Accountability of Heads of State before International Criminal Court
Abstract
International Criminal Court (ICC), an established permanent forum, imposes
accountability for anyone commit international crimes based on international
criminal law. Anyone means the court is expected to procced all actor without
disntiction not to mention someone with high status e.g. Heads of State. Other than
personally engaged, as a superior, someone must be responsible for the commission
of crime by subordinates including as civilian superior. By the time this research
conducted, there have been three examples of heads of state proceeded before
international criminal court. Laurent Gbagbo, Omar Al-Bashir and Uhuru Kenyatta
are the only presidents who have been brought to ICC because their involvement in
international crimes.
Discussing accountability needs first and foremost, applicable law in international
criminal court covering issues of accountability such as general principles, offence,
knowledge, and jurisdiction. Aside from the general concept, this includes special
feature of liability for civilian superior and its application while considering
relevant issues of head of state. Lastly, there will be a completion theory of
leadership and accountability by another dimension, Islamic Law. As the second
chapter use statutory and history approach, subsequent chapter conceive case
approach with specific legal and non-legal issues in the case of Laurent Gbagbo,
Omar Al-Bashir and Uhuru Kenyatta.
At the end of discussion, in fact ICC had shown unwavering commitment to even
bring heads of state before the court yet with upcoming challenges, the court could
take a step forward to impose accountability against heads of state. Starting with
comprehensive legal statute and legacy from other international tribunals, the court
also gave advancement in the creation of non-immunity rule. Despite being unclear
in some instances, ICC brought a new understanding of immunity for third party of
Rome Statute which was enlightened in Omar Al-Bashir decison. In Uhuru
Kenyatta, ICC ruled about admissibility and complementary issue even though well
written in the Statute, the court invested in demanding interpretation that the state
must establish progressive domestic proceeding. Finally, still eventhough superior
responsibility is possible to be attached at heads of state, the court decided to put it
aside after direct responsibility in Laurent Gbagbo decision.
Thereafter, the court could be more refined in study and collaboration with other
international body in making interpretation for Rome statute. Other than that, state
party is the only element who can be relied upon for the betterment of the court’s
law enforcement in upholding international criminal justice.
Keywords: Accoutability, International Criminal Court, Heads of State, Superior
responsibility
Collections
- Law [2021]