CYIL 2014

328

ONDŘEJ SVAČEK

CYIL 5 ȍ2014Ȏ

v oblasti odpovědnosti mezinárodních organizací za mezinárodně protiprávní chová-

ní a institutem náležité bdělosti v mezinárodním právu.

Key words:

International Criminal Court, human rights, Article 21(3) of the Rome

Statute, non-refoulement, family visits, responsibility of international organizations, due

diligence.

On the Author:

JUDr. Ondřej Svaček, Ph.D., LLM. Senior lecturer at the Department

of Constitutional Law and Public International Law, Faculty of Law, Palacký University,

Olomouc. At the time of writing visiting professional at the T.M.C. Asser Instituut,

The Hague.

Introduction

That International Criminal Court (ICC or Court) is obliged to consider

internationally recognized human rights in its interpretation and application of

applicable law is very well known.

The exact boundaries of the principal interpretative

guideline contained in Article 21(3) of the Rome Statute nevertheless remains subject

to considerable debate both in the doctrine and practice of the ICC. The aim of the

article presented here is to analyze achievements (consensus) reached with respect to

the interpretation and application of human rights before the ICC and at the same

time point to challenges which remain and should be settled in upcoming years. The

article reveals a close inter-relation existing between international criminal law and

human rights law and highlights the importance of human rights jurisprudence before

the ICC.

The ICC’s jurisprudence rendered since 2005 has clarified some contentious

aspects of Article 21(3) which have been steadily presented in scholarly literature.

Article 21(3) of the ICC Statute provides: The application and interpretation of law pursuant to this

article must be consistent with internationally recognized human rights, and be without any adverse

distinction founded on grounds such as gender as defined in article 7, paragraph 3, age, race, colour,

language, religion or belief, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, wealth, birth or

other status.

GALLANT, Kenneth S. Individual Human Rights in a New International Organization: The Rome

Statute of the International Criminal Court. In: BASSIOUNI, Cherif (ed.).

International Criminal

Law

. Vol. III. Ardsley: Transnational Publishers, 1999, pp. 693-723. PELLET, Alain, Applicable Law.

In: CASSESE, Antonio et al.

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Commentary

Vol. II. Oxford: OUP, 2002, pp. 1079-1082. HAFNER, Gerhard, BINDER, Christina. The

Interpretation of Article 21(3) ICC Statute. Opinion Reviewed.

Austrian Review of International

and European Law

. 2004, vol. 9, pp. 163-190. MCAULIFFE DE GUZMAN, Margaret. Article

21. Applicable Law. In: TRIFFTERER, Otto.

Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International

Criminal Court: observers’ notes, article by article

. München: Beck, 2008, pp. 711-712. SCHABAS,

William.

The International Criminal Court: a commentary of the Rome Statute

. Oxford: OUP, 2010,

pp. 397-400. SHEPPARD, Daniel. The International Criminal Court and “Internationally Recognized

Human Rights”: Understanding Article 21(3) of the Rome Statute.

International Criminal Law Review

2010, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 43-71. PAULUSSEN, Christophe.

Male captus bene detentus? Surrendering

suspects to the International Criminal Court

. Antwerp: Intersentia, 2010, pp. 820-837. CROQUET, A.

J. Nicholas. The International Criminal Court and the Treatment of Defence Rights: A Mirror of the