The International Criminal Court: an Analysis of Its Evolution end Its Competence to Judge the Crime of Terrorism

Abstract

The normative and institutional framework of International Criminal Law has developed substantially since the first steps given in the Treaty of Versailles; the constitution of the courts of Nuremberg and Tokyo, the ad hoc Tribunals for Rwanda and for the former Yugoslavia were consolidating steps in the process, which culminated in the creation of the International Criminal Court, the ICC. The ICC is a permanent international judicial court, created for the greater purpose of contributing to the preservation of world peace and security 

by putting an end to the impunity of those responsible for more serious crimes affecting the international community. It has been assigned the competence to judge four categories of crimes: crimes against humanity; genocide; war crimes and the crime of aggression. The questions now raised are: despite its undeniable advancing, is there a need to question and review its substantive jurisdiction to include jurisdiction over the crime of terrorism? The second question digs further: given its characteristics, there are those who argue that this crime fits into the category of crimes against humanity. Should this, therefore, be included in the list concerning crimes of this nature, referred to in art. 7 of the Rome Statute, (constitutional instrument of the International Criminal Court)? The subject was chosen in view of its undeniable importance to the International Society as well as sovereign states, in a moment in which no State, nor the International Society, seems to be free of threat from this horror. The method adopted was that of bibliography and jurisprudence review, associated to the critical method.