The project is centred on a number of core themes.
1. Origin and genesis of the principle of complementarity
What are the origins of complementarity? To what extent is it a novel and unique feature of the Rome Statute? Is there one or are there several models of complementarity? What are its rationales and goals? How do expectations from the Rome Conference relate to contemporary practice? What are the strengths and weaknesses of existing approaches? To what extent does complementarity extend to other jurisdictions than the ICC?
2. Analytical dimensions of complementarity
(i) Conceptions of complementarity
How does complementarity operate? How does complementarity affect the identity of the ICC, and its role with respect to domestic jurisdictions? To what extent is it based on 'carrots and sticks'? How does it apply in relation to non-state actors? What is the purpose of the distinction between 'classical' and 'positive' complementarity? How can a more pro-active and managerial dimension of complementarity be operationalised?
(ii) Complementarity and the distinction between 'situations' and 'cases'
How does complementarity affect investigation and prosecution techniques? When does it become relevant? How does it apply in relation to 'situations' and 'cases'? What criteria should be used to assess complementarity at the 'situation' stage? What is the understanding and meaning of the concept of a 'case' under the Rome Statute, and how does it affect the scope of complementarity?
(iii) Complementarity and statutory interpretation
What are main problems of interpretation of Article 17, and to what extent can they be solved by legal means or discourse? To what extent is the Court competent in cases of mere 'inaction' by States? Under what circumstances should the Court act as a matter of law or policy? What is the role of 'gravity'? What are the substantive and procedural implications of a 'self-referral'? To what extent are such referrals desirable? What lessons can be learned from human rights law or other courts and tribunals for the interpretation of the criteria of 'inability' or 'unwillingness'? Under what circumstances does ordinary crime prosecution satisfy the complementarity test? What are the requirements and implications of admissibility challenges? How does the burden of proof operate in such circumstances? How does complementarity interrelate with cooperation?
(iv) Complementarity and crimes
What is the relationship between complementarity and implementing legislation? To what extent do approaches in domestic legislation facilitate or restrict the exercise of the complementarity? How does complementarity apply with respect to the crime of aggression? What is the potential benefit and impact of the Legal Tools Project?
3. Complementarity in perspective
What are the broader implications of complementarity on the global system of justice? To what extent does complementarity influence the debate on traditional and alternative forms of justice? What lessons can be learned from the engagement of the ad hoc tribunals with domestic and local actors, in terms of outreach, impact and legal empowerment? How does complementarity affect interstate-relations and the exercise of domestic jurisdiction? What is the relationship between complementarity and the 'Responsibility to Protect', and how can it be operationalised?
4. Complementarity in practice
How has complementarity been applied in the context of the first ICC situations? What strategies and policies have been applied by the Court? How have they operated and been received by different constituencies? What are the benefits and risks of ICC engagement? How does complementarity affect victims and society? To what extent does Court action have a catalytic effect on domestic institutions? How long, and in what form should the Court stay engaged in situations? What can be realistically achieved through action of different organs or entities of the Court (Prosecutor, Registry, Trust Frund)? What lessons can be learned from existing engagements in relation to Uganda, the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Central African Republic and Colombia? What implications do they entail for Court practice, international cooperation and development strategies?
.gif)