware that it will occur in the ordinary course of events. 3. For the purposes of this article, "knowledge" means awareness that a circumstance exists or a consequence will occur in the ordinary course of events. "Know" and "knowingly" shall be construed accordingly. Article 31 Grounds for excluding criminal responsibility 1. In addition to other grounds for excluding criminal responsibility provided for in this Statute, a person shall not be criminally responsible if, at the time of that person's conduct: (a) The person suffers from a mental disease or defect that destroys that person's capacity to appreciate the unlawfulness or nature of his or her conduct, or capacity to control his or her conduct to conform to the requirements of law; (b) The person is in a state of intoxication that destroys that person's capacity to appreciate the unlawfulness or nature of his or her conduct, or capacity to control his or her conduct to conform to the requirements of law, unless the person has become voluntarily intoxicated under such circumstances that the person knew, or disregarded the risk, that, as a result of the intoxication, he or she was likely to engage in conduct constituting a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; (c) The person acts reasonably to defend himself or herself or another person or, in the case of war crimes, property which is essential for the survival of the person or another person or property which is essential for accomplishing a military mission, against an imminent and unlawful use of force in a manner proportionate to the degree of danger to the person or the other person or property protected. The fact that the person was involved in a defensive operation conducted by forces shall not in itself constitute a ground for excluding criminal responsibility under this subparagraph; (d) The conduct which is alleged to constitute a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been caused by duress resulting from a threat of imminent death or of continuing or imminent serious bodily harm against that person or another person, and the person acts necessarily and reasonably to avoid this threat, provided that the person does not intend to cause a greater harm than the one sought to be avoided. Such a threat may either be: (i) Made by other persons; or (ii) Constituted by other circumstances beyond that person's control. 2. The Court shall determine the applicability of the grounds for excluding criminal responsibility provided for in this Statute to the case before it. 3. At trial, the Court may consider a ground for excluding criminal responsibility other than those referred to in paragraph 1 where such a ground is derived from applicable law as set forth in article 21. The procedures relating to the consideration of such a ground shall be provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 32 Mistake of fact or mistake of law 1. A mistake of fact shall be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility only if it negates the mental element required by the crime. 2. A mistake of law as to whether a particular type of conduct is a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court shall not be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility. A mistake of law may, however, be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility if it negates the mental element required by such a crime, or as provided for in article 33. Article 33 Superior orders and prescription of law 1. The fact that a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been committed by a person pursuant to an order of a Government or of a superior, whether military or civilian, shall not relieve that person of criminal responsibility unless: (a) The person was under a legal obligation to obey orders of the Government or the superior in question; (b) The person did not know that the order was unlawful; and (c) The order was not manifestly unlawful. 2. For the purposes of this article, orders to commit genocide or crimes against humanity are manifestly unlawful.
17 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 4. COMPOSITION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE COURT Article 34 Organs of the Court The Court shall be composed of the following organs: (a) The Presidency; (b) An Appeals Division, a Trial Division and a Pre-Trial Division; (c) The Office of the Prosecutor; (d) The Registry. Article 35 Service of judges 1. All judges shall be elected as full-time members of the Court and shall be available to serve on that basis from the commencement of their terms of office. 2. The judges composing the Presidency shall serve on a full-time basis as soon as they are elected. 3. The Presidency may, on the basis of the workload of the Court and in consultation with its members, decide from time to time to what extent the remaining judges shall be required to serve on a full-time basis. Any such arrangement shall be without prejudice to the provisions of article 40. 4. The financial arrangements for judges not required to serve on a full-time basis shall be made in accordance with article 49. Article 36 Qualifications, nomination and election of judges 1. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2, there shall be 18 judges of the Court. 2. (a) The Presidency, acting on behalf of the Court, may propose an increase in the number of judges specified in paragraph 1, indicating the reasons why this is considered necessary and appropriate The Registrar shall promptly circulate any such proposal to all States Parties. (b) Any such proposal shall then be considered at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties to be convened in accordance with article 112. The proposal shall be considered adopted if approved at the meeting by a vote of two thirds of the members of the Assembly of States Parties and shall enter into force at such time as decided by the Assembly of States Parties. (c) (i) Once a proposal for an increase in the number of judges has been adopted under subparagraph (b), the election of the additional judges shall take place at the next session of the Assembly of States Parties in accordance with paragraphs 3 to 8, and article 37, paragraph 2; (ii) Once a proposal for an increase in the number of judges has been adopted and brought into effect under subparagraphs (b) and (c) (i), it shall be open to the Presidency at any time thereafter, if the workload of the Court justifies it, to propose a reduction in the number of judges, provided that the number of judges shall not be reduced below that specified in paragraph 1. The proposal shall be dealt with in accordance with the procedure laid down in subparagraphs (a) and (b). In the event that the proposal is adopted, the number of judges shall be progressively decreased as the terms of office of serving judges expire, until the necessary number has been reached. 3. (a) The judges shall be chosen from among persons of high moral character, impartiality and integrity who possess the qualifications required in their respective States for appointment to the highest judicial offices. (b) Every candidate for election to the Court shall: (i) Have established competence in criminal law and procedure, and the necessary relevant experience, whether as judge, prosecutor, advocate or in other similar capacity, in criminal proceedings; or (ii) Have established competence in relevant areas of international law such as international humanitarian law and the law of human rights, and extensive experience in a professional legal capacity which is of relevance to the judicial work of the Court;
18 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(c) Every candidate for election to the Court shall have an excellent knowledge of and be fluent in at least one of the working languages of the Court. 4. (a) Nominations of candidates for election to the Court may be made by any State Party to this Statute, and shall be made either: (i) By the procedure for the nomination of candidates for appointment to the highest judicial offices in the State in question; or (ii) By the procedure provided for the nomination of candidates for the International Court of Justice in the Statute of that Court. Nominations shall be accompanied by a statement in the necessary detail specifying how the candidate fulfils the requirements of paragraph 3. (b) Each State Party may put forward one candidate for any given election who need not necessarily be a national of that State Party but shall in any case be a national of a State Party. (c) The Assembly of States Parties may decide to establish, if appropriate, an Advisory Committee on nominations. In that event, the Committee's composition and mandate shall be established by the Assembly of States Parties. 5. For the purposes of the election, there shall be two lists of candidates: List A containing the names of candidates with the qualifications specified in paragraph 3 (b) (i); and List B containing the names of candidates with the qualifications specified in paragraph 3 (b) (ii). A candidate with sufficient qualifications for both lists may choose on which list to appear. At the first election to the Court, at least nine judges shall be elected from list A and at least five judges from list B. Subsequent elections shall be so organized as to maintain the equivalent proportion on the Court of judges qualified on the two lists. 6. (a) The judges shall be elected by secret ballot at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties convened for that purpose under article 112. Subject to paragraph 7, the persons elected to the Court shall be the 18 candidates who obtain the highest number of votes and a two-thirds majority of the States Parties present and voting. (b) In the event that a sufficient number of judges is not elected on the first ballot, successive ballots shall be held in accordance with the procedures laid down in subparagraph (a) until the remaining places have been filled. 7. No two judges may be nationals of the same State. A person who, for the purposes of membership of the Court, could be regarded as a national of more than one State shall be deemed to be a national of the State in which that person ordinarily exercises civil and political rights. 8. (a) The States Parties shall, in the selection of judges, take into account the need, within the membership of the Court, for: (i) The representation of the principal legal systems of the world; (ii) Equitable geographical representation; and (iii) A fair representation of female and male judges. (b) States Parties shall also take into account the need to include judges with legal expertise on specific issues, including, but not limited to, violence against women or children. 9. (a) Subject to subparagraph (b), judges shall hold office for a term of nine years and, subject to subparagraph (c) and to article 37, paragraph 2, shall not be eligible for re-election. (b) At the first election, one third of the judges elected shall be selected by lot to serve for a term of three years; one third of the judges elected shall be selected by lot to serve for a term of six years; and the remainder shall serve for a term of nine years. (c) A judge who is selected to serve for a term of three years under subparagraph (b) shall be eligible for re-election for a full term. 10. Notwithstanding paragraph 9, a judge assigned to a Trial or Appeals Chamber in accordance with article 39 shall continue in office to complete any trial or appeal the hearing of which has already commenced before that Chamber.
19 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 37 Judicial vacancies 1. In the event of a vacancy, an election shall be held in accordance with article 36 to fill the vacancy. 2. A judge elected to fill a vacancy shall serve for the remainder of the predecessor's term and, if that period is three years or less, shall be eligible for re-election for a full term under article 36. Article 38 The Presidency 1. The President and the First and Second Vice-Presidents shall be elected by an absolute majority of the judges. They shall each serve for a term of three years or until the end of their respective terms of office as judges, whichever expires earlier. They shall be eligible for re-election once. 2. The First Vice-President shall act in place of the President in the event that the President is unavailable or disqualified. The Second Vice-President shall act in place of the President in the event that both the President and the First Vice-President are unavailable or disqualified. 3. The President, together with the First and Second Vice-Presidents, shall constitute the Presidency, which shall be responsible for: (a) The proper administration of the Court, with the exception of the Office of the Prosecutor; and (b) The other functions conferred upon it in accordance with this Statute. 4. In discharging its responsibility under paragraph 3 (a), the Presidency shall coordinate with and seek the concurrence of the Prosecutor on all matters of mutual concern. Article 39 Chambers 1. As soon as possible after the election of the judges, the Court shall organize itself into the divisions specified in article 34, paragraph (b). The Appeals Division shall be composed of the President and four other judges, the Trial Division of not less than six judges and the Pre-Trial Division of not less than six judges. The assignment of judges to divisions shall be based on the nature of the functions to be performed by each division and the qualifications and experience of the judges elected to the Court, in such a way that each division shall contain an appropriate combination of expertise in criminal law and procedure and in international law. The Trial and Pre-Trial Divisions shall be composed predominantly of judges with criminal trial experience. 2. (a) The judicial functions of the Court shall be carried out in each division by Chambers. (b) (i) The Appeals Chamber shall be composed of all the judges of the Appeals Division; (ii) The functions of the Trial Chamber shall be carried out by three judges of the Trial Division; (iii) The functions of the Pre-Trial Chamber shall be carried out either by three judges of the Pre- Trial Division or by a single judge of that division in accordance with this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (c) Nothing in this paragraph shall preclude the simultaneous constitution of more than one Trial Chamber or Pre-Trial Chamber when the efficient management of the Court's workload so requires. 3. (a) Judges assigned to the Trial and Pre-Trial Divisions shall serve in those divisions for a period of three years, and thereafter until the completion of any case the hearing of which has already commenced in the division concerned. (b) Judges assigned to the Appeals Division shall serve in that division for their entire term of office. 4. Judges assigned to the Appeals Division shall serve only in that division. Nothing in this article shall, however, preclude the temporary attachment of judges from the Trial Division to the Pre-Trial Division or vice versa, if the Presidency considers that the efficient management of the Court's workload so requires, provided that under no circumstances shall a judge who has participated in the pre-trial phase of a case be eligible to sit on the Trial Chamber hearing that case.
20 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 40 Independence of the judges 1. The judges shall be independent in the performance of their functions. 2. Judges shall not engage in any activity which is likely to interfere with their judicial functions or to affect confidence in their independence. 3. Judges required to serve on a full-time basis at the seat of the Court shall not engage in any other occupation of a professional nature. 4. Any question regarding the application of paragraphs 2 and 3 shall be decided by an absolute majority of the judges. Where any such question concerns an individual judge, that judge shall not take part in the decision. Article 41 Excusing and disqualification of judges 1. The Presidency may, at the request of a judge, excuse that judge from the exercise of a function under this Statute, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 2. (a) A judge shall not participate in any case in which his or her impartiality might reasonably be doubted onany ground. A judge shall be disqualified from a case in accordance with this paragraph if, inter alia, that judge has previously been involved in any capacity in that case beforethe Court or in a related criminal case at the national level involving the person being investigated or prosecuted. A judge shall also be disqualified on such other grounds as may be provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. (b) The Prosecutor or the person being investigated or prosecuted may request the disqualification of a judge under this paragraph. (c) Any question as to the disqualification of a judge shall be decided by an absolute majority of the judges. The challenged judge shall be entitled to present his or her comments on the matter, but shall not take part in the decision. Article 42 The Office of the Prosecutor 1. The Office of the Prosecutor shall act independently as a separate organ of the Court. It shall be responsible for receiving referrals and any substantiated information on crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court, for examining them and for conducting investigations and prosecutions before the Court. A member of the Office shall not seek or act on instructions from any external source. 2. The Office shall be headed by the Prosecutor. The Prosecutor shall have full authority over the management and administration of the Office, including the staff, facilities and other resources thereof. The Prosecutor shall be assisted by one or more Deputy Prosecutors, who shall be entitled to carry out any of the acts required of the Prosecutor under this Statute. The Prosecutor and the Deputy Prosecutors shall be of different nationalities. They shall serve on a full-time basis. 3. The Prosecutor and the Deputy Prosecutors shall be persons of high moral character, be highly competent in and have extensive practical experience in the prosecution or trial of criminal cases. They shall have an excellent knowledge of and be fluent in at least one of the working languages of the Court. 4. The Prosecutor shall be elected by secret ballot by an absolute majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. The Deputy Prosecutors shall be elected in the same way from a list of candidates provided by the Prosecutor. The Prosecutor shall nominate three candidates for each position of Deputy Prosecutor to be filled. Unless a shorter term is decided upon at the time of their election, the Prosecutor and the Deputy Prosecutors shall hold office for a term of nine years and shall not be eligible for re-election. 5. Neither the Prosecutor nor a Deputy Prosecutor shall engage in any activity which is likely to interfere with his or her prosecutorial functions or to affect confidence in his or her independence. They shall not engage in any other occupation of a professional nature. 6. The Presidency may excuse the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor, at his or her request, from acting in a particular case.
21 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court7. Neither the Prosecutor nor a Deputy Prosecutor shall participate in any matter in which their impartiality might reasonably be doubted on any ground. They shall be disqualified from a case in accordance with this paragraph if, inter alia , they have previously been involved in any capacity in that case before the Court or in a related criminal case at the national level involving the person being investigated or prosecuted. 8. Any question as to the disqualification of the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor shall be decided by the Appeals Chamber. (a) The person being investigated or prosecuted may at any time request the disqualification of the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor on the grounds set out in this article; (b) The Prosecutor or the Deputy Prosecutor, as appropriate, shall be entitled to present his or her comments on the matter; 9. The Prosecutor shall appoint advisers with legal expertise on specific issues, including, but not limited to, sexual and gender violence and violence against children. Article 43 The Registry 1. The Registry shall be responsible for the non-judicial aspects of the administration and servicing of the Court, without prejudice to the functions and powers of the Prosecutor in accordance with article 42. 2. The Registry shall be headed by the Registrar, who shall be the principal administrative officer of the Court. The Registrar shall exercise his or her functions under the authority of the President of the Court. 3. The Registrar and the Deputy Registrar shall be persons of high moral character, be highly competent and have an excellent knowledge of and be fluent in at least one of the working languages of the Court. 4. The judges shall elect the Registrar by an absolute majority by secret ballot, taking into account any recommendation by the Assembly of States Parties. If the need arises and upon the recommendation of the Registrar, the judges shall elect, in the same manner, a Deputy Registrar. 5. The Registrar shall hold office for a term of five years, shall be eligible for re-election once and shall serve on a full-time basis. The Deputy Registrar shall hold office for a term of five years or such shorter term as may be decided upon by an absolute majority of the judges, and may be elected on the basis that the Deputy Registrar shall be called upon to serve as required. 6. The Registrar shall set up a Victims and Witnesses Unit within the Registry. This Unit shall provide, in consultation with the Office of the Prosecutor, protective measures and security arrangements, counseling and other appropriate assistance for witnesses, victims who appear before the Court, and others who are at risk on account of testimony given by such witnesses. The Unit shall include staff with expertise in trauma, including trauma related to crimes of sexual violence. Article 44 Staff 1. The Prosecutor and the Registrar shall appoint such qualified staff as may be required to their respective offices. In the case of the Prosecutor, this shall include the appointment of investigators. 2. In the employment of staff, the Prosecutor and the Registrar shall ensure the highest standards of efficiency, competency and integrity, and shall have regard, mutatis mutandis , to the criteria set forth in article 36, paragraph 8. 3. The Registrar, with the agreement of the Presidency and the Prosecutor, shall propose Staff Regulations which include the terms and conditions upon which the staff of the Court shall be appointed, remunerated and dismissed. The Staff Regulations shall be approved by the Assembly of States Parties. 4. The Court may, in exceptional circumstances, employ the expertise of gratis personnel offered by States Parties, intergovernmental organizations or non-governmental organizations to assist with the work of any of the organs of the Court. The Prosecutor may accept any such offer on behalf of the Office of the Prosecutor. Such gratis personnel shall be employed in accordance with guidelines to be established by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 45 Solemn undertaking Before taking up their respective duties under this Statute, the judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors, the Registrar and the Deputy Registrar shall each make a solemn undertaking in open court to exercise his or her respective functions impartially and conscientiously.
22 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 46 Removal from office 1. A judge, the Prosecutor, a Deputy Prosecutor, the Registrar or the Deputy Registrar shall be removed from office if a decision to this effect is made in accordance with paragraph 2, in cases where that person: (a) Is found to have committed serious misconduct or a serious breach of his or her duties under this Statute, as provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; or (b) Is unable to exercise the functions required by this Statute. 2. A decision as to the removal from office of a judge, the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor under paragraph 1 shall be made by the Assembly of States Parties, by secret ballot: (a) In the case of a judge, by a two-thirds majority of the States Parties upon a recommendation adopted by a two-thirds majority of the other judges; (b) In the case of the Prosecutor, by an absolute majority of the States Parties; (c) In the case of a Deputy Prosecutor, by an absolute majority of the States Parties upon the recommendation of the Prosecutor. 3. A decision as to the removal from office of the Registrar or Deputy Registrar shall be made by an absolute majority of the judges. 4. A judge, Prosecutor, Deputy Prosecutor, Registrar or Deputy Registrar whose conduct or ability to exercise the functions of the office as required by this Statute is challenged under this article shall have full opportunity to present and receive evidence and to make submissions in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The person in question shall not otherwise participate in the consideration of the matter. Article 47 Disciplinary measures A judge, Prosecutor, Deputy Prosecutor, Registrar or Deputy Registrar who has committed misconduct of a less serious nature than that set out in article 46, paragraph 1, shall be subject to disciplinary measures, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 48 Privileges and immunities 1. The Court shall enjoy in the territory of each State Party such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the fulfilment of its purposes. 2. The judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors and the Registrar shall, when engaged on or with respect to the business of the Court, enjoy the same privileges and immunities as are accorded to heads of diplomatic missions and shall, after the expiry of their terms of office, continue to be accorded immunity from legal process of every kind in respect of words spoken or written and acts performed by them in their official capacity. 3. The Deputy Registrar, the staff of the Office of the Prosecutor and the staff of the Registry shall enjoy the privileges and immunities and facilities necessary for the performance of their functions, in accordance with the agreement on the privileges and immunities of the Court. 4. Counsel, experts, witnesses or any other person required to be present at the seat of the Court shall be accorded such treatment as is necessary for the proper functioning of the Court, in accordance with the agreement on the privileges and immunities of the Court. 5. The privileges and immunities of: (a) A judge or the Prosecutor may be waived by an absolute majority of the judges; (b) The Registrar may be waived by the Presidency; (c) The Deputy Prosecutors and staff of the Office of the Prosecutor may be waived by the Prosecutor; (d) The Deputy Registrar and staff of the Registry may be waived by the Registrar.
23 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 49 Salaries, allowances and expenses The judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors, the Registrar and the Deputy Registrar shall receive such salaries, allowances and expenses as may be decided upon by the Assembly of States Parties. These salaries and allowances shall not be reduced during their terms of office. Article 50 Official and working languages 1. The official languages of the Court shall be Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish. The judgements of the Court, as well as other decisions resolving fundamental issues before the Court, shall be published in the official languages. The Presidency shall, in accordance with the criteria established by the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, determine which decisions may be considered as resolving fundamental issues for the purposes of this paragraph. 2. The working languages of the Court shall be English and French. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence shall determine the cases in which other official languages may be used as working languages. 3. At the request of any party to a proceeding or a State allowed to intervene in a proceeding, the Court shall authorize a language other than English or French to be used by such a party or State, provided that the Court considers such authorization to be adequately justified. Article 51 Rules of Procedure and Evidence 1. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence shall enter into force upon adoption by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 2. Amendments to the Rules of Procedure and Evidence may be proposed by: (a) Any State Party; (b) The judges acting by an absolute majority; or (c) The Prosecutor. Such amendments shall enter into force upon adoption by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 3. After the adoption of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, in urgent cases where the Rules do not provide for a specific situation before the Court, the judges may, by a two-thirds majority, draw up provisional Rules to be applied until adopted, amended or rejected at the next ordinary or special session of the Assembly of States Parties. 4. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence, amendments thereto and any provisional Rule shall be consistent with this Statute. Amendments to the Rules of Procedure and Evidence as well as provisional Rules shall not be applied retroactively to the detriment of the person who is being investigated or prosecuted or who has been convicted. 5. In the event of conflict between the Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, the Statute shall prevail. Article 52 Regulations of the Court 1. The judges shall, in accordance with this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, adopt, by an absolute majority, the Regulations of the Court necessary for its routine functioning. 2. The Prosecutor and the Registrar shall be consulted in the elaboration of the Regulations and any amendments thereto. 3. The Regulations and any amendments thereto shall take effect upon adoption unless otherwise decided by the judges. Immediately upon adoption, they shall be circulated to States Parties for comments. If within six months there are no objections from a majority of States Parties, they shall remain in force.
24 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 5. INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION Article 53 Initiation of an investigation 1. The Prosecutor shall, having evaluated the information made available to him or her, initiate an investigation unless he or she determines that there is no reasonable basis to proceed under this Statute. In deciding whether to initiate an investigation, the Prosecutor shall consider whether: (a) The information available to the Prosecutor provides a reasonable basis to believe that a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been or is being committed; (b) The case is or would be admissible under article 17; and (c) Taking into account the gravity of the crime and the interests of victims, there are nonetheless substantial reasons to believe that an investigation would not serve the interests of justice. If the Prosecutor determines that there is no reasonable basis to proceed and his or her determination is based solely on subparagraph (c) above, he or she shall inform the Pre-Trial Chamber. 2. If, upon investigation, the Prosecutor concludes that there is not a sufficient basis for a prosecution because: (a) There is not a sufficient legal or factual basis to seek a warrant or summons under article 58; (b) The case is inadmissible under article 17; or (c) A prosecution is not in the interests of justice, taking into account all the circumstances, including the gravity of the crime, the interests of victims and the age or infirmity of the alleged perpetrator, and his or her role in the alleged crime; the Prosecutor shall inform the Pre-Trial Chamber and the State making a referral under article 14 or the Security Council in a case under article 13, paragraph (b), of his or her conclusion and the reasons for the conclusion. 3. (a) At the request of the State making a referral under article 14 or the Security Council under article 13, paragraph (b), the Pre-Trial Chamber may review a decision of the Prosecutor under paragraph 1 or 2 not to proceed and mayrequest the Prosecutor to reconsider that decision. (b) In addition, the Pre-Trial Chamber may, on its own initiative, review a decision of the Prosecutor not to proceed if it is based solely on paragraph 1 (c) or 2 (c). In such a case, the decision of the Prosecutor shall be effective only if confirmed by the Pre-Trial Chamber. 4. The Prosecutor may, at any time, reconsider a decision whether to initiate an investigation or prosecution based on new facts or information. Article 54 Duties and powers of the Prosecutor with respect to investigations 1. The Prosecutor shall: (a) In order to establish the truth, extend the investigation to cover all facts and evidence relevant to an assessment of whether there is criminal responsibility under this Statute, and, in doing so, investigate incriminating and exonerating circumstances equally; (b) Take appropriate measures to ensure the effective investigation and prosecution of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court, and in doing so, respect the interests and personal circumstances of victims and witnesses, including age, gender as defined in article 7, paragraph 3, and health, and take into account the nature of the crime, in particular where it involves sexual violence, gender violence or violence against children; and (c) Fully respect the rights of persons arising under this Statute. 2. The Prosecutor may conduct investigations on the territory of a State: (a) In accordance with the provisions of Part 9; or (b) As authorized by the Pre-Trial Chamber under article 57, paragraph 3 (d).
25 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3. The Prosecutor may: (a) Collect and examine evidence; (b) Request the presence of and question persons being investigated, victims and witnesses; (c) Seek the cooperation of any State or intergovernmental organization or arrangement in accordance with its respective competence and/or mandate; (d) Enter into such arrangements or agreements, not inconsistent with this Statute, as may be necessary to facilitate the cooperation of a State, intergovernmental organization or person; (e) Agree not to disclose, at any stage of the proceedings, documents or information that the Prosecutor obtains on the condition of confidentiality and solely for the purpose of generating new evidence, unless the provider of the information consents; and (f) Take necessary measures, or request that necessary measures be taken, to ensure the confidentiality of information, the protection of any person or the preservation of evidence. Article 55 Rights of persons during an investigation 1. In respect of an investigation under this Statute, a person: (a) Shall not be compelled to incriminate himself or herself or to confess guilt; (b) Shall not be subjected to any form of coercion, duress or threat, to torture or to any other form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; (c) Shall, if questioned in a language other than a language the person fully understands and speaks, have, free of any cost, the assistance of a competent interpreter and such translations as are necessary to meet the requirements of fairness; and (d) Shall not be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention, and shall not be deprived of his or her liberty except on such grounds and in accordance with such procedures as are established in this Statute. 2. Where there are grounds to believe that a person has committed a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court and that person is about to be questioned either by the Prosecutor, or by national authorities pursuant to a request made under Part 9, that person shall also have the following rights of which he or she shall be informed prior to being questioned: (a) To be informed, prior to being questioned, that there are grounds to believe that he or she has committed a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; (b) To remain silent, without such silence being a consideration in the determination of guilt or innocence; (c) To have legal assistance of the person's choosing, or, if the person does not have legal assistance, to have legal assistance assigned to him or her, in any case where the interests of justice so require, and without payment by the person in any such case if the person does not have sufficient means to pay for it; and (d) To be questioned in the presence of counsel unless the person has voluntarily waived his or her right to counsel. Article 56 Role of the Pre-Trial Chamber in relation to a unique investigative opportunity 1. (a) Where the Prosecutor considers an investigation to present a unique opportunity to take testimony or a statement from a witness or to examine, collect or test evidence, which may not be available subsequently for the purposes of a trial, the Prosecutor shall so inform the Pre-Trial Chamber. (b) In that case, the Pre-Trial Chamber may, upon request of the Prosecutor, take such measures as may be necessary to ensure the efficiency and integrity of the proceedings and, in particular, to protect the rights of the defence. (c) Unless the Pre-Trial Chamber orders otherwise, the Prosecutor shall provide the relevant information to the person who has been arrested or appeared in response to a summons in connection with the investigation referred to in subparagraph (a), in order that he or she may be heard on the matter.
26 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The measures referred to in paragraph 1 (b) may include: (a) Making recommendations or orders regarding procedures to be followed; (b) Directing that a record be made of the proceedings; (c) Appointing an expert to assist; (d) Authorizing counsel for a person who has been arrested, or appeared before the Court in response to a summons, to participate, or where there has not yet been such an arrest or appearance or counsel has not been designated, appointing another counsel to attend and represent the interests of the defence; (e) Naming one of its members or, if necessary, another available judge of the Pre-Trial or Trial Division to observe and make recommendations or orders regarding the collection and preservation of evidence and the questioning of persons; (f) Taking such other action as may be necessary to collect or preserve evidence. 3. (a) Where the Prosecutor has not sought measures pursuant to this article but the Pre-Trial Chamberconsiders that such measures are required to preserve evidence that it deems would be essential for the defence at trial, it shall consult with the Prosecutor as to whether there is good reason for the Prosecutor's failure to request the measures. If upon consultation, the Pre-Trial Chamber concludes that the Prosecutor's failure to request such measures is unjustified, the Pre-Trial Chamber may take such measures on its own initiative. (b) A decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber to act on its own initiative under this paragraph may be appealedby the Prosecutor. The appeal shall be heard on an expedited basis. 4. The admissibility of evidence preserved or collected for trial pursuant to this article, or the record thereof, shall be governed at trial by article 69, and given such weight as determined by the Trial Chamber. Article 57 Functions and powers of the Pre-Trial Chamber 1. Unless otherwise provided in this Statute, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall exercise its functions in accordance with the provisions of this article. 2. (a) Orders or rulings of the Pre-Trial Chamber issued under articles 15, 18, 19, 54, paragraph 2, 61, paragraph 7, and 72 must be concurred in by a majority of its judges. (b) In all other cases, a single judge of the Pre-Trial Chamber may exercise the functions provided for in this Statute, unless otherwise provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence or by a majority of the Pre-Trial Chamber. 3. In addition to its other functions under this Statute, the Pre-Trial Chamber may: (a) At the request of the Prosecutor, issue such orders and warrants as may be required for the purposes of an investigation; (b) Upon the request of a person who has been arrested or has appeared pursuant to a summons under article 58, issue such orders, including measures such as those described in article 56, or seek such cooperation pursuant to Part 9 as may be necessary to assist the person in the preparation of his or her defence; (c) Where necessary, provide for the protection and privacy of victims and witnesses, the preservation of evidence, the protection of persons who have been arrested or appeared in response to a summons, and the protection of national security information; (d) Authorize the Prosecutor to take specific investigative steps within the territory of a State Party without having secured the cooperation of that State under Part 9 if, whenever possible having regard to the views of the State concerned, the Pre-Trial Chamber has determined in that case that the State is clearly unable to execute a request for cooperation due to the unavailability of any authority or any component of its judicial system competent to execute the request for cooperation under Part 9; (e) Where a warrant of arrest or a summons has been issued under article 58, and having due regard to the strength of the evidence and the rights of the parties concerned, as provided for in this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, seek the cooperation of States pursuant to article 93, paragraph 1 (k), to take protective measures for the purpose of forfeiture, in particular for the ultimate benefit of victims.
27 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 58 Issuance by the Pre-Trial Chamber of a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear 1. At any time after the initiation of an investigation, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall, on the application of the Prosecutor, issue a warrant of arrest of a person if, having examined the application and the evidence or other information submitted by the Prosecutor, it is satisfied that: (a) There are reasonable grounds to believe that the person has committed a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; and (b) The arrest of the person appears necessary: (i) To ensure the person's appearance at trial; (ii) To ensure that the person does not obstruct or endanger the investigation or the court proceedings; or (iii) Where applicable, to prevent the person from continuing with the commission of that crime or a related crime which is within the jurisdiction of the Court and which arises out of the same circumstances. 2. The application of the Prosecutor shall contain: (a) The name of the person and any other relevant identifying information; (b) A specific reference to the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court which the person is alleged to have committed; (c) A concise statement of the facts which are alleged to constitute those crimes; (d) A summary of the evidence and any other information which establish reasonable grounds to believe that the person committed those crimes; and (e) The reason why the Prosecutor believes that the arrest of the person is necessary. 3. The warrant of arrest shall contain: (a) The name of the person and any other relevant identifying information; (b) A specific reference to the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court for which the person's arrest is sought; and (c) A concise statement of the facts which are alleged to constitute those crimes. 4. The warrant of arrest shall remain in effect until otherwise ordered by the Court. 5. On the basis of the warrant of arrest, the Court may request the provisional arrest or the arrest and surrender of the person under Part 9. 6. The Prosecutor may request the Pre-Trial Chamber to amend the warrant of arrest by modifying or adding to the crimes specified therein. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall so amend the warrant if it is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the person committed the modified or additional crimes. 7. As an alternative to seeking a warrant of arrest, the Prosecutor may submit an application requesting that the Pre-Trial Chamber issue a summons for the person to appear. If the Pre-Trial Chamber is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the person committed the crime alleged and that a summons is sufficient to ensure the person's appearance, it shall issue the summons, with or without conditions restricting liberty (other than detention) if provided for by national law, for the person to appear. The summons shall contain: (a) The name of the person and any other relevant identifying information; (b) The specified date on which the person is to appear; (c) A specific reference to the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court which the person is alleged to have committed; and (d) A concise statement of the facts which are alleged to constitute the crime. The summons shall be served on the person.
28 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 59 Arrest proceedings in the custodial State 1. A State Party which has received a request for provisional arrest or for arrest and surrender shall immediately take steps to arrest the person in question in accordance with its laws and the provisions of Part 9. 2. A person arrested shall be brought promptly before the competent judicial authority in the custodial State which shall determine, in accordance with the law of that State, that: (a) The warrant applies to that person; (b) The person has been arrested in accordance with the proper process; and (c) The person's rights have been respected. 3. The person arrested shall have the right to apply to the competent authority in the custodial State for interim release pending surrender. 4. In reaching a decision on any such application, the competent authority in the custodial State shall consider whether, given the gravity of the alleged crimes, there are urgent and exceptional circumstances to justify interim release and whether necessary safeguards exist to ensure that the custodial State can fulfil its duty to surrender the person to the Court. It shall not be open to the competent authority of the custodial State to consider whether the warrant of arrest was properly issued in accordance with article 58, paragraph 1 (a) and (b). 5. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall be notified of any request for interim release and shall make recommendations to the competent authority in the custodial State. The competent authority in the custodial State shall give full consideration to such recommendations, including any recommendations on measures to prevent the escape of the person, before rendering its decision. 6. If the person is granted interim release, the Pre-Trial Chamber may request periodic reports on the status of the interim release. 7. Once ordered to be surrendered by the custodial State, the person shall be delivered to the Court as soon as possible. Article 60 Initial proceedings before the Court 1. Upon the surrender of the person to the Court, or the person's appearance before the Court voluntarily or pursuant to a summons, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall satisfy itself that the person has been informed of the crimes which he or she is alleged to have committed, and of his or her rights under this Statute, including the right to apply for interim release pending trial. 2. A person subject to a warrant of arrest may apply for interim release pending trial. If the Pre-Trial Chamber is satisfied that the conditions set forth in article 58, paragraph 1, are met, the person shall continue to be detained. If it is not so satisfied, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall release the person, with or without conditions. 3. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall periodically review its ruling on the release or detention of the person, and may do so at any time on the request of the Prosecutor or the person. Upon such review, it may modify its ruling as to detention, release or conditions of release, if it is satisfied that changed circumstances so require. 4. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall ensure that a person is not detained for an unreasonable period prior to trial due to inexcusable delay by the Prosecutor. If such delay occurs, the Court shall consider releasing the person, with or without conditions. 5. If necessary, the Pre-Trial Chamber may issue a warrant of arrest to secure the presence of a person who has been released. Article 61 Confirmation of the charges before trial 1. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2, within a reasonable time after the person's surrender or voluntary appearance before the Court, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall hold a hearing to confirm the charges on which the Prosecutor intends to seek trial. The hearing shall be held in the presence of the Prosecutor and the person charged, as well as his or her counsel.
29 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The Pre-Trial Chamber may, upon request of the Prosecutor or on its own motion, hold a hearing in the absence of the person charged to confirm the charges on which the Prosecutor intends to seek trial when the person has: (a) Waived his or her right to be present; or (b) Fled or cannot be found and all reasonable steps have been taken to secure his or her appearance before the Court and to inform the person of the charges and that a hearing to confirm those charges will be held. In that case, the person shall be represented by counsel where the Pre-Trial Chamber determines that it is in the interests of justice. 3. Within a reasonable time before the hearing, the person shall: (a) Be provided with a copy of the document containing the charges on which the Prosecutor intends to bring the person to trial; and (b) Be informed of the evidence on which the Prosecutor intends to rely at the hearing. The Pre-Trial Chamber may issue orders regarding the disclosure of information for the purposes of the hearing. 4. Before the hearing, the Prosecutor may continue the investigation and may amend or withdraw any charges. The person shall be given reasonable notice before the hearing of any amendment to or withdrawal of charges. In case of a withdrawal of charges, the Prosecutor shall notify the Pre-Trial Chamber of the reasons for the withdrawal. 5. At the hearing, the Prosecutor shall support each charge with sufficient evidence to establish substantial grounds to believe that the person committed the crime charged. The Prosecutor may rely on documentary or summary evidence and need not call the witnesses expected to testify at the trial. 6. At the hearing, the person may: (a) Object to the charges; (b) Challenge the evidence presented by the Prosecutor; and (c) Present evidence. 7. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall, on the basis of the hearing, determine whether there is sufficient evidence to establish substantial grounds to believe that the person committed each of the crimes charged. Based on its determination, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall: (a) Confirm those charges in relation to which it has determined that there is sufficient evidence, and commit the person to a Trial Chamber for trial on the charges as confirmed; (b) Decline to confirm those charges in relation to which it has determined that there is insufficient evidence; (c) Adjourn the hearing and request the Prosecutor to consider: (i) Providing further evidence or conducting further investigation with respect to a particular charge; or (ii) Amending a charge because the evidence submitted appears to establish a different crime within the jurisdiction of the Court. 8. Where the Pre-Trial Chamber declines to confirm a charge, the Prosecutor shall not be precluded from subsequently requesting its confirmation if the request is supported by additional evidence. 9. After the charges are confirmed and before the trial has begun, the Prosecutor may, with the permission of the Pre-Trial Chamber and after notice to the accused, amend the charges. If the Prosecutor seeks to add additional charges or to substitute more serious charges, a hearing under this article to confirm those charges must be held. After commencement of the trial, the Prosecutor may, with the permission of the Trial Chamber, withdraw the charges. 10. Any warrant previously issued shall cease to have effect with respect to any charges which have not been confirmed by the Pre-Trial Chamber or which have been withdrawn by the Prosecutor.
30 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court11. Once the charges have been confirmed in accordance with this article, the Presidency shall constitute a Trial Chamber which, subject to paragraph 9 and to article 64, paragraph 4, shall be responsible for the conduct of subsequent proceedings and may exercise any function of the Pre-Trial Chamber that is relevant and capable of application in those proceedings.
31 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 6. THE TRIAL Article 62 Place of trial Unless otherwise decided, the place of the trial shall be the seat of the Court. Article 63 Trial in the presence of the accused 1. The accused shall be present during the trial. 2. If the accused, being present before the Court, continues to disrupt the trial, the Trial Chamber may remove the accused and shall make provision for him or her to observe the trial and instruct counsel from outside the courtroom, through the use of communications technology, if required. Such measures shall be taken only in exceptional circumstances after other reasonable alternatives have proved inadequate, and only for such duration as is strictly required. Article 64 Functions and powers of the Trial Chamber 1. The functions and powers of the Trial Chamber set out in this article shall be exercised in accordance with this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 2. The Trial Chamber shall ensure that a trial is fair and expeditious and is conducted with full respect for the rights of the accused and due regard for the protection of victims and witnesses. 3. Upon assignment of a case for trial in accordance with this Statute, the Trial Chamber assigned to deal with the case shall: (a) Confer with the parties and adopt such procedures as are necessary to facilitate the fair and expeditious conduct of the proceedings; (b) Determine the language or languages to be used at trial; and (c) Subject to any other relevant provisions of this Statute, provide for disclosure of documents or information not previously disclosed, sufficiently in advance of the commencement of the trial to enable adequate preparation for trial. 4. The Trial Chamber may, if necessary for its effective and fair functioning, refer preliminary issues to the Pre- Trial Chamber or, if necessary, to another available judge of the Pre-Trial Division. 5. Upon notice to the parties, the Trial Chamber may, as appropriate, direct that there be joinder or severance in respect of charges against more than one accused. 6. In performing its functions prior to trial or during the course of a trial, the Trial Chamber may, as necessary: (a) Exercise any functions of the Pre-Trial Chamber referred to in article 61, paragraph 11; (b) Require the attendance and testimony of witnesses and production of documents and other evidence by obtaining, if necessary, the assistance of States as provided in this Statute; (c) Provide for the protection of confidential information; (d) Order the production of evidence in addition to that already collected prior to the trial or presented during the trial by the parties; (e) Provide for the protection of the accused, witnesses and victims; and (f) Rule on any other relevant matters. 7. The trial shall be held in public. The Trial Chamber may, however, determine that special circumstances require that certain proceedings be in closed session for the purposes set forth in article 68, or to protect confidential or sensitive information to be given in evidence. 8. (a) At the commencement of the trial, the Trial Chamber shall have read to the accused the charges previously confirmed by the Pre-Trial Chamber. The Trial Chamber shall satisfy itself that the accused understands the nature of the charges. It shall afford him or her the opportunity to make an admission of guilt in accordance with article 65 or to plead not guilty.
32 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) At the trial, the presiding judge may give directions for the conduct of proceedings, including to ensure that they are conducted in a fair and impartial manner. Subject to any directions of the presiding judge, the parties may submit evidence in accordance with the provisions of this Statute. 9. The Trial Chamber shall have, inter alia , the power on application of a party or on its own motion to: (a) Rule on the admissibility or relevance of evidence; and (b) Take all necessary steps to maintain order in the course of a hearing. 10. The Trial Chamber shall ensure that a complete record of the trial, which accurately reflects the proceedings, is made and that it is maintained and preserved by the Registrar. Article 65 Proceedings on an admission of guilt 1. Where the accused makes an admission of guilt pursuant to article 64, paragraph 8 (a), the Trial Chamber shall determine whether: (a) The accused understands the nature and consequences of the admission of guilt; (b) The admission is voluntarily made by the accused after sufficient consultation with defence counsel; and (c) The admission of guilt is supported by the facts of the case that are contained in: (i) The charges brought by the Prosecutor and admitted by the accused; (ii) Any materials presented by the Prosecutor which supplement the charges and which the accused accepts; and (iii) Any other evidence, such as the testimony of witnesses, presented by the Prosecutor or the accused. 2. Where the Trial Chamber is satisfied that the matters referred to in paragraph 1 are established, it shall consider the admission of guilt, together with any additional evidence presented, as establishing all the essential facts that are required to prove the crime to which the admission of guilt relates, and may convict the accused of that crime. 3. Where the Trial Chamber is not satisfied that the matters referred to in paragraph 1 are established, it shall consider the admission of guilt as not having been made, in which case it shall order that the trial be continued under the ordinary trial procedures provided by this Statute and may remit the case to another Trial Chamber. 4. Where the Trial Chamber is of the opinion that a more complete presentation of the facts of the case is required in the interests of justice, in particular the interests of the victims, the Trial Chamber may: (a) Request the Prosecutor to present additional evidence, including the testimony of witnesses; or (b) Order that the trial be continued under the ordinary trial procedures provided by this Statute, in which case it shall consider the admission of guilt as not having been made and may remit the case to another Trial Chamber. 5. Any discussions between the Prosecutor and the defence regarding modification of the charges, the admission of guilt or the penalty to be imposed shall not be binding on the Court. Article 66 Presumption of innocence 1. Everyone shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty before the Court in accordance with the applicable law. 2. The onus is on the Prosecutor to prove the guilt of the accused. 3. In order to convict the accused, the Court must be convinced of the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
33 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 67 Rights of the accused 1. In the determination of any charge, the accused shall be entitled to a public hearing, having regard to the provisions of this Statute, to a fair hearing conducted impartially, and to the following minimum guarantees, in full equality: (a) To be informed promptly and in detail of the nature, cause and content of the charge, in a language which the accused fully understands and speaks; (b) To have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of the defence and to communicate freely with counsel of the accused's choosing in confidence; (c) To be tried without undue delay; (d) Subject to article 63, paragraph 2, to be present at the trial, to conduct the defence in person or through legal assistance of the accused's choosing, to be informed, if the accused does not have legal assistance, of this right and to have legal assistance assigned by the Court in any case where the interests of justice so require, and without payment if the accused lacks sufficient means to pay for it; (e) To examine, or have examined, the witnesses against him or her and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his or her behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him or her. The accused shall also be entitled to raise defences and to present other evidence admissible under this Statute; (f) To have, free of any cost, the assistance of a competent interpreter and such translations as are necessary to meet the requirements of fairness, if any of the proceedings of or documents presented to the Court are not in a language which the accused fully understands and speaks; (g) Not to be compelled to testify or to confess guilt and to remain silent, without such silence being a consideration in the determination of guilt or innocence; (h) To make an unsworn oral or written statement in his or her defence; and (i) Not to have imposed on him or her any reversal of the burden of proof or any onus of rebuttal. 2. In addition to any other disclosure provided for in this Statute, the Prosecutor shall, as soon as practicable, disclose to the defence evidence in the Prosecutor's possession or control which he or she believes shows or tends to show the innocence of the accused, or to mitigate the guilt of the accused, or which may affect the credibility of prosecution evidence. In case of doubt as to the application of this paragraph, the Court shall decide. Article 68 Protection of the victims and witnesses and their participation in the proceedings 1. The Court shall take appropriate measures to protect the safety, physical and psychological well-being, dignity and privacy of victims and witnesses. In so doing, the Court shall have regard to all relevant factors, including age, gender as defined in article 7, paragraph 3, and health, and the nature of the crime, in particular, but not limited to, where the crime involves sexual or gender violence or violence against children. The Prosecutor shall take such measures particularly during the investigation and prosecution of such crimes. These measures shall not be prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial. 2. As an exception to the principle of public hearings provided for in article 67, the Chambers of the Court may, to protect victims and witnesses or an accused, conduct any part of the proceedings in camera or allow the presentation of evidence by electronic or other special means. In particular, such measures shall be implemented in the case of a victim of sexual violence or a child who is a victim or a witness, unless otherwise ordered by the Court, having regard to all the circumstances, particularly the views of the victim or witness. 3. Where the personal interests of the victims are affected, the Court shall permit their views and concerns to be presented and considered at stages of the proceedings determined to be appropriate by the Court and in a manner which is not prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial. Such views and concerns may be presented by the legal representatives of the victims where the Court considers it appropriate, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. The Victims and Witnesses Unit may advise the Prosecutor and the Court on appropriate protective measures, security arrangements, counselling and assistance as referred to in article 43, paragraph 6.
34 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court5. Where the disclosure of evidence or information pursuant to this Statute may lead to the grave endangerment of the security of a witness or his or her family, the Prosecutor may, for the purposes of any proceedings conducted prior to the commencement of the trial, withhold such evidence or information and instead submit a summary thereof. Such measures shall be exercised in a manner which is not prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial. 6. A State may make an application for necessary measures to be taken in respect of the protection of its servants or agents and the protection of confidential or sensitive information. Article 69 Evidence 1. Before testifying, each witness shall, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, give an undertaking as to the truthfulness of the evidence to be given by that witness. 2. The testimony of a witness at trial shall be given in person, except to the extent provided by the measures set forth in article 68 or in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The Court may also permit the giving of viva voce (oral) or recorded testimony of a witness by means of video or audio technology, as well as the introduction of documents or written transcripts, subject to this Statute and in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. These measures shall not be prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused. 3. The parties may submit evidence relevant to the case, in accordance with article 64. The Court shall have the authority to request the submission of all evidence that it considers necessary for the determination of the truth. 4. The Court may rule on the relevance or admissibility of any evidence, taking into account, inter alia , the probative value of the evidence and any prejudice that such evidence may cause to a fair trial or to a fair evaluation of the testimony of a witness, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 5. The Court shall respect and observe privileges on confidentiality as provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 6. The Court shall not require proof of facts of common knowledge but may take judicial notice of them. 7. Evidence obtained by means of a violation of this Statute or internationally recognized human rights shall not be admissible if: (a) The violation casts substantial doubt on the reliability of the evidence; or (b) The admission of the evidence would be antithetical to and would seriously damage the integrity of the proceedings. 8. When deciding on the relevance or admissibility of evidence collected by a State, the Court shall not rule on the application of the State's national law. Article 70 Offences against the administration of justice 1. The Court shall have jurisdiction over the following offences against its administration of justice when committed intentionally: (a) Giving false testimony when under an obligation pursuant to article 69, paragraph 1, to tell the truth; (b) Presenting evidence that the party knows is false or forged; (c) Corruptly influencing a witness, obstructing or interfering with the attendance or testimony of a witness, retaliating against a witness for giving testimony or destroying, tampering with or interfering with the collection of evidence; (d) Impeding, intimidating or corruptly influencing an official of the Court for the purpose of forcing or persuading the official not to perform, or to perform improperly, his or her duties; (e) Retaliating against an official of the Court on account of duties performed by that or another official; (f) Soliciting or accepting a bribe as an official of the Court in connection with his or her official duties. 2. The principles and procedures governing the Court's exercise of jurisdiction over offences under this article shall be those provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The conditions for providing international cooperation to the Court with respect to its proceedings under this article shall be governed by the domestic laws of the requested State.
