Document Type : Original Article from Result of Thesis
Authors
1 PhD. student in Public International Law, Department of Public International Law, Faculty of Law, Islamic Azad University, International Branch, Qeshm, Iran.
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Law, Faculty of Law, Qeshm International Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qeshm, Iran.
Abstract
Highlights
Introduction
For the first time ever, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court has considered the act of invasion an international crime, the perpetrators of which are held accountable for the criminal liability. The ICC has officially started operating since the sixtieth country was added to the Statute of the Court on July 1, 2002. The Assembly of States Parties (ASP) has created a new preliminary commission to address the unsolved problems regarding the crime of invasion.
Iran has signed the Rome Statute of the ICC but has not joined it yet. The political atmosphere ensuing from Iran’s international experiences with the eight-year war against Iraq, problems with human rights, and Iran’s nuclear program affected this country’s approach to the Statute of the Court. However, the definition of “invasion” was finalized and welcomed with the active participation of developing countries, especially Iran, in the Kampala Review Conference. By definition, the UN Security Council will not be the only authority of “invasion” referral to the ICC.
The Islamic Republic of Iran has adopted an active foreign policy for changes in the international criminal law by playing a consistent role in realizing these changes such as the definition of invasion. Basically, the IR Iran expects that changes, formation, and formulation of the international criminal law and the procedural law of the ICC should not be governed by powerful companies having the UN Security Council veto power. The IR Iran also expects that the UN Security Council should not have exclusive authority over the definition and cases of invasion and that the UN General Assembly Members should be involved in determining the cases of invasion. Since the UN Security Council has never recognized Iraq as an invader in the Iran–Iraq War, the IR Iran insists that the Council should not be the only international authority for the determination of crimes under the jurisdiction of the ICC and the crime of invasion.
Since Iran has signed the Statute of the Court but has not yet ratified it, what effects will the limited authorities of the UN Security Council in the Kampala Review Conference, i.e., a major demand made by Iran, have on this country’s approach to the Statute of the Court? How can the futurology of Iran’s membership and addition to the Statute be conducted?
Methodology
This descriptive-analytical study is the futurology of effects of changes in the concept of invasion in the Kampala Review Conference on the quality of interaction between Iran and the ICC. For this purpose, the literature is reviewed to historically analyze the background to the Kampala Review Conference and changes in the concept of invasion to finally determine the potential quality of interaction between Iran and the ICC based on the definition of invasion in the international criminal law through possible scenarios.
Research Findings and Futurological Scenarios on IRI–ICC Relationships
Given the political costs, it appears that the IR Iran will not revoke the spectator membership and exit the ICC completely in the future.
The persistence of this approach is predictable for the following reasons:
2-1: Ratifying the Rome Statute and making the IR Iran a permanent member of the ICC will compel this country to implement the principles of the Rome Statute. Acting as a spectator, although the IR Iran participates in the normalization process and the Court activities, it is not required to implement the principles and provisions of the Statute.
2-2: No regional powers known as the IR Iran’s rivals are the permanent members of the ICC.
2-3: The USA and Israel are now considered two major enemies in the IR Iran’s political atmosphere and are not the permanent members of the ICC. Therefore, Iran prefers to maintain its role as a spectator.
2-4: Since the Rome Statute is greatly based on Western norms, maintaining the spectator membership will not compel the IR Iran to accept these norms, some of which may contradict Islamic norms and the domestic laws of Iran.
2-5: The behavioral patterns of the IR Iran and its high-rank authorities
The fulfillment of this strategy is predictable due to the following reasons:
3-1: Customization crimes under the jurisdiction of the ICC
3-2: International responsibilities of states
3-3: Domestic laws of Iran in consistence with the Rome Statute
Conclusion
The Kampala Review Conference made a substantial breakthrough in the international law by defining the crime of invasion and its elements in 2010. Considered a noteworthy development in the ICC activities, this breakthrough can also change the IR Iran’s status in the ICC. Hence, it will be possible to define invasion, something which decreases or even eliminates uncertainties about Iran’s permanent membership in the ICC.
The USA has always considered the military action a viable option against the IR Iran. If a war breaks out against the IR Iran, Tehran can file a lawsuit to the ICC with respect to the Article 8 of the Rome Statute. In fact, if a reason for the USA’s disagreement with permanent membership in the ICC is about the inclusion of a definition of invasion in the Rome Statute, a reason for the IR Iran’s addition to the ICC can be the same. This is the outcome of the Kampala Review Conference. Furthermore, the IR Iran can regard the definition of invasion in the Kampala Review Conference as an opportunity to pursue beneficial and secure positions in international institutions, especially the ICC. Hence, the definition of invasion improves the chance of changing Iran’s spectator status in the ICC to a permanent membership. In this case, it will be possible to resolve all legal and political setbacks regarding the addition of Iran to the ICC from the rule of negation to the conflict of laws and the dominance of the Security Council based on the new definition of invasion.
Keywords
Main Subjects
', './data/isjq/coversheet/451668209756.jpg'))