Towards an integrated regime for the prosecution of international crimes
This thesis investigates the extent to which there is an integrated system of prosecution of international crimes, involving the prosecution of international crimes by national and international criminal tribunals operating in tandem. It also seeks to investigate the extent that the values protected by international criminal law have been accepted into the structure of international society and how they have altered it. It does these things by looking at two different aspects of the prosecution of international crimes. First, how international criminal tribunals have overcome the problems encountered by national courts and the structural inadequacies of the bilateral, inter-State model of the nature of the international system. Secondly, it investigates whether or not international criminal tribunals have managed to avoid the criticism that the actual enforcement of universal crimes has been selective, and primarily directed against suspects who are not affiliated with the regime that is prosecuting them. It concludes that international criminal tribunals have, to differing extents overcome the problems of national courts and the supposed bilateral nature of international system. Selectivity, both in terms of who is prosecuted, and what they are prosecuted for, remains a problem. Although the coming into being of the ICC will alleviate some of the jurisdictional selectivity rationae personae, particularly as it creates a powerful national interest for States to prosecute offences by their own officials, nationals, or occurring on their territory, the definitions of crimes in the Rome Statute mean that selectivity in relation to the law applied remains, to some extent, problematic.