35 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3. In the event of conviction, the Court may impose a term of imprisonment not exceeding five years, or a fine in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, or both. 4. (a) Each State Party shall extend its criminal laws penalizing offences against the integrity of its own investigative or judicial process to offences against the administration of justice referred to in this article, committed on its territory, or by one of its nationals; (b) Upon request by the Court, whenever it deems it proper, the State Party shall submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution. Those authorities shall treat such cases with diligence and devote sufficient resources to enable them to be conducted effectively. Article 71 Sanctions for misconduct before the Court 1. The Court may sanction persons present before it who commit misconduct, including disruption of its proceedings or deliberate refusal to comply with its directions, by administrative measures other than imprisonment, such as temporary or permanent removal from the courtroom, a fine or other similar measures provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 2. The procedures governing the imposition of the measures set forth in paragraph 1 shall be those provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 72 Protection of national security information 1. This article applies in any case where the disclosure of the information or documents of a State would, in the opinion of that State, prejudice its national security interests. Such cases include those falling within the scope of article 56, paragraphs 2 and 3, article 61, paragraph 3, article 64, paragraph 3, article 67, paragraph 2, article 68, paragraph 6, article 87, paragraph 6 and article 93, as well as cases arising at any other stage of the proceedings where such disclosure may be at issue. 2. This article shall also apply when a person who has been requested to give information or evidence has refused to do so or has referred the matter to the State on the ground that disclosure would prejudice the national security interests of a State and the State concerned confirms that it is of the opinion that disclosure would prejudice its national security interests. 3. Nothing in this article shall prejudice the requirements of confidentiality applicable under article 54, paragraph 3 (e) and (f), or the application of article 73. 4. If a State learns that information or documents of the State are being, or are likely to be, disclosed at any stage of the proceedings, and it is of the opinion that disclosure would prejudice its national security interests, that State shall have the right to intervene in order to obtain resolution of the issue in accordance with this article. 5. If, in the opinion of a State, disclosure of information would prejudice its national security interests, all reasonable steps will be taken by the State, acting in conjunction with the Prosecutor, the defence or the Pre-Trial Chamber or Trial Chamber, as the case may be, to seek to resolve the matter by cooperative means. Such steps may include: (a) Modification or clarification of the request; (b) A determination by the Court regarding the relevance of the information or evidence sought, or a determination as to whether the evidence, though relevant, could be or has been obtained from a source other than the requested State; (c) Obtaining the information or evidence from a different source or in a different form; or (d) Agreement on conditions under which the assistance could be provided including, among other things, providing summaries or redactions, limitations on disclosure, use of in camera or ex parte proceedings, or other protective measures permissible under the Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 6. Once all reasonable steps have been taken to resolve the matter through cooperative means, and if the State considers that there are no means or conditions under which the information or documents could be provided or disclosed without prejudice to its national security interests, it shall so notify the Prosecutor or the Court of the specific reasons for its decision, unless a specific description of the reasons would itself necessarily result in such prejudice to the State's national security interests.
36 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court7. Thereafter, if the Court determines that the evidence is relevant and necessary for the establishment of the guilt or innocence of the accused, the Court may undertake the following actions: (a) Where disclosure of the information or document is sought pursuant to a request for cooperation under Part 9 or the circumstances described in paragraph 2, and the State has invoked the ground for refusal referred to in article 93, paragraph 4: (i) The Court may, before making any conclusion referred to in subparagraph 7 (a) (ii), request further consultations for the purpose of considering the State's representations, which may include, as appropriate, hearings in camera and ex parte ; (ii) If the Court concludes that, by invoking the ground for refusal under article 93, paragraph 4, in the circumstances of the case, the requested State is not acting in accordance with its obligations under this Statute, the Court may refer the matter in accordance with article 87, paragraph 7, specifying the reasons for its conclusion; and (iii) The Court may make such inference in the trial of the accused as to the existence or non- existence of a fact, as may be appropriate in the circumstances; or (b) In all other circumstances: (i) Order disclosure; or (ii) To the extent it does not order disclosure, make such inference in the trial of the accused as to the existence or non-existence of a fact, as may be appropriate in the circumstances. Article 73 Third-party information or documents If a State Party is requested by the Court to provide a document or information in its custody, possession or control, which was disclosed to it in confidence by a State, intergovernmental organization or international organization, it shall seek the consent of the originator to disclose that document or information. If the originator is a State Party, it shall either consent to disclosure of the information or document or undertake to resolve the issue of disclosure with the Court, subject to the provisions of article 72. If the originator is not a State Party and refuses to consent to disclosure, the requested State shall inform the Court that it is unable to provide the document or information because of a pre-existing obligation of confidentiality to the originator. Article 74 Requirements for the decision 1. All the judges of the Trial Chamber shall be present at each stage of the trial and throughout their deliberations. The Presidency may, on a case-by-case basis, designate, as available, one or more alternate judges to be present at each stage of the trial and to replace a member of the Trial Chamber if that member is unable to continue attending. 2. The Trial Chamber's decision shall be based on its evaluation of the evidence and the entire proceedings. The decision shall not exceed the facts and circumstances described in the charges and any amendments to the charges. The Court may base its decision only on evidence submitted and discussed before it at the trial. 3. The judges shall attempt to achieve unanimity in their decision, failing which the decision shall be taken by a majority of the judges. 4. The deliberations of the Trial Chamber shall remain secret. 5. The decision shall be in writing and shall contain a full and reasoned statement of the Trial Chamber's findings on the evidence and conclusions. The Trial Chamber shall issue one decision. When there is no unanimity, the Trial Chamber's decision shall contain the views of the majority and the minority. The decision or a summary thereof shall be delivered in open court. Article 75 Reparations to victims 1. The Court shall establish principles relating to reparations to, or in respect of, victims, including restitution, compensation and rehabilitation. On this basis, in its decision the Court may, either upon request or on its own motion in exceptional circumstances, determine the scope and extent of any damage, loss and injury to, or in respect of, victims and will state the principles on which it is acting.
37 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The Court may make an order directly against a convicted person specifying appropriate reparations to, or in respect of, victims, including restitution, compensation and rehabilitation. Where appropriate, the Court may order that the award for reparations be made through the Trust Fund provided for in article 79. 3. Before making an order under this article, the Court may invite and shall take account of representations from or on behalf of the convicted person, victims, other interested persons or interested States. 4. In exercising its power under this article, the Court may, after a person is convicted of a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court, determine whether, in order to give effect to an order which it may make under this article, it is necessary to seek measures under article 93, paragraph 1. 5. A State Party shall give effect to a decision under this article as if the provisions of article 109 were applicable to this article. 6. Nothing in this article shall be interpreted as prejudicing the rights of victims under national or international law. Article 76 Sentencing 1. In the event of a conviction, the Trial Chamber shall consider the appropriate sentence to be imposed and shall take into account the evidence presented and submissions made during the trial that are relevant to the sentence. 2. Except where article 65 applies and before the completion of the trial, the Trial Chamber may on its own motion and shall, at the request of the Prosecutor or the accused, hold a further hearing to hear any additional evidence or submissions relevant to the sentence, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 3. Where paragraph 2 applies, any representations under article 75 shall be heard during the further hearing referred to in paragraph 2 and, if necessary, during any additional hearing. 4. The sentence shall be pronounced in public and, wherever possible, in the presence of the accused.
38 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 7. PENALTIES Article 77 Applicable penalties 1. Subject to article 110, the Court may impose one of the following penalties on a person convicted of a crime referred to in article 5 of this Statute: (a) Imprisonment for a specified number of years, which may not exceed a maximum of 30 years; or (b) A term of life imprisonment when justified by the extreme gravity of the crime and the individual circumstances of the convicted person. 2. In addition to imprisonment, the Court may order: (a) A fine under the criteria provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (b) A forfeiture of proceeds, property and assets derived directly or indirectly from that crime, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties. Article 78 Determination of the sentence 1. In determining the sentence, the Court shall, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, take into account such factors as the gravity of the crime and the individual circumstances of the convicted person. 2. In imposing a sentence of imprisonment, the Court shall deduct the time, if any, previously spent in detention in accordance with an order of the Court. The Court may deduct any time otherwise spent in detention in connection with conduct underlying the crime. 3. When a person has been convicted of more than one crime, the Court shall pronounce a sentence for each crime and a joint sentence specifying the total period of imprisonment. This period shall be no less than the highest individual sentence pronounced and shall not exceed 30 years imprisonment or a sentence of life imprisonment in conformity with article 77, paragraph 1 (b). Article 79 Trust Fund 1. A Trust Fund shall be established by decision of the Assembly of States Parties for the benefit of victims of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court, and of the families of such victims. 2. The Court may order money and other property collected through fines or forfeiture to be transferred, by order of the Court, to the Trust Fund. 3. The Trust Fund shall be managed according to criteria to be determined by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 80 Non-prejudice to national application of penalties and national laws Nothing in this Part affects the application by States of penalties prescribed by their national law, nor the law of States which do not provide for penalties prescribed in this Part.
39 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 8. APPEAL AND REVISION Article 81 Appeal against decision of acquittal or conviction or against sentence 1. A decision under article 74 may be appealed in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence as follows: (a) The Prosecutor may make an appeal on any of the following grounds: (i) Procedural error, (ii) Error of fact, or (iii) Error of law; (b) The convicted person, or the Prosecutor on that person's behalf, may make an appeal on any of the following grounds: (i) Procedural error, (ii) Error of fact, (iii) Error of law, or (iv) Any other ground that affects the fairness or reliability of the proceedings or decision. 2. (a) A sentence may be appealed, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, by the Prosecutor or the convicted person on the ground of disproportion between the crime and the sentence; (b) If on an appeal against sentence the Court considers that there are grounds on which the conviction might be set aside, wholly or in part, it may invite the Prosecutor and the convicted person to submit grounds under article 81, paragraph 1 (a) or (b), and may render a decision on conviction in accordance with article 83; (c) The same procedure applies when the Court, on an appeal against conviction only, considers that there are grounds to reduce the sentence under paragraph 2 (a). 3. (a) Unless the Trial Chamber orders otherwise, a convicted person shall remain in custody pending an appeal; (b) When a convicted person's time in custody exceeds the sentence of imprisonment imposed, that person shall be released, except that if the Prosecutor is also appealing, the release may be subject to the conditions under subparagraph (c) below; (c) In case of an acquittal, the accused shall be released immediately, subject to the following: (i) Under exceptional circumstances, and having regard, inter alia , to the concrete risk of flight, the seriousness of the offence charged and the probability of success on appeal, the Trial Chamber, at the request of the Prosecutor, may maintain the detention of the person pending appeal; (ii) A decision by the Trial Chamber under subparagraph (c) (i) may be appealed in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 3 (a) and (b), execution of the decision or sentence shall be suspended during the period allowed for appeal and for the duration of the appeal proceedings. Article 82 Appeal against other decisions 1. Either party may appeal any of the following decisions in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence: (a) A decision with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility; (b) A decision granting or denying release of the person being investigated or prosecuted; (c) A decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber to act on its own initiative under article 56, paragraph 3; (d) A decision that involves an issue that would significantly affect the fair and expeditious conduct of the proceedings or the outcome of the trial, and for which, in the opinion of the Pre-Trial or Trial Chamber, an immediate resolution by the Appeals Chamber may materially advance the proceedings.
40 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. A decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber under article 57, paragraph 3 (d), may be appealed against by the State concerned or by the Prosecutor, with the leave of the Pre-Trial Chamber. The appeal shall be heard on an expedited basis. 3. An appeal shall not of itself have suspensive effect unless the Appeals Chamber so orders, upon request, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. A legal representative of the victims, the convicted person or a bona fide owner of property adversely affected by an order under article 75 may appeal against the order for reparations, as provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 83 Proceedings on appeal 1. For the purposes of proceedings under article 81 and this article, the Appeals Chamber shall have all the powers of the Trial Chamber. 2. If the Appeals Chamber finds that the proceedings appealed from were unfair in a way that affected the reliability of the decision or sentence, or that the decision or sentence appealed from was materially affected by error of fact or law or procedural error, it may: (a) Reverse or amend the decision or sentence; or (b) Order a new trial before a different Trial Chamber. For these purposes, the Appeals Chamber may remand a factual issue to the original Trial Chamber for it to determine the issue and to report back accordingly, or may itself call evidence to determine the issue. When the decision or sentence has been appealed only by the person convicted, or the Prosecutor on that person's behalf, it cannot be amended to his or her detriment. 3. If in an appeal against sentence the Appeals Chamber finds that the sentence is disproportionate to the crime, it may vary the sentence in accordance with Part 7. 4. The judgement of the Appeals Chamber shall be taken by a majority of the judges and shall be delivered in open court. The judgement shall state the reasons on which it is based. When there is no unanimity, the judgement of the Appeals Chamber shall contain the views of the majority and the minority, but a judge may deliver a separate or dissenting opinion on a question of law. 5. The Appeals Chamber may deliver its judgement in the absence of the person acquitted or convicted. Article 84 Revision of conviction or sentence 1. The convicted person or, after death, spouses, children, parents or one person alive at the time of the accused's death who has been given express written instructions from the accused to bring such a claim, or the Prosecutor on the person's behalf, may apply to the Appeals Chamber to revise the final judgement of conviction or sentence on the grounds that: (a) New evidence has been discovered that: (i) Was not available at the time of trial, and such unavailability was not wholly or partially attributable to the party making application; and (ii) Is sufficiently important that had it been proved at trial it would have been likely to have resulted in a different verdict; (b) It has been newly discovered that decisive evidence, taken into account at trial and upon which the conviction depends, was false, forged or falsified; (c) One or more of the judges who participated in conviction or confirmation of the charges has committed, in that case, an act of serious misconduct or serious breach of duty of sufficient gravity to justify the removal of that judge or those judges from office under article 46. 2. The Appeals Chamber shall reject the application if it considers it to be unfounded. If it determines that the application is meritorious, it may, as appropriate: (a) Reconvene the original Trial Chamber; (b) Constitute a new Trial Chamber; or
41 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(c) Retain jurisdiction over the matter, with a view to, after hearing the parties in the manner set forth in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, arriving at a determination on whether the judgement should be revised. Article 85 Compensation to an arrested or convicted person 1. Anyone who has been the victim of unlawful arrest or detention shall have an enforceable right to compensation. 2. When a person has by a final decision been convicted of a criminal offence, and when subsequently his or her conviction has been reversed on the ground that a new or newly discovered fact shows conclusively that there has been a miscarriage of justice, the person who has suffered punishment as a result of such conviction shall be compensated according to law, unless it is proved that the non-disclosure of the unknown fact in time is wholly or partly attributable to him or her. 3. In exceptional circumstances, where the Court finds conclusive facts showing that there has been a grave and manifest miscarriage of justice, it may in its discretion award compensation, according to the criteria provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, to a person who has been released from detention following a final decision of acquittal or a termination of the proceedings for that reason.
42 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 9. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AND JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE Article 86 General obligation to cooperate States Parties shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Statute, cooperate fully with the Court in its investigation and prosecution of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. Article 87 Requests for cooperation: general provisions 1. (a) The Court shall have the authority to make requests to States Parties for cooperation. The requestsshall be transmitted through the diplomatic channel or any other appropriate channel as may be designated by each State Party upon ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Subsequent changes to the designation shall be made by each State Party in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. (b) When appropriate, without prejudice to the provisions of subparagraph (a), requests may also be transmitted through the International Criminal Police Organization or any appropriate regional organization. 2. Requests for cooperation and any documents supporting the request shall either be in or be accompanied by a translation into an official language of the requested State or one of the working languages of the Court, in accordance with the choice made by that State upon ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Subsequent changes to this choice shall be made in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 3. The requested State shall keep confidential a request for cooperation and any documents supporting the request, except to the extent that the disclosure is necessary for execution of the request. 4. In relation to any request for assistance presented under this Part, the Court may take such measures, including measures related to the protection of information, as may be necessary to ensure the safety or physical or psychological well-being of any victims, potential witnesses and their families. The Court may request that any information that is made available under this Part shall be provided and handled in a manner that protects the safety and physical or psychological well-being of any victims, potential witnesses and their families. 5. (a) The Court may invite any State not party to this Statute to provide assistance under this Part on the basis of an ad hoc arrangement, an agreement with such State or any other appropriate basis. (b) Where a State not party to this Statute, which has entered into an ad hoc arrangement or an agreement with the Court, fails to cooperate with requests pursuant to any such arrangement or agreement, the Court may so inform the Assembly of States Parties or, where the Security Council referred the matter to the Court, the Security Council. 6. The Court may ask any intergovernmental organization to provide information or documents. The Court may also ask for other forms of cooperation and assistance which may be agreed upon with such an organization and which are in accordance with its competence or mandate. 7. Where a State Party fails to comply with a request to cooperate by the Court contrary to the provisions of this Statute, thereby preventing the Court from exercising its functions and powers under this Statute, the Court may make a finding to that effect and refer the matter to the Assembly of States Parties or, where the Security Council referred the matter to the Court, to the Security Council. Article 88 Availability of procedures under national law States Parties shall ensure that there are procedures available under their national law for all of the forms of cooperation which are specified under this Part. Article 89 Surrender of persons to the Court 1. The Court may transmit a request for the arrest and surrender of a person, together with the material supporting the request outlined in article 91, to any State on the territory of which that person may be found and shall request the cooperation of that State in the arrest and surrender of such a person. States Parties shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Part and the procedure under their national law, comply with requests for arrest and surrender.
43 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. Where the person sought for surrender brings a challenge before a national court on the basis of the principle of ne bis in idem as provided in article 20, the requested State shall immediately consult with the Court to determine if there has been a relevant ruling on admissibility. If the case is admissible, the requested State shall proceed with the execution of the request. If an admissibility ruling is pending, the requested State may postpone the execution of the request for surrender of the person until the Court makes a determination on admissibility. 3. (a) A State Party shall authorize, in accordance with its national procedural law, transportation through its territory of a person being surrendered to the Court by another State, except where transit through that State would impede or delay the surrender. (b) A request by the Court for transit shall be transmitted in accordance with article 87. The request for transit shall contain: (i) A description of the person being transported; (ii) A brief statement of the facts of the case and their legal characterization; and (iii) The warrant for arrest and surrender; (c) A person being transported shall be detained in custody during the period of transit; (d) No authorization is required if the person is transported by air and no landing is scheduled on the territory of the transit State; (e) If an unscheduled landing occurs on the territory of the transit State, that State may require a request for transit from the Court as provided for in subparagraph (b). The transit State shall detain the person being transported until the request for transit is received and the transit is effected, provided that detention for purposes of this subparagraph may not be extended beyond 96 hours from the unscheduled landing unless the request is received within that time. 4. If the person sought is being proceeded against or is serving a sentence in the requested State for a crime different from that for which surrender to the Court is sought, the requested State, after making its decision to grant the request, shall consult with the Court. Article 90 Competing requests 1. A State Party which receives a request from the Court for the surrender of a person under article 89 shall, if it also receives a request from any other State for the extradition of the same person for the same conduct which forms the basis of the crime for which the Court seeks the person's surrender, notify the Court and the requesting State of that fact. 2. Where the requesting State is a State Party, the requested State shall give priority to the request from the Court if: (a) The Court has, pursuant to article 18 or 19, made a determination that the case in respect of which surrender is sought is admissible and that determination takes into account the investigation or prosecution conducted by the requesting State in respect of its request for extradition; or (b) The Court makes the determination described in subparagraph (a) pursuant to the requested State's notification under paragraph 1. 3. Where a determination under paragraph 2 (a) has not been made, the requested State may, at its discretion, pending the determination of the Court under paragraph 2 (b), proceed to deal with the request for extradition from the requesting State but shall not extradite the person until the Court has determined that the case is inadmissible. The Court's determination shall be made on an expedited basis. 4. If the requesting State is a State not Party to this Statute the requested State, if it is not under an international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State, shall give priority to the request for surrender from the Court, if the Court has determined that the case is admissible. 5. Where a case under paragraph 4 has not been determined to be admissible by the Court, the requested State may, at its discretion, proceed to deal with the request for extradition from the requesting State. 6. In cases where paragraph 4 applies except that the requested State is under an existing international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State not Party to this Statute, the requested State shall determine whether to surrender the person to the Court or extradite the person to the requesting State. In making its decision, the requested State shall consider all the relevant factors, including but not limited to:
44 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(a) The respective dates of the requests; (b) The interests of the requesting State including, where relevant, whether the crime was committed in its territory and the nationality of the victims and of the person sought; and (c) The possibility of subsequent surrender between the Court and the requesting State. 7. Where a State Party which receives a request from the Court for the surrender of a person also receives a request from any State for the extradition of the same person for conduct other than that which constitutes the crime for which the Court seeks the person's surrender: (a) The requested State shall, if it is not under an existing international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State, give priority to the request from the Court; (b) The requested State shall, if it is under an existing international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State, determine whether to surrender the person to the Court or to extradite the person to the requesting State. In making its decision, the requested State shall consider all the relevant factors, including but not limited to those set out in paragraph 6, but shall give special consideration to the relative nature and gravity of the conduct in question. 8. Where pursuant to a notification under this article, the Court has determined a case to be inadmissible, and subsequently extradition to the requesting State is refused, the requested State shall notify the Court of this decision. Article 91 Contents of request for arrest and surrender 1. A request for arrest and surrender shall be made in writing. In urgent cases, a request may be made by any medium capable of delivering a written record, provided that the request shall be confirmed through the channel provided for in article 87, paragraph 1 (a). 2. In the case of a request for the arrest and surrender of a person for whom a warrant of arrest has been issued by the Pre-Trial Chamber under article 58, the request shall contain or be supported by: (a) Information describing the person sought, sufficient to identify the person, and information as to that person's probable location; (b) A copy of the warrant of arrest; and (c) Such documents, statements or information as may be necessary to meet the requirements for the surrender process in the requested State, except that those requirements should not be more burdensome than those applicable to requests for extradition pursuant to treaties or arrangements between the requested State and other States and should, if possible, be less burdensome, taking into account the distinct nature of the Court. 3. In the case of a request for the arrest and surrender of a person already convicted, the request shall contain or be supported by: (a) A copy of any warrant of arrest for that person; (b) A copy of the judgement of conviction; (c) Information to demonstrate that the person sought is the one referred to in the judgement of conviction; and (d) If the person sought has been sentenced, a copy of the sentence imposed and, in the case of a sentence for imprisonment, a statement of any time already served and the time remaining to be served. 4. Upon the request of the Court, a State Party shall consult with the Court, either generally or with respect to a specific matter, regarding any requirements under its national law that may apply under paragraph 2 (c). During the consultations, the State Party shall advise the Court of the specific requirements of its national law.
45 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 92 Provisional arrest 1. In urgent cases, the Court may request the provisional arrest of the person sought, pending presentation of the request for surrender and the documents supporting the request as specified in article 91. 2. The request for provisional arrest shall be made by any medium capable of delivering a written record and shall contain: (a) Information describing the person sought, sufficient to identify the person, and information as to that person's probable location; (b) A concise statement of the crimes for which the person's arrest is sought and of the facts which are alleged to constitute those crimes, including, where possible, the date and location of the crime; (c) A statement of the existence of a warrant of arrest or a judgement of conviction against the person sought; and (d) A statement that a request for surrender of the person sought will follow. 3. A person who is provisionally arrested may be released from custody if the requested State has not received the request for surrender and the documents supporting the request as specified in article 91 within the time limits specified in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. However, the person may consent to surrender before the expiration of this period if permitted by the law of the requested State. In such a case, the requested State shall proceed to surrender the person to the Court as soon as possible. 4. The fact that the person sought has been released from custody pursuant to paragraph 3 shall not prejudice the subsequent arrest and surrender of that person if the request for surrender and the documents supporting the request are delivered at a later date. Article 93 Other forms of cooperation 1. States Parties shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Part and under procedures of national law, comply with requests by the Court to provide the following assistance in relation to investigations or prosecutions: (a) The identification and whereabouts of persons or the location of items; (b) The taking of evidence, including testimony under oath, and the production of evidence, including expert opinions and reports necessary to the Court; (c) The questioning of any person being investigated or prosecuted; (d) The service of documents, including judicial documents; (e) Facilitating the voluntary appearance of persons as witnesses or experts before the Court; (f) The temporary transfer of persons as provided in paragraph 7; (g) The examination of places or sites, including the exhumation and examination of grave sites; (h) The execution of searches and seizures; (i) The provision of records and documents, including official records and documents; (j) The protection of victims and witnesses and the preservation of evidence; (k) The identification, tracing and freezing or seizure of proceeds, property and assets and instrumentalities of crimes for the purpose of eventual forfeiture, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties; and (l) Any other type of assistance which is not prohibited by the law of the requested State, with a view to facilitating the investigation and prosecution of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. 2. The Court shall have the authority to provide an assurance to a witness or an expert appearing before the Court that he or she will not be prosecuted, detained or subjected to any restriction of personal freedom by the Court in respect of any act or omission that preceded the departure of that person from the requested State.
46 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3. Where execution of a particular measure of assistance detailed in a request presented under paragraph 1, is prohibited in the requested State on the basis of an existing fundamental legal principle of general application, the requested State shall promptly consult with the Court to try to resolve the matter. In the consultations, consideration should be given to whether the assistance can be rendered in another manner or subject to conditions. If after consultations the matter cannot be resolved, the Court shall modify the request as necessary. 4. In accordance with article 72, a State Party may deny a request for assistance, in whole or in part, only if the request concerns the production of any documents or disclosure of evidence which relates to its national security. 5. Before denying a request for assistance under paragraph 1 (l), the requested State shall consider whether the assistance can be provided subject to specified conditions, or whether the assistance can be provided at a later date or in an alternative manner, provided that if the Court or the Prosecutor accepts the assistance subject to conditions, the Court or the Prosecutor shall abide by them. 6. If a request for assistance is denied, the requested State Party shall promptly inform the Court or the Prosecutor of the reasons for such denial. 7. (a) The Court may request the temporary transfer of a person in custody for purposes of identification or for obtaining testimony or other assistance. The person may be transferred if the following conditions are fulfilled: (i) The person freely gives his or her informed consent to the transfer; and (ii) The requested State agrees to the transfer, subject to such conditions as that State and the Court may agree. (b) The person being transferred shall remain in custody. When the purposes of the transfer have been fulfilled, the Court shall return the person without delay to the requested State. 8. (a) The Court shall ensure the confidentiality of documents and information, except as required for the investigation and proceedings described in the request. (b) The requested State may, when necessary, transmit documents or information to the Prosecutor on a confidential basis. The Prosecutor may then use them solely for the purpose of generating new evidence. (c) The requested State may, on its own motion or at the request of the Prosecutor, subsequently consent to the disclosure of such documents or information. They may then be used as evidence pursuant to the provisions of Parts 5 and 6 and in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 9. (a) (i) In the event that a State Party receives competing requests, other than for surrender or extradition, from the Court and from another State pursuant to an international obligation, the State Party shall endeavour, in consultation with the Court and the other State, to meet both requests, if necessary by postponing or attaching conditions to one or the other request. (ii) Failing that, competing requests shall be resolved in accordance with the principles established in article 90. (b) Where, however, the request from the Court concerns information, property or persons which are subject to the control of a third State or an international organization by virtue of an international agreement, the requested States shall so inform the Court and the Court shall direct its request to the third State or international organization. 10. (a) The Court may, upon request, cooperate with and provide assistance to a State Party conducting an investigation into or trial in respect of conduct which constitutes a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court or which constitutes a serious crime under the national law of the requesting State. (b) (i) The assistance provided under subparagraph (a) shall include, inter alia : a. The transmission of statements, documents or other types of evidence obtained in the course of an investigation or a trial conducted by the Court; and b. The questioning of any person detained by order of the Court;
47 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(ii) In the case of assistance under subparagraph (b) (i) a: a. If the documents or other types of evidence have been obtained with the assistance of a State, such transmission shall require the consent of that State; b. If the statements, documents or other types of evidence have been provided by a witness or expert, such transmission shall be subject to the provisions of article 68. (c) The Court may, under the conditions set out in this paragraph, grant a request for assistance under this paragraph from a State which is not a Party to this Statute. Article 94 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of ongoing investigation or prosecution 1. If the immediate execution of a request would interfere with an ongoing investigation or prosecution of a case different from that to which the request relates, the requested State may postpone the execution of the request for a period of time agreed upon with the Court. However, the postponement shall be no longer than is necessary to complete the relevant investigation or prosecution in the requested State. Before making a decision to postpone, the requested State should consider whether the assistance may be immediately provided subject to certain conditions. 2. If a decision to postpone is taken pursuant to paragraph 1, the Prosecutor may, however, seek measures to preserve evidence, pursuant to article 93, paragraph 1 (j). Article 95 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of an admissibility challenge Where there is an admissibility challenge under consideration by the Court pursuant to article 18 or 19, the requested State may postpone the execution of a request under this Part pending a determination by the Court, unless the Court has specifically ordered that the Prosecutor may pursue the collection of such evidence pursuant to article 18 or 19. Article 96 Contents of request for other forms of assistance under article 93 1. A request for other forms of assistance referred to in article 93 shall be made in writing. In urgent cases, a request may be made by any medium capable of delivering a written record, provided that the request shall be confirmed through the channel provided for in article 87, paragraph 1 (a). 2. The request shall, as applicable, contain or be supported by the following: (a) A concise statement of the purpose of the request and the assistance sought, including the legal basis and the grounds for the request; (b) As much detailed information as possible about the location or identification of any person or place that must be found or identified in order for the assistance sought to be provided; (c) A concise statement of the essential facts underlying the request; (d) The reasons for and details of any procedure or requirement to be followed; (e) Such information as may be required under the law of the requested State in order to execute the request; and (f) Any other information relevant in order for the assistance sought to be provided. 3. Upon the request of the Court, a State Party shall consult with the Court, either generally or with respect to a specific matter, regarding any requirements under its national law that may apply under paragraph 2 (e). During the consultations, the State Party shall advise the Court of the specific requirements of its national law. 4. The provisions of this article shall, where applicable, also apply in respect of a request for assistance made to the Court.
48 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 97 Consultations Where a State Party receives a request under this Part in relation to which it identifies problems which may impede or prevent the execution of the request, that State shall consult with the Court without delay in order to resolve the matter. Such problems may include, inter alia : (a) Insufficient information to execute the request; (b) In the case of a request for surrender, the fact that despite best efforts, the person sought cannot be located or that the investigation conducted has determined that the person in the requested State is clearly not the person named in the warrant; or (c) The fact that execution of the request in its current form would require the requested State to breach a pre-existing treaty obligation undertaken with respect to another State. Article 98 Cooperation with respect to waiver of immunity and consent to surrender 1. The Court may not proceed with a request for surrender or assistance which would require the requested State to act inconsistently with its obligations under international law with respect to the State or diplomatic immunity of a person or property of a third State, unless the Court can first obtain the cooperation of that third State for the waiver of the immunity. 2. The Court may not proceed with a request for surrender which would require the requested State to act inconsistently with its obligations under international agreements pursuant to which the consent of a sending State is required to surrender a person of that State to the Court, unless the Court can first obtain the cooperation of the sending State for the giving of consent for the surrender. Article 99 Execution of requests under articles 93 and 96 1. Requests for assistance shall be executed in accordance with the relevant procedure under the law of the requested State and, unless prohibited by such law, in the manner specified in the request, including following any procedure outlined therein or permitting persons specified in the request to be present at and assist in the execution process. 2. In the case of an urgent request, the documents or evidence produced in response shall, at the request of the Court, be sent urgently. 3. Replies from the requested State shall be transmitted in their original language and form. 4. Without prejudice to other articles in this Part, where it is necessary for the successful execution of a request which can be executed without any compulsory measures, including specifically the interview of or taking evidence from a person on a voluntary basis, including doing so without the presence of the authorities of the requested State Party if it is essential for the request to be executed, and the examination without modification of a public site or other public place, the Prosecutor may execute such request directly on the territory of a State as follows: (a) When the State Party requested is a State on the territory of which the crime is alleged to have been committed, and there has been a determination of admissibility pursuant to article 18 or 19, the Prosecutor may directly execute such request following all possible consultations with the requested State Party; (b) In other cases, the Prosecutor may execute such request following consultations with the requested State Party and subject to any reasonable conditions or concerns raised by that State Party. Where the requested State Party identifies problems with the execution of a request pursuant to this subparagraph it shall, without delay, consult with the Court to resolve the matter. 5. Provisions allowing a person heard or examined by the Court under article 72 to invoke restrictions designed to prevent disclosure of confidential information connected with national security shall also apply to the execution of requests for assistance under this article.
49 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 100 Costs 1. The ordinary costs for execution of requests in the territory of the requested State shall be borne by that State, except for the following, which shall be borne by the Court: (a) Costs associated with the travel and security of witnesses and experts or the transfer under article 93 of persons in custody; (b) Costs of translation, interpretation and transcription; (c) Travel and subsistence costs of the judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors, the Registrar, the Deputy Registrar and staff of any organ of the Court; (d) Costs of any expert opinion or report requested by the Court; (e) Costs associated with the transport of a person being surrendered to the Court by a custodial State; and (f) Following consultations, any extraordinary costs that may result from the execution of a request. 2. The provisions of paragraph 1 shall, as appropriate, apply to requests from States Parties to the Court. In that case, the Court shall bear the ordinary costs of execution. Article 101 Rule of speciality 1. A person surrendered to the Court under this Statute shall not be proceeded against, punished or detained for any conduct committed prior to surrender, other than the conduct or course of conduct which forms the basis of the crimes for which that person has been surrendered. 2. The Court may request a waiver of the requirements of paragraph 1 from the State which surrendered the person to the Court and, if necessary, the Court shall provide additional information in accordance with article 91. States Parties shall have the authority to provide a waiver to the Court and should endeavour to do so. Article 102 Use of terms For the purposes of this Statute: (a) "surrender" means the delivering up of a person by a State to the Court, pursuant to this Statute. (b) "extradition" means the delivering up of a person by one State to another as provided by treaty, convention or national legislation.
50 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 10. ENFORCEMENT Article 103 Role of States in enforcement of sentences of imprisonment 1. (a) A sentence of imprisonment shall be served in a State designated by the Court from a list of States which have indicated to the Court their willingness to accept sentenced persons. (b) At the time of declaring its willingness to accept sentenced persons, a State may attach conditions to its acceptance as agreed by the Court and in accordance with this Part. (c) A State designated in a particular case shall promptly inform the Court whether it accepts the Court's designation. 2. (a) The State of enforcement shall notify the Court of any circumstances, including the exercise of any conditions agreed under paragraph 1, which could materially affect the terms or extent of the imprisonment. The Court shall be given at least 45 days' notice of any such known or foreseeable circumstances. During this period, the State of enforcement shall take no action that might prejudice its obligations under article 110. (b) Where the Court cannot agree to the circumstances referred to in subparagraph (a), it shall notify the State of enforcement and proceed in accordance with article 104, paragraph 1. 3. In exercising its discretion to make a designation under paragraph 1, the Court shall take into account the following: (a) The principle that States Parties should share the responsibility for enforcing sentences of imprisonment, in accordance with principles of equitable distribution, as provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (b) The application of widely accepted international treaty standards governing the treatment of prisoners; (c) The views of the sentenced person; (d) The nationality of the sentenced person; (e) Such other factors regarding the circumstances of the crime or the person sentenced, or the effective enforcement of the sentence, as may be appropriate in designating the State of enforcement. 4. If no State is designated under paragraph 1, the sentence of imprisonment shall be served in a prison facility made available by the host State, in accordance with the conditions set out in the headquarters agreement referred to in article 3, paragraph 2. In such a case, the costs arising out of the enforcement of a sentence of imprisonment shall be borne by the Court. Article 104 Change in designation of State of enforcement 1. The Court may, at any time, decide to transfer a sentenced person to a prison of another State. 2. A sentenced person may, at any time, apply to the Court to be transferred from the State of enforcement. Article 105 Enforcement of the sentence 1. Subject to conditions which a State may have specified in accordance with article 103, paragraph 1 (b), the sentence of imprisonment shall be binding on the States Parties, which shall in no case modify it. 2. The Court alone shall have the right to decide any application for appeal and revision. The State of enforcement shall not impede the making of any such application by a sentenced person. Article 106 Supervision of enforcement of sentences and conditions of imprisonment 1. The enforcement of a sentence of imprisonment shall be subject to the supervision of the Court and shall be consistent with widely accepted international treaty standards governing treatment of prisoners.
51 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The conditions of imprisonment shall be governed by the law of the State of enforcement and shall be consistent with widely accepted international treaty standards governing treatment of prisoners; in no case shall such conditions be more or less favourable than those available to prisoners convicted of similar offences in the State of enforcement. 3. Communications between a sentenced person and the Court shall be unimpeded and confidential. Article 107 Transfer of the person upon completion of sentence 1. Following completion of the sentence, a person who is not a national of the State of enforcement may, in accordance with the law of the State of enforcement, be transferred to a State which is obliged to receive him or her, or to another State which agrees to receive him or her, taking into account any wishes of the person to be transferred to that State, unless the State of enforcement authorizes the person to remain in its territory. 2. If no State bears the costs arising out of transferring the person to another State pursuant to paragraph 1, such costs shall be borne by the Court. 3. Subject to the provisions of article 108, the State of enforcement may also, in accordance with its national law, extradite or otherwise surrender the person to a State which has requested the extradition or surrender of the person for purposes of trial or enforcement of a sentence. Article 108 Limitation on the prosecution or punishment of other offences 1. A sentenced person in the custody of the State of enforcement shall not be subject to prosecution or punishment or to extradition to a third State for any conduct engaged in prior to that person's delivery to the State of enforcement, unless such prosecution, punishment or extradition has been approved by the Court at the request of the State of enforcement. 2. The Court shall decide the matter after having heard the views of the sentenced person. 3. Paragraph 1 shall cease to apply if the sentenced person remains voluntarily for more than 30 days in the territory of the State of enforcement after having served the full sentence imposed by the Court, or returns to the territory of that State after having left it. Article 109 Enforcement of fines and forfeiture measures 1. States Parties shall give effect to fines or forfeitures ordered by the Court under Part 7, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties, and in accordance with the procedure of their national law. 2. If a State Party is unable to give effect to an order for forfeiture, it shall take measures to recover the value of the proceeds, property or assets ordered by the Court to be forfeited, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties. 3. Property, or the proceeds of the sale of real property or, where appropriate, the sale of other property, which is obtained by a State Party as a result of its enforcement of a judgement of the Court shall be transferred to the Court. Article 110 Review by the Court concerning reduction of sentence 1. The State of enforcement shall not release the person before expiry of the sentence pronounced by the Court. 2. The Court alone shall have the right to decide any reduction of sentence, and shall rule on the matter after having heard the person. 3. When the person has served two thirds of the sentence, or 25 years in the case of life imprisonment, the Court shall review the sentence to determine whether it should be reduced. Such a review shall not be conducted before that time. 4. In its review under paragraph 3, the Court may reduce the sentence if it finds that one or more of the following factors are present: (a) The early and continuing willingness of the person to cooperate with the Court in its investigations and prosecutions;
52 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) The voluntary assistance of the person in enabling the enforcement of the judgements and orders of the Court in other cases, and in particular providing assistance in locating assets subject to orders of fine, forfeiture or reparation which may be used for the benefit of victims; or (c) Other factors establishing a clear and significant change of circumstances sufficient to justify the reduction of sentence, as provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 5. If the Court determines in its initial review under paragraph 3 that it is not appropriate to reduce the sentence, it shall thereafter review the question of reduction of sentence at such intervals and applying such criteria as provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 111 Escape If a convicted person escapes from custody and flees the State of enforcement, that State may, after consultation with the Court, request the person's surrender from the State in which the person is located pursuant to existing bilateral or multilateral arrangements, or may request that the Court seek the person's surrender, in accordance with Part 9. It may direct that the person be delivered to the State in which he or she was serving the sentence or to another State designated by the Court.
53 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 11. ASSEMBLY OF STATES PARTIES Article 112 Assembly of States Parties 1. An Assembly of States Parties to this Statute is hereby established. Each State Party shall have one representative in the Assembly who may be accompanied by alternates and advisers. Other States which have signed this Statute or the Final Act may be observers in the Assembly. 2. The Assembly shall: (a) Consider and adopt, as appropriate, recommendations of the Preparatory Commission; (b) Provide management oversight to the Presidency, the Prosecutor and the Registrar regarding the administration of the Court; (c) Consider the reports and activities of the Bureau established under paragraph 3 and take appropriate action in regard thereto; (d) Consider and decide the budget for the Court; (e) Decide whether to alter, in accordance with article 36, the number of judges; (f) Consider pursuant to article 87, paragraphs 5 and 7, any question relating to non-cooperation; (g) Perform any other function consistent with this Statute or the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 3. (a) The Assembly shall have a Bureau consisting of a President, two Vice-Presidents and 18 members elected by the Assembly for three-year terms. (b) The Bureau shall have a representative character, taking into account, in particular, equitable geographical distribution and the adequate representation of the principal legal systems of the world. (c) The Bureau shall meet as often as necessary, but at least once a year. It shall assist the Assembly in the discharge of its responsibilities. 4. The Assembly may establish such subsidiary bodies as may be necessary, including an independent oversight mechanism for inspection, evaluation and investigation of the Court, in order to enhance its efficiency and economy. 5. The President of the Court, the Prosecutor and the Registrar or their representatives may participate, as appropriate, in meetings of the Assembly and of the Bureau. 6. The Assembly shall meet at the seat of the Court or at the Headquarters of the United Nations once a year and, when circumstances so require, hold special sessions. Except as otherwise specified in this Statute, special sessions shall be convened by the Bureau on its own initiative or at the request of one third of the States Parties. 7. Each State Party shall have one vote. Every effort shall be made to reach decisions by consensus in the Assembly and in the Bureau. If consensus cannot be reached, except as otherwise provided in the Statute: (a) Decisions on matters of substance must be approved by a two-thirds majority of those present and voting provided that an absolute majority of States Parties constitutes the quorum for voting; (b) Decisions on matters of procedure shall be taken by a simple majority of States Parties present and voting. 8. A State Party which is in arrears in the payment of its financial contributions towards the costs of the Court shall have no vote in the Assembly and in the Bureau if the amount of its arrears equals or exceeds the amount of the contributions due from it for the preceding two full years. The Assembly may, nevertheless, permit such a State Party to vote in the Assembly and in the Bureau if it is satisfied that the failure to pay is due to conditions beyond the control of the State Party. 9. The Assembly shall adopt its own rules of procedure. 10. The official and working languages of the Assembly shall be those of the General Assembly of the United Nations.
54 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 12. FINANCING Article 113 Financial Regulations Except as otherwise specifically provided, all financial matters related to the Court and the meetings of the Assembly of States Parties, including its Bureau and subsidiary bodies, shall be governed by this Statute and the Financial Regulations and Rules adopted by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 114 Payment of expenses Expenses of the Court and the Assembly of States Parties, including its Bureau and subsidiary bodies, shall be paid from the funds of the Court. Article 115 Funds of the Court and of the Assembly of States Parties The expenses of the Court and the Assembly of States Parties, including its Bureau and subsidiary bodies, as provided for in the budget decided by the Assembly of States Parties, shall be provided by the following sources: (a) Assessed contributions made by States Parties; (b) Funds provided by the United Nations, subject to the approval of the General Assembly, in particular in relation to the expenses incurred due to referrals by the Security Council. Article 116 Voluntary contributions Without prejudice to article 115, the Court may receive and utilize, as additional funds, voluntary contributions from Governments, international organizations, individuals, corporations and other entities, in accordance with relevant criteria adopted by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 117 Assessment of contributions The contributions of States Parties shall be assessed in accordance with an agreed scale of assessment, based on the scale adopted by the United Nations for its regular budget and adjusted in accordance with the principles on which that scale is based. Article 118 Annual audit The records, books and accounts of the Court, including its annual financial statements, shall be audited annually by an independent auditor.
55 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 13. FINAL CLAUSES Article 119 Settlement of disputes 1. Any dispute concerning the judicial functions of the Court shall be settled by the decision of the Court. 2. Any other dispute between two or more States Parties relating to the interpretation or application of this Statute which is not settled through negotiations within three months of their commencement shall be referred to the Assembly of States Parties. The Assembly may itself seek to settle the dispute or may make recommendations on further means of settlement of the dispute, including referral to the International Court of Justice in conformity with the Statute of that Court. Article 120 Reservations No reservations may be made to this Statute. Article 121 Amendments 1. After the expiry of seven years from the entry into force of this Statute, any State Party may propose amendments thereto. The text of any proposed amendment shall be submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall promptly circulate it to all States Parties. 2. No sooner than three months from the date of notification, the Assembly of States Parties, at its next meeting, shall, by a majority of those present and voting, decide whether to take up the proposal. The Assembly may deal with the proposal directly or convene a Review Conference if the issue involved so warrants. 3. The adoption of an amendment at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties or at a Review Conference on which consensus cannot be reached shall require a two-thirds majority of States Parties. 4. Except as provided in paragraph 5, an amendment shall enter into force for all States Parties one year after instruments of ratification or acceptance have been deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations by seven-eighths of them. 5. Any amendment to articles 5, 6, 7 and 8 of this Statute shall enter into force for those States Parties which have accepted the amendment one year after the deposit of their instruments of ratification or acceptance. In respect of a State Party which has not accepted the amendment, the Court shall not exercise its jurisdiction regarding a crime covered by the amendment when committed by that State Party's nationals or on its territory. 6. If an amendment has been accepted by seven-eighths of States Parties in accordance with paragraph 4, any State Party which has not accepted the amendment may withdraw from this Statute with immediate effect, notwithstanding article 127, paragraph 1, but subject to article 127, paragraph 2, by giving notice no later than one year after the entry into force of such amendment. 7. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall circulate to all States Parties any amendment adopted at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties or at a Review Conference. Article 122 Amendments to provisions of an institutional nature 1. Amendments to provisions of this Statute which are of an exclusively institutional nature, namely, article 35, article 36, paragraphs 8 and 9, article 37, article 38, article 39, paragraphs 1 (first two sentences), 2 and 4, article 42, paragraphs 4 to 9, article 43, paragraphs 2 and 3, and articles 44, 46, 47 and 49, may be proposed at any time, notwithstanding article 121, paragraph 1, by any State Party. The text of any proposed amendment shall be submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations or such other person designated by the Assembly of States Parties who shall promptly circulate it to all States Parties and to others participating in the Assembly. 2. Amendments under this article on which consensus cannot be reached shall be adopted by the Assembly of States Parties or by a Review Conference, by a two-thirds majority of States Parties. Such amendments shall enter into force for all States Parties six months after their adoption by the Assembly or, as the case may be, by the Conference.
56 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 123 Review of the Statute 1. Seven years after the entry into force of this Statute the Secretary-General of the United Nations shall convene a Review Conference to consider any amendments to this Statute. Such review may include, but is not limited to, the list of crimes contained in article 5. The Conference shall be open to those participating in the Assembly of States Parties and on the same conditions. 2. At any time thereafter, at the request of a State Party and for the purposes set out in paragraph 1, the Secretary-General of the United Nations shall, upon approval by a majority of States Parties, convene a Review Conference. 3. The provisions of article 121, paragraphs 3 to 7, shall apply to the adoption and entry into force of any amendment to the Statute considered at a Review Conference. Article 124 Transitional Provision Notwithstanding article 12, paragraphs 1 and 2, a State, on becoming a party to this Statute, may declare that, for a period of seven years after the entry into force of this Statute for the State concerned, it does not accept the jurisdiction of the Court with respect to the category of crimes referred to in article 8 when a crime is alleged to have been committed by its nationals or on its territory. A declaration under this article may be withdrawn at any time. The provisions of this article shall be reviewed at the Review Conference convened in accordance with article 123, paragraph 1. Article 125 Signature, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession 1. This Statute shall be open for signature by all States in Rome, at the headquarters of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, on 17 July 1998. Thereafter, it shall remain open for signature in Rome at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Italy until 17 October 1998. After that date, the Statute shall remain open for signature in New Y ork, at United Nations Headquarters, until 31 December 2000. 2. This Statute is subject to ratification, acceptance or approval by signatory States. Instruments of ratification, acceptance or approval shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. 3. This Statute shall be open to accession by all States. Instruments of accession shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Article 126 Entry into force 1. This Statute shall enter into force on the first day of the month after the 60th day following the date of the deposit of the 60th instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. 2. For each State ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to this Statute after the deposit of the 60th instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, the Statute shall enter into force on the first day of the month after the 60th day following the deposit by such State of its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Article 127 Withdrawal 1. A State Party may, by written notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, withdraw from this Statute. The withdrawal shall take effect one year after the date of receipt of the notification, unless the notification specifies a later date. 2. A State shall not be discharged, by reason of its withdrawal, from the obligations arising from this Statute while it was a Party to the Statute, including any financial obligations which may have accrued. Its withdrawal shall not affect any cooperation with the Court in connection with criminal investigations and proceedings in relation to which the withdrawing State had a duty to cooperate and which were commenced prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective, nor shall it prejudice in any way the continued consideration of any matter which was already under consideration by the Court prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective.
57 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 128 Authentic texts The original of this Statute, of which the Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish texts are equally authentic, shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall send certified copies thereof to all States. In W Itness W hereof , the undersigned, being duly authorized thereto by their respective Governments, have signed this Statute. Done at Rome, this 17th day of July 1998.
58 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court

