| dc.description.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. | en_US |
