The Governance of Complementary Global Regimes Dealing With War and Crime:The Interaction Between the United Nations and the International Criminal Court

The establishment of an international judicial institution responsible to verify on a case-by-case basis when serious humanitarian crimes would fall within the competence of domestic judicial authorities,and when an international judiciary would be required is a visible accomplishment advocated for years.The important paradigm shift refers to governing the transitional challenges characterizing massive humanitarian escalations in conflict and post-conflict situations between the responsibility to protect civilians and the fight against the impunity of international crimes.In the current legislation of the UN the civilian protection duties are associated to the maintenance of peace and security and to the right of intervention in the domestic affairs of sovereign States for humanitarian reasons,extending further the reach of a criminal jurisdiction to punish the perpetrators.This has been the case in Darfur,Sudan,and Libya.Both these situations have been referred by the UN Security Council to the International Criminal Court(ICC).From an empirical perspective,it is still not demonstrated whether international criminal justice would have an impact on the maintenance and restoration of international peace and security,while its complementary role with global political regimes is in transition and deserves attention.The questions arising are as follow:how to rely on international criminal justice for the preservation,maintenance,and restoration of peace and security in extreme conflict zones,without solving the governance gaps during mass atrocity escalations characterized by jurisdictional referrals?Is this realistic considering the traditional concept of international security relying on old models of militarization,such as in the case of Libya?Are there political and strategic reasons for a postponement of accountability during such humanitarian interventions?In short,what kind of public authority is desired for the emerging regime of international criminal justice,and how would such tool function in the complexity of international governance?

The Determinants of the Italian Support to International Criminal Courts

Since the beginning of the 1990s, Italian foreign policy actors have showed a steady and bipartisan commitment to international criminal justice institutions, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia （ICTY） and the International Criminal Court （ICC） in particular. This paper aims at investigating the determinants of Italian foreign policy decisions to support and actively sponsor such institutions, as well as at providing a valuable account of the trajectory of the Italian foreign policy decisions with regards the issue under analysis. Starting with an historical account of the Italian contribution to the establishment of the ICTY and the ICC, the analysis will then focus on the internal and external determinants that may have contributed to the formulation of the Italian foreign policy. In this connection, the role played by political elites and their ideas about the Italian aspirated role as a responsible and ethical foreign policy actor will emerge as particularly relevant. Moreover, as observed in other cases connected to the Italian foreign policy in the broader area of human rights, Italy＇s commitment to international values raises the issue of the Country＇s incoherence as for the national implementation of those same values.

Establishment of International Criminal Court

The Rome Statute on the International Criminal Court (ICC) came into effect officially on July 1, 2002, signifying the birth of the first permanent international criminal justice organization in human history. Although it still takes some time before the court goes into official operation, the coming into effect of the Statute signifies a solid step toward the lofty ideal long cherished by man-realizing judicial justice and safeguarding lasting peace in the world.

International Seminar on Criminal Penalty Execution and Human Rights Protection

An International Seminar on Criminal Penalty Execution and Human Rights Protection was held in Kunming, capital of Yunnan Province from November 28-29, 2005. Sponsored by the Chinese Supreme People＇s Procuratorate, the UNDP, the Norway Parliament Administrative Supervisor＇s Office and the China International Economic and Technical Exchange Center of the Ministry of Commerce, the seminar was attended by more than 190 Chinese and foreign representatives from the International Prosecutors＇ Association,

THE ADMISSIBILITY OF PRE-TRIAL TESTIMONIAL TRANSCRIPTS： A DISCUSSION OF PRACTICE IN CHINA AND IN THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNALS

In Chinese criminal procedure, the issues of illegally obtained evidence and witnesses not appearing in courtroom are under fire, which is partly rooted in the fact that the Chinese courts do not limit the admissibility ofpre-trial testimonial transcripts in judicial practice, zealously pursue the ＂truth of fact＂ while disregard defendant＇s right to confront. Focusing on the admissibility ofpre-trial testimonial transcripts, the article will first analyze the current legislations and judicial practice in China, then from a comparative perspective introduce the corresponding written testimony rules of the International Criminal Tribunal （Court） which distinguishes the admissibility of different categories of written testimony, with an aim of both protecting the criminal defendant＇s right of confrontation and pursuing truth in fact-finding. The practice in International Criminal Tribunal （Court） provides a good starting point for China to rethink its own practice and learn from.