[Previous Article]#[Next]

Schon wieder Kurzarbeit... (DIE ROTE FAHNE)



(Korrespondenz aus dem Betrieb)



Ende Dezember haben wir im Betrieb die Mitteilung erhalten, dass der Betriebsurlaub auf Grund der schlechten Auftragslage verlängert und im Jahr 2024 wieder Kurzarbeit angemeldet wird.


„Kurzarbeit neu" ist das Folgemodell der Corona-Kurzarbeit. Ein Kriseninstrument des Kapitals zu Lasten der Arbeiter!

Nun sollen wir ein Jahr auf Kurzarbeit angemeldet werden, das heißt wir bekommen nun zehn Prozent weniger Lohn. In den Nachrichten stand überall, dass wir das angeblich auf freiwilliger Basis machen würden, jetzt müssen wir aber eine Betriebsvereinbarung unterschreiben. In den Nachrichten stand auch, dass es keine Kündigungen gibt. Dennoch mussten jetzt 100 Kollegen, die in Leiharbeit waren, gehen. Insgesamt sind wir 1.000 Kollegen, die jetzt zehn Prozent weniger Lohn bekommen. Unsere Miete, der Einkauf, die Versicherungen werden aber nicht um 10 Prozent billiger!




Bildquelle: Solarpanel, Markus Spiske, Unsplash


_______________________________________________________________________________________


Was sind Korrespondenzen?


Korrespondenzen sind Beiträge aus verschiedenen Teilen der Bevölkerung, sozusagen ein direktes Sprachrohr aus dem Volk. Ihre Gemeinsamkeit ist, dass die jeweiligen Korrespondenten direkt aus ihrem alltäglichen Leben berichten: aus dem Betrieb, dem Viertel, der Familie, der Schule, usw… Als Presse aus dem Volk, drückt die revolutionäre und demokratische Presse nicht nur die Interessen des Großteils der Bevölkerung aus, sondern bindet deren Repräsentantinnen und Repräsentanten auch aktiv ein, gibt ihnen eine Stimme, präsentiert die verschiedenen Meinungen und Ideen aus den Massen um sie miteinander vergleichen zu können und in Diskussion treten zu lassen. Daher finden in der Roten Fahne die Arbeiterinnen und Arbeiter, Stimmen der Jugend- und Frauenbewegung, der Studierenden, der Gewerkschaftskräfte, der Migrantinnen und Migranten ebenso wie der kleinen Selbstständigen und Gewerbetreibenden, Stimmen aus Stadt und Land, eine Plattform und ein Organ. Die Korrespondenten sind keine Redaktionsmitglieder, weshalb sie auch nicht im engeren Sinne an die Blattlinie gebunden sind, sondern “ihre Stimme” zum Ausdruck bringen.



Wie kann man Korrespondent der Roten Fahne werden?


Möchtest du aus deinem Betrieb, dem Viertel, der Familie, oder Nachbarschaft berichten? Dann schreibe uns unter korrespondenz@rotefahne.at und schildere kurz warum du Korrespondent sein und worüber du berichten möchtest.



[Previous Article]#[Next]

ΠΕΙΡΑΙΑΣ | Από τη διαδήλωση ενάντια στις συνδικαλιστικές-πολιτικές διώξεις στο Δημοτικό Θέατρο Πειραιά (Resistance in the neighbourhood)


Εκατοντάδες συγκεντρώθηκαν και ανταποκρίθηκαν στο κάλεσμα των πρωτοβάθμιων σωματείων και των συλλογικοτήτων ενάντια στις διώξεις χθες Πέμπτη 21/3 το απόγευμα στη Πλατεία Δημοτικού Θεάτρου στον Πειραιά. Στις 18:30 ξεκίνησαν οι ομιλίες από εκπροσώπους σωματείων, από διωκόμενους αγωνιστές και από συλλογικότητες.

Στην συνέχεια εκπαιδευτικοί, φοιτητές, εργαζόμενοι και νεολαίοι διαδήλωσαν από κοινού στους δρόμους του Πειραιά και φώναξαν συνθήματα ενάντια στην κρατική τρομοκρατία, τη βιομηχανία συνδικαλιστικών διώξεων, την καταστολή των αγώνων, των σωματείων, το χτύπημα στο δικαίωμα στην απεργία.

Βασικά συνθήματα που φωνάζονταν:

«Ούτε βήμα πίσω, καμιά υποταγή, στον δρόμο θα τσακίσουμε την καταστολή»
«Κάτω οι διώξεις των εκπαιδευτικών, των φοιτητών, των νέων και των εργατών»
«Αυτοί με διώξεις και με τρομοκρατία, εμείς με το λαό για δωρεάν παιδεία»
«Φτώχεια διώξεις καταστολή - αυτή η πολιτική μπορεί να ανατραπεί»
«Νόμος είναι το δίκιο του εργάτη, του απεργού, του άνεργου και του μετανάστη»
«Ακρίβεια ανεργία, ξεφτίλα οι μισθοί, να γιατί χρειάζονται την καταστολή»
«Κάτω τα χέρια από τα σωματεία, τους λαϊκούς αγώνες και την απεργία»
«Δεν είναι γλάστρες τα σωματεία, στο δρόμο θα τσακίσουμε την τρομοκρατία»

Τη διαδήλωση στήριξαν τα σωματεία:

ΕΛΜΕ Καλλιθέας – Νέας Σμύρνης – Μοσχάτου, Ε’ ΕΛΜΕ Αθήνας, ΕΛΜΕ Άνω Λιοσίων – Ζεφυρίου – Φυλής, Α΄ΕΛΜΕ Δυτικής Αττικής (Ελευσίνα), Ε’ ΕΛΜΕ Ανατολικής Αττικής, ΣΕΠΕ Πειραιά «Πρόοδος», ΣΕΠΕ «Κ. Σωτηρίου», ΣΕΠΕ «Αριστοτέλης», ΣΕΠΕ Άνω Λιοσίων – Ζεφυρίου Φυλής «Ηρώ Κωνσταντοπούλου», Σύλλογος Υπαλλήλων Βιβλίου – Χάρτου – Ψηφιακών Μέσων Αττικής, ΠΕΝΕΝ, Σωματείο Εργαζομένων στο νοσοκομείο «Αγ. Σάββας», Πανελλήνια Ένωση Συνταξιούχων Εκπαιδευτικών (ΠΕΣΕΚ), Σύλλογος Εργαζομένων ΤΕΕ, Σύλλογος Διοικητικού Προσωπικού ΕΚΠΑ, Πανελλήνιος Σύλλογος ΕΔΙΠ ΑΕΙ, Συντονιστικό Αναπληρωτών Αδιόριστων Εκπαιδευτικών.

Επίσης οι παρακάτω κινήσεις:

Ενότητα Αντίστασης Ανατροπής Πειραιά, δημοτικό σχήμα “Ανυπότακτος Κορυδαλλός”, πολιτική οργάνωση Κόκκινο Νήμα, Αγωνιστικές Κινήσεις Εκπαιδευτικών, Λαϊκή Αντίσταση Πειραιά, Αγωνιστική Παρέμβαση Γ΄ Δυτικής Αθήνας, Ταξική Πορεία, Αγωνιστικές Κινήσεις, Εκπαιδευτικός Όμιλος Αντιτετράδια της Εκπαίδευσης, Αγωνιστική Παρέμβαση Νέας Σμύρνης – Καλλιθέας – Μοσχάτου, ΟΡΜΑ (Οργάνωση Μαχητικού Αντιφασισμού), Εργατική Συμμαχία στα Δυτικά, δημοτική κίνηση «Ανταρσία στην Κοκκινιά», δημοτική κίνηση «Ανταρσία στο Λιμάνι», Ταξική Αντεπίθεση, Διαρκής Αγώνας, Πρωτοβουλία εργαζομένων στο ΥΠΑΙΘ.

Ήταν μια πετυχημένη, μαχητική και μαζική διαδήλωση. Που απέδειξε ότι η απάντηση στο ζήτημα των διώξεων μπορεί και πρέπει να πάρει κινηματικά και κεντρικά χαρακτηριστικά. Άλλωστε η κυβέρνηση και το σύστημα κλιμακώνουν την επίθεση τους, με τον νέο ποινικό κώδικα, το άνοιγμα της συζήτησης για το ξεπάγωμα του νόμου Χρυσοχοΐδη για τις διαδηλώσεις, με το χτύπημα των φοιτητών καταλήψεων και με νέες διώξεις συνδικαλιστών και αγωνιστών.

  Ο αγώνας συνεχίζεται. Άλλωστε με το τέλος της διαδήλωσης ανανεώθηκε το ραντεβού με τη νέα σύσκεψη Συνδικαλιστικών Οργανώσεων & Κινήσεων- Συλλογικοτήτων- Κινήσεων Γειτονιάς (Τρίτη 26/3 στις 18:30 στο 3ο ΓΕΛ Πειραιά -Μαυρομιχάλη 14-) που θα αποφασίσει τα νέα βήματα που πρέπει να γίνουν.

ΝΑ ΠΑΡΘΟΥΝ ΠΙΣΩ ΟΛΕΣ ΟΙ ΔΙΩΞΕΙΣ

ΚΑΤΩ ΤΑ ΧΕΡΙΑ ΑΠΟ ΣΩΜΑΤΕΙΑ-ΑΓΩΝΕΣ-ΑΓΩΝΙΣΤΕΣ-ΑΠΕΡΓΙΑ








[Previous Article]#[Next]

Ηράκλειο | Από την συγκέντρωση καταγγελίας των πολιτικών-συνδικαλιστικών διώξεων (Resistance in the neighbourhood)



Την  Πέμπτη 21/3  πραγματοποιήθηκε στο κέντρο του  Ηρακλείου συγκέντρωση καταγγελίας των διώξεων αγωνιστών εκπαιδευτικών για την πολιτική και συνδικαλιστική τους δράση στο Πειραιά αλλά και σε  άλλες πόλεις και των 49 φοιτητών του ΑΠΘ. 

Ως Αγωνιστικές Κινήσεις των Εκπαιδευτικών προτείναμε στα σχήματα των παρεμβάσεων  στην πρωτοβάθμια και δευτεροβάθμια εκπαίδευση    να καλέσουμε την ίδια μέρα συγκέντρωση στο Ηράκλειο για το ζήτημα αυτό. Μάλιστα προτείναμε να συναντηθούμε την Παρασκευή 15/3 για να οργανώσουμε όσο γίνεται καλύτερα αυτή την συγκέντρωση. Αυτή η συνάντηση δεν έγινε για διάφορους λόγους. Η ΕΛΜΕ όχι μόνο δεν συμμετείχε   αλλά ούτε καν έβγαλε ψήφισμα. Τα επιχειρήματα των ΣΥΝΕΚ ,της ΠΕΚ και του ΠΑΜΕ  όχι  μόνο ήταν απαράδεκτα   αλλά και γελοία.  

 Τελικά χωρίς ιδιαίτερη ζύμωση και ουσιαστική παρέμβαση στα σχολεία,  έγινε η συγκέντρωση. Συμμετείχαν με πανό οι Αγωνιστικές Κινήσεις Εκπαιδευτικών, η Αριστερή Παρέμβαση, η Αριστερή Παρέμβαση Συσπείρωση και η Ταξική Πορεία.   Επίσης δεκάδες εκπαιδευτικοί και εργαζόμενοι ανταποκρίθηκαν. Στήθηκε μικροφωνική, μοιράστηκαν εκατοντάδες  προκηρύξεις και υπήρχε ένα πολύ καλό κλίμα όσο αφορά την ανταπόκριση του κόσμου. Όμως τελικά δεν  μπορέσαμε να κάνουμε διαδήλωση.   

Θεωρούμε ότι οι αδυναμίες μας αλλά και οι δυνατότητες που φάνηκαν αρκετά καλά σε αυτή την κινητοποίηση πρέπει να απασχολήσουν όλες τις δυνάμεις που συμμετείχαμε. Αν το επόμενο διάστημα κινηθούμε πιο αποφασιστικά για το σοβαρό ζήτημα των διώξεων (και όχι μόνο)  το αποτέλεσμα θα είναι πολύ καλύτερο. 





[Previous Article]#[Next]

Εσύ ταλαίπωρε γιορτάζεις στις 20 Μάρτη; (Resistance in the neighbourhood)


Λάβαμε και δημοσιεύουμε από τον Κ.Μ. μέλος της Πρωτοβουλίας Αντίστασης στα Χανιά το παρακάτω κείμενο:

Ετούτη η μέρα είναι καθιερωμένη από τον «ευαγή» ΟΗΕ σαν παγκόσμια ημέρα ευτυχίας. Πράγματι, τόση έγνοια για την ουσιαστική ευδαιμονία της ανθρωπότητας δεν βαστιέται. Θα λυγίσουμε από το υπερβολικό βάρος. Άραγε το περίσσευμα της αγωνίας των καλών σαμαρείτιδων που θα το εναποθέσουμε; Μάλλον ας το επωμιστεί ο πρωτοκάθεδρος των αρίστων (τουλάχιστον στον βαλκανικό νοτιά) Μητσοτάκης, ώστε να ανεβάσει τη χώρα από την 64η θέση (από τις 143 συνολικά) της διεθνής κατάταξης, λίγο ψηλότερα.

Βέβαια όσο και να μοχθήσει άοκνα ο ευλογημένος (γιατί οπωσδήποτε κάποιοι τον ευγνωμονούν), απίθανο να πλησιάσει τη ζηλευτή τέταρτη (εκτιμήσεις προ γενοκτονίας) του Ισραήλ!! Επιβραβεύεται όμως η προσπάθεια του, αδιάκριτα τελικού αποτελέσματος.

Έτσι λοιπόν αμολά τους ροπαλοφόρους γενίτσαρους να τσακίζουν στο ξύλο και συλλαμβάνουν αθρόα φοιτητές, με σκοπό να κλειδώσει οριστικά τη τελευταία επιτυχία θέσπισης ιδιωτικών ανώτατων σχολών. Σαν επακόλουθο της οποίας λίαν συντόμως μέσα σε πέλαγα «ευτυχίας» θα πληρώνει ο λαός για τις σπουδές των παιδιών του (που δεν θα μπορεί δηλαδή) αλμυρότατα δίδακτρα στα δημόσια πανεπιστήμια.

Εξίσου «περιχαρείς» και καθόλου περιδεείς θα κάνουν οι νέοι το στερνό της ζωής τους ταξίδι «αναψυχής» με τα ιδιωτικοποιημένα και εκσυγχρονισμένα τραίνα. Θα προσφέρουν τα στρατευμένα αρσενικά το αίμα τους μέσα σε δίνη «αγαλλίασης» στα όποια πολεμικά μέτωπα προστάξει το εθνικό γόητρο και εθνικιστικό καθήκον αγαστά αγκαλιασμένο (υποταγμένο) με τις ιμπεριαλιστικούς αμερικανονατοϊκούς μακάβριους σχεδιασμούς. Όπως ακριβώς έπραξαν «ένδοξα» οι πρόγονοι σε Κριμαία, Σαγγάριο και Κορέα.

Μέσα σε παραζάλη «μακαριότητας» επίσης θα κατακτούν την επουράνια αιωνιότητα αποχαιρετώντας τον μάταιο κόσμο της ύλης (που το χριστεπώνυμο κηφηναριό της κοινωνίας απολαμβάνει σε μυθικές δοσολογίες) στην πυρά του Ματιού (επίτευγμα όχι άμεσα της τωρινής κυβέρνησης, αλλά οπωσδήποτε συστημικό) ή στους πνιγμούς της νεροποντής. Συντροφιά θα έχουν φυσικά την αθάνατη (κατά θρησκεία) ψυχή των «απρόσεχτων» σκοτωμένων εργατών στα εργοδοτικά κολαστήρια. Εκεί όπου με ασυγκράτητο «ενθουσιασμό» εξουθενώνεται ο πένητας βιοπαλαιστής για την παραγωγική ανάπτυξη του τόπου δίνοντας καρτερικά την καθημερινή μάχη με το μη καπιταλιστικό και μάλλον εξωγήινης προέλευσης τέρας της ακρίβειας.

Αρκεί μολαταύτα να μην παρασυρθεί από δημαγωγικές, κακεντρεχείς σειρήνες το διευθυντήριο της ολιγαρχίας λαβώνοντας οδυνηρά την λαϊκή «ευφορία». Η οποία πηγάζει από την αποκαθήλωση της καλπάζουσας πολιτικής λαιμητόμου των κατακτημένων απομειναριών του κράτους πρόνοιας. Με «φρικτή» συνέπεια αντί της «λαχταριστής» προσφυγής στα απογευματινά χειρουργεία να υποχρεώνεται ο λαός σε αναζήτηση … δωρεάν θεραπείας στα νοσοκομεία και σε βάρος πάντα της ιερής εξοικονόμησης πόρων. Των αναγκαίων δηλαδή θυσιών για την αγορά αμυντικών (η οποία άμυνα δίχως αγκυλώσεις εσωστρέφειας εξαπλώνεται θαλερά ίσαμε την Ερυθρά θάλασσα) σύνεργων «ειρηνοποιού» θανάτου και αισθήματος ασφάλειας … συριακής ή ιρακινής χροιάς. Τέτοιου μεγέθους μάλιστα γρανιτένια σιγουριά, παντελώς ακλόνητη από τους «αστεϊσμούς» του απειλητικού Πούτιν περί πυρηνικού ολοκαυτώματος.

Το «θεσπέσιο δε κλίμα έκστασης και ανεμελιάς» του λαού εμπλουτίζεται και ολοκληρώνεται με τα ηδονικά αναφωνητά δωδεκάχρονων κοριτσιών, ανάμεικτα με «ευγνωμοσύνη» προς τον μαστροπό τους. Ο οποίος με τη βούλα της ατιμωρησίας του (αστικού) νόμου τα εκδίδει «αλτρουιστικά» στους διεστραμμένους, για να κερδίζουν οι άπορες κορασίδες «ευχάριστα» τα προς το ζην.

Δεν φτάνει που η απανταχού της γης κυριαρχία κεφαλαίου και ιμπεριαλιστών καταντά γνήσιο εφιάλτη την επιβίωση των εργατολαϊκών μαζών, παρά μας εμπαίζουν συνάμα ασύστολα. Καθιερώνουν μέρες γιορτής και βαφτίζουν καθεμιά από τις 365 μαρτυρικές μέρες του χρόνου με ευφάνταστες ονομασίες. Σε μια υδρόγειο πείνας, πόνου, τρόμου και σπαραγμού.

Ακούς εκεί ευτυχία. Που άραγε και με τι κριτήρια την προσμετρούν οι φυσικοί και ηθικοί αυτουργοί των μεγαλύτερων εγκλημάτων της οικουμένης; Στα κρεματόρια Γάζας και Ουκρανίας ή στους σχεδόν εννέα εκατομμύρια νεκρούς σε ετήσια βάση στον πλανήτη από οξεία ασιτία; Μήπως με τις εκατοντάδες πρόσφυγες στον βυθό Πύλου ή στα 35.000 μνήματα των αδικοχαμένων από την πανδημία μονάχα στην Ελλάδα;

Οι λαοί μια μονάχα αναστάσιμη γιορτή πρέπει να προγραμματίζουν κάθε μέρα και στιγμή. Εκείνη της αντίστασης απέναντι στη βαρβαρότητα και υποκρισία του συστήματος. Είναι αδύνατον να πανηγυρίζουν ταυτόχρονα όλοι μαζί, αφεντικά και δούλοι. Ή οι τύραννοι θα γλεντούν την ανομολόγητη (επίσημα έστω) παραδεισένια καλοπέραση προξενώντας στις μάζες ασφυκτικές στερήσεις, απελπισία, στυγνή καταστολή και πολεμικά μακελειά ή οι λαοί θα ανασαίνουν ελευθέρα, γαλήνια, δημιουργικά, ελπιδοφόρα στις λεωφόρους των αγώνων και επαναστατικών αναμετρήσεων.

Η ευαρέσκεια των λίγων ποδοπατά ανελέητα την ικανοποίηση των συμφερόντων της πλειοψηφίας. Ενώ η ευτυχία των πολλών προϋποθέτει την ήττα και συντριβή των ταξικών αντίπαλων της μιας χούφτας εκμεταλλευτών. Τίποτα ενδιάμεσο δεν νοείται.

ΚΜ μέλος της Πρωτοβουλίας Αντίστασης





[Previous Article]#[Next]

ΠΡΟΛΕΤΑΡΙΑΚΗ ΣΗΜΑΙΑ Σάββατο 23 Μάρτη 2024 • φ.959 | Με (ευρω)αυταπάτες θέλουν να ελέγξουν την κοινωνική οργή! Να δώσουμε διεξόδους μέσα από τη μαζική πάλη! (Resistance in the neighbourhood)


Η υπουργός Παιδείας της Γερμανίας δηλώνει ότι τα σχολεία οφείλουν να προετοιμάσουν τους μαθητές για το ενδεχόμενο πολέμου, την ίδια στιγμή που το ντόπιο αστικό πολιτικό σύστημα χορεύει στον ρυθμό της ευρωκάλπης του Ιουνίου. Ο πρόεδρος του Ευρωπαϊκού Συμβουλίου, Σαρλ Μισέλ, διακηρύσσει ότι «αν θέλει ειρήνη, η Ευρώπη πρέπει να ετοιμαστεί για πόλεμο» και πως χρειάζεται να «περάσουμε σε λειτουργία οικονομίας πολέμου», ενώ, παράλληλα, τα ξέφτια των πάλαι ποτέ κραταιών αυταπατών και ψεμάτων για την «Ευρώπη των λαών» επιστρατεύονται ξανά από τους κυρίαρχους για να σύρουν τους λαούς τους στην επερχόμενη εκλογική φάρσα. Έτσι και εδώ, ο εγχώριος αστισμός ετοιμάζεται να φορέσει τα «δημοκρατικά» του κουστούμια, την ίδια ώρα που κάνει σχέδια για να ντύσει τον κόσμο της δουλειάς και τη νεολαία στις παραλλαγές, όποτε αυτό απαιτηθεί.

Γιατί εκεί ακριβώς οδηγεί η αναβάθμιση της εμπλοκής της χώρας στις εστίες αντιπαράθεσης που έχει ανάψει η παρόξυνση του ιμπεριαλιστικού ανταγωνισμού των ΗΠΑ-Δύσης με τη Ρωσία, αλλά και την Κίνα! Η συνάντηση του Μητσοτάκη με τον Ζελένσκι στην Οδησσό, κατά παραγγελία των Αμερικάνων και σε αναζήτηση ρόλων για λογαριασμό της ντόπιας άρχουσας τάξης σε πεδία που ήδη έχει κατοχυρώσει συμμετοχή η ανταγωνίστρια τουρκική, σημαδεύτηκε από τη «συμπτωματική» ρωσική πυραυλική επιδρομή μερικές εκατοντάδες μέτρα πιο δίπλα. Και οι προειδοποιητικές αναφορές του ρωσικού υπουργείου Εξωτερικών προς την Ελλάδα, που ακολούθησαν, αποτέλεσαν μια υπενθύμιση για το μέγεθος των κινδύνων που προκύπτουν από το γεγονός ότι η χώρα μετατρέπεται σε εν δυνάμει «στόχο» στο πλαίσιο της ενδοϊμπεριαλιστικής διαπάλης. Το ίδιο ισχύει και σε σχέση με την όλο και βαθύτερη ένταξη στο μέτωπο της Μέσης Ανατολής, με τη φρεγάτα «Ύδρα» να αναλαμβάνει ενεργό στρατιωτικό ρόλο στην Ερυθρά Θάλασσα στο πλαίσιο της «ευρωπαϊκής» αποστολής Aspides, κόντρα στα drones των Χούθι και προς στήριξη της σιωνιστικής γενοκτονίας του παλαιστινιακού λαού.
συνέχεια εδώ

Διαβάστε στο φύλλο 959 που κυκλοφορεί το Σάββατο 23 Μάρτη 2024

Περιεχόμενα του φύλλου εδώ

Κυριότερα άρθρα

Με (ευρω)αυταπάτες θέλουν να ελέγξουν την κοινωνική οργή!
Να δώσουμε διεξόδους μέσα από τη μαζική πάλη!


ΑΝΑΚΟΙΝΩΣΗ ΤΟΥ Π.Γ. ΤΟΥ ΚΚΕ(μ-λ) - Μάρτης 2024
Έξω η Ελλάδα από την ΕΕ! - Aποχή από τις ευρωεκλογές!


Έγκλημα στα Τέμπη
Οι ένοχοι συνεχίζουν την επιχείρηση συγκάλυψης


Φάρμακο δια πάσα νόσο... ο λαός να πληρώνει το μάρμαρο

Πόσες πιστοποιήσεις κάνουν έναν απόφοιτο λυκείου;

Διώξεις και απειλές για διαγραφές φοιτητών
Η ένταση της καταστολής δεν μπορεί να «πείσει» τη νεολαία να υποταχθεί


Παλαιστίνη
Ενεργή η διελκυστίνδα μεταξύ ΗΠΑ και Ισραήλ ενώ η σφαγή συνεχίζεται
 

Ουκρανία
Το Κίεβο σε απόγνωση, η Ευρώπη σε σύγχυση, ο Πούτιν… ενισχυμένος

ΚΕΝΤΡΙΚΑ ΣΗΜΕΙΑ ΠΩΛΗΣΗΣ

ΑΘΗΝΑ

Βιβλιοπωλείο-Καφέ Εκτός των Τειχών Γραβιάς 10-12 Εξάρχεια

Στέκι Απέναντι Μιλτιάδου 3 Δάφνη

ΘΕΣΣΑΛΟΝΙΚΗ

Σφεντόνα χώρος νεολαίας και πολιτισμού, Συγγρού 24, 2ος όροφος

ΓΙΑΝΝΕΝΑ

Αριστερό Στέκι Νεολαίας Κουγκίου 23

ΞΑΝΘΗ

Ρωγμή Αριστερός χώρος σκέψης και δράσης, Μ.Βόγδου 20

ΗΡΑΚΛΕΙΟ

Ζάλο Αριστερός χώρος πολιτικής και πολιτισμού, Χαριλάου Τρικούπη 21

ΠΑΤΡΑ

Ανάστροφα Στέκι νεολαίας και εργαζομένων, Πουκεβίλ 2

 






[Previous Article]#[Next]

Parties Involved Decide To Continue With Socialist Front Of Nepal - Redspark (Redspark)


Kathmandu, March 22, 2024: The parties concerned have agreed to continue the four-party Socialist Front of Nepal.

Top leaders of the CPN (Unified Socialist), Janata Samajwadi Party, Communist Party of Nepal led by Netra Bikram Chand and the CPN (Maoist Centre), all participants in the Socialist Front of Nepal, held a meeting at the Prime Minister’s Residence, Baluwatar, on Friday morning. Khadga Bahadur Bishwakarma, spokesperson for the Chand-led CPN, said that it had been agreed to continue the Socialist Front and advance the front’s programs.

In the same meeting, it was decided to try to get the CPN-UML to participate in the Socialist Front of Nepal. “From the beginning, our party was in favor of including other parties including the UML in the Socialist Front. However, due to the previous power coalition, UML was not accepting that,” Bishwakarma said. “Now, the environment has become easier after the change of power. Since they are also in the government, there has been a discussion about getting them to participate in the Front.”

With the changed situation, the parties have become hopeful that UML will participate in the Front. For this, a team including Chand, who is also the coordinator of the Socialist Front, held a two-hour conversation with UML Chairman KP Sharma Oli on Thursday. Bishwakarma said that Oli appeared positive. “He is positive. However, it is necessary to discuss some issues further,” he said.

“In today’s meeting, Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal, Unified Socialist Chairman Madhav Kumar Nepal and JSP Chairman Upendra Yadav have been given the responsibility to further communicate with Oli,” Bishwakarma said.

Source : https://myrepublica.nagariknetwork.com/news/socialist-front-to-continue-efforts-underway-to-include-uml/


[Previous Article]#[Next]

pc 23 marzo - Taranto oggi manifestazione: Palestina/contro imperialismo (proletari comunisti)


 


[Previous Article]#[Next]

Egitto - Scioperi operai: di nuovo in campo le operaie di Mahalla al Kubra (femminismo proletario rivoluzionario)


Come già abbiamo denunciato (*), il regime egiziano di Al Sisi sta facendo costruire un recinto nel deserto del Sinai per rinchiudervi i palestinesi in fuga da Gaza, e facilitare così la “pulizia etnica” da parte di Israele, in cambio di finanziamenti del Fmi.

Il regime egiziano è dominato dai militari, che sono anche tra i maggiori capitalisti del paese. Lanciatisi in affari “faraonici”, come la costruzione della nuova capitale (con enormi profitti per sé e per gli amici), hanno ingigantito anche il debito dello stato e ora il solo pagamento degli interessi sul debito pesa per oltre il 10% del Pil. Soluzione: stampare moneta, quindi creare inflazione, ossia tagliare il potere d’acquisto dei salari per mantenere i profitti dei padroni, privati, di stato e militari.
A settembre 2023 l’inflazione aveva raggiunto il 40%, ossia il potere d’acquisto dei già miseri salari e stipendi aveva subito un taglio del 40%.

Temendo il malcontento per i salari di fame anche tra i dipendenti pubblici, il governo ha decretato l’aumento del salario minimo da 4.000 a 6.000 sterline egiziane (al cambio corrente, oggi 120 euro al mese). Per i dipendenti privati, però, il salario minimo è stato portato a sole LE 3.500.
A gennaio, ai lavoratori che protestavano per i bassi salari, al Sisi aveva avuto la spudoratezza di rispondere: “Non mangiamo? Mangiamo. Non beviamo? Beviamo, e tutto funziona [e qui aveva fatto un osceno, irridente, paragone con la condizione dei palestinesi deliberatamente affamati e assetati dallo stato sionista – ndr.]. Le cose sono costose e alcune non sono disponibili? E allora?”.

La risposta delle lavoratrici della più grande fabbrica egiziana, il complesso tessile di MISR di Mahalla al-Kubra nel Delta del Nilo, che ha più di un secolo di storia e di lotte, è arrivata il 22 febbraio. Scandendo slogan di protesta sono scese in sciopero in 3.700. Nonostante l’intervento delle guardie per impedire loro di accedere al piazzale centrale, e la scesa in campo del sindacato ufficiale contro lo sciopero, lo sciopero, sostenuto da un sindacato indipendente, si è esteso ad almeno 7 mila lavoratori.
La risposta dei padroni e del governo è stata: bastone e carota. Salario minimo a 6.000 LE (un aumento del 70%), arresto di 13 “leader” dello sciopero (fonte: LabourStart), di cui due ancora detenuti alla data del 13 marzo, sono anche minacciati di licenziamento per assenza ingiustificata.

Evidentemente padroni e governo contano sulla prosecuzione dell’inflazione (ancora al 31% a gennaio 2024), che rimangerà gli aumenti, e gli arresti sono un avvertimento a chiunque, a Mahalla o altrove, venisse in mente di tornare alla lotta.
Ma lasciar proseguire lo sciopero senza concessioni è sembrato troppo pericoloso al governo: avrebbe rischiato un’esplosione generalizzata perché sa che il forte aumento del costo della vita ha aumentato la pressione tra i lavoratori.
Un’esplosione che potrebbe collegarsi al sostegno popolare alla causa palestinese che in Egitto c’è, per quanto il regime militare faccia tutto quel che può per non farlo manifestare, e al più generale malcontento per le pesantissime condizioni di lavoro e di vita di milioni di proletari.

Negli stessi giorni, infatti, sono scesi in lotta anche centinaia di lavoratori di una grande impresa di costruzioni di proprietà del miliardario Talaat Moustafa, in società con la famiglia saudita dei Bin Laden.

Hanno protestato contro il licenziamento dei lavoratori a tempo indeterminato (soprattutto quelli che hanno subito incidenti sul lavoro o si sono ammalati) per assumere lavoratori con contratti precari, e chiedendo il pagamento di arretrati, un aumento salariale per il carovita, misure di sicurezza e dispositivi di protezione sui cantieri, una maggiore copertura sanitaria.

In questo caso è significativo che le guardie aziendali, che una settimana prima erano intervenute a reprimere una protesta degli impiegati, qualche giorno dopo hanno a loro volta rifiutato di entrare in servizio, lamentando il fatto di essere pagati LE 3000 (60 euro) al mese per 14 ore di lavoro al giorno, e hanno ottenuto un aumento.

Il gruppo Talaat Moustafa, divenuto un colosso con le commesse per la nuova capitale, sta ora partecipando in società con il gruppo Adq degli Emirati a un progetto da 35 miliardi di dollari per la costruzione di una città turistica sul litorale mediterraneo, su terreni privatizzati dai militari.

Questi episodi di lotte operaie sono indicativi di una temperatura sociale che sta salendo in Egitto come in altri paesi del Medio Oriente e che potrebbe portare a nuove esplosioni se la crisi economica si aggraverà, in collegamento anche con la rabbia provocata dalla guerra genocidaria di Israele contro la popolazione di Gaza.
Non a caso il Fmi offre ad al-Sisi miliardi in cambio del lavoro sporco di collaborazione con Israele; mentre da parte loro Meloni e von del Leyen promettono 7,4 miliardi di euro all’Egitto perché faccia il lavoro altrettanto sporco di trattenere gli emigranti verso l’Europa, oltre che per altri lucrosi affari.

Ci permettiamo di ripeterlo: gli unici veri amici dei palestinesi aggrediti e oppressi da Israele a Gaza e in Cisgiordania sono i lavoratori e gli sfruttati della regione e del mondo, non i governi capitalisti arabi che sfruttano e reprimono i propri lavoratori e sono pronti a fare affari collaborando con le metropoli imperialiste nella repressione di palestinesi e migranti.

(*) https://pungolorosso.com/…/il-vile-baratto-di-al-sisi…/

Riportiamo la traduzione di un articolo apparso su “Mada Masr” ed estratti dal sito del Socialist Party britannico:

MIGLIAIA DI LAVORATORI SCIOPERANO PER L’AUMENTO DEI SALARI NELLA FABBRICA DI GHAZL AL-MAHALLA

– di Beesan Kassab, 25 febbraio 2024

I lavoratori di Ghazl al-Mahalla sono in sciopero per ottenere salari più alti e bonus più equi.

