Assessing The ICC Jurisdiction Upon Newly Independent State Before the Emergence of the Declaring State

Abstract

This thesis explored the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC) which run based on jurisdiction delegation from state parties. This delegation can be created by acceding into the Rome Statute or creating a declaration to accept court jurisdiction for a certain period. Transfer of jurisdiction may provide a new problem. The state argued on which state is eligible to delegate its jurisdiction to the court. Furthermore, the transfer of jurisdiction on several occasions cannot be separated from the succession process itself. Even after World War II ended, there were many armed conflicts that resulted in the emergence of a newly independent state. With such a problem, international society sometimes opposed the jurisdiction of the ICC by saying that delegation of jurisdiction submitted by a newly independent state is not valid. This thesis used normative legal research by focusing on treaties such as the Rome Statute, jurisprudence, and general principle of law as its main sources and brought secondary sources to strengthen the result. The research findings concluded that the ICC was still able to exercise jurisdiction even with the declaration created by the newly independent state. The important thing to be examined was the authority of the individual to represent that state. The individual with full power could delegate state jurisdiction regardless of control over that territory when the alleged crimes are committed.