Tag Archives: International Criminal Court

Common Law Community Training Manual

http://itccs.org/the-common-law-and-its-courts-a-community-training-manual/

What is assembling is the first court in history to bring judgment against the Vatican and the Crown of England as institutions. But our Court also signals the dawn of a new notion of justice: one defined by the people themselves, and especially by the historic victims of church and state, to bring about not only a judgment on their persecutors, but a new political and spiritual arrangement to undo the systems responsible for intergenerational crimes against humanity

Two great principles summarize this Natural Law:

1. All things exist and are held in common. By the state of nature, no one has any more of a claim to the earth than another, as noted by a founder of modern law, Thomas Hobbes:

“I demonstrate in the first place, that in the natural state of men (which state we may properly call the state of nature) all men have equal right unto all things” (Leviathan, 1651)

2. The Law does harm to no-one. (Actus Regis Nemini Facit Injuriam) Arising from the Ten Commandments and God’s law to do no harm to one’s neighbour, this principle forms the basis of modern law.

Public Notice: The Board of GSK will be held accountable before the ICC in relation to Ebola Vaccine Trials

http://www.gsk.com/en-gb/about-us/board-of-directors/
The Board members as shown below and listed on their website are as of the 25th January 2015 the executives responsible for ANY harm or loss by their products especially in relation to vaccine trials in West Africa (Liberia).

Corporate Criminal Responsibility for International Crimes: Exploring the Possibilities

http://chinesejil.oxfordjournals.org/content/12/1/43.abstract

This article investigates whether it is possible and recommendable that corporate criminal responsibility should be introduced for international crimes and that the International Criminal Court should therefore have jurisdiction over legal entities

The recurrent question is whether it would have been fair and feasible in those situations to hold the legal entity which these corporate agents were representing criminally responsible as well. The analysis reveals that the answer to this question would undoubtedly have been affirmative

Complaint to the International Criminal Court against the CEO of Chevron

http://rightsasusual.com/?p=895

While the complaint has objectively very little chance to lead to the prosecution of anyone, let alone provide remedies for the hundreds of victims of pollution in Ecuador, it sheds light on an interesting and often overlooked aspect of the current international criminal legal system, namely that business people can be prosecuted before the ICC irrespective of the fact that the ICC has no jurisdiction over corporations.

The omission of legal persons from the Rome Statute should not be interpreted as a concerted exercise that reflected a legal view that legal persons are completely beyond the purview of international criminal law. We thus hold that no definitive legal conclusion can be drawn from the exclusion of legal persons from the jurisdiction ratione personae of the ICC. Instead, it is a reflection of the lack of a political (rather than legal) consensus to provide such jurisdiction in the Rome Statute. [para. 66]

Full Post on Rights as Usual
Rights as Usual Home Page