Circa 7.000 lavoratori si sono riuniti sabato mattina nella piazza centrale del complesso industriale di Ghazl al-Mahalla per uno sciopero che dura già da tre giorni.

Chiedono che il loro pasto giornaliero venga aumentato a 30 LE [=0,57 euro], alzando un coro in cui si dice che l’importo copre a malapena “il prezzo di un litro di latte”.

Chiedono anche l’applicazione di salari più alti, facendo riferimento a un recente aumento salariale per il settore pubblico basato su istruzioni del presidente Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, in mezzo a un’ondata inflazionistica che ha fatto salire il costo della vita a livello nazionale. In altri slogan, i lavoratori hanno chiesto: “Dov’è la decisione di Sisi?”.

La mega-fabbrica di proprietà pubblica impiega decine di migliaia di persone nei settori della filatura, del tessile e del cotone medicale, oltre a una centrale elettrica su un’enorme area di terreno a Mahalla al-Kubra, nel governatorato di Gharbiya.

Fino a domenica, le trattative dei lavoratori con la società madre sono fallite, ha dichiarato il Centro per i sindacati e i servizi ai lavoratori in un comunicato diffuso sabato sera. All’incontro hanno partecipato un rappresentante della presidenza, dell’Ufficio del Lavoro, del Ministero del Commercio e dell’Industria e il presidente del Sindacato Generale della Filatura e Tessitura.

Diversi uomini che lavorano nell’azienda sono stati trattenuti sabato dall’Agenzia nazionale per la sicurezza dopo essere stati convocati per essere interrogati dall’organismo di sicurezza insieme ad alcune lavoratrici, ha dichiarato la CTUWS, senza specificare il numero dei detenuti.

I lavoratori hanno lanciato lo sciopero giovedì [22 febbraio], hanno dichiarato a Mada Masr, iniziando nelle fabbriche di abbigliamento a prevalenza femminile, che storicamente sono state in prima linea in diversi scioperi famosi dell’azienda.

Hanan*, supervisore di una fabbrica di abbigliamento, ha raccontato a Mada Masr che gli operai del suo edificio hanno iniziato a scandire slogan, interrompendo infine il lavoro mentre i canti si diffondevano da una fabbrica all’altra.

Contemporaneamente, il personale di sicurezza ha sigillato le uscite per evitare che le donne si riversassero nella piazza centrale del complesso, nota come piazza Talaat Harb. Questa misura di sicurezza è stata applicata anche alla centrale elettrica, secondo Abdullah* che lavora lì.

Il personale di sicurezza ha sbloccato i cancelli della fabbrica intorno alle 15.00 di giovedì, mezz’ora prima della fine del turno mattutino, per assicurarsi che i lavoratori uscissero dai locali e non si riunissero all’interno, ha detto Hanan.

I lavoratori dell’azienda hanno descritto i bassi salari come causa di insoddisfazione.

Il costo della vita è aumentato in tutto il Paese, con un’inflazione che supererà il 30% nel 2024. Un recente “pacchetto presidenziale”, che sarà varato a partire da marzo, prevede un aumento del salario minimo per il settore pubblico da 4.000 a 6.000 LE al mese, con incrementi che vanno da 1.000 a 1.200 LE per le diverse categorie lavorative.

Sebbene sia di proprietà dello Stato, la Misr Spinning and Weaving Company, che possiede Ghazl al-Mahalla, non rientra nell’ambito del pacchetto presidenziale, ha dichiarato a Mada Masr una fonte del Ministero delle Finanze.

I salari dell’azienda sono invece guidati dalle decisioni del Consiglio nazionale per i salari, che lo scorso ottobre ha innalzato il salario minimo del settore privato a 3.500 LE.

Ma l’aumento di ottobre non è servito a contrastare la riduzione del potere d’acquisto causata dall’inflazione. Dopo più di 25 anni di servizio, Abdel Aziz* ha dichiarato a Mada Masr che il suo guadagno totale non supera i 4.000 LE al mese. La cifra equivale a circa 130 dollari al tasso di cambio ufficiale, o a circa 80 dollari al tasso del mercato parallelo al momento in cui scriviamo.

Abdullah ha dichiarato che il suo stipendio è di 4.200 LEE dopo 33 anni di lavoro con l’azienda. Hanan, che si sta avvicinando alla pensione, riceve uno stipendio di circa 6.200 LE.

Diverse fonti di lavoro dell’azienda hanno raccontato che giorni prima dello sciopero, il governatore di Gharbiya aveva effettuato una serie di visite per ispezionare un convoglio che fornisce beni sovvenzionati ai lavoratori dell’azienda.

Abdel Aziz ha aggiunto che durante la visita di mercoledì, il governatore ha ispezionato un convoglio medico che rifornisce i lavoratori e “un lavoratore ha detto al governatore che il suo stipendio non supera i 3500 LE”.

Secondo una dichiarazione della CTUWS pubblicata sabato, i lavoratori chiedono ora che il salario minimo sia portato a 6.000 LE, con aumenti salariali in base all’anzianità di servizio e una riduzione degli stanziamenti fiscali.

Chiedono inoltre che la loro indennità giornaliera per i pasti sia aumentata a 30 LE, per un totale di 900 LE al mese invece degli attuali 210 LE al mese, con un canto che circolava durante lo sciopero in cui si affermava che l’importo copre a malapena “il prezzo di un litro di latte”.

La dichiarazione del CTUWS di sabato [24 febbraio] ha sottolineato che i membri del comitato sindacale ufficiale dell’azienda, affiliato alla Federazione sindacale egiziana allineata allo Stato, hanno cercato di dissuadere i lavoratori dallo sciopero e di intimidirli, ma sono stati espulsi dalla piazza.

Una figura di spicco del comitato sindacale ufficiale dell’azienda ha dichiarato giovedì a Mada Masr, a condizione di anonimato, che il comitato “preferisce la negoziazione allo sciopero, ma sostiene le richieste dei lavoratori”.

Ghazl al-Mahalla ha agito da catalizzatore alla fine del 2006 per una rinascita dell’azione sindacale a livello nazionale, quando uno sciopero di decine di migliaia di lavoratori della fabbrica si è riverberato in un movimento di scioperi simili in altre fabbriche del Paese.

*Su loro richiesta, Mada Masr ha utilizzato pseudonimi per tutte le fonti.

***

EGITTO:

LE FORZE DI SICUREZZA ARRESTANO LAVORATORI DI GHAZL EL MAHALLA

A CAUSA DEL LORO SCIOPERO

E LA DIREZIONE EMETTE AVVISI DI LICENZIAMENTO NEI LORO CONFRONTI –

11 marzo 2024

Comunicato stampa del Comitato per la Giustizia
Ginevra – 6 marzo 2024

In uno sviluppo preoccupante, la Sicurezza Nazionale di Gharbia, in Egitto, avrebbe trattenuto almeno cinque dipendenti della rinomata azienda tessile Ghazl El-Mahalla, nonostante la decisione dei lavoratori di disperdere il loro sciopero del 29 febbraio 2024.
I dipendenti hanno iniziato lo sciopero per chiedere l’applicazione del salario minimo.

Tra i detenuti ci sono Wael Abu Zuwayed e Mohamed Mahmoud Tolba, attualmente trattenuti presso la sede della Sicurezza Nazionale a Tanta. Essi si aggiungono ad altri tre lavoratori, Sabah Ali al-Qattan, Muhammad al-Attar e Abdel Hamid Abu Amna, anch’essi detenuti.

Wael Abu Zuwayed è stato portato davanti alla Procura della Sicurezza di Stato del Cairo, dove è stato deciso di trattenerlo in custodia cautelare per 15 giorni. È accusato di aver aderito a un gruppo formato in violazione della legge e di aver diffuso false informazioni.

Con una mossa controversa, il 4 marzo la direzione di Ghazl El Mahalla ha emesso avvisi di licenziamento per i lavoratori detenuti, Wael Muhammad Abu Zuwayed e Muhammad Mahmoud Tolba. L’azienda sostiene che la loro assenza dal lavoro è durata dieci giorni, ignorando opportunamente che è avvenuta in seguito alla loro detenzione da parte della Sicurezza Nazionale.

Il Comitato per la giustizia (CFJ) ha condannato le detenzioni, affermando che lo sciopero è una reazione “spontanea” alle difficoltà economiche dell’Egitto e alla confusione della politica finanziaria. Il CFJ sottolinea la necessità di un dialogo costruttivo e di soluzioni realistiche per affrontare le legittime richieste dei lavoratori, invece di ricorrere alla repressione e all’intimidazione. […]

***

LE NUOVE AZIONI DEI LAVORATORI OFFRONO UNA SPERANZA DI CAMBIAMENTO IN EGITTO
– David Johnson, da: http://www.socialistparty.org

Oltre a subire le pressioni delle masse per la vile risposta del regime egiziano agli spietati attacchi dello Stato israeliano a Gaza, il presidente “uomo forte” Sisi deve affrontare la crescente rabbia dei lavoratori. L’aumento vertiginoso dei prezzi dei generi alimentari ha colpito duramente i lavoratori egiziani a basso salario, ma ci sono segnali di una ripresa della lotta.

Circa 14.000 lavoratori tessili della più grande fabbrica egiziana, la Misr Spin-ning and Weaving Company, a Mahalla al-Kubra, nella regione del Delta del Nilo, hanno iniziato una settimana di sciopero il 22 febbraio. I lavoratori di una delle maggiori filiali della società immobiliare Talaat Moustafa Group, la Alexan-dria Construction, al Cairo, hanno protestato il 28 febbraio.

Sono state le lavoratrici della fabbrica di abbigliamento Mahalla a iniziare a scandire slogan che si sono rapidamente diffusi da un edificio all’altro. Il personale di sicurezza ha bloccato le uscite per impedire che questi lavoratori, così come quelli della centrale elettrica in loco, si riunissero nella piazza centrale. Tuttavia, il terzo giorno, 7.000 scioperanti si sono radunati lì. Decine di persone sono state arrestate. Come di consueto, il comitato sindacale ufficiale gestito dallo Stato ha denunciato lo sciopero, ma i lavoratori li hanno cacciati dalla manifestazione.

Questo evento riecheggia lo storico sciopero del 2006, quando le donne di Mahalla iniziarono lo sciopero che fu un passo fondamentale verso la rivolta del 2011 che mise fine ai 31 anni di governo del presidente Hosni Mubarak. Nel 2008, la città ha assistito a una rivolta che si sarebbe ripetuta su scala nazionale tre anni dopo.

[…] Lo sciopero è terminato dopo una settimana, in seguito all’intervento del Ministro del settore pubblico. La direzione ha accettato di pagare un minimo di 6.000 LE al mese e la maggior parte dei lavoratori arrestati è stata rilasciata. Un’offerta precedente, che includeva il pagamento degli straordinari, la partecipazione agli utili e l’assicurazione sanitaria, non è stata accettata.

Protesta dei lavoratori edili

Centinaia di lavoratori della Talaat Moustafa hanno protestato davanti alla sede dell’azienda. L’azienda ha licenziato lavoratori con contratti a tempo indeterminato e li ha sostituiti con lavoratori temporanei a condizioni peggiori. I lavoratori hanno chiesto pagamenti arretrati, un bonus per il costo della vita, una migliore assicurazione sanitaria e dispositivi di sicurezza nei cantieri.

Le condizioni dei cantieri sono pessime, non sono disponibili dispositivi di sicurezza e la copertura sanitaria è insufficiente. Molti lavoratori licenziati sono stati feriti sul lavoro o soffrono di malattie croniche.

I lavoratori hanno riferito ai giornalisti che i criteri per i bonus e gli aumenti sono oscuri, ma vengono costantemente erogati a persone imparentate o collegate ai dirigenti. I dirigenti e i loro assistenti ricevono benefici sontuosi, mentre le retribuzioni dei lavoratori rimangono basse.

Insolitamente, la polizia non ha tentato di bloccare la protesta, anche se in passato ha fermato proteste più piccole. Tuttavia, il 4 marzo una protesta dei lavoratori degli uffici è stata impedita quando le forze di sicurezza hanno bloccato i cancelli.

Ma poi centinaia di guardie di sicurezza dell’azienda si sono rifiutate di iniziare il loro turno! Hanno chiesto salari più alti, migliori benefit, orari di lavoro e ferie. “I nostri stipendi sono molto bassi, pari a 3.000 LE. Lavoriamo per oltre 14 ore al giorno, a differenza del resto dei dipendenti. Riceviamo il bonus trimestrale a una percentuale inferiore rispetto a loro”, ha spiegato una guardia.

Nel giro di 30 minuti, un alto dirigente li ha incontrati, promettendo di pagare un aumento entro due mesi, dopodiché la protesta è terminata.

Il regime di Mubarak rimane

Il gruppo Talaat Moustafa ha avuto enormi contratti per la costruzione della nuova capitale che il presidente Sisi ha supervisionato. Nell’ultimo anno ha triplicato le sue attività nel settore immobiliare e dell’ospitalità, nonostante la crisi economica dell’Egitto. Negli ultimi mesi il prezzo delle sue azioni è salito, facendo guadagnare milioni di dollari al suo multimilionario azionista principale, Talaat Moustafa. Uno degli uomini più ricchi dell’Africa, era vicino al figlio di Hosni Mubarak, Gamal, odiato dai lavoratori per aver spinto una vasta privatizzazione quando il padre era presidente.

Nel 2008, Talaat Moustafa è stato riconosciuto colpevole di aver pagato 2 milioni di dollari a un ex poliziotto per uccidere la cantante libanese Suzanne Tamim. Gli altri principali azionisti del Gruppo Talaat Moustafa sono la famiglia Bin Laden dell’Arabia Saudita.

A febbraio, la società ha concluso un accordo di partnership con la società di investimenti degli Emirati Arabi Uniti ADQ per la costruzione di una nuova e vasta città turistica a Ras el-Hikma, sulla costa mediterranea, a ovest di Alessandria. L’operazione da 35 miliardi di dollari, compresa la vendita di terreni da parte dell’esercito, aiuterà notevolmente il governo di Sisi a pagare i 42 miliardi di dollari di debiti e gli interessi che dovrà pagare quest’anno. Molti sono gli interrogativi sollevati, tra cui la fattibilità del progetto, il suo costo ambientale, il vero valore del terreno, come si sia arrivati alla proprietà dell’esercito, quale sia l’opinione dei residenti locali (che non sono stati consultati) e quali controlli ci saranno sui futuri profitti in una “zona economica libera”.

Il disperato bisogno di valuta estera del governo Sisi lo ha costretto a vendere beni di proprietà dello Stato. Ras el-Hikma si aggiunge alla lista crescente di aziende e terreni egiziani ora sotto la proprietà e il controllo del Golfo.

Le gravi disuguaglianze, la corruzione e la brutale repressione dell’opposizione del regime dell’ex presidente Hosni Mubarak sono continuate, e persino aumentate, sotto Sisi. I recenti scioperi e le proteste dei lavoratori potrebbero segnare l’inizio di una nuova ondata di azioni della classe operaia, come quella sviluppatasi negli ultimi anni di Mubarak.

Il risveglio della classe operaia egiziana potrebbe essere un potente fattore per porre fine alla crisi di Gaza, aprire il valico di Rafah agli aiuti umanitari e incoraggiare i lavoratori e i poveri di tutto il Medio Oriente e del Nord Africa a spodestare i loro governanti mega-ricchi in tutta la regione.

Per porre fine alla povertà capitalista, alla guerra e alla distruzione dell’ambiente è necessario costruire sindacati indipendenti e partiti dei lavoratori con programmi socialisti, democratici e internazionalisti.

traduzione di un articolo apparso su “Mada Masr” ed estratti dal sito del Socialist Party britannico:


[Previous Article]#[Next]

pc 23 marzo - Newroz... rivolta resistenza - un intervento dei compagni turchi (proletari comunisti)


in via di traduzione

Description No: 2024/2

Revolt, Resistance, Uprising against Annihilation, Denial and Assimilation; Occupation and Annexation; Exploitation, Hunger, Poverty and Fascism!

NEWROZ PİROZ BE!

Newroz is the symbol of the revolt of the exploited and oppressed peoples against the oppressors and exploiters in the thousands of years of class societies in our geography. Today, it has become the name of the rebellion and resistance of all oppressed peoples, especially the Kurdish people, against the persecution of cruelty, the rebellion of the blacksmith Kawa against the cruel and massacring Dehaks, and the burning of the fires of rebellion in all four corners.

We are welcoming Newroz in a period in which the attacks and massacres of the cruel Dehaks are increasing worldwide and in our geography. We are in a process where the conditions for a new imperialist sharing war are maturing and preparations are being made for it. The increasing rivalry of the imperialist bourgeoisie is triggering conflicts and occupations at the regional level. There are not only rivalries and "trade wars" between the imperialist blocs. The possibility of direct military confrontation is also increasing. As Russia's war of occupation of Ukraine evolves into a "protracted war" war between the imperialist camps, some spokespersons of the bourgeoisie make statements that "we must be ready for war".

The increasing rivalry between imperialist monopolies is increasing the aggression of reactionary forces in our geography. They raise their heads to take advantage of the crisis

for their own interests, to expand their areas of domination and to hold positions. After the Azerbaijani reactionary occupation of Artsakh-Nagorno-Karabakh, the attacks launched by Israeli Zionism, citing the October 7 Flood of the Palestinian national resistance, turned into genocide. The oppressed Palestinian people were confronted with a new Nakba (catastrophe).

The Turkish state, one of the most reactionary forces in our geography, continues its aggression against the Kurdish nation with daily terrorist attacks on the territory of the Autonomous Administration of Northeast Syria-Rojava and invasion attacks against Iraqi Kurdistan. It is preparing for a comprehensive invasion attack to liquidate the gains of the Rojava Revolution and to eliminate the heavy military losses it suffered in Iraqi Kurdistan. While liquidating the gains of the Kurdish National Freedom Movement, the Turkish state is aiming for occupation and then annexation in the region. It wants to realize its centuries-old "Misak-ı Milli" goal with the approval of the imperialists and with its own collaborator reactionary lines in the region.

For this purpose, after negotiations with the reactionary forces of the region, a bargain was struck at the door of US imperialism. The fascist Turkish Republic's traditional policy of "taking advantage of the contradictions between the imperialist camps" is once again in effect. Once again, preparations are being made to attack the oppressed peoples of our geography, especially the Kurdish people. For this, the isolation policy is being implemented on revolutionary and patriotic prisoners, especially Abdullah Öcalan, the leader of the Kurdish National Freedom Movement. On the other hand, pressure and arrest attacks against revolutionaries continue.

The reason for this aggression of the Turkish fascism is not independent of the situation it is in. The century-old regime of oppression and exploitation is in a picture of complete bankruptcy, especially in the economy. As we have witnessed in the Earthquakes of February 6, while tens of thousands of people are waiting for help under the debris, they were faced with a reality of an enemy of the people who did nothing and prevented those who go to help. The government, which responded to the people's call for help from the mouth of R.T. Erdogan himself with the curses "You're immoral, you're despicable, you're dishonorable"; At the current stage, he is once again asking for votes from the people. The general elections did not solve the crisis of the ruling classes and even failed to postpone it. At the current stage, they are once again struggling for rent sharing, this time on the occasion of local elections.

While the ruling classes continue to fight for rent and cliques within themselves, the poverty of workers and laborers is increasing. Dozens of workers are murdered every other day in workplace murders. There is an increase in massacres and hate crimes against women and other gender identities. Massacres of nature and the environment for the sake of capitalist rent and plunder continue at full speed. The policy of annihilation, denial, assimilation and oppression against oppressed nationalities and beliefs, especially the Kurdish nation, continues. The policies implemented by fascism to maintain its power have created a situation of social insanity in which torturous massacres of stray animals are committed.

Turkish state fascism, facing this picture it has created with its government and opposition, does what it knows best, fueling racism and chauvinism, under the name of "social values", it increases its fascist oppression against "those who are not like itself" and in reality against all segments that do not obey it. Sunni Islam, the dominant belief of Turkish fascism, is used as a means of oppressing different beliefs and to prevent the working and laboring people from rebelling against the conditions of hunger and poverty they are forced into. While the policy of "Prayers for Palestine, Ships for Israel" is continued with determination, fascist aggression against those who do not bow their heads continues.

Today's cruel Dehaks are at work. They continue their robbery, extortion and massacres against the people of the region, especially the people of our country, for their own wealth and riches. They are preparing new invasions and attacks for the survival of their regimes built on corruption and theft. However, there are and will always be blacksmith Kawas against the cruel Dehaks.

It is time to be the blacksmith Kawa against the cruel Dehaks. Now is the time to resist and struggle. Now is the time to stand up against the oppressors.

Our motto against Annihilation, Denial and Assimilation; Occupation and Annexation; Exploitation, Hunger, Poverty and Fascism is Newroz.

Stand Up Against Fascism, Spread the Fire of Newroz Everywhere!

Newroz Piroz Be!

Communist Party of Turkey Marxist-Leninist (TKP-ML)

Central Committee

March 2024

Link:https://www.tkpml.com/communist-party-of-turkey-marxist-leninist-central-committee-newroz-piroz-be/?swcfpc=1




[Previous Article]#[Next]

pc 23 marzo - Scritti e interventi sulla Comune di Parigi a base del discorso di proletari comunisti in occasione dell'anniversario del 18 marzo - 2 (proletari comunisti)


Mao e la Comune di Parigi

Da Mao opere

È DI ESTREMA IMPORTANZA PER IL POPOLO RIVOLUZIONARIO AVERE IN MANO IL FUCILE


L’esperienza storica della Comune di Parigi ha provato appieno che è di estrema importanza per la rivoluzione proletaria e la dittatura del proletariato possedere forze armate rivoluzionarie.
Parlando dell’esperienza della Comune di Parigi, Lenin cita un’importante tesi di Engels, ossia che in Francia, dopo ogni rivoluzione, gli operai erano armati; il disarmo degli operai era quindi il primo comandamento per i borghesi che si trovavano al governo dello Stato. Lenin ritiene che in questa conclusione di Engels, “l’essenza del problema, come del resto l’essenza della questione dello Stato (la classe oppressa dispone di armi?), è afferrata in modo ammirevole”.
La Comune di Parigi nacque durante l’accanita lotta tra la rivoluzione armata e la controrivoluzione armata. I 72 giorni di vita della Comune di Parigi furono 72 giorni di insurrezione armata, di lotta armata e di autodifesa armata. Ciò che provocò un timor panico tra i reazionari borghesi fu proprio il fatto che il proletariato di Parigi aveva impugnato il fucile. L’errore fatale della Comune di Parigi risiedette precisamente nel fatto che essa si dimostrò troppo clemente verso la controrivoluzione e non marciò immediatamente su Versailles, ciò che permise a Thiers di riprendere fiato e di radunare le sue truppe reazionarie per gettarsi furiosamente su Parigi rivoluzionaria. Come disse Engels: “Sarebbe la Comune di Parigi durata un solo giorno se non si fosse servita di questa autorità del popolo armato contro i borghesi? Non si può al contrario rimproverarle di non essersene servita abbastanza?”

Il compagno Mao Tse-tung ha ricapitolato in modo conciso l’importante significato della lotta armata e dell’esercito popolare e ha formulato la famosa tesi secondo la quale “il potere politico nasce dalla canna del fucile”

Egli ha sottolineato: “Secondo la teoria marxista dello Stato, l’esercito è la principale componente del potere statale. Chiunque voglia impadronirsi del potere statale e conservarlo, deve possedere un forte esercito”.

La rivoluzione violenta è un principio universale della rivoluzione proletaria. I partiti marxisti-leninisti devono seguire con fermezza questo principio universale e applicarlo alla pratica concreta dei loro paesi. L’esperienza storica dimostra che là dove il proletariato e i popoli oppressi hanno preso il potere e conquistato la vittoria, essi l’hanno fatto con la forza del fucile, sotto la direzione dei partiti proletari, in conformità delle condizioni specifiche dei propri paesi, costituendo gradualmente forze armate popolari e conducendo la guerra popolare sulla base dell’ampia mobilitazione delle masse nella lotta e ingaggiando ripetute lotte contro gli imperialisti e i reazionari. Ciò vale per la rivoluzione russa, per la rivoluzione cinese e per la rivoluzione dell’Albania, del Vietnam, della Corea e di altri paesi, senza alcuna eccezione.
Al contrario, quando i partiti proletari non cercano di creare forze armate rivoluzionarie o vi rinunciano, essi causano rovesci alla rivoluzione; esistono serie lezioni a questo proposito. Avendo rinunciato a impugnare il fucile, alcuni partiti sono stati presi alla sprovvista di fronte a un attacco di sorpresa dell’imperialismo e dei suoi lacchè e alla loro repressione controrivoluzionaria e di conseguenza milioni di rivoluzionari sono stati massacrati; in altri casi, poiché volevano ottenere posti di alti funzionari nei governi borghesi o sono caduti nella trappola tesa dai reazionari, alcuni partiti hanno consegnato loro le forze armate popolari, rovinando i frutti della rivoluzione, quando il popolo rivoluzionario aveva già impugnato le armi e le forze armate popolari si erano già sviluppate notevolmente.
In questi cento anni, molti partiti comunisti hanno partecipato alle elezioni e sono entrati nel parlamento, ma nessuno di essi ha potuto instaurare la dittatura del proletariato con tale mezzo. Anche se un partito comunista ottiene la maggioranza nel parlamento o entra nel governo, ciò non significa che il carattere borghese del potere politico sia cambiato e ancora meno che la vecchia macchina statale sia demolita. La classe dominante reazionaria potrà proclamare non valide le elezioni, sciogliere il parlamento o addirittura ricorrere alla violenza per estromettere i comunisti. Se un partito proletario, invece di svolgere il lavoro tra le masse e di impegnarsi nella lotta armata, sostiene con zelo le elezioni
parlamentari, esso non farà altro che addormentare le masse e corrompere se stesso. La borghesia compra i partiti comunisti attraverso le elezioni parlamentari e li trasforma in partiti revisionisti, in partiti borghesi. La storia non ci fornisce forse numerosi esempi di questo genere?
Il proletariato deve conquistare il potere politico con il fucile e deve anche difenderlo con il fucile. Un esercito popolare sotto la direzione di un partito marxista-leninista è il solido pilastro della dittatura del proletariato e il fattore principale tra i vari fattori per prevenire la restaurazione del capitalismo. Con un esercito popolare armato dell’ideologia marxista-leninista, si può affrontare qualsiasi situazione, per quanto complessa possa essere, nella lotta di classe sia all’interno che fuori del paese e difendere il potere del proletariato...

[Previous Article]#[Next]

Un report sull'Assemblea per Ilaria Salis di Torino - da una compagna avvocata del Mfpr di Taranto (femminismo proletario rivoluzionario)


Il 28 marzo a Budapest, si celebrerà la seconda udienza che vede imputata Ilaria Salis in un processo la cui valenza è unicamente politica. La procura dello Stato ungherese vuole mandare un messaggio a tutti i movimenti antinazisti e di sinistra europei: non venite a manifestare da noi, siamo un paese dove manifestazioni antinaziste non sono ben accette, non siamo un paese che accoglie il dissenso contro i neonazisti quindi andate da un'altra parte a manifestare, se venite qui subirete la sorte di Ilaria Salis e degli altri suoi compagni che in questo momento si trovano incarcerati.

Se ne è discusso a Torino, durante un interessante incontro organizzato presso la Casa del Popolo Estella, per ricordare quanto sta accadendo, ne ha parlato il padre di Ilaria, Roberto Salis, il quale ha ripercorso il dramma giudiziario che sta vivendo la figlia. Le condizioni disumane di detenzione sia a livello igienico che a livello di regime carcerario poiché per ben 35 giorni ad Ilaria non è stato concesso il diritto di parlare con alcuno; la procedura processuale che evidenzia palesi violazione dei diritti essenziali dell’imputato - ricordiamo che a tutt’oggi ad Ilaria non è stata data la possibilità di prendere visione delle prove raccolte a suo carico dalla procura ungherese; tutto evidenzia la compromissione del diritto di difesa in un racconto che sembra arrivare da un luogo molto lontano dallo stato di diritto che dovrebbe caratterizzare gli Stati membri dell'unione europea.

Ed infatti, Massimo Congiu, giornalista, studioso di geopolitica dell’Europa centro-orientale, ospite del predetto incontro, ha sottolineato come nella pratica del sistema di potere di Victor Orban l’idea di giustizia è quella di una giustizia che punisce, avvilisce, mortifica senza alcun rispetto per la dignità umana, per la dignità della persona, come effettivamente abbiamo purtroppo visto con Ilaria. Il sistema di potere di Orban è un sistema basato sulla paura, fortemente antidemocratico che produce ed afferma una serie di falsità alcune particolarmente atroci ripetute a mò di martellamento che determina effetti deleteri sull’opinione pubblica, ed il prevalere di questa paura genera una giustizia vista e presentata come qualcosa di cui si debba temere. La commissione europea ha sanzionato più volte l’Ungheria per violazione dei diritti umani bloccando anche i fondi destinati a Budapest per l’ammontare di ben 20 miliardi. Ma vi sono altri aspetti di cui il governo ungherese si è distinto negativamente e, sempre citando l’intervento di Congiu, si parla per esempio del controllo che esercita sulla stampa, del suo impegno a silenziare le voci dissenzienti, dell’impegno a controllare in modo capillare le varie manifestazioni della vita pubblica del paese fino alla vita accademica dell'università. Si pone, quindi, in maniera drammatica una questione di Stato di diritto in questo paese che Orban attraverso una sua retorica e propaganda animata da sentimenti patriottici, ultranazionalisti sta modellando proprio in tal senso ovvero in termini antidemocratici e la povera Ilaria si trova incastrata in questo meccanismo.

Il dibattito è continuato con l’intervento di Francesca Trasatti, avvocata, osservatrice per il Centro di Ricerca ed Elaborazione per la Democrazia nel processo Salis, la quale ha subito evidenziato come la vicenda di Ilaria Salis rappresenti un vero e proprio buco nero della democrazia politica e del giusto processo. Un trattamento disumano e degradante che configura una tortura considerato che per le normative internazionali 15 giorni di isolamento prolungato costituiscono a tutti gli effetti tortura ed Ilaria ha subìto un isolamento per ben 35 giorni, ma soprattutto non sta scontando alcuna condanna bensì solo carcerazione preventiva. Anche la stessa procedura processuale non garantisce in alcun modo il diritto di difesa di Ilaria né l’imparzialità di un giudice che ha già emesso decisione di condanna nei confronti di un coimputato tedesco nel medesimo processo di Ilaria.

L’Ungheria di Orban è un’ombra nera antidemocratica che macchia l’Europa, che in Italia trova sponda nell’amica Presidente la quale si è fintamente appellata all’indipendenza della magistratura, all’autonomia dei giudici, ben sapendo che l’Ungheria ha molto da imparare in tema di separazione dei poteri e di rispetto dei diritti umani essenziali.

ILARIA LIBERA!!


[Previous Article]#[Next]

pc 23 marzo - Un report sull'Assemblea per Ilaria Salis di Torino - da una compagna avvocata del Mfpr di Taranto (proletari comunisti)


 Il 28 marzo a Budapest, si celebrerà la seconda udienza che vede imputata Ilaria Salis in un processo la cui valenza è unicamente politica. La procura dello Stato ungherese vuole mandare un messaggio a tutti i movimenti antinazisti e di sinistra europei: non venite a manifestare da noi, siamo un paese dove manifestazioni antinaziste non sono ben accette, non siamo un paese che accoglie il dissenso contro i neonazisti quindi andate da un'altra parte a manifestare, se venite qui subirete la sorte di Ilaria Salis e degli altri suoi compagni che in questo momento si trovano incarcerati.

Se ne è discusso a Torino, durante un interessante incontro organizzato presso la Casa del Popolo Estella, per ricordare quanto sta accadendo, ne ha parlato il padre di Ilaria, Roberto Salis, il quale ha ripercorso il dramma giudiziario che sta vivendo la figlia. Le condizioni disumane di detenzione sia a livello igienico che a livello di regime carcerario poiché per ben 35 giorni ad Ilaria non è stato concesso il diritto di parlare con alcuno; la procedura processuale che evidenzia palesi violazione dei diritti essenziali dell’imputato - ricordiamo che a tutt’oggi ad Ilaria non è stata data la possibilità di prendere visione delle prove raccolte a suo carico dalla procura ungherese; tutto evidenzia la compromissione del diritto di difesa in un racconto che sembra arrivare da un luogo molto lontano dallo stato di diritto che dovrebbe caratterizzare gli Stati membri dell'unione europea.

Ed infatti, Massimo Congiu, giornalista, studioso di geopolitica dell’Europa centro-orientale, ospite del

predetto incontro, ha sottolineato come nella pratica del sistema di potere di Victor Orban l’idea di giustizia è quella di una giustizia che punisce, avvilisce, mortifica senza alcun rispetto per la dignità umana, per la dignità della persona, come effettivamente abbiamo purtroppo visto con Ilaria. Il sistema di potere di Orban è un sistema basato sulla paura, fortemente antidemocratico che produce ed afferma una serie di falsità alcune particolarmente atroci ripetute a mò di martellamento che determina effetti deleteri sull’opinione pubblica, ed il prevalere di questa paura genera una giustizia vista e presentata come qualcosa di cui si debba temere. La commissione europea ha sanzionato più volte l’Ungheria per violazione dei diritti umani bloccando anche i fondi destinati a Budapest per l’ammontare di ben 20 miliardi. Ma vi sono altri aspetti di cui il governo ungherese si è distinto negativamente e, sempre citando l’intervento di Congiu, si parla per esempio del controllo che esercita sulla stampa, del suo impegno a silenziare le voci dissenzienti, dell’impegno a controllare in modo capillare le varie manifestazioni della vita pubblica del paese fino alla vita accademica dell'università. Si pone, quindi, in maniera drammatica una questione di Stato di diritto in questo paese che Orban attraverso una sua retorica e propaganda animata da sentimenti patriottici, ultranazionalisti sta modellando proprio in tal senso ovvero in termini antidemocratici e la povera Ilaria si trova incastrata in questo meccanismo.

Il dibattito è continuato con l’intervento di Francesca Trasatti, avvocata, osservatrice per il Centro di Ricerca ed Elaborazione per la Democrazia nel processo Salis, la quale ha subito evidenziato come la vicenda di Ilaria Salis rappresenti un vero e proprio buco nero della democrazia politica e del giusto processo. Un trattamento disumano e degradante che configura una tortura considerato che per le normative internazionali 15 giorni di isolamento prolungato costituiscono a tutti gli effetti tortura ed Ilaria ha subìto un isolamento per ben 35 giorni, ma soprattutto non sta scontando alcuna condanna bensì solo carcerazione preventiva. Anche la stessa procedura processuale non garantisce in alcun modo il diritto di difesa di Ilaria né l’imparzialità di un giudice che ha già emesso decisione di condanna nei confronti di un coimputato tedesco nel medesimo processo di Ilaria.

L’Ungheria di Orban è un’ombra nera antidemocratica che macchia l’Europa, che in Italia trova sponda nell’amica Presidente la quale si è fintamente appellata all’indipendenza della magistratura, all’autonomia dei giudici, ben sapendo che l’Ungheria ha molto da imparare in tema di separazione dei poteri e di rispetto dei diritti umani essenziali.

ILARIA LIBERA!!


[Previous Article]#[Next]

pc 23 marzo - India - 23 marzo Giornata Antimperialista in ricordo dei martiri rivoluzionari (proletari comunisti)


 



PARTITO COMUNISTA DELL’INDIA (MAOISTA)

Ufficio Regionale Centrale



20 marzo 2022



Celebriamo lo storico 23 marzo come Giornata Antimperialista,
nell'immortale ricordo dei compagni rivoluzionari Bhagat Singh, Sukdev e Rajguru!

Sconfiggiamo l’imperialismo, distruggiamo il fascismo brahmanico Hindutva!


Continuiamo la nostra lotta per realizzare i sogni di tutti i grandi martiri del movimento per la libertà e lottiamo per l’India di Nuova Democrazia


Nella lunga storia di lotta del nostro movimento democratico popolare, il 23 marzo ha un valore rivoluzionario particolare nel cuore di tutti quanti si battono per una società giusta e allo stesso tempo disprezzano risolutamente l’imperialismo. Il 23 marzo i compagni Bhagat Singh, Sukdev e Rajguru sono stati impiccati dal potere coloniale britannico per schiacciare il movimento di liberazione anti-coloniale di allora. La vittoria della rivoluzione bolscevica aveva influenzato questi tre rivoluzionari indiani che formarono dell'HSRA (Associazione Rivoluzionaria Socialista dell'Hindustan). Il compagno Baghat Singh ebbe un ruolo fondamentale nella formazione dell'HSRA, e affermò chiaramente che quale che sia il colore le classi dominanti, che siano di pelle bianca, nera o altro, si deve continuare la lotta contro tutti gli sfruttatori.

Quegli stessi sfruttatori collusi con gli imperialisti oggi celebrano il loro martirio e in particolare lo celebra la direzione dell'RSS che si oppose duramente a Bhagat Singh e alla sua causa. Il BJP, organo politico dell'RSS, oggi rivendica tutti i combattenti per la libertà, compresi i compagni Bhagat Singh e i suoi, Non hanno alcuno diritto morale nemmeno di parlare dei combattenti per la libertà e di distorcere il loro movimento. Il nostro Partito, PCI (maoista), rende loro il suo omaggio rivoluzionario e combatte per la realizzazione delle loro aspirazioni rivoluzionarie.


Dopo l'indipendenza formale nel 1947, l'India è divenuto un paese semi-coloniale e le classi dominanti indiane, la grande borghesia compradora e i proprietari terrieri hanno continuato a servire senza esitazione i loro padroni imperialisti. Tutte le politiche economiche delle classi dominanti indiane dopo il 1947 sono state concepite al servizio degli interessi dell’imperialismo e delle élite nazionali. Le classi borghese compradora e dei latifondisti, proprietari della gran parte dei mezzi di produzione del paese, hanno attuato una politica industriale di sviluppo distorta a vantaggio proprio e dei loro padroni imperialisti. Scopo sulla politica industriale era quella soddisfare i bisogni dell’1% della popolazione delle élites dell’India. Con la penetrazione del capitale finanziario (sotto forma sia di crediti che di investimenti) ci sono stati espropri su vasta scala, deportazioni senza precedenti di popolazioni oppresse. Le masse lavoratrici indiane continuarono a soffrire uno sfruttamento sfrenato, anche più intenso di prima. Dopo gli anni ’90, sotto i dettami delle forze imperialiste, le classi dominanti indiane hanno attuato politiche di liberalizzazione, globalizzazione e privatizzazione. Misure che hanno dato mano libera al capitale imperialista straniero di rapinare e saccheggiare le risorse dell’India e accumularne sempre più profitti. Tutti i principali partiti politici parlamentari, indipendentemente dal colore delle loro bandiere, hanno immancabilmente imposto politiche di globalizzazione, privatizzazione e liberalizzazione. Così hanno spezzato la spina dorsale dell’economia indiana e causato l’indescrivibile miseria delle masse lavoratrici.


Dopo la salita al potere di Narendra Modi nel 2014 sotto, il BJP ha fatto dell’India un campo aperto alla rapina e saccheggio del capitale straniero grazie a programmi pilota quali “Make in India”, “Digital India”, “One Nation-One Tax”, “Start-UP India” e molti altri ancora. Il BJP ha adottato programmi e politiche filo-imperialiste contro agli interessi delle larghe masse del paese. Da un lato consegna alle multinazionali straniere le risorse del paese, dall’altro fomenta i conflitti religiosi, con la sua agenda di Hindu Rashtra. Il compagno Bhagat Singh era risolutamente contrario a ogni politica filo-imperialista o all’ideologia fondamentalista da cui hanno avuto origine RSS e BJP. Bhagat Singh era totalmente contrario all'Hindu-Rashtra s all'idea di una nazione basata sulla religione o razza. Sosteneva le idee del pensiero scientifico, laiche e socialiste. Oggi invece le forze brahmaniche Hindutva distorcono le idee del compagno Bhagat Singh per sostenere il loro progetto di Hindu Rashtra.


La crescita economica dell’India significa usurpazione delle terre degli oppressi. Per uscire dalla sua crisi generale, l'imperialismo va a caccia delle risorse naturali a basso costo disponibili nei paesi del terzo mondo. L’India ha abbondanti riserve di risorse naturali, che si trovano principalmente nelle regioni delle popolazioni tribali dell’India centrale e orientale. Per saccheggiare queste risorse, l’imperialismo sostiene ogni attacco fascista contro le popolazioni indigene dell’India da parte dello Stato ad esso fedele. Per schiacciare il movimento rivoluzionario maoista in India, le classi dominanti indiane, in collaborazione con gli imperialisti, portarono avanti diversi programmi di fascisti anti-sovversione, come Salwa Judum, Sendera, Operazione Green Hunt, Operazione Operazione Samadhan, e ora ha lanciato la Operazione Kagaar. Tutti questi genocidi fascisti di indigeni sono finanziati, diretti e aspirati dalla finanza mondiale e dal capitale burocratico compradore. Nel suo stadio di crisi avanzata, l’imperialismo diventa feroce e in India ha dato origine a un sistema politico fascista. Nell’India centrale è in corso un i ingente dispiegamento di forze militari per accelerare il saccheggio delle risorse naturali dei territori Adivasi. La resistenza popolare contro il processo si privatizzazione e militarizzazione di villaggi, terre e foreste è repressa brutalmente dallo stato indiano sotto il governo del BJP. Ogni giorno i giornali del Chhattisgarh riportano notizie terrificanti di uccisioni di Adivasi da parte delle forze di polizia. Non è un fatto nuovo né cesserà fino a quando questo agonizzante sistema di saccheggio e saccheggio non sarà sradicato dall’India. La stessa origine del capitalismo si fondò sul massacro delle popolazioni indigene di Africa e in America Latina. Nel 21° secolo L’imperialismo ha sviluppato apparati e armi mortali ancora più brutali per massacrare le masse in lotta. Oggi, il popolo del'Indiaa (soprattutto dell’India centrale e orientale) guidato del PCI (maoista) sta combattendo contro queste armi e piani del nemico.


Il Comitato Centrale del PCI (maoista) fa appello a tutti i democratici, patrioti, operai, contadini, dalit e alle organizzazioni delle donne, degli adivasi, di studenti, scrittori, insegnanti, avvocati e attivisti per i diritti umani a celebrare il 23 marzo con spirito antimperialista ed entusiasmo rivoluzionario. Fa appello a tenere seminari, incontri, manifestazioni a sostengno delle idee dei compagni Bhagat Singh, Sukdev e Rajguru per denunciare i subdoli tentativi delle forze hindutva di zafferonizzare Bhagat Singh e i suoi compagni.


Morte all'imperialismo!

Morte al fascismo brahmanico Hindutva!

Viva il marxismo-leninismo-maoismo!

Viva i compagni Bhagat Singh, Sukdev e Rajguru!

Inquilab Zindabad!


Saluti rivoluzionari




Pratap

Portavoce

Ufficio Regionale Centrale

Partito Comunista dell’India (maoista)


[Previous Article]#[Next]

CPI (Maoist) CC Calls Upon Masses To Celebrate March 23rd As Anti-Imperialism Day – info (ICSPW India)


Hyderabad District, March 21, 2024: The Central Committee of the CPI (Maoist) has called upon all democratic forces and others including peasantry, Dalits, women’s organizations, and others to celebrate March 23 as an anti-imperialism day with revolutionary spirit and enthusiasm.

It also appealed to the masses to conduct seminars, meetings, rallies upholding the ideas of Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru; and to expose the alleged treacherous design of the Hindutva forces to saffronize Bhagat Singh and his comrades who laid down their lives fighting the imperialist forces.

A statement issued today in the name of Comrade Pratap, spokesperson for the Central Regional Bureau of the Communist Party of India (Maoist), has emphasized the need to combat imperialism and Brahmanical Hindutva fascism, advocating for a New Democratic India.

