Legal Responses to Transnational and International Crimes
Show Less

Legal Responses to Transnational and International Crimes

Towards an Integrative Approach

Edited by Harmen Van der Wilt and Christophe Paulussen

This book critically reflects on the relationship between ‘core crimes’ which make up the subject matter jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (such as war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, and aggression) and transnational crimes. The contributions in the book address the features of several transnational crimes and generally acknowledge that the boundaries between core crimes and transnational crimes are blurring. One of the major questions is whether, in view of this gradual merger of the categories, the distinction in legal regime is still warranted. Should prosecution and trial of transnational crimes be transferred from national to international jurisdictions?
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 14: The distinction between ‘international’ and ‘transnational’ crimes in the African Criminal Court

Charles Chernor Jalloh

Abstract

This chapter examines the distinction between ‘international’ and ‘transnational’ crimes in contemporary international legal literature. It considers this traditional division through the lens of the African Union’s Malabo Protocol, adopted in June 2014, which seeks to establish the first regional penal court with material jurisdiction over fourteen crimes. These include well-known “core crimes” such as genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and aggression, but also less known or even novel offenses such as the crime of unconstitutional change of government, illicit exploitation of natural resources, mercenarism, corruption, as well as trafficking in persons, drugs, and hazardous wastes. The author argues that, while the international/transnational crimes distinction may be analytically convenient, the codification of both types of prohibitions into a regional treaty illustrates that some states are less concerned about adherence to crime categories and more interested in proscribing whatever conduct poses threats to their security. While the Malabo Protocol has been controversial, because it is perceived as an outcome of Africa’s backlash against the International Criminal Court and for its temporary immunity provision shielding sitting government officials, it is submitted that the merits of the African Union instrument must be assessed on criteria other than whether it retains the conventional distinction between transnational and international crimes.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.


Further information

or login to access all content.