首页> 外文期刊>International Legal Materials >INTRODUCTORY NOTE TO PROSECUTOR V. LAURENT KOUDOU GBAGBO: JUDGMENT ON THE APPEAL AGAINST THE DECISION OF PRE-TRIAL CHAMBER I ON JURISDICTION AND STAY OF THE PROCEEDINGS (INT'L. CRIM. CT.)
【24h】

INTRODUCTORY NOTE TO PROSECUTOR V. LAURENT KOUDOU GBAGBO: JUDGMENT ON THE APPEAL AGAINST THE DECISION OF PRE-TRIAL CHAMBER I ON JURISDICTION AND STAY OF THE PROCEEDINGS (INT'L. CRIM. CT.)

机译:检察官V.Laurent KOUDOU GBAGBO的介绍性注释:对针对庭前第一审判庭的管辖权和维持程序的上诉作出的判决(INT.L. CRIM。CT。)

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

On December 12, 2012, the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court (Court) in the case of Prosecutor v. Laurent Koudou Gbagbo unanimously confirmed the Pre-Trial Chamber I decision to dismiss Mr. Gbagbo's challenge to the jurisdiction of the Court. In the Judgment, the Appeals Chamber, for the first time, was called to interpret Article 12(3) of the Rome Statute (Statute), which allows a non-party State to accept the jurisdiction of the Court on an ad hoc basis without acceding to the Statute. The Judgment further includes two procedural issues. Firstly, the Appeals Chamber found that although the Pre-Trial Chamber erred by not rendering a separate decision on Cote d'Ivoire's request for leave to submit its observations, this error did not materially affect the Pre-Trial Chamber's decision. Secondly, the Appeals Chamber dismissed, in limine, Mr. Gbagbo's request for a stay of proceedings based on allegations of violations of his fundamental rights, since it was not jurisdictional in nature and thus fell outside the scope of the appealable matter. This Introductory Note will focus on the main issue of the Gbagbo Appeal Judgment, namely, whether the Court had jurisdiction over the case based on Cote d'Ivoire's Article 12(3) declaration.
机译:2012年12月12日,在检察官诉Laurent Koudou Gbagbo案中,国际刑事法院(法院)上诉分庭一致确认了第一预审分庭关于驳回Gbagbo先生对法院管辖权的质疑的决定。在判决书中,首次要求上诉分庭解释《罗马规约》(《规约》)第12条第3款,该条允许非当事国在不加任何规定的情况下临时接受法院的管辖权。加入规约。判决书还包括两个程序性问题。首先,上诉分庭认为,尽管预审分庭没有就科特迪瓦请假发表意见的请求作出单独决定而犯了错误,但这一错误并未对预审分庭的决定产生实质性影响。第二,上诉分庭驳回了巴博先生基于侵犯其基本权利的指控而中止诉讼的要求,因为它本质上不具有管辖权,因此不在上诉范围之内。本介绍性说明将重点关注巴博上诉判决的主要问题,即法院是否根据科特迪瓦第12条第3款声明对案件具有管辖权。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号