“March 23 holds historical significance as it was the day Bhagat Singh, Sukdev, and Rajguru were martyred by British colonial powers,” Comrade Pratap said, adding that the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) had no moral right to even speak about freedom fighters and to hijack the freedom movement.

Comrade Pratap criticized the post-independence economic policies, accusing ruling classes of serving imperialism and exacerbating exploitation. Pointing at the BJP government led by Narendra Modi, Comrade Pratap accused it of facilitating foreign capital exploitation through various flagship programs. He also criticized the BJP’s alleged promotion of Hindu Rashtra ideology, contrary to the secular and socialist ideals upheld by Bhagat Singh.


[Previous Article]#[Next]

Celebrate historic 23rd March as Anti-Imperialist Day in the immortal revolutionaries’ memories of Comrades Bhagat Singh, Sukdev, and Rajguru. _ Communist Party of India (Maoist) (ICSPW India)


Let us defeat Imperialism. Let us smash Brahmanical Hindutva Fascism.
Let us continue our struggle to fulfill the dreams of all great martyrs of freedom
movement and let us fight for a New Democratic India.

 
In our long history of people’s democratic struggle, 23rd March hold a specific revolutionary place in the
history of class struggle for all those hearts that beats for a just – equitable society, and at the same time that despises Imperialism vehemently. On 23rd March, Comrades Bhagat Singh, Sukdev, and Rajguru were hanged by the British colonial power in order to crush the ongoing anti-colonial freedom movement. They were influenced by the success of Bolshevik revolution that had left overwhelming impact on these three Indian revolutionaries that led to the formation of HSRA (Hindustan Socialist Revolutionary Association). In the formation of HSRA Comrade Baghat Singh played a fundamental role, and he clearly stated that ruling classes whether of white skin or black skin, we have to continue our struggle against the loot and plunder of all exploiters. But the same exploiters who colluded with the imperialists forces are today celebrating their martyrdom and particularly the leadership of RSS who bitterly opposed Bhagat Singh and his cause. Today BJP the political organ of RSS is upholding all freedom fighters including Com. Bhagat Singh and his comrades. They have no moral right to even speak about freedom fighters and to hijack the freedom movement and now they are distorting it. Our Party CPI (Maoist) pays its revolutionary homage to them and will fight for the fulfillment of their revolutionary dreams.
After the formal independence in 1947 India became a semi-colonial country, and the Indian ruling classes:
comprador big bourgeois and big landlord continued to serve their imperial masters without any hesitation. Entire economic policies of the Indian ruling classes after 1947, was designed to serve the interest of imperialism and native elites. Comprador bourgeois and landlord classes as the owners of the significant number of means of
production of the country implemented distorted development industrial policy that benefits them, and their Imperialist bosses. Emphasis on industrial policy was to assist the needs of the 1 percent of elite population of India.
With the entry of finance capital (both in the form of loans and investments) vast scale of dispossession and displacement of the oppressed people happened on an unprecedented manner. Toiling masses of India continued to face unbridled exploitation in more intense manner than before. After 1990s, under the dictates of imperialist forces, Indian ruling classes implemented Liberalization, globalization, and Privatization policies in the country. This measure was a cakewalk for the foreign imperialist capital to loot and plunder the Indian resources, and to accumulate more and more profits. All parliamentary mainstream political parties, irrespective of their party flags have flawlessly implemented LPG policies. This has broken the backbone of Indian economy and has caused unspeakable misery to the toiling masses.
After BJP came to power in 2014 under the leadership of Narendra Modi, it has turned India into an open
field for the loot and plunder of the country by the foreign capital under the flagship programs of Make in India, Digital India, One Nation-One Tax, Start- UP India, and many other flagship programs. BJP has enacted several pro- imperialist policies that are against the interest of the board masses of the country. At one hand it is handing over the resources of the country to foreign MNCs, and at the same time it is spreading religious enmity in the country through its agenda of Hindu Rashtra. Com. Bhagat Singh was absolutely against all pro-imperialist policies and communal ideology from which RSS and BJP orginated. Bhagat Singh was totally against Hindu-Rashtra or the idea ofnation based on religion or race. He upholds the idea of scientific reasoning, secularism, and socialism. But, today the Brahmanical Hindutva forces are distorting com. Bhagat Singh ideas to fulfill its agenda of Hindu Rashtra.
Development in India happens by the usurpation of the lands from the oppressed people. Imperialism to come out from the general crisis look for cheap natural resources that are available in the third world countries. India has abundant deposits of natural resources that mainly lie in the tribal belts of central and Eastern India. To plunder the resources of India, Imperialism has backed every fascist onslaught of its pliant state on the indigenous people of India. To crush the revolutionary Maoist movement in India, the Indian ruling classes in collaboration with the imperialist carried out several fascist counter-insurgency programs like Salwa Judum, Sendera, Operation Green- Hunt, Operation Samadhan, and now it has unleashed Operation Kagaar. All these fascist genocide of indigenous people was funded, directed and aspired by the global finance and Comprador bureaucratic Capital. In its crisis ridden state, Imperialism has become ferocious, and has given rise to fascist political system in India. Massive deployments of military forces are going on in Central India to expedite the plunder of the natural resources from
the Adivasi region. People’s resistance to corporatization and militarization of their villages, lands, and forest are being brutally crushed by the Indian state under the BJP’S rule. Every day newspapers in Chhattisgarh carry horrific news of killings of Adivasi by the police forces. It is not happening for the first time, and neither is going to stop until and unless this moribund system of loot and plunder is uprooted from India. The very foundation of capitalism is laid on the massacre of the indigenous population in Africa and in Latin-America. Imperialism in 21st century has developed more brutal machines and deadly weapons to unleash massacres on the struggling masses. Today, the people of India (especially in Central and Eastern India) under the leadership of CPI (Maoist) are fighting against this enemy’s machines and methods.
Central Committee of CPI (Maoist) gives a call to all democratic, patriotic, working- class, peasantry, dalits, and women’s organizations, well- wishers of the adivasi, students, writers, teachers, lawyers and human rights activists to celebrate 23rd March as an Anti-Imperialism with revolutionary spirit and enthusiasm. It also appeals to conduct seminars, meetings, rallies upholding the ideas of comrades Bhagat Singh, Sukdev and Rajguru in order to expose the treacherous design of the hindutva forces to saffronize Bhagat Singh and his comrades.




Down with Imperialism!
Down with Brahmanical Hindutva Fascism!
Long Live Marxism-Leninism-Maoism!
Long Live Comrade Bhagat Singh, Comrade Sukdev, and Comrade Rajguru!
Inquilab Zindabad!

 
With Revolutionary Greetings,
Pratap
Spokes person
Central Regional Bureau
Communist Party of India (Maoist)


[Previous Article]#[Next]

Hamburg: Veranstaltung anlässlich des 18. März (Dem Volke Dienen)


 

Am Donnerstag den 21. März fand eine Veranstaltung im Internationalen Zentrum B5 aus Anlass des 18. März, dem Tag der politischen Gefangen und Jahrestag der Pariser Kommune, statt. Zur Veranstaltung lud das Palästina-Bündnis Hamburg ein.

Begonnen wurde mit einem kulturellen Beitrag, bei dem Aktivistinnen des Roten Bundes das Lied „Die Frauen der Kommune“ sangen. Dann legten diese die Hintergründen des 18. März als Jahrestag der Pariser Kommune, dar. Es wurden die Hintergründe des Aufstands der Pariser Arbeiter, der die Errichtung der Pariser Kommune zufolge hatte, ihre Errungenschaften und ihre Lehren hervorgehoben. Das neu erschienene Interview mit Professor Saibaba, der kürzlich freigelassen wurde, wurde bekannt gegeben.

Es wurde auch von Young Struggle zur Lage der politischen Gefangenen in der Türkei und Kurdistan berichtet, den Foltermethoden in den Knästen, Gefängnistypen und erläutert, wie das Gefängnissystem zur Unterbringen der revolutionären Gefangen erweitert wurde.

Hamburg Veranstaltung 18 März 2

Von Vertretern des GefangenenInfo wurden auch zu den Hintergründe der Festnahme von Daniela Klette, was ihr Vorgeworfen wird, wie sie gedemütigt wird und von der Kundegebung die am Sonntag den 10. März in Vechta stattgefunden hat, berichtet, wo Solidarität gezeigt wurde. Die Anmelderin der Kundgebung, ein Mitglied des Betriebsrates im Krankenhaus in Bremen, hat in dem Klinikum, in dem sie arbeitet, inzwischen sogar Hausverbot bekommen. Die Repression gegen diese Person hat inzwischen so absurde Züge angenommen, dass wieder Berufsverbote im Raum stehen, nur für politische Ideen die man hat – also grundsätzlich Gesinnungsjustiz.

In der Diskussion zeigte sich wieder einmal, in den Zeiten in denen die Massen auf der Welt – vor allem in Palästina in diesem Moment – kämpfen und auch in der BRD in Bewegung sind, wichtige Themen auf die Tagesordnung gesetzt werden. So gelangte die Diskussion schnell zu wichtigen Grundfragen revolutionärer Arbeit und vor allem, ob die Revolutionäre noch weiter warten sollen um den Massen den richtigen Weg zur Befreiung zu zeigen, ober ob sie jetzt in der Praxis zeigen müssen wie dieser Kampf zu führen ist. Kurz: Ob es Missionare braucht oder eine tatsächliche revolutionäre Vorhut.


[Previous Article]#[Next]

UML Chairman Oli Denies Speculations Of His Party's Inclusion In Socialist Front Of Nepal - Redspark (Redspark)


Kathmandu, March 22, 2024: KP Sharma Oli, Chairman of the CPN-UML, has dismissed speculations regarding his party’s potential entry into the Socialist Front of Nepal. This came following a discussion with Prime Minister and Chairman of CPN (Maoist Centre), Pushpa Kamal Dahal.

Contrary to earlier reports suggesting UML’s integration into the Socialist Front of Nepal, Chairman Oli clarified the party’s stance, refuting any such plans.

The decision came after a meeting between PM Dahal and Chairman Oli, where the matter was deliberated upon.

Despite the Socialist Front’s earlier decision to extend an invitation to the CPN-UML, Chairman Oli’s statement firmly denies the possibility.

The Socialist Front of Nepal, formed on June 19, 2023, comprises four parties, including the CPN (Maoist Centre), CPN (Unified Socialist), Janata Samajwadi Party, and the Communist Party of Nepal led by Netra Bikram Chand.

With a collective representation of 54 lawmakers in the House of Representatives, the parties affiliated to the newly established Socialist Front of Nepal have made their presence felt in the political arena.

Source : https://english.khabarhub.com/2024/22/347427/


[Previous Article]#[Next]

pc 23 marzo - Contro la guerra, contro le fabbriche di morte: liber* tutt*. Corteo oggi a Palermo (proletari comunisti)


da Piazza Bellini ore 16, 30 - Palermo 


Misure cautelari per tre militanti di Antudo per un sanzionamento alla Leonardo S.p.A. Repressione su chi fa luce sulle fabbriche di morte e le guerre in atto lda 




[Previous Article]#[Next]

pc 23 marzo - Milano, manifestanti pro Palestina invadono il mercato di piazza Portello. UNA INIZIATIVA D'AVANGUARDIA CHE VA NELLA DIREZIONE GIUSTA E NECESSARIO DA ESTENDERE E CONTINUARE (proletari comunisti)


articolo e video del sole24ore 

https://stream24.ilsole24ore.com/video/italia/milano-corteo-contro-azienda-accusata-esportare-armi-israele/AFm3abAD

Milano, corteo contro azienda accusata di esportare armi in Israele

LaPresse) - Un centinaio di persone hanno manifestato questa sera a Milano contro la C.A.B.I. Cattaneo, azienda che produce, tra le altre cose, componenti per mezzi speciali, marini e aerei, accusata dai dimostranti di fornire materiali all'esercito israeliano per alimentare la guerra in corso sulla Striscia di Gaza. "Siamo davanti alla C.A.B.I. Cattaneo perché è una fabbrica di armi, attiva nella subacquea e sta collaborando con Leonardo Fincantieri per fornire i mezzi subacquei alla marina statunitense anche a quella israeliana, nonostante la guerra in corso contro Gaza il genocidio in Palestina, l'Italia continua a vendere armi", spiega Arturo di 'Milano per la Palestina', "Questa denuncia del mercanto di armi e delle fabbriche di produzione di armi continuerà. A Milano non c'è solo questa e adesso ci stiamo documentando e studiando e faremo altre iniziative". I manifestanti hanno percorso in corteo le vie del quartiere dietro lo striscione con scritto 'Blocchiamo chi arma Israele" ma non hanno mai raggiunto l'ingresso dell'azienda presidiato da alcune squadre di poliziotti in tenuta antisommossa. Il corteo è poi proseguito e i manifestanti hanno occupato gli spazi del centro commerciale di piazza Portello dove sono presenti alcune attività accusate di finanziare Israele e la guerra di Gaza. Sono stati urlati slogan contro Biden, Macron, Netanyahu e anche nei confronti del presidente del consiglio, Giorgia Meloni. Ci sono stati alcuni momenti di tensione con gli addetti alla sicurezza della galleria commerciale, subito sedati dagli agenti di polizia presenti sul posto.



Ieri, presidio trasformato in corteo contro fabbriche di morte, nello specifico CABI Cattaneo

Presidio e corteo molto partecipato e con una buona risposta da parte degli abitanti, la maggior parte all' oscuro che cabi produca armi, solidali. In diversi si sono uniti al presidio e poi al corteo. Il corteo a visto la partecipazione delle tante realtà della solidarietà alla Resistenza del Popolo Palestinese e delle sue organizzazioni, che ha messo al centro il ruolo complice dell'imperialismo/fascista del governo Meloni al genocidio a Gaza e in CisGiordania. Mettendo in luce l'altra faccia di questa guerra - quella interna -fatta di tagli a sanità, scuola, servizi e repressione delle lotte sociali


[Previous Article]#[Next]

Crimes of Israel – The Red Herald (Red Herald)


Featured image: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Source: AFP

In the International Military Tribunal, know as the Nuremberg trial, the Soviet Union together with Yankee, British and French imperialism tried crimes of the European Axis, mainly by the Nazis.

In the Charter of the International Military Tribunal, war crimes is defined as follows:

‘ War crimes: ‘ namely, violations of the laws or customs of war. Such violations shall include, but not be limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave labour or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity;”

In addition the Soviet Union proposed to include crimes against civilians, which were defined in the Charter as crimes against humanity:

‘ Crimes against humanity: ‘ namely, murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, before or during the war, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds in execution of or in connection with any crime within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, whether or not in violation of the domestic law of the country where perpetrated.”

The charter also established that not only the individual directly committing an act is responsible for the crime:

Leaders, organizers, instigators and accomplices participating in the formulation or execution of a common plan or conspiracy to commit any of the foregoing crimes are responsible for all acts performed by any persons in execution of such plan.”

Regarding war crimes we have already reported on some of the violation of laws of war committed by the State of Israel. With neglecting to provide necessary supplies to the population under its occupation and further blocking other parties from delivering these supplies, in addition to destroying necessary infrastructure such as water wells and poisoning the groundwater with seawater, the State of Israel is using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare. These acts violates Article 23 and Article 55 of the Fourth Geneva Convention as well as Article 54 and Article 70 of the Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions.

Regarding “murder, ill-treatment or deportation … for any … purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory” the State of Israel has murdered at least 31,988 people in Gaza since the 7th of October, including more than 13,000 children and 8,400 women. This is already more than one percent of the population in Gaza. In addition more than 8,000 people are missing, likely dead under the rubble of destroyed buildings. With this the real death toll is likely closer to 2% of the Palestinians in Gaza. The imminent famine and continuing military attacks against civilians point toward even larger parts of the population being murdered. The State of Israel has also forcefully displaced almost 1.9 million people, 85% of the population in Gaza. More than half of the population, an estimated 1.4 million people are currently living in Rafah, which used to have a population of around 250,000 people.

360,000 housing units, more than half of the homes of Gaza, have been destroyed or damaged. Only 12 out of 35 hospitals are partially functioning. 392 educational facilities have been destroyed or damaged. 83% of groundwater wells are not operational. 267 places of worship have been destroyed or damaged. According to satellite images an estimated 157,200 buildings have been damaged or destroyed. In densely populated areas more than half of all buildings have been destroyed. In northern Gaza almost three-fourths of all buildings have been damaged or destroyed. There is no doubt that the State of Israel is committing “wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity”.

Beit Hanoun, Gaza, on the 1st of May 2023 (left) and on the 21st of October (right). Source: Maxar Technologies

The mentioned war crimes are also crimes against humanity: “murder, … deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population”. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court expands on “extermination” as a crime against humanity: “’Extermination’ includes the intentional infliction of conditions of life, inter alia the deprivation of access to food and medicine, calculated to bring about the destruction of part of a population”.

The State of Israel is not only committing war crimes and crimes against humanity, they are carrying out a genocide against the Palestinians in Gaza. The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide from 1948, defines genocide as “any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

We have already explained how the State of Israel is killing Palestinians in Gaza, causing them serious bodily harm, and inflicting upon them conditions of life such as starvation. Since last October Israeli officials have at many times publicly revealed their genocidal intention and have made direct and public incitement to genocide. Many examples of these are included in South Africa’s application to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for charging the State of Israel for genocide.

The Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, has made many statements dehumanizing the Palestinian people and called for exterminating them. On the 15th of October 2023 he stated that Israeli soldiers “understand the scope of the mission” and stand ready “to defeat the bloodthirsty monsters who have risen against [Israel] to destroy us”. On the 16th October, in a formal address to the Israeli Knesset, he described the situation as “a struggle between the children of light and the children of darkness, between humanity and the law of the jungle”. In his “Christmas message” Netanyahu stated the following: “we’re facing monsters, monsters who murdered children in front of their parents … This is a battle not only of Israel against these barbarians, it’s a battle of civilization against barbarism”.

On the 28th of October, while preparing for the land invasion of Gaza, he stated: “you must remember what Amalek has done to you, says our Holy Bible. And we do remember”. This referees a biblical passage: “Now go, attack Amalek, and proscribe all that belongs to him. Spare no one, but kill alike men and women, infants and sucklings, oxen and sheep, camels and asses”.

On the 12th of October the President of Israel, Isaac Herzog, stated the following in a press conference: “It’s an entire nation out there that is responsible. It’s not true this rhetoric about civilians not aware not involved. It’s absolutely not true. … and we will fight until we break their backbone.” He has also made handwritten messages on bombs dropped in Gaza.

The Israeli Minister of Defense, Yoav Gallant, in an Israeli Army ‘situation update’ stated that Israel was “imposing a complete siege on Gaza. No electricity, no food, no water, no fuel. Everything is closed. We are fighting human animals and we are acting accordingly.” He has further made the genocidal plan clear by stating the following: “Gaza won’t return to what it was before. We will eliminate everything. If it doesn’t take one day, it will take a week. It will take weeks or even months, we will reach all places.”

On the 10th of November the Israeli Minister for National Security, Itamar Ben-Gvir, clarified the government’s position, stating: “[t]o be clear, when we say that Hamas should be destroyed, it also means those who celebrate, those who support, and those who hand out candy — they’re all terrorists, and they should also be destroyed.”

The Israeli Minister of Heritage, Amichai Eliyahu, stated the following on the 1st of November: “The north of the Gaza Strip, more beautiful than ever. Everything is blown up and flattened, simply a pleasure for the eyes … We must talk about the day after. In my mind, we will hand over lots to all those who fought for Gaza over the years and to those evicted from Gush Katif” [a former Israeli settlement].

Israeli Army Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (‘COGAT’), Major General Ghassan Alian, stated the following in an official video statement addressed to Hamas and Gaza residents: “Hamas became ISIS and the citizens of Gaza are celebrating instead of being horrified. Human animals are dealt with accordingly. Israel has imposed a total blockade on Gaza, no electricity, no water, just damage. You wanted hell, you will get hell.”

Giora Eiland, Israeli Army Reservist Major General, former Head of the Israeli National Security Council, and adviser to the Defense Minister, has, among many genocidal statements, incited genocide by targeting the water supply, noting that water in Gaza “comes from wells with salt water unfit for consumption. They have water treatment plants, Israel should hit those plants.” He has also stated that “Israel needs to create a humanitarian crisis in Gaza, compelling tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands to seek refuge in Egypt or the Gulf … Gaza will become a place where no human being can exist”. If the genocidal intentions of the State of Israel was not already clear, Eiland makes sure to clarify this by stating that: “When senior Israeli figures say in the media ‘It’s either us or them’ we should clarify the question of who is ‘them’. ‘They’ are not only Hamas fighters with weapons, but also all the ‘civilian’ officials, including hospital administrators and school administrators, and also the entire Gaza population who enthusiastically supported Hamas and cheered on its atrocities on October 7th.”

With the facts of the ongoing genocide being clear, the signatures of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, including the imperialists, are obliged to prevent and punish it.

However, not only are the imperialists negating this obligation, some of the imperialists are also complicit in the genocide. We already denounced this on the 15th of October: “The US, the UK as well as Germany, have intensified their military support to Israel. In Germany the State has announced a ban of public support of the Palestinian people and a ban of the Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network, Samidoun. In France the State has banned pro-Palestinian protests and has used teargas to suppress the popular support for the Palestinian people. The British Home Secretary has sent a letter to police chiefs in England and Wales, stating that waving the Palestinian flag, and shouting slogans such as ‘From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free’, may be a criminal offense.” Accordingly German imperialism faces accusations of being complicit in the genocide at the ICJ.

The imperialists have only widened their support for the genocide since this. Yankee President, Joe Biden, is currently working on giving a further 14 billion US-Dollar of military aid to the State of Israel. In January several imperialist cut funding for the United Nations agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA) after the State of Israel made absurd allegations against it. This happened just days after the ICJ ruling that the State of Israel should “take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article II” of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

While we here have focused on crimes committed in the current campaign against Gaza, the peoples of the world will not forget the other crimes committed by the State of Israel since it was established, and the crimes it is currently committing in the West Bank, such as the increasing amount of illegal settlements, as well as the crime of apartheid within the annexed territory.

PDF Content:



