Provisions of the Rome Statute enable the Prosecutor not to proceed, even though there is a reasonable or sufficient basis to do so considering the requirements of jurisdiction and admissibility. It may do so, when (s)he determines that there are nonetheless substantial reasons to believe or a sufficient basis that an investigation or prosecution »would not serve the interests of justice«. However, there is no clear definition or guidelines on its scope, content or application within International Criminal Court’s (ICC) documents.
Institute’s ambiguity, obscurity, indeterminacy, but at the same time its importance have come to the fore in April 2019. It is when the Pre-trial Chamber of the ICC (PTC) decided not to authorise the Prosecutor’s request for the initiation of the proprio motu investigation into the situation in Afghanistan. Arguing it »would not serve the interests of justice«. The PTC’s interpretation of the institute opened up additional questions and controversies about its scope and application. It also provoked strong political responses.
The master’s thesis from various angles examines the issues and challenges of the scope and application of the »interests of justice« arising from the Rome Statute. It does so through the prism of different interpretative tools, taking into account the relevant provisions of the applicable law of the ICC. The hypothesis of the master thesis are that the scope of the institute “interests of justice” should be interpreted in a narrow way and that its application is in Prosecutor’s discretionary power, while the PTC has the power to judicially review that discretion only when the interests of justice represent the basis of the Prosecutor’s decision not to investigate the referred situations or not to prosecute.
|
