Transfer of cases from the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda to Domestic Jurisdictions
نام عام مواد
[Article]
نام نخستين پديدآور
Alex Obote-Odora
وضعیت نشر و پخش و غیره
محل نشرو پخش و غیره
Leiden
نام ناشر، پخش کننده و غيره
Brill | Nijhoff
یادداشتهای مربوط به خلاصه یا چکیده
متن يادداشت
The article examines Rule 11bis on the transfer of cases from the Rwanda Tribunal to domestic jurisdictions. It discusses the criteria for transfer under Rule 11bis and reflects on reasons for the denial of all the Prosecutor's requests for transfer except in the recent Uwinkindi's Appeals Chamber decision. The article also examines how the Appeals Chamber resolved the ambiguity between the Death Penalty Law vis-à-vis Imprisonment in Isolation in Munyakazi, on the one hand, and ambiquity in Article 59 of the Rwanda Code of Criminal Procedure ("RCCP") vis-à-vis Articles 13(10) and 25 of the Transfer Law, on the other hand, opening the way for the transfer of Uwinkindi to Rwanda. The article recognizes the high standards the Appeals Chamber has established for the transfer of cases to domestic jurisdictions and notes that only few States satisfactorily meet these requirements. In sum, the article welcomes the Uwinkindi decision and recognises a positive development in international criminal law and procedure. However, it also cautions that in practice the precedent may not necessarily translate into a flood of cases being transferred to Rwanda because many States will not be able to meet the Rule 11bis high international standards. The article examines Rule 11bis on the transfer of cases from the Rwanda Tribunal to domestic jurisdictions. It discusses the criteria for transfer under Rule 11bis and reflects on reasons for the denial of all the Prosecutor's requests for transfer except in the recent Uwinkindi's Appeals Chamber decision. The article also examines how the Appeals Chamber resolved the ambiguity between the Death Penalty Law vis-à-vis Imprisonment in Isolation in Munyakazi, on the one hand, and ambiquity in Article 59 of the Rwanda Code of Criminal Procedure ("RCCP") vis-à-vis Articles 13(10) and 25 of the Transfer Law, on the other hand, opening the way for the transfer of Uwinkindi to Rwanda. The article recognizes the high standards the Appeals Chamber has established for the transfer of cases to domestic jurisdictions and notes that only few States satisfactorily meet these requirements. In sum, the article welcomes the Uwinkindi decision and recognises a positive development in international criminal law and procedure. However, it also cautions that in practice the precedent may not necessarily translate into a flood of cases being transferred to Rwanda because many States will not be able to meet the Rule 11bis high international standards. The article examines Rule 11bis on the transfer of cases from the Rwanda Tribunal to domestic jurisdictions. It discusses the criteria for transfer under Rule 11bis and reflects on reasons for the denial of all the Prosecutor's requests for transfer except in the recent Uwinkindi's Appeals Chamber decision. The article also examines how the Appeals Chamber resolved the ambiguity between the Death Penalty Law vis-à-vis Imprisonment in Isolation in Munyakazi, on the one hand, and ambiquity in Article 59 of the Rwanda Code of Criminal Procedure ("RCCP") vis-à-vis Articles 13(10) and 25 of the Transfer Law, on the other hand, opening the way for the transfer of Uwinkindi to Rwanda. The article recognizes the high standards the Appeals Chamber has established for the transfer of cases to domestic jurisdictions and notes that only few States satisfactorily meet these requirements. In sum, the article welcomes the Uwinkindi decision and recognises a positive development in international criminal law and procedure. However, it also cautions that in practice the precedent may not necessarily translate into a flood of cases being transferred to Rwanda because many States will not be able to meet the Rule 11bis high international standards. The article examines Rule 11bis on the transfer of cases from the Rwanda Tribunal to domestic jurisdictions. It discusses the criteria for transfer under Rule 11bis and reflects on reasons for the denial of all the Prosecutor's requests for transfer except in the recent Uwinkindi's Appeals Chamber decision. The article also examines how the Appeals Chamber resolved the ambiguity between the Death Penalty Law vis-à-vis Imprisonment in Isolation in Munyakazi, on the one hand, and ambiquity in Article 59 of the Rwanda Code of Criminal Procedure ("RCCP") vis-à-vis Articles 13(10) and 25 of the Transfer Law, on the other hand, opening the way for the transfer of Uwinkindi to Rwanda. The article recognizes the high standards the Appeals Chamber has established for the transfer of cases to domestic jurisdictions and notes that only few States satisfactorily meet these requirements. In sum, the article welcomes the Uwinkindi decision and recognises a positive development in international criminal law and procedure. However, it also cautions that in practice the precedent may not necessarily translate into a flood of cases being transferred to Rwanda because many States will not be able to meet the Rule 11bis high international standards.
مجموعه
تاريخ نشر
2012
توصيف ظاهري
147-180
عنوان
African Journal of Legal Studies
شماره جلد
5/2
شماره استاندارد بين المللي پياييندها
1708-7384
اصطلاحهای موضوعی کنترل نشده
اصطلاح موضوعی
adequate penalty structure
اصطلاح موضوعی
Fair Trial Rights
اصطلاح موضوعی
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR)
اصطلاح موضوعی
Legal framework
اصطلاح موضوعی
monitoring trials of transferred cases
اصطلاح موضوعی
protection of defence and prosecution witnesses
اصطلاح موضوعی
Revocation of Rule 11bis transferred cases
اصطلاح موضوعی
Rule 11bis
اصطلاح موضوعی
suitability of detention facilities
نام شخص به منزله سر شناسه - (مسئولیت معنوی درجه اول )