The text of the Rome Statute reproduced herein was originally circulated as document A/CONF.183/9 of 17 J uly 1 998 and corrected by procès-verbaux of 10 November 1998, 12 July 1999, 30 November 1999, 8 May 2000, 17 January 2001 and 16 January 2002. The amendments to article 8 reproduce the text contained in depositary notification C.N.651.2010 Treaties-6, while the amendments regarding articles 8 bis, 15 bis and 15 ter replicate the text contained in depositary notification C.N.651.2010 Treaties-8; both depositary communications are dated 29 November 2010. The table of contents is not part of the text of the Rome Statute adopted by the United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court on 17 July 1998. It has been included in this publication for ease of reference. Done at Rome on 17 July 1998, in force on 1 July 2002, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2187, No. 38544, Depositary: Secretary-General of the United Nations, http://treaties.un.org .Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPublished by the International Criminal Court ISBN No. 92-9227-232-2 ICC-PIOS-LT-03-002/15_Eng Copyright © International Criminal Court 2011 All rights reserved International Criminal Court | Po Box 19519 | 2500 CM | The Hague | The Netherlands | www.icc-cpi.int
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Table of Contents PREAMBLE 1 PART 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COURT 2 Article 1 The Court 2 Article 2 Relationship of the Court with the United Nations 2 Article 3 Seat of the Court 2 Article 4 Legal status and powers of the Court 2 PART 2. JURISDICTION, ADMISSIBILITY AND APPLICABLE LAW 3 Article 5 Crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court 3 Article 6 Genocide 3 Article 7 Crimes against humanity 3 Article 8 War crimes 4 Article 8 bis Crime of aggression 7 Article 9 Elements of Crimes 8 Article 10 8 Article 11 Jurisdiction ratione temporis 8 Article 12 Preconditions to the exercise of jurisdiction 8 Article 13 Exercise of jurisdiction 9 Article 14 Referral of a situation by a State Party 9 Article 15 Prosecutor 9 Article 15 bis Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (State referral, proprio motu ) 9 Article 15 ter Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (Security Council referral) 10 Article 16 Deferral of investigation or prosecution 10 Article 17 Issues of admissibility 10 Article 18 Preliminary rulings regarding admissibility 11 Article 19 Challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court or the admissibility of a case 12 Article 20 Ne bis in idem 1 3 Article 21 Applicable law 13 PART 3. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW 14 Article 22 Nullum crimen sine lege 14 Article 23 Nulla poena sine lege 14 Article 24 Non-retroactivity ratione personae 14 Article 25 Individual criminal responsibility 14 Article 26 Exclusion of jurisdiction over persons under eighteen 15 Article 27 Irrelevance of official capacity 15 Article 28 Responsibility of commanders and other superiors 15 Article 29 Non-applicability of statute of limitations 15 Article 30 Mental element 15 Article 31 Grounds for excluding criminal responsibility 16 Article 32 Mistake of fact or mistake of law 16 Article 33 Superior orders and prescription of law 16 PART 4. COMPOSITION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE COURT 17 Article 34 Organs of the Court 17 Article 35 Service of judges 17 Article 36 Qualifications, nomination and election of judges 17 Article 37 Judicial vacancies 19 Article 38 The Presidency 19 Article 39 Chambers 19 Article 40 Independence of the judges 20
Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 41 Excusing and disqualification of judges 20 Article 42 The Office of the Prosecutor 20 Article 44 Staff 21 Article 45 Solemn undertaking 21 Article 46 Removal from office 22 Article 47 Disciplinary measures 22 Article 48 Privileges and immunities 22 Article 49 Salaries, allowances and expenses 23 Article 50 Official and working languages 23 Article 51 Rules of Procedure and Evidence 23 Article 52 Regulations of the Court 23 PART 5. INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION 24 Article 53 Initiation of an investigation 24 Article 54 Duties and powers of the Prosecutor with respect to investigations 24 Article 55 Rights of persons during an investigation 25 Article 56 Role of the Pre-Trial Chamber in relation to a unique investigative opportunity 25 Article 57 Functions and powers of the Pre-Trial Chamber 26 Article 58 Issuance by the Pre-Trial Chamber of a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear 27 Article 59 Arrest proceedings in the custodial State 28 Article 60 Initial proceedings before the Court 28 Article 61 Confirmation of the charges before trial 28 PART 6. THE TRIAL 31 Article 62 Place of trial 31 Article 63 Trial in the presence of the accused 31 Article 64 Functions and powers of the Trial Chamber 31 Article 65 Proceedings on an admission of guilt 32 Article 66 Presumption of innocence 32 Article 67 Rights of the accused 33 Article 68 Protection of the victims and witnesses and their participation in the proceedings 33 Article 69 Evidence 34 Article 70 Offences against the administration of justice 34 Article 71 Sanctions for misconduct before the Court 35 Article 72 Protection of national security information 35 Article 73 Third-party information or documents 36 Article 74 Requirements for the decision 36 Article 75 Reparations to victims 36 Article 76 Sentencing 37 PART 7. PENALTIES 38 Article 77 Applicable penalties 38 Article 78 Determination of the sentence 38 Article 79 Trust Fund 38 Article 80 Non-prejudice to national application of penalties and national laws 38 PART 8. APPEAL AND REVISION 39 Article 81 Appeal against decision of acquittal or conviction or against sentence 39 Article 82 Appeal against other decisions 39 Article 83 Proceedings on appeal 40 Article 84 Revision of conviction or sentence 40 Article 85 Compensation to an arrested or convicted person 41
Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 9. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AND JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE 42 Article 86 General obligation to cooperate 42 Article 87 Requests for cooperation: general provisions 42 Article 88 Availability of procedures under national law 42 Article 89 Surrender of persons to the Court 42 Article 90 Competing requests 43 Article 91 Contents of request for arrest and surrender 44 Article 92 Provisional arrest 45 Article 93 Other forms of cooperation 45 Article 94 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of ongoing investigation or prosecution 47 Article 95 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of an admissibility challenge 47 Article 96 Contents of request for other forms of assistance under article 93 47 Article 97 Consultations 48 Article 98 Cooperation with respect to waiver of immunity and consent to surrender 48 Article 99 Execution of requests under articles 93 and 96 48 Article 100 Costs 49 Article 101 Rule of speciality 49 Article 102 Use of terms 49 PART 10. ENFORCEMENT 50 Article 103 Role of States in enforcement of sentences of imprisonment 50 Article 104 Change in designation of State of enforcement 50 Article 105 Enforcement of the sentence 50 Article 106 Supervision of enforcement of sentences and conditions of imprisonment 50 Article 107 Transfer of the person upon completion of sentence 51 Article 108 Limitation on the prosecution or punishment of other offences 51 Article 109 Enforcement of fines and forfeiture measures 51 Article 110 Review by the Court concerning reduction of sentence 51 Article 111 Escape 52 PART 11. ASSEMBLY OF STATES PARTIES 53 Article 112 Assembly of States Parties 53 PART 12. FINANCING 54 Article 113 Financial Regulations 54 Article 114 Payment of expenses 54 Article 115 Funds of the Court and of the Assembly of States Parties 54 Article 116 Voluntary contributions 54 Article 117 Assessment of contributions 54 Article 118 Annual audit 54 PART 13. FINAL CLAUSES 55 Article 119 Settlement of disputes 55 Article 120 Reservations 55 Article 121 Amendments 55 Article 122 Amendments to provisions of an institutional nature 55 Article 123 Review of the Statute 56 Article 124 Transitional Provision 56 Article 125 Signature, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession 56 Article 126 Entry into force 56 Article 127 Withdrawal 56 Article 128 Authentic texts 57
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
1 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPREAMBLE The States Parties to this Statute, Conscious that all peoples are united by common bonds, their cultures pieced together in a shared heritage, and concerned that this delicate mosaic may be shattered at any time, Mindful that during this century millions of children, women and men have been victims of unimaginable atrocities that deeply shock the conscience of humanity, Recognizing that such grave crimes threaten the peace, security and well-being of the world, Affirming that the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole must not go unpunished and that their effective prosecution must be ensured by taking measures at the national level and by enhancing international cooperation, Determined to put an end to impunity for the perpetrators of these crimes and thus to contribute to the prevention of such crimes, Recalling that it is the duty of every State to exercise its criminal jurisdiction over those responsible for international crimes, Reaffirming the Purposes and Principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and in particular that all States shall refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations, Emphasizing in this connection that nothing in this Statute shall be taken as authorizing any State Party to intervene in an armed conflict or in the internal affairs of any State, Determined to these ends and for the sake of present and future generations, to establish an independent permanent International Criminal Court in relationship with the United Nations system, with jurisdiction over the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole, Emphasizing that the International Criminal Court established under this Statute shall be complementary to national criminal jurisdictions, Resolved to guarantee lasting respect for and the enforcement of international justice, Have agreed as follows:
2 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COURT Article 1 The Court An International Criminal Court ("the Court") is hereby established. It shall be a permanent institution and shall have the power to exercise its jurisdiction over persons for the most serious crimes of international concern, as referred to in this Statute, and shall be complementary to national criminal jurisdictions. The jurisdiction and functioning of the Court shall be governed by the provisions of this Statute. Article 2 Relationship of the Court with the United Nations The Court shall be brought into relationship with the United Nations through an agreement to be approved by the Assembly of States Parties to this Statute and thereafter concluded by the President of the Court on its behalf. Article 3 Seat of the Court 1. The seat of the Court shall be established at The Hague in the Netherlands ("the host State"). 2. The Court shall enter into a headquarters agreement with the host State, to be approved by the Assembly of States Parties and thereafter concluded by the President of the Court on its behalf. 3. The Court may sit elsewhere, whenever it considers it desirable, as provided in this Statute. Article 4 Legal status and powers of the Court 1. The Court shall have international legal personality. It shall also have such legal capacity as may be necessary for the exercise of its functions and the fulfilment of its purposes. 2. The Court may exercise its functions and powers, as provided in this Statute, on the territory of any State Party and, by special agreement, on the territory of any other State.
3 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 2. JURISDICTION, ADMISSIBILITY AND APPLICABLE LAW Article 51 Crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court The jurisdiction of the Court shall be limited to the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole. The Court has jurisdiction in accordance with this Statute with respect to the following crimes: (a) The crime of genocide; (b) Crimes against humanity; (c) War crimes; (d) The crime of aggression. Article 6 Genocide For the purpose of this Statute, "genocide" means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. Article 7 Crimes against humanity 1. For the purpose of this Statute, "crime against humanity" means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack: (a) Murder; (b) Extermination; (c) Enslavement; (d) Deportation or forcible transfer of population; (e) Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law; (f) Torture; (g) Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity; (h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; (i) Enforced disappearance of persons; (j) The crime of apartheid; (k) Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health. 1 Paragraph 2 of article 5 (“The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression once a provision is adopted in accordance with articles 121 and 123 defining the crime and setting out the conditions under which the Court shall exercise jurisdiction with respect to this crime. Such a provision shall be consistent with the relevant provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.”) was deleted in accordance with RC/Res.6, annex I, of 11 June 2010.
4 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. For the purpose of paragraph 1: (a) "Attack directed against any civilian population" means a course of conduct involving the multiple commission of acts referred to in paragraph 1 against any civilian population, pursuant to or in furtherance of a State or organizational policy to commit such attack; (b) "Extermination" includes the intentional infliction of conditions of life, inter alia the deprivation of access to food and medicine, calculated to bring about the destruction of part of a population; (c) "Enslavement" means the exercise of any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership over a person and includes the exercise of such power in the course of trafficking in persons, in particular women and children; (d) "Deportation or forcible transfer of population" means forced displacement of the persons concerned by expulsion or other coercive acts from the area in which they are lawfully present, without grounds permitted under international law; (e) "Torture" means the intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, upon a person in the custody or under the control of the accused; except that torture shall not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions; (f) "Forced pregnancy" means the unlawful confinement of a woman forcibly made pregnant, with the intent of affecting the ethnic composition of any population or carrying out other grave violations of international law. This definition shall not in any way be interpreted as affecting national laws relating to pregnancy; (g) "Persecution" means the intentional and severe deprivation of fundamental rights contrary to international law by reason of the identity of the group or collectivity; (h) "The crime of apartheid" means inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime; (i) "Enforced disappearance of persons" means the arrest, detention or abduction of persons by, or with the authorization, support or acquiescence of, a State or a political organization, followed by a refusal to acknowledge that deprivation of freedom or to give information on the fate or whereabouts of those persons, with the intention of removing them from the protection of the law for a prolonged period of time. 3. For the purpose of this Statute, it is understood that the term "gender" refers to the two sexes, male and female, within the context of society. The term "gender" does not indicate any meaning different from the above. Article 82 War crimes 1. The Court shall have jurisdiction in respect of war crimes in particular when committed as part of a plan or policy or as part of a large-scale commission of such crimes. 2. For the purpose of this Statute, "war crimes" means: (a) Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention: (i) Wilful killing; (ii) Torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments; (iii) Wilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health; (iv) Extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly; (v) Compelling a prisoner of war or other protected person to serve in the forces of a hostile Power; (vi) Wilfully depriving a prisoner of war or other protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial; 2 Paragraphs 2 (e) (xiii) to 2 (e) (xv) were amended by resolution RC/Res.5 of 11 June 2010 (adding paragraphs 2 (e) (xiii) to 2 (e) (xv)).
5 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(vii) Unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement; (viii) Taking of hostages. (b) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts: (i) Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities; (ii) Intentionally directing attacks against civilian objects, that is, objects which are not military objectives; (iii) Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict; (iv) Intentionally launching an attack in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated; (v) Attacking or bombarding, by whatever means, towns, villages, dwellings or buildings which are undefended and which are not military objectives; (vi) Killing or wounding a combatant who, having laid down his arms or having no longer means of defence, has surrendered at discretion; (vii) Making improper use of a flag of truce, of the flag or of the military insignia and uniform of the enemy or of the United Nations, as well as of the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions, resulting in death or serious personal injury; (viii) The transfer, directly or indirectly, by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies, or the deportation or transfer of all or parts of the population of the occupied territory within or outside this territory; (ix) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military objectives; (x) Subjecting persons who are in the power of an adverse party to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons; (xi) Killing or wounding treacherously individuals belonging to the hostile nation or army; (xii) Declaring that no quarter will be given; (xiii) Destroying or seizing the enemy's property unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war; (xiv) Declaring abolished, suspended or inadmissible in a court of law the rights and actions of the nationals of the hostile party; (xv) Compelling the nationals of the hostile party to take part in the operations of war directed against their own country, even if they were in the belligerent's service before the commencement of the war; (xvi) Pillaging a town or place, even when taken by assault; (xvii) Employing poison or poisoned weapons; (xviii) Employing asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and all analogous liquids, materials or devices;
6 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(xix) Employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions; (xx) Employing weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare which are of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering or which are inherently indiscriminate in violation of the international law of armed conflict, provided that such weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare are the subject of a comprehensive prohibition and are included in an annex to this Statute, by an amendment in accordance with the relevant provisions set forth in articles 121 and 123; (xxi) Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (xxii) Committing rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, as defined in article 7, paragraph 2 (f), enforced sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence also constituting a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions; (xxiii) Utilizing the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas or military forces immune from military operations; (xxiv) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings, material, medical units and transport, and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions in conformity with international law; (xxv) Intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions; (xxvi) Conscripting or enlisting children under the age of fifteen years into the national armed forces or using them to participate actively in hostilities. (c) In the case of an armed conflict not of an international character, serious violations of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts committed against persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention or any other cause: (i) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; (ii) Committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (iii) Taking of hostages; (iv) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgement pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all judicial guarantees which are generally recognized as indispensable. (d) Paragraph 2 (c) applies to armed conflicts not of an international character and thus does not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence or other acts of a similar nature. (e) Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in armed conflicts not of an international character, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts: (i) Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities; (ii) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings, material, medical units and transport, and personnel using the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions in conformity with international law; (iii) Intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, as long as they are entitled to the protection given to civilians or civilian objects under the international law of armed conflict; (iv) Intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not military objectives; (v) Pillaging a town or place, even when taken by assault;
7 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(vi) Committing rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, as defined in article 7, paragraph 2 (f), enforced sterilization, and any other form of sexual violence also constituting a serious violation of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions; (vii) Conscripting or enlisting children under the age of fifteen years into armed forces or groups or using them to participate actively in hostilities; (viii) Ordering the displacement of the civilian population for reasons related to the conflict, unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand; (ix) Killing or wounding treacherously a combatant adversary; (x) Declaring that no quarter will be given; (xi) Subjecting persons who are in the power of another party to the conflict to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons; (xii) Destroying or seizing the property of an adversary unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of the conflict; (xiii) Employing poison or poisoned weapons; (xiv) Employing asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and all analogous liquids, materials or devices; (xv) Employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions. (f) Paragraph 2 (e) applies to armed conflicts not of an international character and thus does not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence or other acts of a similar nature. It applies to armed conflicts that take place in the territory of a State when there is protracted armed conflict between governmental authorities and organized armed groups or between such groups. 3. Nothing in paragraph 2 (c) and (e) shall affect the responsibility of a Government to maintain or re- establish law and order in the State or to defend the unity and territorial integrity of the State, by all legitimate means. Article 8 bis3 Crime of aggression 1. For the purpose of this Statute, “crime of aggression” means the planning, preparation, initiation or execution, by a person in a position effectively to exercise control over or to direct the political or military action of a State, of an act of aggression which, by its character, gravity and scale, constitutes a manifest violation of the Charter of the United Nations. 2. For the purpose of paragraph 1, “act of aggression” means the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations. Any of the following acts, regardless of a declaration of war, shall, in accordance with United Nations General Assembly resolution 3314 (XXIX) of 14 December 1974, qualify as an act of aggression: (a) The invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another State, or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such invasion or attack, or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State or part thereof; (b) Bombardment by the armed forces of a State against the territory of another State or the use of any weapons by a State against the territory of another State; (c) The blockade of the ports or coasts of a State by the armed forces of another State; (d) An attack by the armed forces of a State on the land, sea or air forces, or marine and air fleets of another State; 3 Inserted by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010.
8 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(e) The use of armed forces of one State which are within the territory of another State with the agreement of the receiving State, in contravention of the conditions provided for in the agreement or any extension of their presence in such territory beyond the termination of the agreement; (f) The action of a State in allowing its territory, which it has placed at the disposal of another State, to be used by that other State for perpetrating an act of aggression against a third State; (g) The sending by or on behalf of a State of armed bands, groups, irregulars or mercenaries, which carry out acts of armed force against another State of such gravity as to amount to the acts listed above, or its substantial involvement therein. Article 94 Elements of Crimes 1. Elements of Crimes shall assist the Court in the interpretation and application of articles 6, 7, 8 and 8 bis. They shall be adopted by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 2. Amendments to the Elements of Crimes may be proposed by: (a) Any State Party; (b) The judges acting by an absolute majority; (c) The Prosecutor. Such amendments shall be adopted by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 3. The Elements of Crimes and amendments thereto shall be consistent with this Statute. Article 10 Nothing in this Part shall be interpreted as limiting or prejudicing in any way existing or developing rules of international law for purposes other than this Statute. Article 11 Jurisdiction ratione temporis 1. The Court has jurisdiction only with respect to crimes committed after the entry into force of this Statute. 2. If a State becomes a Party to this Statute after its entry into force, the Court may exercise its jurisdiction only with respect to crimes committed after the entry into force of this Statute for that State, unless that State has made a declaration under article 12, paragraph 3. Article 12 Preconditions to the exercise of jurisdiction 1. A State which becomes a Party to this Statute thereby accepts the jurisdiction of the Court with respect to the crimes referred to in article 5. 2. In the case of article 13, paragraph (a) or (c), the Court may exercise its jurisdiction if one or more of the following States are Parties to this Statute or have accepted the jurisdiction of the Court in accordance with paragraph 3: (a) The State on the territory of which the conduct in question occurred or, if the crime was committed on board a vessel or aircraft, the State of registration of that vessel or aircraft; (b) The State of which the person accused of the crime is a national. 3. If the acceptance of a State which is not a Party to this Statute is required under paragraph 2, that State may, by declaration lodged with the Registrar, accept the exercise of jurisdiction by the Court with respect to the crime in question. The accepting State shall cooperate with the Court without any delay or exception in accordance with Part 9. 4 As amended by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010 (inserting the reference to article 8 bis).
9 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 13 Exercise of jurisdiction The Court may exercise its jurisdiction with respect to a crime referred to in article 5 in accordance with the provisions of this Statute if: (a) A situation in which one or more of such crimes appears to have been committed is referred to the Prosecutor by a State Party in accordance with article 14; (b) A situation in which one or more of such crimes appears to have been committed is referred to the Prosecutor by the Security Council acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations; or (c) The Prosecutor has initiated an investigation in respect of such a crime in accordance with article 15. Article 14 Referral of a situation by a State Party 1. A State Party may refer to the Prosecutor a situation in which one or more crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court appear to have been committed requesting the Prosecutor to investigate the situation for the purpose of determining whether one or more specific persons should be charged with the commission of such crimes. 2. As far as possible, a referral shall specify the relevant circumstances and be accompanied by such supporting documentation as is available to the State referring the situation. Article 15 Prosecutor 1. The Prosecutor may initiate investigations proprio motu on the basis of information on crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. 2. The Prosecutor shall analyse the seriousness of the information received. For this purpose, he or she may seek additional information from States, organs of the United Nations, intergovernmental or non- governmental organizations, or other reliable sources that he or she deems appropriate, and may receive written or oral testimony at the seat of the Court. 3. If the Prosecutor concludes that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation, he or she shall submit to the Pre-Trial Chamber a request for authorization of an investigation, together with any supporting material collected. Victims may make representations to the Pre-Trial Chamber, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. If the Pre-Trial Chamber, upon examination of the request and the supporting material, considers that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation, and that the case appears to fall within the jurisdiction of the Court, it shall authorize the commencement of the investigation, without prejudice to subsequent determinations by the Court with regard to the jurisdiction and admissibility of a case. 5. The refusal of the Pre-Trial Chamber to authorize the investigation shall not preclude the presentation of a subsequent request by the Prosecutor based on new facts or evidence regarding the same situation. 6. If, after the preliminary examination referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, the Prosecutor concludes that the information provided does not constitute a reasonable basis for an investigation, he or she shall inform those who provided the information. This shall not preclude the Prosecutor from considering further information submitted to him or her regarding the same situation in the light of new facts or evidence. Article 15 bis5 Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (State referral, proprio motu ) 1. The Court may exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with article 13, paragraphs (a) and (c), subject to the provisions of this article. 2. The Court may exercise jurisdiction only with respect to crimes of aggression committed one year after the ratification or acceptance of the amendments by thirty States Parties. 3. The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with this article, subject to a decision to be taken after 1 January 2017 by the same majority of States Parties as is required for the adoption of an amendment to the Statute. 5 Inserted by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010.
10 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court4. The Court may, in accordance with article 12, exercise jurisdiction over a crime of aggression, arising from an act of aggression committed by a State Party, unless that State Party has previously declared that it does not accept such jurisdiction by lodging a declaration with the Registrar. The withdrawal of such a declaration may be effected at any time and shall be considered by the State Party within three years. 5. In respect of a State that is not a party to this Statute, the Court shall not exercise its jurisdiction over the crime of aggression when committed by that State’s nationals or on its territory. 6. Where the Prosecutor concludes that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation in respect of a crime of aggression, he or she shall first ascertain whether the Security Council has made a determination of an act of aggression committed by the State concerned. The Prosecutor shall notify the Secretary-General of the United Nations of the situation before the Court, including any relevant information and documents. 7. Where the Security Council has made such a determination, the Prosecutor may proceed with the investigation in respect of a crime of aggression. 8. Where no such determination is made within six months after the date of notification, the Prosecutor may proceed with the investigation in respect of a crime of aggression, provided that the Pre-Trial Division has authorized the commencement of the investigation in respect of a crime of aggression in accordance with the procedure contained in article 15, and the Security Council has not decided otherwise in accordance with article16. 9. A determination of an act of aggression by an organ outside the Court shall be without prejudice to the Court’s own findings under this Statute. 10. This article is without prejudice to the provisions relating to the exercise of jurisdiction with respect to other crimes referred to in article 5. Article 15 ter6 Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (Security Council referral) 1. The Court may exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with article 13, paragraph (b), subject to the provisions of this article. 2. The Court may exercise jurisdiction only with respect to crimes of aggression committed one year after the ratification or acceptance of the amendments by thirty States Parties. 3. The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with this article, subject to a decision to be taken after 1 January 2017 by the same majority of States Parties as is required for the adoption of an amendment to the Statute. 4. A determination of an act of aggression by an organ outside the Court shall be without prejudice to the Court’s own findings under this Statute. 5. This article is without prejudice to the provisions relating to the exercise of jurisdiction with respect to other crimes referred to in article 5. Article 16 Deferral of investigation or prosecution No investigation or prosecution may be commenced or proceeded with under this Statute for a period of 12 months after the Security Council, in a resolution adopted under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, has requested the Court to that effect; that request may be renewed by the Council under the same conditions. Article 17 Issues of admissibility 1. Having regard to paragraph 10 of the Preamble and article 1, the Court shall determine that a case is inadmissible where: (a) The case is being investigated or prosecuted by a State which has jurisdiction over it, unless the State is unwilling or unable genuinely to carry out the investigation or prosecution; 6 Inserted by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010.
11 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) The case has been investigated by a State which has jurisdiction over it and the State has decided not to prosecute the person concerned, unless the decision resulted from the unwillingness or inability of the State genuinely to prosecute; (c) The person concerned has already been tried for conduct which is the subject of the complaint, and a trial by the Court is not permitted under article 20, paragraph 3; (d) The case is not of sufficient gravity to justify further action by the Court. 2. In order to determine unwillingness in a particular case, the Court shall consider, having regard to the principles of due process recognized by international law, whether one or more of the following exist, as applicable: (a) The proceedings were or are being undertaken or the national decision was made for the purpose of shielding the person concerned from criminal responsibility for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court referred to in article 5; (b) There has been an unjustified delay in the proceedings which in the circumstances is inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice; (c) The proceedings were not or are not being conducted independently or impartially, and they were or are being conducted in a manner which, in the circumstances, is inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice. 3. In order to determine inability in a particular case, the Court shall consider whether, due to a total or substantial collapse or unavailability of its national judicial system, the State is unable to obtain the accused or the necessary evidence and testimony or otherwise unable to carry out its proceedings. Article 18 Preliminary rulings regarding admissibility 1. When a situation has been referred to the Court pursuant to article 13 (a) and the Prosecutor has determined that there would be a reasonable basis to commence an investigation, or the Prosecutor initiates an investigation pursuant to articles 13 (c) and 15, the Prosecutor shall notify all States Parties and those States which, taking into account the information available, would normally exercise jurisdiction over the crimes concerned. The Prosecutor may notify such States on a confidential basis and, where the Prosecutor believes it necessary to protect persons, prevent destruction of evidence or prevent the absconding of persons, may limit the scope of the information provided to States. 2. Within one month of receipt of that notification, a State may inform the Court that it is investigating or has investigated its nationals or others within its jurisdiction with respect to criminal acts which may constitute crimes referred to in article 5 and which relate to the information provided in the notification to States. At the request of that State, the Prosecutor shall defer to the State's investigation of those persons unless the Pre-Trial Chamber, on the application of the Prosecutor, decides to authorize the investigation. 3. The Prosecutor's deferral to a State's investigation shall be open to review by the Prosecutor six months after the date of deferral or at any time when there has been a significant change of circumstances based on the State's unwillingness or inability genuinely to carry out the investigation. 4. The State concerned or the Prosecutor may appeal to the Appeals Chamber against a ruling of the Pre-Trial Chamber, in accordance with article 82. The appeal may be heard on an expedited basis. 5. When the Prosecutor has deferred an investigation in accordance with paragraph 2, the Prosecutor may request that the State concerned periodically inform the Prosecutor of the progress of its investigations and any subsequent prosecutions. States Parties shall respond to such requests without undue delay. 6. Pending a ruling by the Pre-Trial Chamber, or at any time when the Prosecutor has deferred an investigation under this article, the Prosecutor may, on an exceptional basis, seek authority from the Pre-Trial Chamber to pursue necessary investigative steps for the purpose of preserving evidence where there is a unique opportunity to obtain important evidence or there is a significant risk that such evidence may not be subsequently available. 7. A State which has challenged a ruling of the Pre-Trial Chamber under this article may challenge the admissibility of a case under article 19 on the grounds of additional significant facts or significant change of circumstances.
12 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 19 Challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court or the admissibility of a case 1. The Court shall satisfy itself that it has jurisdiction in any case brought before it. The Court may, on its own motion, determine the admissibility of a case in accordance with article 17. 2. Challenges to the admissibility of a case on the grounds referred to in article 17 or challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court may be made by: (a) An accused or a person for whom a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear has been issued under article 58; (b) A State which has jurisdiction over a case, on the ground that it is investigating or prosecuting the case or has investigated or prosecuted; or (c) A State from which acceptance of jurisdiction is required under article 12. 3. The Prosecutor may seek a ruling from the Court regarding a question of jurisdiction or admissibility. In proceedings with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility, those who have referred the situation under article 13, as well as victims, may also submit observations to the Court. 4. The admissibility of a case or the jurisdiction of the Court may be challenged only once by any person or State referred to in paragraph 2. The challenge shall take place prior to or at the commencement of the trial. In exceptional circumstances, the Court may grant leave for a challenge to be brought more than once or at a time later than the commencement of the trial. Challenges to the admissibility of a case, at the commencement of a trial, or subsequently with the leave of the Court, may be based only on article 17, paragraph 1 (c). 5. A State referred to in paragraph 2 (b) and (c) shall make a challenge at the earliest opportunity. 6. Prior to the confirmation of the charges, challenges to the admissibility of a case or challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court shall be referred to the Pre-Trial Chamber. After confirmation of the charges, they shall be referred to the Trial Chamber. Decisions with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility may be appealed to the Appeals Chamber in accordance with article 82. 7. If a challenge is made by a State referred to in paragraph 2 (b) or (c), the Prosecutor shall suspend the investigation until such time as the Court makes a determination in accordance with article 17. 8. Pending a ruling by the Court, the Prosecutor may seek authority from the Court: (a) To pursue necessary investigative steps of the kind referred to in article 18, paragraph 6; (b) To take a statement or testimony from a witness or complete the collection and examination of evidence which had begun prior to the making of the challenge; and (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. 9. The making of a challenge shall not affect the validity of any act performed by the Prosecutor or any order or warrant issued by the Court prior to the making of the challenge. 10. If the Court has decided that a case is inadmissible under article 17, the Prosecutor may submit a request for a review of the decision when he or she is fully satisfied that new facts have arisen which negate the basis on which the case had previously been found inadmissible under article 17. 11. If the Prosecutor, having regard to the matters referred to in article 17, defers an investigation, the Prosecutor may request that the relevant State make available to the Prosecutor information on the proceedings. That information shall, at the request of the State concerned, be confidential. If the Prosecutor thereafter decides to proceed with an investigation, he or she shall notify the State to which deferral of the proceedings has taken place.
13 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 207 Ne bis in idem 1. Except as provided in this Statute, no person shall be tried before the Court with respect to conduct which formed the basis of crimes for which the person has been convicted or acquitted by the Court. 2. No person shall be tried by another court for a crime referred to in article 5 for which that person has already been convicted or acquitted by the Court. 3. No person who has been tried by another court for conduct also proscribed under article 6, 7, 8 or 8 bis shall be tried by the Court with respect to the same conduct unless the proceedings in the other court: (a) Were for the purpose of shielding the person concerned from criminal responsibility for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court; or (b) Otherwise were not conducted independently or impartially in accordance with the norms of due process recognized by international law and were conducted in a manner which, in the circumstances, was inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice. Article 21 Applicable law 1. The Court shall apply: (a) In the first place, this Statute, Elements of Crimes and its Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (b) In the second place, where appropriate, applicable treaties and the principles and rules of international law, including the established principles of the international law of armed conflict; (c) Failing that, general principles of law derived by the Court from national laws of legal systems of the world including, as appropriate, the national laws of States that would normally exercise jurisdiction over the crime, provided that those principles are not inconsistent with this Statute and with international law and internationally recognized norms and standards. 2. The Court may apply principles and rules of law as interpreted in its previous decisions. 3. The application and interpretation of law pursuant to this article must be consistent with internationally recognized human rights, and be without any adverse distinction founded on grounds such as gender as defined in article 7, paragraph 3, age, race, colour, language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, wealth, birth or other status. 7 As amended by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010 (inserting the reference to article 8 bis).
14 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 3. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW Article 22 Nullum crimen sine lege 1. A person shall not be criminally responsible under this Statute unless the conduct in question constitutes, at the time it takes place, a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court. 2. The definition of a crime shall be strictly construed and shall not be extended by analogy. In case of ambiguity, the definition shall be interpreted in favour of the person being investigated, prosecuted or convicted. 3. This article shall not affect the characterization of any conduct as criminal under international law independently of this Statute. Article 23 Nulla poena sine leg e A person convicted by the Court may be punished only in accordance with this Statute. Article 24 Non-retroactivity ratione personae 1. No person shall be criminally responsible under this Statute for conduct prior to the entry into force of the Statute. 2. In the event of a change in the law applicable to a given case prior to a final judgement, the law more favourable to the person being investigated, prosecuted or convicted shall apply. Article 258 Individual criminal responsibility 1. The Court shall have jurisdiction over natural persons pursuant to this Statute. 2. A person who commits a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court shall be individually responsible and liable for punishment in accordance with this Statute. 3. In accordance with this Statute, a person shall be criminally responsible and liable for punishment for a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court if that person: (a) Commits such a crime, whether as an individual, jointly with another or through another person, regardless of whether that other person is criminally responsible; (b) Orders, solicits or induces the commission of such a crime which in fact occurs or is attempted; (c) For the purpose of facilitating the commission of such a crime, aids, abets or otherwise assists in its commission or its attempted commission, including providing the means for its commission; (d) In any other way contributes to the commission or attempted commission of such a crime by a group of persons acting with a common purpose. Such contribution shall be intentional and shall either: (i) Be made with the aim of furthering the criminal activity or criminal purpose of the group, where such activity or purpose involves the commission of a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; or (ii) Be made in the knowledge of the intention of the group to commit the crime; (e) In respect of the crime of genocide, directly and publicly incites others to commit genocide; (f) Attempts to commit such a crime by taking action that commences its execution by means of a substantial step, but the crime does not occur because of circumstances independent of the person's intentions. However, a person who abandons the effort to commit the crime or otherwise prevents the completion of the crime shall not be liable for punishment under this Statute for the attempt to commit that crime if that person completely and voluntarily gave up the criminal purpose. 8 As amended by resolution RC/Res.6 of 11 June 2010 (adding paragraph 3 bis).
15 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3 bis. In respect of the crime of aggression, the provisions of this article shall apply only to persons in a position effectively to exercise control over or to direct the political or military action of a State. 4. No provision in this Statute relating to individual criminal responsibility shall affect the responsibility of States under international law. Article 26 Exclusion of jurisdiction over persons under eighteen The Court shall have no jurisdiction over any person who was under the age of 18 at the time of the alleged commission of a crime. Article 27 Irrelevance of official capacity 1. This Statute shall apply equally to all persons without any distinction based on official capacity. In particular, official capacity as a Head of State or Government, a member of a Government or parliament, an elected representative or a government official shall in no case exempt a person from criminal responsibility under this Statute, nor shall it, in and of itself, constitute a ground for reduction of sentence. 2. Immunities or special procedural rules which may attach to the official capacity of a person, whether under national or international law, shall not bar the Court from exercising its jurisdiction over such a person. Article 28 Responsibility of commanders and other superiors In addition to other grounds of criminal responsibility under this Statute for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court: (a) A military commander or person effectively acting as a military commander shall be criminally responsible for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court committed by forces under his or her effective command and control, or effective authority and control as the case may be, as a result of his or her failure to exercise control properly over such forces, where: (i) That military commander or person either knew or, owing to the circumstances at the time, should have known that the forces were committing or about to commit such crimes; and (ii) That military commander or person failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power to prevent or repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecution. (b) With respect to superior and subordinate relationships not described in paragraph (a), a superior shall be criminally responsible for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court committed by subordinates under his or her effective authority and control, as a result of his or her failure to exercise control properly over such subordinates, where: (i) The superior either knew, or consciously disregarded information which clearly indicated, that the subordinates were committing or about to commit such crimes; (ii) The crimes concerned activities that were within the effective responsibility and control of the superior; and (iii) The superior failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power to prevent or repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecution. Article 29 Non-applicability of statute of limitations The crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court shall not be subject to any statute of limitations. Article 30 Mental element 1. Unless otherwise provided, a person shall be criminally responsible and liable for punishment for a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court only if the material elements are committed with intent and knowledge. 2. For the purposes of this article, a person has intent where: (a) In relation to conduct, that person means to engage in the conduct;
16 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) In relation to a consequence, that person means to cause that consequence or is aware that it will occur in the ordinary course of events. 3. For the purposes of this article, "knowledge" means awareness that a circumstance exists or a consequence will occur in the ordinary course of events. "Know" and "knowingly" shall be construed accordingly. Article 31 Grounds for excluding criminal responsibility 1. In addition to other grounds for excluding criminal responsibility provided for in this Statute, a person shall not be criminally responsible if, at the time of that person's conduct: (a) The person suffers from a mental disease or defect that destroys that person's capacity to appreciate the unlawfulness or nature of his or her conduct, or capacity to control his or her conduct to conform to the requirements of law; (b) The person is in a state of intoxication that destroys that person's capacity to appreciate the unlawfulness or nature of his or her conduct, or capacity to control his or her conduct to conform to the requirements of law, unless the person has become voluntarily intoxicated under such circumstances that the person knew, or disregarded the risk, that, as a result of the intoxication, he or she was likely to engage in conduct constituting a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; (c) The person acts reasonably to defend himself or herself or another person or, in the case of war crimes, property which is essential for the survival of the person or another person or property which is essential for accomplishing a military mission, against an imminent and unlawful use of force in a manner proportionate to the degree of danger to the person or the other person or property protected. The fact that the person was involved in a defensive operation conducted by forces shall not in itself constitute a ground for excluding criminal responsibility under this subparagraph; (d) The conduct which is alleged to constitute a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been caused by duress resulting from a threat of imminent death or of continuing or imminent serious bodily harm against that person or another person, and the person acts necessarily and reasonably to avoid this threat, provided that the person does not intend to cause a greater harm than the one sought to be avoided. Such a threat may either be: (i) Made by other persons; or (ii) Constituted by other circumstances beyond that person's control. 2. The Court shall determine the applicability of the grounds for excluding criminal responsibility provided for in this Statute to the case before it. 3. At trial, the Court may consider a ground for excluding criminal responsibility other than those referred to in paragraph 1 where such a ground is derived from applicable law as set forth in article 21. The procedures relating to the consideration of such a ground shall be provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 32 Mistake of fact or mistake of law 1. A mistake of fact shall be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility only if it negates the mental element required by the crime. 2. A mistake of law as to whether a particular type of conduct is a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court shall not be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility. A mistake of law may, however, be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility if it negates the mental element required by such a crime, or as provided for in article 33. Article 33 Superior orders and prescription of law 1. The fact that a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been committed by a person pursuant to an order of a Government or of a superior, whether military or civilian, shall not relieve that person of criminal responsibility unless: (a) The person was under a legal obligation to obey orders of the Government or the superior in question; (b) The person did not know that the order was unlawful; and (c) The order was not manifestly unlawful. 2. For the purposes of this article, orders to commit genocide or crimes against humanity are manifestly unlawful.
17 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 4. COMPOSITION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE COURT Article 34 Organs of the Court The Court shall be composed of the following organs: (a) The Presidency; (b) An Appeals Division, a Trial Division and a Pre-Trial Division; (c) The Office of the Prosecutor; (d) The Registry. Article 35 Service of judges 1. All judges shall be elected as full-time members of the Court and shall be available to serve on that basis from the commencement of their terms of office. 2. The judges composing the Presidency shall serve on a full-time basis as soon as they are elected. 3. The Presidency may, on the basis of the workload of the Court and in consultation with its members, decide from time to time to what extent the remaining judges shall be required to serve on a full-time basis. Any such arrangement shall be without prejudice to the provisions of article 40. 4. The financial arrangements for judges not required to serve on a full-time basis shall be made in accordance with article 49. Article 36 Qualifications, nomination and election of judges 1. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2, there shall be 18 judges of the Court. 2. (a) The Presidency, acting on behalf of the Court, may propose an increase in the number of judges specified in paragraph 1, indicating the reasons why this is considered necessary and appropriate The Registrar shall promptly circulate any such proposal to all States Parties. (b) Any such proposal shall then be considered at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties to be convened in accordance with article 112. The proposal shall be considered adopted if approved at the meeting by a vote of two thirds of the members of the Assembly of States Parties and shall enter into force at such time as decided by the Assembly of States Parties. (c) (i) Once a proposal for an increase in the number of judges has been adopted under subparagraph (b), the election of the additional judges shall take place at the next session of the Assembly of States Parties in accordance with paragraphs 3 to 8, and article 37, paragraph 2; (ii) Once a proposal for an increase in the number of judges has been adopted and brought into effect under subparagraphs (b) and (c) (i), it shall be open to the Presidency at any time thereafter, if the workload of the Court justifies it, to propose a reduction in the number of judges, provided that the number of judges shall not be reduced below that specified in paragraph 1. The proposal shall be dealt with in accordance with the procedure laid down in subparagraphs (a) and (b). In the event that the proposal is adopted, the number of judges shall be progressively decreased as the terms of office of serving judges expire, until the necessary number has been reached. 3. (a) The judges shall be chosen from among persons of high moral character, impartiality and integrity who possess the qualifications required in their respective States for appointment to the highest judicial offices. (b) Every candidate for election to the Court shall: (i) Have established competence in criminal law and procedure, and the necessary relevant experience, whether as judge, prosecutor, advocate or in other similar capacity, in criminal proceedings; or (ii) Have established competence in relevant areas of international law such as international humanitarian law and the law of human rights, and extensive experience in a professional legal capacity which is of relevance to the judicial work of the Court;
18 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(c) Every candidate for election to the Court shall have an excellent knowledge of and be fluent in at least one of the working languages of the Court. 4. (a) Nominations of candidates for election to the Court may be made by any State Party to this Statute, and shall be made either: (i) By the procedure for the nomination of candidates for appointment to the highest judicial offices in the State in question; or (ii) By the procedure provided for the nomination of candidates for the International Court of Justice in the Statute of that Court. Nominations shall be accompanied by a statement in the necessary detail specifying how the candidate fulfils the requirements of paragraph 3. (b) Each State Party may put forward one candidate for any given election who need not necessarily be a national of that State Party but shall in any case be a national of a State Party. (c) The Assembly of States Parties may decide to establish, if appropriate, an Advisory Committee on nominations. In that event, the Committee's composition and mandate shall be established by the Assembly of States Parties. 5. For the purposes of the election, there shall be two lists of candidates: List A containing the names of candidates with the qualifications specified in paragraph 3 (b) (i); and List B containing the names of candidates with the qualifications specified in paragraph 3 (b) (ii). A candidate with sufficient qualifications for both lists may choose on which list to appear. At the first election to the Court, at least nine judges shall be elected from list A and at least five judges from list B. Subsequent elections shall be so organized as to maintain the equivalent proportion on the Court of judges qualified on the two lists. 6. (a) The judges shall be elected by secret ballot at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties convened for that purpose under article 112. Subject to paragraph 7, the persons elected to the Court shall be the 18 candidates who obtain the highest number of votes and a two-thirds majority of the States Parties present and voting. (b) In the event that a sufficient number of judges is not elected on the first ballot, successive ballots shall be held in accordance with the procedures laid down in subparagraph (a) until the remaining places have been filled. 7. No two judges may be nationals of the same State. A person who, for the purposes of membership of the Court, could be regarded as a national of more than one State shall be deemed to be a national of the State in which that person ordinarily exercises civil and political rights. 8. (a) The States Parties shall, in the selection of judges, take into account the need, within the membership of the Court, for: (i) The representation of the principal legal systems of the world; (ii) Equitable geographical representation; and (iii) A fair representation of female and male judges. (b) States Parties shall also take into account the need to include judges with legal expertise on specific issues, including, but not limited to, violence against women or children. 9. (a) Subject to subparagraph (b), judges shall hold office for a term of nine years and, subject to subparagraph (c) and to article 37, paragraph 2, shall not be eligible for re-election. (b) At the first election, one third of the judges elected shall be selected by lot to serve for a term of three years; one third of the judges elected shall be selected by lot to serve for a term of six years; and the remainder shall serve for a term of nine years. (c) A judge who is selected to serve for a term of three years under subparagraph (b) shall be eligible for re-election for a full term. 10. Notwithstanding paragraph 9, a judge assigned to a Trial or Appeals Chamber in accordance with article 39 shall continue in office to complete any trial or appeal the hearing of which has already commenced before that Chamber.
19 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 37 Judicial vacancies 1. In the event of a vacancy, an election shall be held in accordance with article 36 to fill the vacancy. 2. A judge elected to fill a vacancy shall serve for the remainder of the predecessor's term and, if that period is three years or less, shall be eligible for re-election for a full term under article 36. Article 38 The Presidency 1. The President and the First and Second Vice-Presidents shall be elected by an absolute majority of the judges. They shall each serve for a term of three years or until the end of their respective terms of office as judges, whichever expires earlier. They shall be eligible for re-election once. 2. The First Vice-President shall act in place of the President in the event that the President is unavailable or disqualified. The Second Vice-President shall act in place of the President in the event that both the President and the First Vice-President are unavailable or disqualified. 3. The President, together with the First and Second Vice-Presidents, shall constitute the Presidency, which shall be responsible for: (a) The proper administration of the Court, with the exception of the Office of the Prosecutor; and (b) The other functions conferred upon it in accordance with this Statute. 4. In discharging its responsibility under paragraph 3 (a), the Presidency shall coordinate with and seek the concurrence of the Prosecutor on all matters of mutual concern. Article 39 Chambers 1. As soon as possible after the election of the judges, the Court shall organize itself into the divisions specified in article 34, paragraph (b). The Appeals Division shall be composed of the President and four other judges, the Trial Division of not less than six judges and the Pre-Trial Division of not less than six judges. The assignment of judges to divisions shall be based on the nature of the functions to be performed by each division and the qualifications and experience of the judges elected to the Court, in such a way that each division shall contain an appropriate combination of expertise in criminal law and procedure and in international law. The Trial and Pre-Trial Divisions shall be composed predominantly of judges with criminal trial experience. 2. (a) The judicial functions of the Court shall be carried out in each division by Chambers. (b) (i) The Appeals Chamber shall be composed of all the judges of the Appeals Division; (ii) The functions of the Trial Chamber shall be carried out by three judges of the Trial Division; (iii) The functions of the Pre-Trial Chamber shall be carried out either by three judges of the Pre- Trial Division or by a single judge of that division in accordance with this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (c) Nothing in this paragraph shall preclude the simultaneous constitution of more than one Trial Chamber or Pre-Trial Chamber when the efficient management of the Court's workload so requires. 3. (a) Judges assigned to the Trial and Pre-Trial Divisions shall serve in those divisions for a period of three years, and thereafter until the completion of any case the hearing of which has already commenced in the division concerned. (b) Judges assigned to the Appeals Division shall serve in that division for their entire term of office. 4. Judges assigned to the Appeals Division shall serve only in that division. Nothing in this article shall, however, preclude the temporary attachment of judges from the Trial Division to the Pre-Trial Division or vice versa, if the Presidency considers that the efficient management of the Court's workload so requires, provided that under no circumstances shall a judge who has participated in the pre-trial phase of a case be eligible to sit on the Trial Chamber hearing that case.
20 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 40 Independence of the judges 1. The judges shall be independent in the performance of their functions. 2. Judges shall not engage in any activity which is likely to interfere with their judicial functions or to affect confidence in their independence. 3. Judges required to serve on a full-time basis at the seat of the Court shall not engage in any other occupation of a professional nature. 4. Any question regarding the application of paragraphs 2 and 3 shall be decided by an absolute majority of the judges. Where any such question concerns an individual judge, that judge shall not take part in the decision. Article 41 Excusing and disqualification of judges 1. The Presidency may, at the request of a judge, excuse that judge from the exercise of a function under this Statute, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 2. (a) A judge shall not participate in any case in which his or her impartiality might reasonably be doubted onany ground. A judge shall be disqualified from a case in accordance with this paragraph if, inter alia, that judge has previously been involved in any capacity in that case beforethe Court or in a related criminal case at the national level involving the person being investigated or prosecuted. A judge shall also be disqualified on such other grounds as may be provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. (b) The Prosecutor or the person being investigated or prosecuted may request the disqualification of a judge under this paragraph. (c) Any question as to the disqualification of a judge shall be decided by an absolute majority of the judges. The challenged judge shall be entitled to present his or her comments on the matter, but shall not take part in the decision. Article 42 The Office of the Prosecutor 1. The Office of the Prosecutor shall act independently as a separate organ of the Court. It shall be responsible for receiving referrals and any substantiated information on crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court, for examining them and for conducting investigations and prosecutions before the Court. A member of the Office shall not seek or act on instructions from any external source. 2. The Office shall be headed by the Prosecutor. The Prosecutor shall have full authority over the management and administration of the Office, including the staff, facilities and other resources thereof. The Prosecutor shall be assisted by one or more Deputy Prosecutors, who shall be entitled to carry out any of the acts required of the Prosecutor under this Statute. The Prosecutor and the Deputy Prosecutors shall be of different nationalities. They shall serve on a full-time basis. 3. The Prosecutor and the Deputy Prosecutors shall be persons of high moral character, be highly competent in and have extensive practical experience in the prosecution or trial of criminal cases. They shall have an excellent knowledge of and be fluent in at least one of the working languages of the Court. 4. The Prosecutor shall be elected by secret ballot by an absolute majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. The Deputy Prosecutors shall be elected in the same way from a list of candidates provided by the Prosecutor. The Prosecutor shall nominate three candidates for each position of Deputy Prosecutor to be filled. Unless a shorter term is decided upon at the time of their election, the Prosecutor and the Deputy Prosecutors shall hold office for a term of nine years and shall not be eligible for re-election. 5. Neither the Prosecutor nor a Deputy Prosecutor shall engage in any activity which is likely to interfere with his or her prosecutorial functions or to affect confidence in his or her independence. They shall not engage in any other occupation of a professional nature. 6. The Presidency may excuse the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor, at his or her request, from acting in a particular case.
21 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court7. Neither the Prosecutor nor a Deputy Prosecutor shall participate in any matter in which their impartiality might reasonably be doubted on any ground. They shall be disqualified from a case in accordance with this paragraph if, inter alia , they have previously been involved in any capacity in that case before the Court or in a related criminal case at the national level involving the person being investigated or prosecuted. 8. Any question as to the disqualification of the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor shall be decided by the Appeals Chamber. (a) The person being investigated or prosecuted may at any time request the disqualification of the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor on the grounds set out in this article; (b) The Prosecutor or the Deputy Prosecutor, as appropriate, shall be entitled to present his or her comments on the matter; 9. The Prosecutor shall appoint advisers with legal expertise on specific issues, including, but not limited to, sexual and gender violence and violence against children. Article 43 The Registry 1. The Registry shall be responsible for the non-judicial aspects of the administration and servicing of the Court, without prejudice to the functions and powers of the Prosecutor in accordance with article 42. 2. The Registry shall be headed by the Registrar, who shall be the principal administrative officer of the Court. The Registrar shall exercise his or her functions under the authority of the President of the Court. 3. The Registrar and the Deputy Registrar shall be persons of high moral character, be highly competent and have an excellent knowledge of and be fluent in at least one of the working languages of the Court. 4. The judges shall elect the Registrar by an absolute majority by secret ballot, taking into account any recommendation by the Assembly of States Parties. If the need arises and upon the recommendation of the Registrar, the judges shall elect, in the same manner, a Deputy Registrar. 5. The Registrar shall hold office for a term of five years, shall be eligible for re-election once and shall serve on a full-time basis. The Deputy Registrar shall hold office for a term of five years or such shorter term as may be decided upon by an absolute majority of the judges, and may be elected on the basis that the Deputy Registrar shall be called upon to serve as required. 6. The Registrar shall set up a Victims and Witnesses Unit within the Registry. This Unit shall provide, in consultation with the Office of the Prosecutor, protective measures and security arrangements, counseling and other appropriate assistance for witnesses, victims who appear before the Court, and others who are at risk on account of testimony given by such witnesses. The Unit shall include staff with expertise in trauma, including trauma related to crimes of sexual violence. Article 44 Staff 1. The Prosecutor and the Registrar shall appoint such qualified staff as may be required to their respective offices. In the case of the Prosecutor, this shall include the appointment of investigators. 2. In the employment of staff, the Prosecutor and the Registrar shall ensure the highest standards of efficiency, competency and integrity, and shall have regard, mutatis mutandis , to the criteria set forth in article 36, paragraph 8. 3. The Registrar, with the agreement of the Presidency and the Prosecutor, shall propose Staff Regulations which include the terms and conditions upon which the staff of the Court shall be appointed, remunerated and dismissed. The Staff Regulations shall be approved by the Assembly of States Parties. 4. The Court may, in exceptional circumstances, employ the expertise of gratis personnel offered by States Parties, intergovernmental organizations or non-governmental organizations to assist with the work of any of the organs of the Court. The Prosecutor may accept any such offer on behalf of the Office of the Prosecutor. Such gratis personnel shall be employed in accordance with guidelines to be established by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 45 Solemn undertaking Before taking up their respective duties under this Statute, the judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors, the Registrar and the Deputy Registrar shall each make a solemn undertaking in open court to exercise his or her respective functions impartially and conscientiously.
22 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 46 Removal from office 1. A judge, the Prosecutor, a Deputy Prosecutor, the Registrar or the Deputy Registrar shall be removed from office if a decision to this effect is made in accordance with paragraph 2, in cases where that person: (a) Is found to have committed serious misconduct or a serious breach of his or her duties under this Statute, as provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; or (b) Is unable to exercise the functions required by this Statute. 2. A decision as to the removal from office of a judge, the Prosecutor or a Deputy Prosecutor under paragraph 1 shall be made by the Assembly of States Parties, by secret ballot: (a) In the case of a judge, by a two-thirds majority of the States Parties upon a recommendation adopted by a two-thirds majority of the other judges; (b) In the case of the Prosecutor, by an absolute majority of the States Parties; (c) In the case of a Deputy Prosecutor, by an absolute majority of the States Parties upon the recommendation of the Prosecutor. 3. A decision as to the removal from office of the Registrar or Deputy Registrar shall be made by an absolute majority of the judges. 4. A judge, Prosecutor, Deputy Prosecutor, Registrar or Deputy Registrar whose conduct or ability to exercise the functions of the office as required by this Statute is challenged under this article shall have full opportunity to present and receive evidence and to make submissions in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The person in question shall not otherwise participate in the consideration of the matter. Article 47 Disciplinary measures A judge, Prosecutor, Deputy Prosecutor, Registrar or Deputy Registrar who has committed misconduct of a less serious nature than that set out in article 46, paragraph 1, shall be subject to disciplinary measures, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 48 Privileges and immunities 1. The Court shall enjoy in the territory of each State Party such privileges and immunities as are necessary for the fulfilment of its purposes. 2. The judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors and the Registrar shall, when engaged on or with respect to the business of the Court, enjoy the same privileges and immunities as are accorded to heads of diplomatic missions and shall, after the expiry of their terms of office, continue to be accorded immunity from legal process of every kind in respect of words spoken or written and acts performed by them in their official capacity. 3. The Deputy Registrar, the staff of the Office of the Prosecutor and the staff of the Registry shall enjoy the privileges and immunities and facilities necessary for the performance of their functions, in accordance with the agreement on the privileges and immunities of the Court. 4. Counsel, experts, witnesses or any other person required to be present at the seat of the Court shall be accorded such treatment as is necessary for the proper functioning of the Court, in accordance with the agreement on the privileges and immunities of the Court. 5. The privileges and immunities of: (a) A judge or the Prosecutor may be waived by an absolute majority of the judges; (b) The Registrar may be waived by the Presidency; (c) The Deputy Prosecutors and staff of the Office of the Prosecutor may be waived by the Prosecutor; (d) The Deputy Registrar and staff of the Registry may be waived by the Registrar.
23 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 49 Salaries, allowances and expenses The judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors, the Registrar and the Deputy Registrar shall receive such salaries, allowances and expenses as may be decided upon by the Assembly of States Parties. These salaries and allowances shall not be reduced during their terms of office. Article 50 Official and working languages 1. The official languages of the Court shall be Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish. The judgements of the Court, as well as other decisions resolving fundamental issues before the Court, shall be published in the official languages. The Presidency shall, in accordance with the criteria established by the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, determine which decisions may be considered as resolving fundamental issues for the purposes of this paragraph. 2. The working languages of the Court shall be English and French. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence shall determine the cases in which other official languages may be used as working languages. 3. At the request of any party to a proceeding or a State allowed to intervene in a proceeding, the Court shall authorize a language other than English or French to be used by such a party or State, provided that the Court considers such authorization to be adequately justified. Article 51 Rules of Procedure and Evidence 1. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence shall enter into force upon adoption by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 2. Amendments to the Rules of Procedure and Evidence may be proposed by: (a) Any State Party; (b) The judges acting by an absolute majority; or (c) The Prosecutor. Such amendments shall enter into force upon adoption by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Assembly of States Parties. 3. After the adoption of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, in urgent cases where the Rules do not provide for a specific situation before the Court, the judges may, by a two-thirds majority, draw up provisional Rules to be applied until adopted, amended or rejected at the next ordinary or special session of the Assembly of States Parties. 4. The Rules of Procedure and Evidence, amendments thereto and any provisional Rule shall be consistent with this Statute. Amendments to the Rules of Procedure and Evidence as well as provisional Rules shall not be applied retroactively to the detriment of the person who is being investigated or prosecuted or who has been convicted. 5. In the event of conflict between the Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, the Statute shall prevail. Article 52 Regulations of the Court 1. The judges shall, in accordance with this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, adopt, by an absolute majority, the Regulations of the Court necessary for its routine functioning. 2. The Prosecutor and the Registrar shall be consulted in the elaboration of the Regulations and any amendments thereto. 3. The Regulations and any amendments thereto shall take effect upon adoption unless otherwise decided by the judges. Immediately upon adoption, they shall be circulated to States Parties for comments. If within six months there are no objections from a majority of States Parties, they shall remain in force.
24 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 5. INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION Article 53 Initiation of an investigation 1. The Prosecutor shall, having evaluated the information made available to him or her, initiate an investigation unless he or she determines that there is no reasonable basis to proceed under this Statute. In deciding whether to initiate an investigation, the Prosecutor shall consider whether: (a) The information available to the Prosecutor provides a reasonable basis to believe that a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been or is being committed; (b) The case is or would be admissible under article 17; and (c) Taking into account the gravity of the crime and the interests of victims, there are nonetheless substantial reasons to believe that an investigation would not serve the interests of justice. If the Prosecutor determines that there is no reasonable basis to proceed and his or her determination is based solely on subparagraph (c) above, he or she shall inform the Pre-Trial Chamber. 2. If, upon investigation, the Prosecutor concludes that there is not a sufficient basis for a prosecution because: (a) There is not a sufficient legal or factual basis to seek a warrant or summons under article 58; (b) The case is inadmissible under article 17; or (c) A prosecution is not in the interests of justice, taking into account all the circumstances, including the gravity of the crime, the interests of victims and the age or infirmity of the alleged perpetrator, and his or her role in the alleged crime; the Prosecutor shall inform the Pre-Trial Chamber and the State making a referral under article 14 or the Security Council in a case under article 13, paragraph (b), of his or her conclusion and the reasons for the conclusion. 3. (a) At the request of the State making a referral under article 14 or the Security Council under article 13, paragraph (b), the Pre-Trial Chamber may review a decision of the Prosecutor under paragraph 1 or 2 not to proceed and mayrequest the Prosecutor to reconsider that decision. (b) In addition, the Pre-Trial Chamber may, on its own initiative, review a decision of the Prosecutor not to proceed if it is based solely on paragraph 1 (c) or 2 (c). In such a case, the decision of the Prosecutor shall be effective only if confirmed by the Pre-Trial Chamber. 4. The Prosecutor may, at any time, reconsider a decision whether to initiate an investigation or prosecution based on new facts or information. Article 54 Duties and powers of the Prosecutor with respect to investigations 1. The Prosecutor shall: (a) In order to establish the truth, extend the investigation to cover all facts and evidence relevant to an assessment of whether there is criminal responsibility under this Statute, and, in doing so, investigate incriminating and exonerating circumstances equally; (b) Take appropriate measures to ensure the effective investigation and prosecution of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court, and in doing so, respect the interests and personal circumstances of victims and witnesses, including age, gender as defined in article 7, paragraph 3, and health, and take into account the nature of the crime, in particular where it involves sexual violence, gender violence or violence against children; and (c) Fully respect the rights of persons arising under this Statute. 2. The Prosecutor may conduct investigations on the territory of a State: (a) In accordance with the provisions of Part 9; or (b) As authorized by the Pre-Trial Chamber under article 57, paragraph 3 (d).
25 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3. The Prosecutor may: (a) Collect and examine evidence; (b) Request the presence of and question persons being investigated, victims and witnesses; (c) Seek the cooperation of any State or intergovernmental organization or arrangement in accordance with its respective competence and/or mandate; (d) Enter into such arrangements or agreements, not inconsistent with this Statute, as may be necessary to facilitate the cooperation of a State, intergovernmental organization or person; (e) Agree not to disclose, at any stage of the proceedings, documents or information that the Prosecutor obtains on the condition of confidentiality and solely for the purpose of generating new evidence, unless the provider of the information consents; and (f) Take necessary measures, or request that necessary measures be taken, to ensure the confidentiality of information, the protection of any person or the preservation of evidence. Article 55 Rights of persons during an investigation 1. In respect of an investigation under this Statute, a person: (a) Shall not be compelled to incriminate himself or herself or to confess guilt; (b) Shall not be subjected to any form of coercion, duress or threat, to torture or to any other form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; (c) Shall, if questioned in a language other than a language the person fully understands and speaks, have, free of any cost, the assistance of a competent interpreter and such translations as are necessary to meet the requirements of fairness; and (d) Shall not be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention, and shall not be deprived of his or her liberty except on such grounds and in accordance with such procedures as are established in this Statute. 2. Where there are grounds to believe that a person has committed a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court and that person is about to be questioned either by the Prosecutor, or by national authorities pursuant to a request made under Part 9, that person shall also have the following rights of which he or she shall be informed prior to being questioned: (a) To be informed, prior to being questioned, that there are grounds to believe that he or she has committed a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; (b) To remain silent, without such silence being a consideration in the determination of guilt or innocence; (c) To have legal assistance of the person's choosing, or, if the person does not have legal assistance, to have legal assistance assigned to him or her, in any case where the interests of justice so require, and without payment by the person in any such case if the person does not have sufficient means to pay for it; and (d) To be questioned in the presence of counsel unless the person has voluntarily waived his or her right to counsel. Article 56 Role of the Pre-Trial Chamber in relation to a unique investigative opportunity 1. (a) Where the Prosecutor considers an investigation to present a unique opportunity to take testimony or a statement from a witness or to examine, collect or test evidence, which may not be available subsequently for the purposes of a trial, the Prosecutor shall so inform the Pre-Trial Chamber. (b) In that case, the Pre-Trial Chamber may, upon request of the Prosecutor, take such measures as may be necessary to ensure the efficiency and integrity of the proceedings and, in particular, to protect the rights of the defence. (c) Unless the Pre-Trial Chamber orders otherwise, the Prosecutor shall provide the relevant information to the person who has been arrested or appeared in response to a summons in connection with the investigation referred to in subparagraph (a), in order that he or she may be heard on the matter.
26 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The measures referred to in paragraph 1 (b) may include: (a) Making recommendations or orders regarding procedures to be followed; (b) Directing that a record be made of the proceedings; (c) Appointing an expert to assist; (d) Authorizing counsel for a person who has been arrested, or appeared before the Court in response to a summons, to participate, or where there has not yet been such an arrest or appearance or counsel has not been designated, appointing another counsel to attend and represent the interests of the defence; (e) Naming one of its members or, if necessary, another available judge of the Pre-Trial or Trial Division to observe and make recommendations or orders regarding the collection and preservation of evidence and the questioning of persons; (f) Taking such other action as may be necessary to collect or preserve evidence. 3. (a) Where the Prosecutor has not sought measures pursuant to this article but the Pre-Trial Chamberconsiders that such measures are required to preserve evidence that it deems would be essential for the defence at trial, it shall consult with the Prosecutor as to whether there is good reason for the Prosecutor's failure to request the measures. If upon consultation, the Pre-Trial Chamber concludes that the Prosecutor's failure to request such measures is unjustified, the Pre-Trial Chamber may take such measures on its own initiative. (b) A decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber to act on its own initiative under this paragraph may be appealedby the Prosecutor. The appeal shall be heard on an expedited basis. 4. The admissibility of evidence preserved or collected for trial pursuant to this article, or the record thereof, shall be governed at trial by article 69, and given such weight as determined by the Trial Chamber. Article 57 Functions and powers of the Pre-Trial Chamber 1. Unless otherwise provided in this Statute, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall exercise its functions in accordance with the provisions of this article. 2. (a) Orders or rulings of the Pre-Trial Chamber issued under articles 15, 18, 19, 54, paragraph 2, 61, paragraph 7, and 72 must be concurred in by a majority of its judges. (b) In all other cases, a single judge of the Pre-Trial Chamber may exercise the functions provided for in this Statute, unless otherwise provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence or by a majority of the Pre-Trial Chamber. 3. In addition to its other functions under this Statute, the Pre-Trial Chamber may: (a) At the request of the Prosecutor, issue such orders and warrants as may be required for the purposes of an investigation; (b) Upon the request of a person who has been arrested or has appeared pursuant to a summons under article 58, issue such orders, including measures such as those described in article 56, or seek such cooperation pursuant to Part 9 as may be necessary to assist the person in the preparation of his or her defence; (c) Where necessary, provide for the protection and privacy of victims and witnesses, the preservation of evidence, the protection of persons who have been arrested or appeared in response to a summons, and the protection of national security information; (d) Authorize the Prosecutor to take specific investigative steps within the territory of a State Party without having secured the cooperation of that State under Part 9 if, whenever possible having regard to the views of the State concerned, the Pre-Trial Chamber has determined in that case that the State is clearly unable to execute a request for cooperation due to the unavailability of any authority or any component of its judicial system competent to execute the request for cooperation under Part 9; (e) Where a warrant of arrest or a summons has been issued under article 58, and having due regard to the strength of the evidence and the rights of the parties concerned, as provided for in this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, seek the cooperation of States pursuant to article 93, paragraph 1 (k), to take protective measures for the purpose of forfeiture, in particular for the ultimate benefit of victims.
