Internationalization of Law & Enforcement

By Lena Waloszek

Faculty of Law

Outline:

- Trend

- Example

- Solution

- Conclusion

Faculty of Law

I. Trend:

- “Internationalization of Law & Enforcement”

- More international courts and tribunals

- Ad hoc tribunals (ICTY, ICTR, SCSL)

Faculty of Law

II. Example: - Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL)

- Established in 2005 by SC Res. 1757

- Assassination of former Lebanese PM

- Several legitimacy problems

Faculty of Law

II. Example: - Problems: - No governmental approval

- Unilateral ratification by the UN Security Council- National law serves as a basis- Jurisdiction of the Tribunal does not differ from national courts

Faculty of Law

II. Example: - Problems: - An internal problem was placed on an

international level

- International solutions for national matters

Faculty of Law

III. Solution:

- National courts of the locus delicti

- ICC as a complementary instrument

- National law

- International law complementary

Faculty of Law

III. Solution:

- National courts are competent to deal with national as well as international crimes

- National court judgments are more effective

- National courts have the expertise in national law and could be trained in international law

Faculty of Law

III. Solution:

- National prosecutors have a closer connection with national authorities (e.g. police)

- ICC complementary in order to have a instrument when a state is unwilling or unable to prosecute (last resort)

Faculty of Law

III. Solution:

- National law serves as a better basis

- International law complementary in order to fill the gaps of national law and to safeguard human rights

Faculty of Law

IV. Conclusion:

- Going back in history BUT taking the ICC as a complementary instrument with us- Apply national law BUT international law if human rights and jus cogens are at stake BECAUSE it is a national matter and should NOT be placed on an international level

- Suggestion: NOT TO FOLLOW THE TREND

Faculty of Law

Thank you for your attention!