Complementarity in the Rome Statute: from theory to practice

Background research project on Complementarity The principle of complementarity is one of the cornerstones of the architecture of the Rome Statute. It shapes various dimensions of ICC and domestic practice, ranging from prosecutorial strategy and criminal policy to statutory implementation and compliance. The operation of complementarity is of paramount importance for the operation and impact of international criminal justice. International courts and tribunals are only able to accomplish their mandates and leave a 'lasting footprint' on society, if they manage to mobilise support and genuine justice efforts at the domestic level.   Traces of complementarity are replicated in the relationship between the ad hoc tribunals and domestic jurisdiction (Rule 11 bis), the exercise of universal jurisdiction ('horizontal complementarity') and the operationalisation of the concept of "Responsibility to Protect". One of the dilemmas of complementarity is that many of its theoretical underpinnings and operational features are underdeveloped. The Rome Statute sets out the general contours of the concept in three paragraphs (Article 17). The existing text leaves a considerable degree of ambiguity and space for creative interpretation. The concept has thus undergone dynamic transformation. The Office of the Prosecutor has developed guidelines and policy principles on complementarity. Other aspects have been clarified by the jurisprudence of the Court in the context of the first situations under investigation. Some of these conceptions deviate from classical understandings of complementarity. Core notions ("gravity", "inability", "case") and key concepts (self-referrals, primacy of domestic jurisdictions, 'positive complementarity') are at the heart of judicial and policy debate. The broader implications of complementarity in international relations and domestic societies are not yet well understood and researched. Implementation remains a challenge, both in terms of law and policy.	Project Background Project goals Research themes Conference report Programme Abstracts Presenters Community
Contributors to the research project include: Ass. Prof. Carsten Stahn, Leiden University Dr. Mohamed El Zeidy, International Criminal Court Ass. Prof. William Burke-White, University of Pennsylvania Ass. Prof. Hector Olasolo, University of Utrecht Enrique Carnero, International Criminal Court Dr. Rod Rastan, International Criminal Court Ass. Prof. Darryl Robinson, Queens University Canada Prof. Frederic Megret, McGill University Ass. Prof. Jann Kleffner, University of Amsterdam Dr. Jo Stigen, University of Oslo Prof. Megan Fairlie, Florida International University Joseph Powderly, National University of Ireland Prof. Harmen van der Wilt, University of Amsterdam Dr. Olympia Bekou, University of Nottingham Morton Bergsmo, Peace Research Institute Oslo Prof. Roger Clark, Rutgers University Prof. Mark Drumbl, Washington and Lee University David Tolbert, Special Tribunal for Lebanon Ass. Prof. Bacle Don Taylor III, St Louis, Washington University Fidelma Donlon, National University of Ireland Dr. Cedric Ryngaert, University of Leuven & Utrecht Paul Seils, United Nations Prof. William Schabas, National University of Ireland Prof. Kai Ambos, University of Gvttingen Prof. Robert Cryer, University of Birmingham Sarah Nouwen, University of Cambridge Dr. Marlies Glasius, University of Amsterdam Christopher Hall, Amnesty International