27 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 58 Issuance by the Pre-Trial Chamber of a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear 1. At any time after the initiation of an investigation, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall, on the application of the Prosecutor, issue a warrant of arrest of a person if, having examined the application and the evidence or other information submitted by the Prosecutor, it is satisfied that: (a) There are reasonable grounds to believe that the person has committed a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; and (b) The arrest of the person appears necessary: (i) To ensure the person's appearance at trial; (ii) To ensure that the person does not obstruct or endanger the investigation or the court proceedings; or (iii) Where applicable, to prevent the person from continuing with the commission of that crime or a related crime which is within the jurisdiction of the Court and which arises out of the same circumstances. 2. The application of the Prosecutor shall contain: (a) The name of the person and any other relevant identifying information; (b) A specific reference to the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court which the person is alleged to have committed; (c) A concise statement of the facts which are alleged to constitute those crimes; (d) A summary of the evidence and any other information which establish reasonable grounds to believe that the person committed those crimes; and (e) The reason why the Prosecutor believes that the arrest of the person is necessary. 3. The warrant of arrest shall contain: (a) The name of the person and any other relevant identifying information; (b) A specific reference to the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court for which the person's arrest is sought; and (c) A concise statement of the facts which are alleged to constitute those crimes. 4. The warrant of arrest shall remain in effect until otherwise ordered by the Court. 5. On the basis of the warrant of arrest, the Court may request the provisional arrest or the arrest and surrender of the person under Part 9. 6. The Prosecutor may request the Pre-Trial Chamber to amend the warrant of arrest by modifying or adding to the crimes specified therein. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall so amend the warrant if it is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the person committed the modified or additional crimes. 7. As an alternative to seeking a warrant of arrest, the Prosecutor may submit an application requesting that the Pre-Trial Chamber issue a summons for the person to appear. If the Pre-Trial Chamber is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the person committed the crime alleged and that a summons is sufficient to ensure the person's appearance, it shall issue the summons, with or without conditions restricting liberty (other than detention) if provided for by national law, for the person to appear. The summons shall contain: (a) The name of the person and any other relevant identifying information; (b) The specified date on which the person is to appear; (c) A specific reference to the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court which the person is alleged to have committed; and (d) A concise statement of the facts which are alleged to constitute the crime. The summons shall be served on the person.
28 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 59 Arrest proceedings in the custodial State 1. A State Party which has received a request for provisional arrest or for arrest and surrender shall immediately take steps to arrest the person in question in accordance with its laws and the provisions of Part 9. 2. A person arrested shall be brought promptly before the competent judicial authority in the custodial State which shall determine, in accordance with the law of that State, that: (a) The warrant applies to that person; (b) The person has been arrested in accordance with the proper process; and (c) The person's rights have been respected. 3. The person arrested shall have the right to apply to the competent authority in the custodial State for interim release pending surrender. 4. In reaching a decision on any such application, the competent authority in the custodial State shall consider whether, given the gravity of the alleged crimes, there are urgent and exceptional circumstances to justify interim release and whether necessary safeguards exist to ensure that the custodial State can fulfil its duty to surrender the person to the Court. It shall not be open to the competent authority of the custodial State to consider whether the warrant of arrest was properly issued in accordance with article 58, paragraph 1 (a) and (b). 5. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall be notified of any request for interim release and shall make recommendations to the competent authority in the custodial State. The competent authority in the custodial State shall give full consideration to such recommendations, including any recommendations on measures to prevent the escape of the person, before rendering its decision. 6. If the person is granted interim release, the Pre-Trial Chamber may request periodic reports on the status of the interim release. 7. Once ordered to be surrendered by the custodial State, the person shall be delivered to the Court as soon as possible. Article 60 Initial proceedings before the Court 1. Upon the surrender of the person to the Court, or the person's appearance before the Court voluntarily or pursuant to a summons, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall satisfy itself that the person has been informed of the crimes which he or she is alleged to have committed, and of his or her rights under this Statute, including the right to apply for interim release pending trial. 2. A person subject to a warrant of arrest may apply for interim release pending trial. If the Pre-Trial Chamber is satisfied that the conditions set forth in article 58, paragraph 1, are met, the person shall continue to be detained. If it is not so satisfied, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall release the person, with or without conditions. 3. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall periodically review its ruling on the release or detention of the person, and may do so at any time on the request of the Prosecutor or the person. Upon such review, it may modify its ruling as to detention, release or conditions of release, if it is satisfied that changed circumstances so require. 4. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall ensure that a person is not detained for an unreasonable period prior to trial due to inexcusable delay by the Prosecutor. If such delay occurs, the Court shall consider releasing the person, with or without conditions. 5. If necessary, the Pre-Trial Chamber may issue a warrant of arrest to secure the presence of a person who has been released. Article 61 Confirmation of the charges before trial 1. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2, within a reasonable time after the person's surrender or voluntary appearance before the Court, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall hold a hearing to confirm the charges on which the Prosecutor intends to seek trial. The hearing shall be held in the presence of the Prosecutor and the person charged, as well as his or her counsel.
29 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The Pre-Trial Chamber may, upon request of the Prosecutor or on its own motion, hold a hearing in the absence of the person charged to confirm the charges on which the Prosecutor intends to seek trial when the person has: (a) Waived his or her right to be present; or (b) Fled or cannot be found and all reasonable steps have been taken to secure his or her appearance before the Court and to inform the person of the charges and that a hearing to confirm those charges will be held. In that case, the person shall be represented by counsel where the Pre-Trial Chamber determines that it is in the interests of justice. 3. Within a reasonable time before the hearing, the person shall: (a) Be provided with a copy of the document containing the charges on which the Prosecutor intends to bring the person to trial; and (b) Be informed of the evidence on which the Prosecutor intends to rely at the hearing. The Pre-Trial Chamber may issue orders regarding the disclosure of information for the purposes of the hearing. 4. Before the hearing, the Prosecutor may continue the investigation and may amend or withdraw any charges. The person shall be given reasonable notice before the hearing of any amendment to or withdrawal of charges. In case of a withdrawal of charges, the Prosecutor shall notify the Pre-Trial Chamber of the reasons for the withdrawal. 5. At the hearing, the Prosecutor shall support each charge with sufficient evidence to establish substantial grounds to believe that the person committed the crime charged. The Prosecutor may rely on documentary or summary evidence and need not call the witnesses expected to testify at the trial. 6. At the hearing, the person may: (a) Object to the charges; (b) Challenge the evidence presented by the Prosecutor; and (c) Present evidence. 7. The Pre-Trial Chamber shall, on the basis of the hearing, determine whether there is sufficient evidence to establish substantial grounds to believe that the person committed each of the crimes charged. Based on its determination, the Pre-Trial Chamber shall: (a) Confirm those charges in relation to which it has determined that there is sufficient evidence, and commit the person to a Trial Chamber for trial on the charges as confirmed; (b) Decline to confirm those charges in relation to which it has determined that there is insufficient evidence; (c) Adjourn the hearing and request the Prosecutor to consider: (i) Providing further evidence or conducting further investigation with respect to a particular charge; or (ii) Amending a charge because the evidence submitted appears to establish a different crime within the jurisdiction of the Court. 8. Where the Pre-Trial Chamber declines to confirm a charge, the Prosecutor shall not be precluded from subsequently requesting its confirmation if the request is supported by additional evidence. 9. After the charges are confirmed and before the trial has begun, the Prosecutor may, with the permission of the Pre-Trial Chamber and after notice to the accused, amend the charges. If the Prosecutor seeks to add additional charges or to substitute more serious charges, a hearing under this article to confirm those charges must be held. After commencement of the trial, the Prosecutor may, with the permission of the Trial Chamber, withdraw the charges. 10. Any warrant previously issued shall cease to have effect with respect to any charges which have not been confirmed by the Pre-Trial Chamber or which have been withdrawn by the Prosecutor.
30 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court11. Once the charges have been confirmed in accordance with this article, the Presidency shall constitute a Trial Chamber which, subject to paragraph 9 and to article 64, paragraph 4, shall be responsible for the conduct of subsequent proceedings and may exercise any function of the Pre-Trial Chamber that is relevant and capable of application in those proceedings.
31 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 6. THE TRIAL Article 62 Place of trial Unless otherwise decided, the place of the trial shall be the seat of the Court. Article 63 Trial in the presence of the accused 1. The accused shall be present during the trial. 2. If the accused, being present before the Court, continues to disrupt the trial, the Trial Chamber may remove the accused and shall make provision for him or her to observe the trial and instruct counsel from outside the courtroom, through the use of communications technology, if required. Such measures shall be taken only in exceptional circumstances after other reasonable alternatives have proved inadequate, and only for such duration as is strictly required. Article 64 Functions and powers of the Trial Chamber 1. The functions and powers of the Trial Chamber set out in this article shall be exercised in accordance with this Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 2. The Trial Chamber shall ensure that a trial is fair and expeditious and is conducted with full respect for the rights of the accused and due regard for the protection of victims and witnesses. 3. Upon assignment of a case for trial in accordance with this Statute, the Trial Chamber assigned to deal with the case shall: (a) Confer with the parties and adopt such procedures as are necessary to facilitate the fair and expeditious conduct of the proceedings; (b) Determine the language or languages to be used at trial; and (c) Subject to any other relevant provisions of this Statute, provide for disclosure of documents or information not previously disclosed, sufficiently in advance of the commencement of the trial to enable adequate preparation for trial. 4. The Trial Chamber may, if necessary for its effective and fair functioning, refer preliminary issues to the Pre- Trial Chamber or, if necessary, to another available judge of the Pre-Trial Division. 5. Upon notice to the parties, the Trial Chamber may, as appropriate, direct that there be joinder or severance in respect of charges against more than one accused. 6. In performing its functions prior to trial or during the course of a trial, the Trial Chamber may, as necessary: (a) Exercise any functions of the Pre-Trial Chamber referred to in article 61, paragraph 11; (b) Require the attendance and testimony of witnesses and production of documents and other evidence by obtaining, if necessary, the assistance of States as provided in this Statute; (c) Provide for the protection of confidential information; (d) Order the production of evidence in addition to that already collected prior to the trial or presented during the trial by the parties; (e) Provide for the protection of the accused, witnesses and victims; and (f) Rule on any other relevant matters. 7. The trial shall be held in public. The Trial Chamber may, however, determine that special circumstances require that certain proceedings be in closed session for the purposes set forth in article 68, or to protect confidential or sensitive information to be given in evidence. 8. (a) At the commencement of the trial, the Trial Chamber shall have read to the accused the charges previously confirmed by the Pre-Trial Chamber. The Trial Chamber shall satisfy itself that the accused understands the nature of the charges. It shall afford him or her the opportunity to make an admission of guilt in accordance with article 65 or to plead not guilty.
32 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) At the trial, the presiding judge may give directions for the conduct of proceedings, including to ensure that they are conducted in a fair and impartial manner. Subject to any directions of the presiding judge, the parties may submit evidence in accordance with the provisions of this Statute. 9. The Trial Chamber shall have, inter alia , the power on application of a party or on its own motion to: (a) Rule on the admissibility or relevance of evidence; and (b) Take all necessary steps to maintain order in the course of a hearing. 10. The Trial Chamber shall ensure that a complete record of the trial, which accurately reflects the proceedings, is made and that it is maintained and preserved by the Registrar. Article 65 Proceedings on an admission of guilt 1. Where the accused makes an admission of guilt pursuant to article 64, paragraph 8 (a), the Trial Chamber shall determine whether: (a) The accused understands the nature and consequences of the admission of guilt; (b) The admission is voluntarily made by the accused after sufficient consultation with defence counsel; and (c) The admission of guilt is supported by the facts of the case that are contained in: (i) The charges brought by the Prosecutor and admitted by the accused; (ii) Any materials presented by the Prosecutor which supplement the charges and which the accused accepts; and (iii) Any other evidence, such as the testimony of witnesses, presented by the Prosecutor or the accused. 2. Where the Trial Chamber is satisfied that the matters referred to in paragraph 1 are established, it shall consider the admission of guilt, together with any additional evidence presented, as establishing all the essential facts that are required to prove the crime to which the admission of guilt relates, and may convict the accused of that crime. 3. Where the Trial Chamber is not satisfied that the matters referred to in paragraph 1 are established, it shall consider the admission of guilt as not having been made, in which case it shall order that the trial be continued under the ordinary trial procedures provided by this Statute and may remit the case to another Trial Chamber. 4. Where the Trial Chamber is of the opinion that a more complete presentation of the facts of the case is required in the interests of justice, in particular the interests of the victims, the Trial Chamber may: (a) Request the Prosecutor to present additional evidence, including the testimony of witnesses; or (b) Order that the trial be continued under the ordinary trial procedures provided by this Statute, in which case it shall consider the admission of guilt as not having been made and may remit the case to another Trial Chamber. 5. Any discussions between the Prosecutor and the defence regarding modification of the charges, the admission of guilt or the penalty to be imposed shall not be binding on the Court. Article 66 Presumption of innocence 1. Everyone shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty before the Court in accordance with the applicable law. 2. The onus is on the Prosecutor to prove the guilt of the accused. 3. In order to convict the accused, the Court must be convinced of the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
33 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 67 Rights of the accused 1. In the determination of any charge, the accused shall be entitled to a public hearing, having regard to the provisions of this Statute, to a fair hearing conducted impartially, and to the following minimum guarantees, in full equality: (a) To be informed promptly and in detail of the nature, cause and content of the charge, in a language which the accused fully understands and speaks; (b) To have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of the defence and to communicate freely with counsel of the accused's choosing in confidence; (c) To be tried without undue delay; (d) Subject to article 63, paragraph 2, to be present at the trial, to conduct the defence in person or through legal assistance of the accused's choosing, to be informed, if the accused does not have legal assistance, of this right and to have legal assistance assigned by the Court in any case where the interests of justice so require, and without payment if the accused lacks sufficient means to pay for it; (e) To examine, or have examined, the witnesses against him or her and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his or her behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him or her. The accused shall also be entitled to raise defences and to present other evidence admissible under this Statute; (f) To have, free of any cost, the assistance of a competent interpreter and such translations as are necessary to meet the requirements of fairness, if any of the proceedings of or documents presented to the Court are not in a language which the accused fully understands and speaks; (g) Not to be compelled to testify or to confess guilt and to remain silent, without such silence being a consideration in the determination of guilt or innocence; (h) To make an unsworn oral or written statement in his or her defence; and (i) Not to have imposed on him or her any reversal of the burden of proof or any onus of rebuttal. 2. In addition to any other disclosure provided for in this Statute, the Prosecutor shall, as soon as practicable, disclose to the defence evidence in the Prosecutor's possession or control which he or she believes shows or tends to show the innocence of the accused, or to mitigate the guilt of the accused, or which may affect the credibility of prosecution evidence. In case of doubt as to the application of this paragraph, the Court shall decide. Article 68 Protection of the victims and witnesses and their participation in the proceedings 1. The Court shall take appropriate measures to protect the safety, physical and psychological well-being, dignity and privacy of victims and witnesses. In so doing, the Court shall have regard to all relevant factors, including age, gender as defined in article 7, paragraph 3, and health, and the nature of the crime, in particular, but not limited to, where the crime involves sexual or gender violence or violence against children. The Prosecutor shall take such measures particularly during the investigation and prosecution of such crimes. These measures shall not be prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial. 2. As an exception to the principle of public hearings provided for in article 67, the Chambers of the Court may, to protect victims and witnesses or an accused, conduct any part of the proceedings in camera or allow the presentation of evidence by electronic or other special means. In particular, such measures shall be implemented in the case of a victim of sexual violence or a child who is a victim or a witness, unless otherwise ordered by the Court, having regard to all the circumstances, particularly the views of the victim or witness. 3. Where the personal interests of the victims are affected, the Court shall permit their views and concerns to be presented and considered at stages of the proceedings determined to be appropriate by the Court and in a manner which is not prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial. Such views and concerns may be presented by the legal representatives of the victims where the Court considers it appropriate, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. The Victims and Witnesses Unit may advise the Prosecutor and the Court on appropriate protective measures, security arrangements, counselling and assistance as referred to in article 43, paragraph 6.
34 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court5. Where the disclosure of evidence or information pursuant to this Statute may lead to the grave endangerment of the security of a witness or his or her family, the Prosecutor may, for the purposes of any proceedings conducted prior to the commencement of the trial, withhold such evidence or information and instead submit a summary thereof. Such measures shall be exercised in a manner which is not prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial. 6. A State may make an application for necessary measures to be taken in respect of the protection of its servants or agents and the protection of confidential or sensitive information. Article 69 Evidence 1. Before testifying, each witness shall, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, give an undertaking as to the truthfulness of the evidence to be given by that witness. 2. The testimony of a witness at trial shall be given in person, except to the extent provided by the measures set forth in article 68 or in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The Court may also permit the giving of viva voce (oral) or recorded testimony of a witness by means of video or audio technology, as well as the introduction of documents or written transcripts, subject to this Statute and in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. These measures shall not be prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused. 3. The parties may submit evidence relevant to the case, in accordance with article 64. The Court shall have the authority to request the submission of all evidence that it considers necessary for the determination of the truth. 4. The Court may rule on the relevance or admissibility of any evidence, taking into account, inter alia , the probative value of the evidence and any prejudice that such evidence may cause to a fair trial or to a fair evaluation of the testimony of a witness, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 5. The Court shall respect and observe privileges on confidentiality as provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 6. The Court shall not require proof of facts of common knowledge but may take judicial notice of them. 7. Evidence obtained by means of a violation of this Statute or internationally recognized human rights shall not be admissible if: (a) The violation casts substantial doubt on the reliability of the evidence; or (b) The admission of the evidence would be antithetical to and would seriously damage the integrity of the proceedings. 8. When deciding on the relevance or admissibility of evidence collected by a State, the Court shall not rule on the application of the State's national law. Article 70 Offences against the administration of justice 1. The Court shall have jurisdiction over the following offences against its administration of justice when committed intentionally: (a) Giving false testimony when under an obligation pursuant to article 69, paragraph 1, to tell the truth; (b) Presenting evidence that the party knows is false or forged; (c) Corruptly influencing a witness, obstructing or interfering with the attendance or testimony of a witness, retaliating against a witness for giving testimony or destroying, tampering with or interfering with the collection of evidence; (d) Impeding, intimidating or corruptly influencing an official of the Court for the purpose of forcing or persuading the official not to perform, or to perform improperly, his or her duties; (e) Retaliating against an official of the Court on account of duties performed by that or another official; (f) Soliciting or accepting a bribe as an official of the Court in connection with his or her official duties. 2. The principles and procedures governing the Court's exercise of jurisdiction over offences under this article shall be those provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The conditions for providing international cooperation to the Court with respect to its proceedings under this article shall be governed by the domestic laws of the requested State.
35 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3. In the event of conviction, the Court may impose a term of imprisonment not exceeding five years, or a fine in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, or both. 4. (a) Each State Party shall extend its criminal laws penalizing offences against the integrity of its own investigative or judicial process to offences against the administration of justice referred to in this article, committed on its territory, or by one of its nationals; (b) Upon request by the Court, whenever it deems it proper, the State Party shall submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution. Those authorities shall treat such cases with diligence and devote sufficient resources to enable them to be conducted effectively. Article 71 Sanctions for misconduct before the Court 1. The Court may sanction persons present before it who commit misconduct, including disruption of its proceedings or deliberate refusal to comply with its directions, by administrative measures other than imprisonment, such as temporary or permanent removal from the courtroom, a fine or other similar measures provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 2. The procedures governing the imposition of the measures set forth in paragraph 1 shall be those provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 72 Protection of national security information 1. This article applies in any case where the disclosure of the information or documents of a State would, in the opinion of that State, prejudice its national security interests. Such cases include those falling within the scope of article 56, paragraphs 2 and 3, article 61, paragraph 3, article 64, paragraph 3, article 67, paragraph 2, article 68, paragraph 6, article 87, paragraph 6 and article 93, as well as cases arising at any other stage of the proceedings where such disclosure may be at issue. 2. This article shall also apply when a person who has been requested to give information or evidence has refused to do so or has referred the matter to the State on the ground that disclosure would prejudice the national security interests of a State and the State concerned confirms that it is of the opinion that disclosure would prejudice its national security interests. 3. Nothing in this article shall prejudice the requirements of confidentiality applicable under article 54, paragraph 3 (e) and (f), or the application of article 73. 4. If a State learns that information or documents of the State are being, or are likely to be, disclosed at any stage of the proceedings, and it is of the opinion that disclosure would prejudice its national security interests, that State shall have the right to intervene in order to obtain resolution of the issue in accordance with this article. 5. If, in the opinion of a State, disclosure of information would prejudice its national security interests, all reasonable steps will be taken by the State, acting in conjunction with the Prosecutor, the defence or the Pre-Trial Chamber or Trial Chamber, as the case may be, to seek to resolve the matter by cooperative means. Such steps may include: (a) Modification or clarification of the request; (b) A determination by the Court regarding the relevance of the information or evidence sought, or a determination as to whether the evidence, though relevant, could be or has been obtained from a source other than the requested State; (c) Obtaining the information or evidence from a different source or in a different form; or (d) Agreement on conditions under which the assistance could be provided including, among other things, providing summaries or redactions, limitations on disclosure, use of in camera or ex parte proceedings, or other protective measures permissible under the Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 6. Once all reasonable steps have been taken to resolve the matter through cooperative means, and if the State considers that there are no means or conditions under which the information or documents could be provided or disclosed without prejudice to its national security interests, it shall so notify the Prosecutor or the Court of the specific reasons for its decision, unless a specific description of the reasons would itself necessarily result in such prejudice to the State's national security interests.
36 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court7. Thereafter, if the Court determines that the evidence is relevant and necessary for the establishment of the guilt or innocence of the accused, the Court may undertake the following actions: (a) Where disclosure of the information or document is sought pursuant to a request for cooperation under Part 9 or the circumstances described in paragraph 2, and the State has invoked the ground for refusal referred to in article 93, paragraph 4: (i) The Court may, before making any conclusion referred to in subparagraph 7 (a) (ii), request further consultations for the purpose of considering the State's representations, which may include, as appropriate, hearings in camera and ex parte ; (ii) If the Court concludes that, by invoking the ground for refusal under article 93, paragraph 4, in the circumstances of the case, the requested State is not acting in accordance with its obligations under this Statute, the Court may refer the matter in accordance with article 87, paragraph 7, specifying the reasons for its conclusion; and (iii) The Court may make such inference in the trial of the accused as to the existence or non- existence of a fact, as may be appropriate in the circumstances; or (b) In all other circumstances: (i) Order disclosure; or (ii) To the extent it does not order disclosure, make such inference in the trial of the accused as to the existence or non-existence of a fact, as may be appropriate in the circumstances. Article 73 Third-party information or documents If a State Party is requested by the Court to provide a document or information in its custody, possession or control, which was disclosed to it in confidence by a State, intergovernmental organization or international organization, it shall seek the consent of the originator to disclose that document or information. If the originator is a State Party, it shall either consent to disclosure of the information or document or undertake to resolve the issue of disclosure with the Court, subject to the provisions of article 72. If the originator is not a State Party and refuses to consent to disclosure, the requested State shall inform the Court that it is unable to provide the document or information because of a pre-existing obligation of confidentiality to the originator. Article 74 Requirements for the decision 1. All the judges of the Trial Chamber shall be present at each stage of the trial and throughout their deliberations. The Presidency may, on a case-by-case basis, designate, as available, one or more alternate judges to be present at each stage of the trial and to replace a member of the Trial Chamber if that member is unable to continue attending. 2. The Trial Chamber's decision shall be based on its evaluation of the evidence and the entire proceedings. The decision shall not exceed the facts and circumstances described in the charges and any amendments to the charges. The Court may base its decision only on evidence submitted and discussed before it at the trial. 3. The judges shall attempt to achieve unanimity in their decision, failing which the decision shall be taken by a majority of the judges. 4. The deliberations of the Trial Chamber shall remain secret. 5. The decision shall be in writing and shall contain a full and reasoned statement of the Trial Chamber's findings on the evidence and conclusions. The Trial Chamber shall issue one decision. When there is no unanimity, the Trial Chamber's decision shall contain the views of the majority and the minority. The decision or a summary thereof shall be delivered in open court. Article 75 Reparations to victims 1. The Court shall establish principles relating to reparations to, or in respect of, victims, including restitution, compensation and rehabilitation. On this basis, in its decision the Court may, either upon request or on its own motion in exceptional circumstances, determine the scope and extent of any damage, loss and injury to, or in respect of, victims and will state the principles on which it is acting.
37 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The Court may make an order directly against a convicted person specifying appropriate reparations to, or in respect of, victims, including restitution, compensation and rehabilitation. Where appropriate, the Court may order that the award for reparations be made through the Trust Fund provided for in article 79. 3. Before making an order under this article, the Court may invite and shall take account of representations from or on behalf of the convicted person, victims, other interested persons or interested States. 4. In exercising its power under this article, the Court may, after a person is convicted of a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court, determine whether, in order to give effect to an order which it may make under this article, it is necessary to seek measures under article 93, paragraph 1. 5. A State Party shall give effect to a decision under this article as if the provisions of article 109 were applicable to this article. 6. Nothing in this article shall be interpreted as prejudicing the rights of victims under national or international law. Article 76 Sentencing 1. In the event of a conviction, the Trial Chamber shall consider the appropriate sentence to be imposed and shall take into account the evidence presented and submissions made during the trial that are relevant to the sentence. 2. Except where article 65 applies and before the completion of the trial, the Trial Chamber may on its own motion and shall, at the request of the Prosecutor or the accused, hold a further hearing to hear any additional evidence or submissions relevant to the sentence, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 3. Where paragraph 2 applies, any representations under article 75 shall be heard during the further hearing referred to in paragraph 2 and, if necessary, during any additional hearing. 4. The sentence shall be pronounced in public and, wherever possible, in the presence of the accused.
38 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 7. PENALTIES Article 77 Applicable penalties 1. Subject to article 110, the Court may impose one of the following penalties on a person convicted of a crime referred to in article 5 of this Statute: (a) Imprisonment for a specified number of years, which may not exceed a maximum of 30 years; or (b) A term of life imprisonment when justified by the extreme gravity of the crime and the individual circumstances of the convicted person. 2. In addition to imprisonment, the Court may order: (a) A fine under the criteria provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (b) A forfeiture of proceeds, property and assets derived directly or indirectly from that crime, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties. Article 78 Determination of the sentence 1. In determining the sentence, the Court shall, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, take into account such factors as the gravity of the crime and the individual circumstances of the convicted person. 2. In imposing a sentence of imprisonment, the Court shall deduct the time, if any, previously spent in detention in accordance with an order of the Court. The Court may deduct any time otherwise spent in detention in connection with conduct underlying the crime. 3. When a person has been convicted of more than one crime, the Court shall pronounce a sentence for each crime and a joint sentence specifying the total period of imprisonment. This period shall be no less than the highest individual sentence pronounced and shall not exceed 30 years imprisonment or a sentence of life imprisonment in conformity with article 77, paragraph 1 (b). Article 79 Trust Fund 1. A Trust Fund shall be established by decision of the Assembly of States Parties for the benefit of victims of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court, and of the families of such victims. 2. The Court may order money and other property collected through fines or forfeiture to be transferred, by order of the Court, to the Trust Fund. 3. The Trust Fund shall be managed according to criteria to be determined by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 80 Non-prejudice to national application of penalties and national laws Nothing in this Part affects the application by States of penalties prescribed by their national law, nor the law of States which do not provide for penalties prescribed in this Part.
39 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 8. APPEAL AND REVISION Article 81 Appeal against decision of acquittal or conviction or against sentence 1. A decision under article 74 may be appealed in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence as follows: (a) The Prosecutor may make an appeal on any of the following grounds: (i) Procedural error, (ii) Error of fact, or (iii) Error of law; (b) The convicted person, or the Prosecutor on that person's behalf, may make an appeal on any of the following grounds: (i) Procedural error, (ii) Error of fact, (iii) Error of law, or (iv) Any other ground that affects the fairness or reliability of the proceedings or decision. 2. (a) A sentence may be appealed, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, by the Prosecutor or the convicted person on the ground of disproportion between the crime and the sentence; (b) If on an appeal against sentence the Court considers that there are grounds on which the conviction might be set aside, wholly or in part, it may invite the Prosecutor and the convicted person to submit grounds under article 81, paragraph 1 (a) or (b), and may render a decision on conviction in accordance with article 83; (c) The same procedure applies when the Court, on an appeal against conviction only, considers that there are grounds to reduce the sentence under paragraph 2 (a). 3. (a) Unless the Trial Chamber orders otherwise, a convicted person shall remain in custody pending an appeal; (b) When a convicted person's time in custody exceeds the sentence of imprisonment imposed, that person shall be released, except that if the Prosecutor is also appealing, the release may be subject to the conditions under subparagraph (c) below; (c) In case of an acquittal, the accused shall be released immediately, subject to the following: (i) Under exceptional circumstances, and having regard, inter alia , to the concrete risk of flight, the seriousness of the offence charged and the probability of success on appeal, the Trial Chamber, at the request of the Prosecutor, may maintain the detention of the person pending appeal; (ii) A decision by the Trial Chamber under subparagraph (c) (i) may be appealed in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 3 (a) and (b), execution of the decision or sentence shall be suspended during the period allowed for appeal and for the duration of the appeal proceedings. Article 82 Appeal against other decisions 1. Either party may appeal any of the following decisions in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence: (a) A decision with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility; (b) A decision granting or denying release of the person being investigated or prosecuted; (c) A decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber to act on its own initiative under article 56, paragraph 3; (d) A decision that involves an issue that would significantly affect the fair and expeditious conduct of the proceedings or the outcome of the trial, and for which, in the opinion of the Pre-Trial or Trial Chamber, an immediate resolution by the Appeals Chamber may materially advance the proceedings.
40 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. A decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber under article 57, paragraph 3 (d), may be appealed against by the State concerned or by the Prosecutor, with the leave of the Pre-Trial Chamber. The appeal shall be heard on an expedited basis. 3. An appeal shall not of itself have suspensive effect unless the Appeals Chamber so orders, upon request, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 4. A legal representative of the victims, the convicted person or a bona fide owner of property adversely affected by an order under article 75 may appeal against the order for reparations, as provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 83 Proceedings on appeal 1. For the purposes of proceedings under article 81 and this article, the Appeals Chamber shall have all the powers of the Trial Chamber. 2. If the Appeals Chamber finds that the proceedings appealed from were unfair in a way that affected the reliability of the decision or sentence, or that the decision or sentence appealed from was materially affected by error of fact or law or procedural error, it may: (a) Reverse or amend the decision or sentence; or (b) Order a new trial before a different Trial Chamber. For these purposes, the Appeals Chamber may remand a factual issue to the original Trial Chamber for it to determine the issue and to report back accordingly, or may itself call evidence to determine the issue. When the decision or sentence has been appealed only by the person convicted, or the Prosecutor on that person's behalf, it cannot be amended to his or her detriment. 3. If in an appeal against sentence the Appeals Chamber finds that the sentence is disproportionate to the crime, it may vary the sentence in accordance with Part 7. 4. The judgement of the Appeals Chamber shall be taken by a majority of the judges and shall be delivered in open court. The judgement shall state the reasons on which it is based. When there is no unanimity, the judgement of the Appeals Chamber shall contain the views of the majority and the minority, but a judge may deliver a separate or dissenting opinion on a question of law. 5. The Appeals Chamber may deliver its judgement in the absence of the person acquitted or convicted. Article 84 Revision of conviction or sentence 1. The convicted person or, after death, spouses, children, parents or one person alive at the time of the accused's death who has been given express written instructions from the accused to bring such a claim, or the Prosecutor on the person's behalf, may apply to the Appeals Chamber to revise the final judgement of conviction or sentence on the grounds that: (a) New evidence has been discovered that: (i) Was not available at the time of trial, and such unavailability was not wholly or partially attributable to the party making application; and (ii) Is sufficiently important that had it been proved at trial it would have been likely to have resulted in a different verdict; (b) It has been newly discovered that decisive evidence, taken into account at trial and upon which the conviction depends, was false, forged or falsified; (c) One or more of the judges who participated in conviction or confirmation of the charges has committed, in that case, an act of serious misconduct or serious breach of duty of sufficient gravity to justify the removal of that judge or those judges from office under article 46. 2. The Appeals Chamber shall reject the application if it considers it to be unfounded. If it determines that the application is meritorious, it may, as appropriate: (a) Reconvene the original Trial Chamber; (b) Constitute a new Trial Chamber; or
41 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(c) Retain jurisdiction over the matter, with a view to, after hearing the parties in the manner set forth in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, arriving at a determination on whether the judgement should be revised. Article 85 Compensation to an arrested or convicted person 1. Anyone who has been the victim of unlawful arrest or detention shall have an enforceable right to compensation. 2. When a person has by a final decision been convicted of a criminal offence, and when subsequently his or her conviction has been reversed on the ground that a new or newly discovered fact shows conclusively that there has been a miscarriage of justice, the person who has suffered punishment as a result of such conviction shall be compensated according to law, unless it is proved that the non-disclosure of the unknown fact in time is wholly or partly attributable to him or her. 3. In exceptional circumstances, where the Court finds conclusive facts showing that there has been a grave and manifest miscarriage of justice, it may in its discretion award compensation, according to the criteria provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, to a person who has been released from detention following a final decision of acquittal or a termination of the proceedings for that reason.
42 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 9. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AND JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE Article 86 General obligation to cooperate States Parties shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Statute, cooperate fully with the Court in its investigation and prosecution of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. Article 87 Requests for cooperation: general provisions 1. (a) The Court shall have the authority to make requests to States Parties for cooperation. The requestsshall be transmitted through the diplomatic channel or any other appropriate channel as may be designated by each State Party upon ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Subsequent changes to the designation shall be made by each State Party in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. (b) When appropriate, without prejudice to the provisions of subparagraph (a), requests may also be transmitted through the International Criminal Police Organization or any appropriate regional organization. 2. Requests for cooperation and any documents supporting the request shall either be in or be accompanied by a translation into an official language of the requested State or one of the working languages of the Court, in accordance with the choice made by that State upon ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Subsequent changes to this choice shall be made in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 3. The requested State shall keep confidential a request for cooperation and any documents supporting the request, except to the extent that the disclosure is necessary for execution of the request. 4. In relation to any request for assistance presented under this Part, the Court may take such measures, including measures related to the protection of information, as may be necessary to ensure the safety or physical or psychological well-being of any victims, potential witnesses and their families. The Court may request that any information that is made available under this Part shall be provided and handled in a manner that protects the safety and physical or psychological well-being of any victims, potential witnesses and their families. 5. (a) The Court may invite any State not party to this Statute to provide assistance under this Part on the basis of an ad hoc arrangement, an agreement with such State or any other appropriate basis. (b) Where a State not party to this Statute, which has entered into an ad hoc arrangement or an agreement with the Court, fails to cooperate with requests pursuant to any such arrangement or agreement, the Court may so inform the Assembly of States Parties or, where the Security Council referred the matter to the Court, the Security Council. 6. The Court may ask any intergovernmental organization to provide information or documents. The Court may also ask for other forms of cooperation and assistance which may be agreed upon with such an organization and which are in accordance with its competence or mandate. 7. Where a State Party fails to comply with a request to cooperate by the Court contrary to the provisions of this Statute, thereby preventing the Court from exercising its functions and powers under this Statute, the Court may make a finding to that effect and refer the matter to the Assembly of States Parties or, where the Security Council referred the matter to the Court, to the Security Council. Article 88 Availability of procedures under national law States Parties shall ensure that there are procedures available under their national law for all of the forms of cooperation which are specified under this Part. Article 89 Surrender of persons to the Court 1. The Court may transmit a request for the arrest and surrender of a person, together with the material supporting the request outlined in article 91, to any State on the territory of which that person may be found and shall request the cooperation of that State in the arrest and surrender of such a person. States Parties shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Part and the procedure under their national law, comply with requests for arrest and surrender.
43 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. Where the person sought for surrender brings a challenge before a national court on the basis of the principle of ne bis in idem as provided in article 20, the requested State shall immediately consult with the Court to determine if there has been a relevant ruling on admissibility. If the case is admissible, the requested State shall proceed with the execution of the request. If an admissibility ruling is pending, the requested State may postpone the execution of the request for surrender of the person until the Court makes a determination on admissibility. 3. (a) A State Party shall authorize, in accordance with its national procedural law, transportation through its territory of a person being surrendered to the Court by another State, except where transit through that State would impede or delay the surrender. (b) A request by the Court for transit shall be transmitted in accordance with article 87. The request for transit shall contain: (i) A description of the person being transported; (ii) A brief statement of the facts of the case and their legal characterization; and (iii) The warrant for arrest and surrender; (c) A person being transported shall be detained in custody during the period of transit; (d) No authorization is required if the person is transported by air and no landing is scheduled on the territory of the transit State; (e) If an unscheduled landing occurs on the territory of the transit State, that State may require a request for transit from the Court as provided for in subparagraph (b). The transit State shall detain the person being transported until the request for transit is received and the transit is effected, provided that detention for purposes of this subparagraph may not be extended beyond 96 hours from the unscheduled landing unless the request is received within that time. 4. If the person sought is being proceeded against or is serving a sentence in the requested State for a crime different from that for which surrender to the Court is sought, the requested State, after making its decision to grant the request, shall consult with the Court. Article 90 Competing requests 1. A State Party which receives a request from the Court for the surrender of a person under article 89 shall, if it also receives a request from any other State for the extradition of the same person for the same conduct which forms the basis of the crime for which the Court seeks the person's surrender, notify the Court and the requesting State of that fact. 2. Where the requesting State is a State Party, the requested State shall give priority to the request from the Court if: (a) The Court has, pursuant to article 18 or 19, made a determination that the case in respect of which surrender is sought is admissible and that determination takes into account the investigation or prosecution conducted by the requesting State in respect of its request for extradition; or (b) The Court makes the determination described in subparagraph (a) pursuant to the requested State's notification under paragraph 1. 3. Where a determination under paragraph 2 (a) has not been made, the requested State may, at its discretion, pending the determination of the Court under paragraph 2 (b), proceed to deal with the request for extradition from the requesting State but shall not extradite the person until the Court has determined that the case is inadmissible. The Court's determination shall be made on an expedited basis. 4. If the requesting State is a State not Party to this Statute the requested State, if it is not under an international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State, shall give priority to the request for surrender from the Court, if the Court has determined that the case is admissible. 5. Where a case under paragraph 4 has not been determined to be admissible by the Court, the requested State may, at its discretion, proceed to deal with the request for extradition from the requesting State. 6. In cases where paragraph 4 applies except that the requested State is under an existing international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State not Party to this Statute, the requested State shall determine whether to surrender the person to the Court or extradite the person to the requesting State. In making its decision, the requested State shall consider all the relevant factors, including but not limited to:
44 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(a) The respective dates of the requests; (b) The interests of the requesting State including, where relevant, whether the crime was committed in its territory and the nationality of the victims and of the person sought; and (c) The possibility of subsequent surrender between the Court and the requesting State. 7. Where a State Party which receives a request from the Court for the surrender of a person also receives a request from any State for the extradition of the same person for conduct other than that which constitutes the crime for which the Court seeks the person's surrender: (a) The requested State shall, if it is not under an existing international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State, give priority to the request from the Court; (b) The requested State shall, if it is under an existing international obligation to extradite the person to the requesting State, determine whether to surrender the person to the Court or to extradite the person to the requesting State. In making its decision, the requested State shall consider all the relevant factors, including but not limited to those set out in paragraph 6, but shall give special consideration to the relative nature and gravity of the conduct in question. 8. Where pursuant to a notification under this article, the Court has determined a case to be inadmissible, and subsequently extradition to the requesting State is refused, the requested State shall notify the Court of this decision. Article 91 Contents of request for arrest and surrender 1. A request for arrest and surrender shall be made in writing. In urgent cases, a request may be made by any medium capable of delivering a written record, provided that the request shall be confirmed through the channel provided for in article 87, paragraph 1 (a). 2. In the case of a request for the arrest and surrender of a person for whom a warrant of arrest has been issued by the Pre-Trial Chamber under article 58, the request shall contain or be supported by: (a) Information describing the person sought, sufficient to identify the person, and information as to that person's probable location; (b) A copy of the warrant of arrest; and (c) Such documents, statements or information as may be necessary to meet the requirements for the surrender process in the requested State, except that those requirements should not be more burdensome than those applicable to requests for extradition pursuant to treaties or arrangements between the requested State and other States and should, if possible, be less burdensome, taking into account the distinct nature of the Court. 3. In the case of a request for the arrest and surrender of a person already convicted, the request shall contain or be supported by: (a) A copy of any warrant of arrest for that person; (b) A copy of the judgement of conviction; (c) Information to demonstrate that the person sought is the one referred to in the judgement of conviction; and (d) If the person sought has been sentenced, a copy of the sentence imposed and, in the case of a sentence for imprisonment, a statement of any time already served and the time remaining to be served. 4. Upon the request of the Court, a State Party shall consult with the Court, either generally or with respect to a specific matter, regarding any requirements under its national law that may apply under paragraph 2 (c). During the consultations, the State Party shall advise the Court of the specific requirements of its national law.
45 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 92 Provisional arrest 1. In urgent cases, the Court may request the provisional arrest of the person sought, pending presentation of the request for surrender and the documents supporting the request as specified in article 91. 2. The request for provisional arrest shall be made by any medium capable of delivering a written record and shall contain: (a) Information describing the person sought, sufficient to identify the person, and information as to that person's probable location; (b) A concise statement of the crimes for which the person's arrest is sought and of the facts which are alleged to constitute those crimes, including, where possible, the date and location of the crime; (c) A statement of the existence of a warrant of arrest or a judgement of conviction against the person sought; and (d) A statement that a request for surrender of the person sought will follow. 3. A person who is provisionally arrested may be released from custody if the requested State has not received the request for surrender and the documents supporting the request as specified in article 91 within the time limits specified in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. However, the person may consent to surrender before the expiration of this period if permitted by the law of the requested State. In such a case, the requested State shall proceed to surrender the person to the Court as soon as possible. 4. The fact that the person sought has been released from custody pursuant to paragraph 3 shall not prejudice the subsequent arrest and surrender of that person if the request for surrender and the documents supporting the request are delivered at a later date. Article 93 Other forms of cooperation 1. States Parties shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Part and under procedures of national law, comply with requests by the Court to provide the following assistance in relation to investigations or prosecutions: (a) The identification and whereabouts of persons or the location of items; (b) The taking of evidence, including testimony under oath, and the production of evidence, including expert opinions and reports necessary to the Court; (c) The questioning of any person being investigated or prosecuted; (d) The service of documents, including judicial documents; (e) Facilitating the voluntary appearance of persons as witnesses or experts before the Court; (f) The temporary transfer of persons as provided in paragraph 7; (g) The examination of places or sites, including the exhumation and examination of grave sites; (h) The execution of searches and seizures; (i) The provision of records and documents, including official records and documents; (j) The protection of victims and witnesses and the preservation of evidence; (k) The identification, tracing and freezing or seizure of proceeds, property and assets and instrumentalities of crimes for the purpose of eventual forfeiture, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties; and (l) Any other type of assistance which is not prohibited by the law of the requested State, with a view to facilitating the investigation and prosecution of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. 2. The Court shall have the authority to provide an assurance to a witness or an expert appearing before the Court that he or she will not be prosecuted, detained or subjected to any restriction of personal freedom by the Court in respect of any act or omission that preceded the departure of that person from the requested State.
46 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court3. Where execution of a particular measure of assistance detailed in a request presented under paragraph 1, is prohibited in the requested State on the basis of an existing fundamental legal principle of general application, the requested State shall promptly consult with the Court to try to resolve the matter. In the consultations, consideration should be given to whether the assistance can be rendered in another manner or subject to conditions. If after consultations the matter cannot be resolved, the Court shall modify the request as necessary. 4. In accordance with article 72, a State Party may deny a request for assistance, in whole or in part, only if the request concerns the production of any documents or disclosure of evidence which relates to its national security. 5. Before denying a request for assistance under paragraph 1 (l), the requested State shall consider whether the assistance can be provided subject to specified conditions, or whether the assistance can be provided at a later date or in an alternative manner, provided that if the Court or the Prosecutor accepts the assistance subject to conditions, the Court or the Prosecutor shall abide by them. 6. If a request for assistance is denied, the requested State Party shall promptly inform the Court or the Prosecutor of the reasons for such denial. 7. (a) The Court may request the temporary transfer of a person in custody for purposes of identification or for obtaining testimony or other assistance. The person may be transferred if the following conditions are fulfilled: (i) The person freely gives his or her informed consent to the transfer; and (ii) The requested State agrees to the transfer, subject to such conditions as that State and the Court may agree. (b) The person being transferred shall remain in custody. When the purposes of the transfer have been fulfilled, the Court shall return the person without delay to the requested State. 8. (a) The Court shall ensure the confidentiality of documents and information, except as required for the investigation and proceedings described in the request. (b) The requested State may, when necessary, transmit documents or information to the Prosecutor on a confidential basis. The Prosecutor may then use them solely for the purpose of generating new evidence. (c) The requested State may, on its own motion or at the request of the Prosecutor, subsequently consent to the disclosure of such documents or information. They may then be used as evidence pursuant to the provisions of Parts 5 and 6 and in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 9. (a) (i) In the event that a State Party receives competing requests, other than for surrender or extradition, from the Court and from another State pursuant to an international obligation, the State Party shall endeavour, in consultation with the Court and the other State, to meet both requests, if necessary by postponing or attaching conditions to one or the other request. (ii) Failing that, competing requests shall be resolved in accordance with the principles established in article 90. (b) Where, however, the request from the Court concerns information, property or persons which are subject to the control of a third State or an international organization by virtue of an international agreement, the requested States shall so inform the Court and the Court shall direct its request to the third State or international organization. 10. (a) The Court may, upon request, cooperate with and provide assistance to a State Party conducting an investigation into or trial in respect of conduct which constitutes a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court or which constitutes a serious crime under the national law of the requesting State. (b) (i) The assistance provided under subparagraph (a) shall include, inter alia : a. The transmission of statements, documents or other types of evidence obtained in the course of an investigation or a trial conducted by the Court; and b. The questioning of any person detained by order of the Court;
47 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(ii) In the case of assistance under subparagraph (b) (i) a: a. If the documents or other types of evidence have been obtained with the assistance of a State, such transmission shall require the consent of that State; b. If the statements, documents or other types of evidence have been provided by a witness or expert, such transmission shall be subject to the provisions of article 68. (c) The Court may, under the conditions set out in this paragraph, grant a request for assistance under this paragraph from a State which is not a Party to this Statute. Article 94 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of ongoing investigation or prosecution 1. If the immediate execution of a request would interfere with an ongoing investigation or prosecution of a case different from that to which the request relates, the requested State may postpone the execution of the request for a period of time agreed upon with the Court. However, the postponement shall be no longer than is necessary to complete the relevant investigation or prosecution in the requested State. Before making a decision to postpone, the requested State should consider whether the assistance may be immediately provided subject to certain conditions. 2. If a decision to postpone is taken pursuant to paragraph 1, the Prosecutor may, however, seek measures to preserve evidence, pursuant to article 93, paragraph 1 (j). Article 95 Postponement of execution of a request in respect of an admissibility challenge Where there is an admissibility challenge under consideration by the Court pursuant to article 18 or 19, the requested State may postpone the execution of a request under this Part pending a determination by the Court, unless the Court has specifically ordered that the Prosecutor may pursue the collection of such evidence pursuant to article 18 or 19. Article 96 Contents of request for other forms of assistance under article 93 1. A request for other forms of assistance referred to in article 93 shall be made in writing. In urgent cases, a request may be made by any medium capable of delivering a written record, provided that the request shall be confirmed through the channel provided for in article 87, paragraph 1 (a). 2. The request shall, as applicable, contain or be supported by the following: (a) A concise statement of the purpose of the request and the assistance sought, including the legal basis and the grounds for the request; (b) As much detailed information as possible about the location or identification of any person or place that must be found or identified in order for the assistance sought to be provided; (c) A concise statement of the essential facts underlying the request; (d) The reasons for and details of any procedure or requirement to be followed; (e) Such information as may be required under the law of the requested State in order to execute the request; and (f) Any other information relevant in order for the assistance sought to be provided. 3. Upon the request of the Court, a State Party shall consult with the Court, either generally or with respect to a specific matter, regarding any requirements under its national law that may apply under paragraph 2 (e). During the consultations, the State Party shall advise the Court of the specific requirements of its national law. 4. The provisions of this article shall, where applicable, also apply in respect of a request for assistance made to the Court.
48 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 97 Consultations Where a State Party receives a request under this Part in relation to which it identifies problems which may impede or prevent the execution of the request, that State shall consult with the Court without delay in order to resolve the matter. Such problems may include, inter alia : (a) Insufficient information to execute the request; (b) In the case of a request for surrender, the fact that despite best efforts, the person sought cannot be located or that the investigation conducted has determined that the person in the requested State is clearly not the person named in the warrant; or (c) The fact that execution of the request in its current form would require the requested State to breach a pre-existing treaty obligation undertaken with respect to another State. Article 98 Cooperation with respect to waiver of immunity and consent to surrender 1. The Court may not proceed with a request for surrender or assistance which would require the requested State to act inconsistently with its obligations under international law with respect to the State or diplomatic immunity of a person or property of a third State, unless the Court can first obtain the cooperation of that third State for the waiver of the immunity. 2. The Court may not proceed with a request for surrender which would require the requested State to act inconsistently with its obligations under international agreements pursuant to which the consent of a sending State is required to surrender a person of that State to the Court, unless the Court can first obtain the cooperation of the sending State for the giving of consent for the surrender. Article 99 Execution of requests under articles 93 and 96 1. Requests for assistance shall be executed in accordance with the relevant procedure under the law of the requested State and, unless prohibited by such law, in the manner specified in the request, including following any procedure outlined therein or permitting persons specified in the request to be present at and assist in the execution process. 2. In the case of an urgent request, the documents or evidence produced in response shall, at the request of the Court, be sent urgently. 3. Replies from the requested State shall be transmitted in their original language and form. 4. Without prejudice to other articles in this Part, where it is necessary for the successful execution of a request which can be executed without any compulsory measures, including specifically the interview of or taking evidence from a person on a voluntary basis, including doing so without the presence of the authorities of the requested State Party if it is essential for the request to be executed, and the examination without modification of a public site or other public place, the Prosecutor may execute such request directly on the territory of a State as follows: (a) When the State Party requested is a State on the territory of which the crime is alleged to have been committed, and there has been a determination of admissibility pursuant to article 18 or 19, the Prosecutor may directly execute such request following all possible consultations with the requested State Party; (b) In other cases, the Prosecutor may execute such request following consultations with the requested State Party and subject to any reasonable conditions or concerns raised by that State Party. Where the requested State Party identifies problems with the execution of a request pursuant to this subparagraph it shall, without delay, consult with the Court to resolve the matter. 5. Provisions allowing a person heard or examined by the Court under article 72 to invoke restrictions designed to prevent disclosure of confidential information connected with national security shall also apply to the execution of requests for assistance under this article.
49 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 100 Costs 1. The ordinary costs for execution of requests in the territory of the requested State shall be borne by that State, except for the following, which shall be borne by the Court: (a) Costs associated with the travel and security of witnesses and experts or the transfer under article 93 of persons in custody; (b) Costs of translation, interpretation and transcription; (c) Travel and subsistence costs of the judges, the Prosecutor, the Deputy Prosecutors, the Registrar, the Deputy Registrar and staff of any organ of the Court; (d) Costs of any expert opinion or report requested by the Court; (e) Costs associated with the transport of a person being surrendered to the Court by a custodial State; and (f) Following consultations, any extraordinary costs that may result from the execution of a request. 2. The provisions of paragraph 1 shall, as appropriate, apply to requests from States Parties to the Court. In that case, the Court shall bear the ordinary costs of execution. Article 101 Rule of speciality 1. A person surrendered to the Court under this Statute shall not be proceeded against, punished or detained for any conduct committed prior to surrender, other than the conduct or course of conduct which forms the basis of the crimes for which that person has been surrendered. 2. The Court may request a waiver of the requirements of paragraph 1 from the State which surrendered the person to the Court and, if necessary, the Court shall provide additional information in accordance with article 91. States Parties shall have the authority to provide a waiver to the Court and should endeavour to do so. Article 102 Use of terms For the purposes of this Statute: (a) "surrender" means the delivering up of a person by a State to the Court, pursuant to this Statute. (b) "extradition" means the delivering up of a person by one State to another as provided by treaty, convention or national legislation.
50 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 10. ENFORCEMENT Article 103 Role of States in enforcement of sentences of imprisonment 1. (a) A sentence of imprisonment shall be served in a State designated by the Court from a list of States which have indicated to the Court their willingness to accept sentenced persons. (b) At the time of declaring its willingness to accept sentenced persons, a State may attach conditions to its acceptance as agreed by the Court and in accordance with this Part. (c) A State designated in a particular case shall promptly inform the Court whether it accepts the Court's designation. 2. (a) The State of enforcement shall notify the Court of any circumstances, including the exercise of any conditions agreed under paragraph 1, which could materially affect the terms or extent of the imprisonment. The Court shall be given at least 45 days' notice of any such known or foreseeable circumstances. During this period, the State of enforcement shall take no action that might prejudice its obligations under article 110. (b) Where the Court cannot agree to the circumstances referred to in subparagraph (a), it shall notify the State of enforcement and proceed in accordance with article 104, paragraph 1. 3. In exercising its discretion to make a designation under paragraph 1, the Court shall take into account the following: (a) The principle that States Parties should share the responsibility for enforcing sentences of imprisonment, in accordance with principles of equitable distribution, as provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence; (b) The application of widely accepted international treaty standards governing the treatment of prisoners; (c) The views of the sentenced person; (d) The nationality of the sentenced person; (e) Such other factors regarding the circumstances of the crime or the person sentenced, or the effective enforcement of the sentence, as may be appropriate in designating the State of enforcement. 4. If no State is designated under paragraph 1, the sentence of imprisonment shall be served in a prison facility made available by the host State, in accordance with the conditions set out in the headquarters agreement referred to in article 3, paragraph 2. In such a case, the costs arising out of the enforcement of a sentence of imprisonment shall be borne by the Court. Article 104 Change in designation of State of enforcement 1. The Court may, at any time, decide to transfer a sentenced person to a prison of another State. 2. A sentenced person may, at any time, apply to the Court to be transferred from the State of enforcement. Article 105 Enforcement of the sentence 1. Subject to conditions which a State may have specified in accordance with article 103, paragraph 1 (b), the sentence of imprisonment shall be binding on the States Parties, which shall in no case modify it. 2. The Court alone shall have the right to decide any application for appeal and revision. The State of enforcement shall not impede the making of any such application by a sentenced person. Article 106 Supervision of enforcement of sentences and conditions of imprisonment 1. The enforcement of a sentence of imprisonment shall be subject to the supervision of the Court and shall be consistent with widely accepted international treaty standards governing treatment of prisoners.
51 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court2. The conditions of imprisonment shall be governed by the law of the State of enforcement and shall be consistent with widely accepted international treaty standards governing treatment of prisoners; in no case shall such conditions be more or less favourable than those available to prisoners convicted of similar offences in the State of enforcement. 3. Communications between a sentenced person and the Court shall be unimpeded and confidential. Article 107 Transfer of the person upon completion of sentence 1. Following completion of the sentence, a person who is not a national of the State of enforcement may, in accordance with the law of the State of enforcement, be transferred to a State which is obliged to receive him or her, or to another State which agrees to receive him or her, taking into account any wishes of the person to be transferred to that State, unless the State of enforcement authorizes the person to remain in its territory. 2. If no State bears the costs arising out of transferring the person to another State pursuant to paragraph 1, such costs shall be borne by the Court. 3. Subject to the provisions of article 108, the State of enforcement may also, in accordance with its national law, extradite or otherwise surrender the person to a State which has requested the extradition or surrender of the person for purposes of trial or enforcement of a sentence. Article 108 Limitation on the prosecution or punishment of other offences 1. A sentenced person in the custody of the State of enforcement shall not be subject to prosecution or punishment or to extradition to a third State for any conduct engaged in prior to that person's delivery to the State of enforcement, unless such prosecution, punishment or extradition has been approved by the Court at the request of the State of enforcement. 2. The Court shall decide the matter after having heard the views of the sentenced person. 3. Paragraph 1 shall cease to apply if the sentenced person remains voluntarily for more than 30 days in the territory of the State of enforcement after having served the full sentence imposed by the Court, or returns to the territory of that State after having left it. Article 109 Enforcement of fines and forfeiture measures 1. States Parties shall give effect to fines or forfeitures ordered by the Court under Part 7, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties, and in accordance with the procedure of their national law. 2. If a State Party is unable to give effect to an order for forfeiture, it shall take measures to recover the value of the proceeds, property or assets ordered by the Court to be forfeited, without prejudice to the rights of bona fide third parties. 3. Property, or the proceeds of the sale of real property or, where appropriate, the sale of other property, which is obtained by a State Party as a result of its enforcement of a judgement of the Court shall be transferred to the Court. Article 110 Review by the Court concerning reduction of sentence 1. The State of enforcement shall not release the person before expiry of the sentence pronounced by the Court. 2. The Court alone shall have the right to decide any reduction of sentence, and shall rule on the matter after having heard the person. 3. When the person has served two thirds of the sentence, or 25 years in the case of life imprisonment, the Court shall review the sentence to determine whether it should be reduced. Such a review shall not be conducted before that time. 4. In its review under paragraph 3, the Court may reduce the sentence if it finds that one or more of the following factors are present: (a) The early and continuing willingness of the person to cooperate with the Court in its investigations and prosecutions;
52 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court(b) The voluntary assistance of the person in enabling the enforcement of the judgements and orders of the Court in other cases, and in particular providing assistance in locating assets subject to orders of fine, forfeiture or reparation which may be used for the benefit of victims; or (c) Other factors establishing a clear and significant change of circumstances sufficient to justify the reduction of sentence, as provided in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 5. If the Court determines in its initial review under paragraph 3 that it is not appropriate to reduce the sentence, it shall thereafter review the question of reduction of sentence at such intervals and applying such criteria as provided for in the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Article 111 Escape If a convicted person escapes from custody and flees the State of enforcement, that State may, after consultation with the Court, request the person's surrender from the State in which the person is located pursuant to existing bilateral or multilateral arrangements, or may request that the Court seek the person's surrender, in accordance with Part 9. It may direct that the person be delivered to the State in which he or she was serving the sentence or to another State designated by the Court.
53 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 11. ASSEMBLY OF STATES PARTIES Article 112 Assembly of States Parties 1. An Assembly of States Parties to this Statute is hereby established. Each State Party shall have one representative in the Assembly who may be accompanied by alternates and advisers. Other States which have signed this Statute or the Final Act may be observers in the Assembly. 2. The Assembly shall: (a) Consider and adopt, as appropriate, recommendations of the Preparatory Commission; (b) Provide management oversight to the Presidency, the Prosecutor and the Registrar regarding the administration of the Court; (c) Consider the reports and activities of the Bureau established under paragraph 3 and take appropriate action in regard thereto; (d) Consider and decide the budget for the Court; (e) Decide whether to alter, in accordance with article 36, the number of judges; (f) Consider pursuant to article 87, paragraphs 5 and 7, any question relating to non-cooperation; (g) Perform any other function consistent with this Statute or the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. 3. (a) The Assembly shall have a Bureau consisting of a President, two Vice-Presidents and 18 members elected by the Assembly for three-year terms. (b) The Bureau shall have a representative character, taking into account, in particular, equitable geographical distribution and the adequate representation of the principal legal systems of the world. (c) The Bureau shall meet as often as necessary, but at least once a year. It shall assist the Assembly in the discharge of its responsibilities. 4. The Assembly may establish such subsidiary bodies as may be necessary, including an independent oversight mechanism for inspection, evaluation and investigation of the Court, in order to enhance its efficiency and economy. 5. The President of the Court, the Prosecutor and the Registrar or their representatives may participate, as appropriate, in meetings of the Assembly and of the Bureau. 6. The Assembly shall meet at the seat of the Court or at the Headquarters of the United Nations once a year and, when circumstances so require, hold special sessions. Except as otherwise specified in this Statute, special sessions shall be convened by the Bureau on its own initiative or at the request of one third of the States Parties. 7. Each State Party shall have one vote. Every effort shall be made to reach decisions by consensus in the Assembly and in the Bureau. If consensus cannot be reached, except as otherwise provided in the Statute: (a) Decisions on matters of substance must be approved by a two-thirds majority of those present and voting provided that an absolute majority of States Parties constitutes the quorum for voting; (b) Decisions on matters of procedure shall be taken by a simple majority of States Parties present and voting. 8. A State Party which is in arrears in the payment of its financial contributions towards the costs of the Court shall have no vote in the Assembly and in the Bureau if the amount of its arrears equals or exceeds the amount of the contributions due from it for the preceding two full years. The Assembly may, nevertheless, permit such a State Party to vote in the Assembly and in the Bureau if it is satisfied that the failure to pay is due to conditions beyond the control of the State Party. 9. The Assembly shall adopt its own rules of procedure. 10. The official and working languages of the Assembly shall be those of the General Assembly of the United Nations.
54 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 12. FINANCING Article 113 Financial Regulations Except as otherwise specifically provided, all financial matters related to the Court and the meetings of the Assembly of States Parties, including its Bureau and subsidiary bodies, shall be governed by this Statute and the Financial Regulations and Rules adopted by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 114 Payment of expenses Expenses of the Court and the Assembly of States Parties, including its Bureau and subsidiary bodies, shall be paid from the funds of the Court. Article 115 Funds of the Court and of the Assembly of States Parties The expenses of the Court and the Assembly of States Parties, including its Bureau and subsidiary bodies, as provided for in the budget decided by the Assembly of States Parties, shall be provided by the following sources: (a) Assessed contributions made by States Parties; (b) Funds provided by the United Nations, subject to the approval of the General Assembly, in particular in relation to the expenses incurred due to referrals by the Security Council. Article 116 Voluntary contributions Without prejudice to article 115, the Court may receive and utilize, as additional funds, voluntary contributions from Governments, international organizations, individuals, corporations and other entities, in accordance with relevant criteria adopted by the Assembly of States Parties. Article 117 Assessment of contributions The contributions of States Parties shall be assessed in accordance with an agreed scale of assessment, based on the scale adopted by the United Nations for its regular budget and adjusted in accordance with the principles on which that scale is based. Article 118 Annual audit The records, books and accounts of the Court, including its annual financial statements, shall be audited annually by an independent auditor.
55 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtPART 13. FINAL CLAUSES Article 119 Settlement of disputes 1. Any dispute concerning the judicial functions of the Court shall be settled by the decision of the Court. 2. Any other dispute between two or more States Parties relating to the interpretation or application of this Statute which is not settled through negotiations within three months of their commencement shall be referred to the Assembly of States Parties. The Assembly may itself seek to settle the dispute or may make recommendations on further means of settlement of the dispute, including referral to the International Court of Justice in conformity with the Statute of that Court. Article 120 Reservations No reservations may be made to this Statute. Article 121 Amendments 1. After the expiry of seven years from the entry into force of this Statute, any State Party may propose amendments thereto. The text of any proposed amendment shall be submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall promptly circulate it to all States Parties. 2. No sooner than three months from the date of notification, the Assembly of States Parties, at its next meeting, shall, by a majority of those present and voting, decide whether to take up the proposal. The Assembly may deal with the proposal directly or convene a Review Conference if the issue involved so warrants. 3. The adoption of an amendment at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties or at a Review Conference on which consensus cannot be reached shall require a two-thirds majority of States Parties. 4. Except as provided in paragraph 5, an amendment shall enter into force for all States Parties one year after instruments of ratification or acceptance have been deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations by seven-eighths of them. 5. Any amendment to articles 5, 6, 7 and 8 of this Statute shall enter into force for those States Parties which have accepted the amendment one year after the deposit of their instruments of ratification or acceptance. In respect of a State Party which has not accepted the amendment, the Court shall not exercise its jurisdiction regarding a crime covered by the amendment when committed by that State Party's nationals or on its territory. 6. If an amendment has been accepted by seven-eighths of States Parties in accordance with paragraph 4, any State Party which has not accepted the amendment may withdraw from this Statute with immediate effect, notwithstanding article 127, paragraph 1, but subject to article 127, paragraph 2, by giving notice no later than one year after the entry into force of such amendment. 7. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall circulate to all States Parties any amendment adopted at a meeting of the Assembly of States Parties or at a Review Conference. Article 122 Amendments to provisions of an institutional nature 1. Amendments to provisions of this Statute which are of an exclusively institutional nature, namely, article 35, article 36, paragraphs 8 and 9, article 37, article 38, article 39, paragraphs 1 (first two sentences), 2 and 4, article 42, paragraphs 4 to 9, article 43, paragraphs 2 and 3, and articles 44, 46, 47 and 49, may be proposed at any time, notwithstanding article 121, paragraph 1, by any State Party. The text of any proposed amendment shall be submitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations or such other person designated by the Assembly of States Parties who shall promptly circulate it to all States Parties and to others participating in the Assembly. 2. Amendments under this article on which consensus cannot be reached shall be adopted by the Assembly of States Parties or by a Review Conference, by a two-thirds majority of States Parties. Such amendments shall enter into force for all States Parties six months after their adoption by the Assembly or, as the case may be, by the Conference.
56 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 123 Review of the Statute 1. Seven years after the entry into force of this Statute the Secretary-General of the United Nations shall convene a Review Conference to consider any amendments to this Statute. Such review may include, but is not limited to, the list of crimes contained in article 5. The Conference shall be open to those participating in the Assembly of States Parties and on the same conditions. 2. At any time thereafter, at the request of a State Party and for the purposes set out in paragraph 1, the Secretary-General of the United Nations shall, upon approval by a majority of States Parties, convene a Review Conference. 3. The provisions of article 121, paragraphs 3 to 7, shall apply to the adoption and entry into force of any amendment to the Statute considered at a Review Conference. Article 124 Transitional Provision Notwithstanding article 12, paragraphs 1 and 2, a State, on becoming a party to this Statute, may declare that, for a period of seven years after the entry into force of this Statute for the State concerned, it does not accept the jurisdiction of the Court with respect to the category of crimes referred to in article 8 when a crime is alleged to have been committed by its nationals or on its territory. A declaration under this article may be withdrawn at any time. The provisions of this article shall be reviewed at the Review Conference convened in accordance with article 123, paragraph 1. Article 125 Signature, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession 1. This Statute shall be open for signature by all States in Rome, at the headquarters of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, on 17 July 1998. Thereafter, it shall remain open for signature in Rome at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Italy until 17 October 1998. After that date, the Statute shall remain open for signature in New Y ork, at United Nations Headquarters, until 31 December 2000. 2. This Statute is subject to ratification, acceptance or approval by signatory States. Instruments of ratification, acceptance or approval shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. 3. This Statute shall be open to accession by all States. Instruments of accession shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Article 126 Entry into force 1. This Statute shall enter into force on the first day of the month after the 60th day following the date of the deposit of the 60th instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. 2. For each State ratifying, accepting, approving or acceding to this Statute after the deposit of the 60th instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, the Statute shall enter into force on the first day of the month after the 60th day following the deposit by such State of its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Article 127 Withdrawal 1. A State Party may, by written notification addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, withdraw from this Statute. The withdrawal shall take effect one year after the date of receipt of the notification, unless the notification specifies a later date. 2. A State shall not be discharged, by reason of its withdrawal, from the obligations arising from this Statute while it was a Party to the Statute, including any financial obligations which may have accrued. Its withdrawal shall not affect any cooperation with the Court in connection with criminal investigations and proceedings in relation to which the withdrawing State had a duty to cooperate and which were commenced prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective, nor shall it prejudice in any way the continued consideration of any matter which was already under consideration by the Court prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective.
57 Rome Statute of the International Criminal CourtArticle 128 Authentic texts The original of this Statute, of which the Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish texts are equally authentic, shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall send certified copies thereof to all States. In W Itness W hereof , the undersigned, being duly authorized thereto by their respective Governments, have signed this Statute. Done at Rome, this 17th day of July 1998.
58 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court

