Emory International Law Review

Volume 33Issue 1
Articles

The Turtle Bay Pivot: How the United Nations Security Council Is Reshaping Naval Pursuit of Nuclear Proliferators, Rogue States, and Pirates

Brian Wilson | 33 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 1 (2018)

Multinational action at the United Nations to combat illicit activity represents the most consequential sanctions period involving the maritime environment since the Athenian Empire’s Megarian Decree. From its inception, the Security Council has authorized measures that have led to naval approaches or boardings of more than 50,000 ships, the destruction of 3,500 vessels, and the maritime rescue of 40,000 people in the pursuit of transnational security threats. The Security Council resolutions adopted since 2008 underscore a diplomatic renaissance in which decisions unfold with unparalleled frequency: Measures impacting naval engagements that were adopted about once every 1.7 years are now approved every 2.5 months. This Article surveys hundreds of Security Council decisions to identify six categories of resolutions that could involve the maritime environment, examines their influence and intersection with one another, discusses potential future focus areas, and concludes with recommendations to improve the utility of these mandates.

Read More »

Reconciling Quasi-States with the Crime of Aggression Under the ICC Statute

Sascha Dominik Bachmann & Yasser Abdelkader | 33 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 91 (2018)

On June 11, 2010, a binding definition of the crime of aggression was finally adopted at the Review Conference of the Rome Statute in Kampala, Uganda. The Rome Statute’s definition of the crime of aggression reflecting on existing practice leads to the assumption that State-like entities that lack universal recognition will not be covered by the Court’s jurisdiction of the crime of aggression. Lack of clear definition of “State” in the Rome Statute gives the first indication of the implied exclusion of State-like entities from the scope of the crime of aggression. However, the most recent interpretation of the term “State” as provided by the International Criminal Court (ICC) delivers even more persuasive evidence, reinforcing the argument that these entities would not be covered by this amendment. This Article argues that uncertainty or explicit exclusion of these entities are both illegitimate; based on historical, legal and practical analyses respectively. Further, this Article examines how to reconcile these entities with the definition of the crime of aggression.

Read More »
Comments

Navigating Between Scylla and Charybdis: How the International Criminal Court Turned Restraint into Power Play

Rebecca A. Shoot | 33 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 133 (2018)

On July 17, 2018, dignitaries and jurists from around the globe gathered at the permanent premises of the first international criminal justice institution to commemorate the twentieth anniversary of the Rome Statute, the foundational treaty of the International Criminal Court (ICC or the Court). After decades in the making and to its detractors’ vexation, the ICC is now a fact of life. Its hurdles are no longer existential but experiential. The ongoing saga surrounding Omar al-Bashir exemplifies the Court’s current challenges in bringing perpetrators of atrocities to justice and fulfilling the promise of accountability. This Comment posits that, on the eve of the Rome Statute’s “platinum anniversary,“ the ICC demonstrated its growing diplomatic maturity with a strategic pre-trial decision regarding a Member State’s flouting of its obligation to deliver the Sudanese president to justice. The ruling ostensibly concerned South Africa’s culpability for non-compliance with the ICC’s outstanding arrest warrant for al-Bashir’s alleged crimes under the court’s jurisdiction, including genocide and crimes against humanity. This Comment argues that the decision also was a significant milestone in an evolving court’s increasingly complex relationship with the “parent” organs on which it relies for enforcement, the Assembly of States Parties and United Nations Security Council.

Read More »

Are the U.K.’s Payment-by-Results Programs Right for U.S. Prisons?

Alys V. Brown | 33 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 175 (2018)

The United States currently houses the world’s largest prison population, which creates a heavy financial burden on our government. To improve the current state of America’s criminal justice system it is imperative that the we look to other countries to determine how to provide justice in a more cost-efficient manner. In 2011 the United Kingdom piloted a Payment-by-Results (PbR) program, a form of incentive-based payments, in a number of their private prisons. The purpose of the PbR program was to encourage private prison providers to find creative ways to lower reconviction rates to receive a bonus payment. This Comment focuses on the PbR programs in the U.K. and their applicability to prisons in the United States. This Comment proposes that both private and public prisons at the state and federal levels in the United States should begin implementing PbR programs to decrease prison populations and costs and increase prisoner wellbeing.

Read More »