[Previous Article]#[Next]

Denmark: The “IUD Campaign” and the social engineering of Danish colonialism in Greenland – The Red Herald (Red Herald)


We publish and unofficial translation of an article published on the Danish news site Socialist Revolution.

Thousands of Greenlandic women were involuntarily implanted with IUDs to prevent them from becoming pregnant in the 1960s-1970s by the Danish colonial authorities. This was done to reduce population growth in Greenland – a cruel and cynical expression of population control as part of Danish imperialism’s colonial policy in Greenland.

Naja was one of the thousands of girls who were involuntarily subjected to state-sanctioned contraception. Source: DR

During the 1950s to 1960s, the birth rate in Greenland increased by 80%, with 1.781 children born per year in 1966. In 1966, the decision was made by the Ministry of Greenland and the Danish National Board of Health to implant IUDs in 4,500 of Greenland’s 9.000 estimated fertile women, that is 50%. Greenland’s population at the time was around 40.500. The so-called “IUD campaign” reached its peak intensity in the period between 1966 and the 1970s, when the procedures were performed without the consent of young women, some as young as 12 years old. Danish imperialism succeeded in slowing population growth through its cynical abuses, but in 1974 it was forced to abandon the policy. Not because it regretted its failures, but because its policy had succeeded and it feared a backlash in the form of rebellion and criticism of its policy from the UN – several of whose conventions had been violated throughout the process.

Article from the 1960s reporting on the high birth rate.

The forced state contraception was carried out during a period when Greenland had formally ceased to be a Danish colony – but still is in practice today. At this time, however, Greenland was still subject to the Ministry of Greenland in the government, which oversaw the introduction of the coercive measures in the so-called IUD Campaign. The abuses were allegedly done so that population growth would not prevent the modernization of Greenland, in other words: not to get in the way of Danish imperialism’s desire to continue its dominance over Greenland. Many people in Greenland do not speak Danish, yet only Danish was spoken in the operating rooms and the doctors were Danes. Many of the girls were not informed that they were being sterilized, both because of the language barrier, but also because it was kept secret from them and their families.

Graph of the number of live births per year in Greenland from 1945 to 2022. Source: Stat.gl.

Greenland’s population growth has never recovered since the IUD Campaign and the population of Greenland has stagnated since the 1990s.

Although the policy was officially abandoned in 1974, it was unofficially continued for many years. In 1992, the local authorities in Greenland took over the health sector, where the policy continued with a further 14 Greenlandic women having IUDs implanted without consent.

The abuse has caused permanent damage to many women today, who experience many discomforts such as pelvic inflammatory disease, severe pain, irregular bleeding and permanent tissue damage and sterilization. The IUDs used at the time were of the Lippes Loop type and were much larger than those used today, and were only intended for women who had already given birth before. For this reason, among others, the IUD has led to permanent trauma in many women’s abdomens after being in place for decades.

Involuntary contraception is not just a thing of the distant past either. In an interview with 4 Greenlandic women, the British media BBC has revealed how at least 4 cases of involuntary birth control have been known to have been carried out by the authorities in Greenland since the turn of the millennium. Information has also reported on at least three involuntary induced abortions performed by the authorities in 2004, 2010 and 2013.

Currently, 143 Greenlandic women are suing the Danish state, seeking compensation of 300.000 DKK [Note by translator: around 44.000 USD] each for their suffering. This case is currently receiving a lot of media attention. The bourgeois Danish state and the authorities in Greenland are currently using the case as part of a “historical investigation of the Danish-Greenlandic history”, 45 million DKK [Note by translator: around 6,5 million USD] has been allocated by the state for this purpose. This investigation is part of the ongoing process for Greenland and the Faroe Islands to go from colonies to semi-colonies. Danish imperialism therefore needs to admit many of its crimes and come clean about them in order to continue its exploitation of Greenland and its strategic position in the Arctic.

The transition from colony to semi-colony for Greenland and the Faroe Islands should be understood as a deliberate act of Danish imperialism. It is a way for it to refine its exploitation of the countries, as this is more stable than the official colonial form. At the same time, it is an expression of the fact that revolution is the main trend in the world today, it is a sign of the decay of imperialism and the collapse of the last remnants of the colonial system in the world. Danish imperialism has learned the lessons of the people’s anti-colonial struggles in mainly Africa and Asia and has chosen to stay ahead of them by dictating the process itself. The inter-imperialist contradictions must also be taken into account, with mainly Yankee imperialism taking a renewed interest in the Arctic in its struggle against Russian imperialism. At the same time, the melting of the Greenland ice sheet has now attracted the attention of other imperialists who want to develop mining in Greenland.

The process for Greenland and the Faroe Islands should therefore be understood as a sign of weakness for Danish imperialism and imperialism in general, which is no longer able to maintain colonies, and that the masses in Greenland and the Faroe Islands defiantly continue to combat and resist.


[Previous Article]#[Next]

US to build “all-encompassing” spy satellite network – The Red Herald (Red Herald)


Featured image: SpaceX headquarters in California. Source: Reuters

SpaceX is building network of spy satellites called ”Starshield” under a classified contract with the US government. SpaceX has a $1.8 billion contract with the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), which includes personnel from the CIA and the Space Forces, to build a network of satellites able to quickly single out military targets almost anywhere in the world to support the ground forces of US imperialism.

“The National Reconnaissance Office is developing the most capable, diverse, and resilient space-based intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance system the world has ever seen,” a spokesperson for the NRO described the system. According to sources close to the project, the system would be so extensive that ”no one could hide”. The spy system would consist of low-orbiting satellites able to provide the US military with detailed images of the Earth, and it would also be more immune to disruptions, which the US says especially Russian imperialism would attempt to cause to its satellites. This system would provide information faster and near-constantly compared to old-type of higher-orbiting satellites.

Chinese social-imperialism has its own aspirations regarding the militarization of space, and its own spy satellite network program, and it immediately expressed its concern over ”Starshield” and accused the US of escalating tensions and threatening “global security”. Russian imperialism warned the US that through using commercial satellites for military purposes, these satellites become legitimate military targets.

In one hand, as is highlighted in the mainstream media, Starshield reflects the US asserting its position as the sole hegemonic superpower over Russian imperialism, as well as Chinese social-imperialism, with a massive militarization of space, using the most advanced new technologies. In the other hand, and mainly, corresponding to the main contradiction in the world today, it is spearheaded against the oppressed nations, in order to increase repression against their struggle for liberation, “so that no one can hide” from the all-seeing eye of Yankee imperialism. Here it is necessary to note however that even though imperialists highlight how advanced, how “omnipotent” this technology is, faced with the peoples of the world it is only a paper tiger.

In 2021, the US Department of Defense (DoD) officials said that space-based capabilities are critical for the US and that the US has to be prepared to conflicts which extent to space or even originate there, not meaning that war would be waged in space but that space would play a role in armed conflicts on Earth. In this context, DoD described as the main threat the space aspirations of Russian imperialism and Chinese social-imperialism: “Russia and China view space as critical to modern warfare and consider the use of counterspace capabilities as both a means of reducing U.S. military effectiveness and winning future wars”, DoD principal director for space policy said.

SpaceX is the largest operator of satellites in the world. The first SpaceX satellite was developed under a contract with the US, and its Falcon 9 rockets have been used to transport US military payloads to space. Already before Starshield SpaceX had aspirations to sell its Starlink technology to the US Department of Defense, but what the US imperialism wanted was technology specifically engineered to meet its needs.

SpaceX has already around 5,500 commercial Starlink satellites orbiting the Earth. These provide internet for different actors, and it is used among others by the Ukrainian military for communications. SpaceX sent 22,000 Starlink terminals to Ukraine in the first year since the beginning of the war of aggression, and they have played a “significant role” according to Ukrainian military sources. This was the first major conflict where such commercial space technology has been used for military purposes in a significant way and some US experts describe that such integration of commercial space technology for military operations is the “way of the future”. The space played already a role in for example the Gulf war, and satellites are commonly used in warfare and intelligence all over the world, but with the war of aggression against Ukraine the use of a commercial service is noteworthy. According to the CEO of SpaceX Elon Musk, who likes to pretend he is a “scientist” working for the good of the human kind, claims that the terminals were provided to Ukraine for “humanitarian” purposes and not military purposes. In 2023 it was also claimed that Musk ordered some connections to be shut down near Crimea to sabotage a Ukrainian attack against Russian warships because he was afraid of Russia reacting with nuclear weapons. In 2024, the Ukrainian military said it has evidence Starlink has been used also by Russia. The war of aggression in Ukraine has therefore in one hand served to refine the technology for military purposes, and in the other it has shown the capabilities of such technology and the “necessity” of the increasing militarization of space for the imperialists. Therefore it has raised the interest of US imperialism to ensure such technology serves its interests only and can be used extensively for this – and to this the Starshield system answers.

It is claimed that as the costs of launching satellites and rockets to space lower and more and more commercial companies pop up, it “democratizes” the space. This is of course a similar machination as the free competition and “the American dream” under capitalism, that today has reached the stage of imperialism, and the tendency of monopolization and struggle for hegemony is seen also in space and this commercialization of space is used by the imperialists to achieve their interests. It is openly stated by US experts that using commercial technologies for military purposes is the future, and companies are put to develop military technologies in close contact with the US government. Trae Stephens, a principal at Founders Fund, whose investments include SpaceX, said in 2023 that the war of aggression has woken up members of the financial oligarchy to see the potential in military technologies instead of civilian infrastructure. This means deeper militarization of society.

As the general crisis of imperialism develops further and further, it becomes more and more urgent for the imperialists to develop all-encompassing militarization, that even reaches space. Technological advancement is put to serve destruction and the maintaining of oppression, the hegemony of the US imperialism in the world. This is a sign of weakness, and as has been seen multiple times, despite its technological overpower, it has experienced and keeps on experiencing devastating blows from the peoples of the world.


[Previous Article]#[Next]

Talonpojat ottivat vesilähteet takaisin suurtilalta lyötyään pyssymiehet yhteenotossa (Uusi Brasilia)


None

Suunnilleen 100 Köyhien Talonpoikien Liiton järjestämää maatilanvalloittajaa Jaqueiran (Pernambuco) eri yhteisöistä ottivat takaisin vesilähteensä, jotka suurtilallisyritys oli aidannut heiltä.

18. maaliskuuta, noin 100 LCP:n järjestämää maatilojen valloittajaa Jaqueirassa, Pernambucossa (PE) sijaitsevista yhteisöistä (Barro Branco, Furnas, Cabugi, Monteir, Caiana, Morcego, Caixa D’agua, Tenório ja Sítio Grande) yhdistivät voimansa palauttaakseen vesilähteensä, joita piiritti suurtilallisyritys Agropecuária Mata Sul S/A, jonka omistaa tilanherra Guilherme Maranhão.

Vuodesta 2015, kun maiden ja vesilähteiden ryöstö alkoi, talonpojat ovat eläneet ja tuottaneet entisen Frei Caneca -tilan mailla. Tilanherra Guilherme Maranhãp, jota tukee entinen kuvernööri Paulo Camara, asetti pyssymiesryhmiä jotka uhkailevat koko väestöä laajentaakseen nautakarjankasvatusta kansainväliseen vientiin Masterboin teurastamon kautta.

Huolimatta kattavasta todistusaineistosta veden myrkytyksestä tilanherrojen päästämillä tuholaismyrkyillä (karjan paskalla ja kusella saastuttamisen lisäksi), Pernambucon Julkinen Ministeriö (MPPE) ja Pernambucon ympäristöasioiden osavaltiosihteeristö (CPRH) eivät koskaan aloittaneet mitään rikostutkintaa suurtilallisyritys Agropecuária Mata Sul S/A:a vastaan.

Näin ollen talonpojat päättivät Kansankokouksessa toimeenpanna suuren aktion vesilähteiden ottamiseksi takaisin suurtilalta. Kutsu saavutti koko paikallisen väestön lentolehtisillä toreilla ja kaikissa tämän ympäristörikoksen ja kansan terveyden vastaisen rikoksen koskettamissa talonpoikaisyhteisöissä. Talonpojat järjestivät myös yhteisponnistuksia vesilähteiden puhdistamiseksi ja eristämiseksi, 50 metrin päässä suurtilanherran karjatiloista ja eucalyptusplantaaseista.

Kaiken tämän työn suorittamiseksi tilanvaltaajat laskivat José Ricardon Vallankumouksellisen Alueen talonpoikien ja Mangue Vermelho -Liikkeen nuorten opiskelijoiden tukeen. He auttoivat raivaamaan puskat ja merkitsemään aidat vesilähteiden suojelemiseksi paahtavassa auringossa. Enemmänkin, he kohtasivat muun kansan rinnalla taistellen tilanherrojen provokaatiot.

Heti kun talonpojat olivat suurella taisteluhengellä saaneet yhteisponnistuksensa päätökseen päivän ensimmäisellä vesilähteellä, laulaen kansanlauluja ja huutaen iskulauseita, puolitusinaa pyssymiestä suurtiloilta ilmestyi traktoreineen, lavafarmareineen, moottoripyörineen ja mönkijöineen. Pyssymiehet saapuivat tolppien, langan ja eukalyptussiementen kanssa laittamaan niitä samalle alueelle, jonka talonpojat olivat juuri raivanneet. Kun talonpoikaismarssi kohtasi bandiitit, tilanherrojen edustajat alkoivat uhkailla talonpoikia tuliaseilla. Jännite johti yhteenottoon, kolme pyssymiestä loukkaantui ja suurtilan drooni tuhottiin tuliaseista raivostuneiden kansanjoukkojen toimesta.

Tänä samana maaliskuuna 18:a MPPE:n maatalouspromoottori, CPRH:n agentit, edusajat Osavaltion Komiteasta Agraarikonfliktien Valvomiseksi (CEACA), edustajat Laidunmaiden Komissiosta (CPT) ja Pernambucon Työläisten ja Talonpoikien Federaatiosta (FETAPE), pormestari Ridete Pellegrino ja kunnanvaltuutetut Jaqueirasta, sekä lakimiehet suurtilallisyritys Agropecuária Mata Sul S/A:sta vierailivat tutkiakseen tilanherran tekemiä valituksia talonpojista. Tämän tiedon mukaan tämä komissio ei vieraillut talonpoikien vesilähteillä, vaan ainoastaan tilanherrojen osoittamissa paikoissa.

Kuitenkin, talonpoikien voimallinen aktio pakotti koko komission esittäytymään aktion tapahtumapaikalla ja hyväksymään kaksi lakimiestä Kansanasianajajien brasilialaisesta yhdistyksestä (Abrapo) sekä Barro Brancon Tilanvaltaajien Yhdistyksen puheenjohtajan komissioon ja tämän lisäksi joutui hyväksymään yleisössä olleen kansan kiireelliset ehdot.

Lopulta MPPE hyväksyi Abrapon edustamien talonpoikien ehdotuksen luoda “vesikäytävä” kansan vesilähteiden erottamiseksi. Tilanherra määrättiin maksamaan tolpat ja lanka, kaupunginhallinto lähettää työntekijät ja Osavaltion ympäristöosaston vastuulle tuli kansan vesien tutkiminen saastumisen määrittelyksi ja rikostutkinnan avaamiseksi tilanherraa vastaan.

Oikeuden kuulemisen jälkeen Guilherme Maranhãon pyssymiehet pyysivät vahvistuksia Pernambucon sotilaspoliisilta (PM-PE) eucalyptuksen istuttamiseksi yhdelle vesilähteistä, jonka talonpojat olivat siivonneet yhteistoimin, ja tilanherrojen lakimies Eduardo Figueredo julisti että he tulisivat suorittaamaan sotilaallisen aktion talonpoikaisperheiden karkottamiseksi metsiä lähellä sijaitsevilta alueilta.

Kaksi ajoneuvoa lähetettiin tuomaan turvaa pyssymiehille jatkaakseen kansanvastaisia toimiaan. Tämä ei ole rohkeutta osoittava teko, vaan pikemminkin pelkuruutta osoittava teko agraarivallankumouksen yhdistämien ja järjestämien talonpoikien pienen voimannäytön edessä. Se myös osoittaa, kuinka omistautuneita tämän vanhan valtion sotilasvoimat ovat tilanherrojen etujen suojelemiselle ja onnettumuuksien edistämiseksi köyhälle väestölle maalla ja kaupungissa.

Entisen Frei Canecan tilaa miehittävät talonpojat ovat päättäväisinä ottamaan takaisin kaikki vesilähteensä ja maansa tilanherran käsistä. Tällä tavoin he kutsuvat kaikkia talonpoikia Pernambucon eteläisellä metsäalueella nousemaan suurtilayritysten pyssymiesryhmiä ja tämän vanhan valtion asevoimia vastaan. Tuhoamatta suurtiloja ei voida koskaan saada oikeutta maaseudun köyhälle kansalle.

Käännetty AND:n uutisesta: https://anovademocracia.com.br/pe-camponeses-retomam-fontes-dagua-do-latifundio-apos-derrotar-pistoleiros-em-confronto/


[Previous Article]#[Next]

MA: Moradores da comunidade de São Benedito no Maranhão denunciam crimes de grilagem na região - A Nova Democracia (A Nova Democracia)


No dia 19 de março, a comunidade camponesa São Benedito, no município de São Bernardo, no Maranhão, denunciou em sua rede social atividades criminosas de grileiros que ameaçam a vida da população local. No vídeo, uma criança de dez anos relata as tentativas de invasão e roubo de terra, mas que os camponeses “não vão deixar”. Ela também mostra a intensa produção camponesa no local.

A comunidade tem mais de 200 anos de existência, com terras passadas de geração para geração, na qual os moradores trabalham na roça para sua subsistência. De acordo com o que foi documentado pelos mesmos, por meio das redes sociais, casas estão sendo demolidas, terras griladas estão sendo desmatadas sem a autorização do IBAMA e suas plantações também estão comprometidas por ações criminosas do latifúndio.

Situações semelhantes têm crescido por todo estado do Maranhão, principalmente após a implementação da “Lei da Grilagem”, sancionada pelo governador Carlos Brandão. Sendo uma versão atualizada da conhecida Lei Sarney de Terras, a legislação que amplia a possibilidade de regularização de terras públicas de 200 para 2,5 mil hectares, servindo de instrumento para que latifundiários, em nome do agronegócio, sintam-se no direito de cometer hediondos atos de violência contra o povo camponês, indígenas e quilombolas. 


[Previous Article]#

pc 23 marzo - Egitto - Scioperi operai: di nuovo in campo le operaie di Mahalla al Kubra (proletari comunisti)




[Previous Article]#