Topic: Universal Jurisdiction in Crimes against Humanity
Country: France
Delegate Name: Trevor Grayeb
School: Forest Hills Northern High School
Topic page: background guide and all position papers All France position papers GLIMUN 2011 committees
The issue of universal jurisdiction has long been considered a formality of international law, with little concrete grounding in legal practice. With the atrocities in the politically and socially unstable Congo Basin and Western Balkans bringing genocide and crimes against humanity into the forefront of humanitarian and judicial agendas, it became necessary to devise a method of reinforcing international criminal justice to ensure that those responsible for such atrocities did not escape with impunity. Though the international community has made great progress over the past two decades, the developments in international justice have been staggered and uneven, and to this day suspects charged with crimes against humanity and genocide are still at large. The framework was laid for a more resolute standard of international justice for such crimes by the creation of three United Nations-endorsed bodies: the International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and the Former Yugoslavia, working under the auspices of the UNSC, and the independently-operating International Criminal Court. Through these courts and others, many of those wanted for crimes against humanity and genocide have been successfully tried and convicted. However, the reach of these organizations is limited and the international community’s most reprehensible criminals continue to slip through the cracks. For this reason, nations around the world frequently seek to try such criminals, regardless of country of origin, on the grounds that their crimes are universal.
The French Republic has always remained committed to the pursuit of international justice, especially in the case of those suspected of humanity’s most grievous offenses. To this end, France seeks to emphasize the importance of balance between the primary jurisdiction of national courts and the authority of international bodies charged with the enforcement of international law and the punishment of universal crimes. Since their inception, France has wholly endorsed the actions of the ICC and UN Special Tribunals, contributing to the arrest and indictment of countless criminals from Rwanda and other conflict zones before an international judiciary. But while supporting the actions of these courts whenever possible, France has also upheld its international responsibility where necessary, such as in cases where the limited jurisdiction of the ICC prevents international action. Article 689 of French Criminal Procedure Code established the right of French courts to try a range of internationally condemned crimes committed outside of French territory by a non-French citizen where the jurisdiction of the ICC would not apply, and simultaneously endorses cooperation with International Courts on all issues within their purview.
To fulfill the duty of the United Nations to combat impunity and uphold international law, the situation now calls for heightened action in order to “plug the leaks,” so to speak, in global justice. Primarily, in keeping with the spirit of General Assembly Resolution 64/117, the U.N. must endorse a much broader mandate to support the practice of universal jurisdiction in cases of genocide or crimes against humanity for all member states. A global standard of universal jurisdiction is a necessity to ensure that international law is evenly and fairly applied. Furthermore, drawing attention to the severe shortcomings of ICC jurisdiction in handling the most grave of cases, there is clear need for a limited expansion of ICC authority to comply with universal standards. Learning from the failures of Belgium’s 1993 Genocide Law in its overly unilateral approach, France places particular emphasis on procedural guidelines to balance the judicial authority of national and supranational courts.
In aiming to try and convict all those guilty of crimes against humanity, the international community must lay out these standards of universal jurisdiction, with extreme respect being paid to the multinational right of states to investigate such crimes as they pertain to them, and equal priority in such cases being established, as in the French judiciary, through the principle of *ne bis in idem.* The inability or unwillingness of states to confront such criminals may then be met by the expanded jurisdiction of the ICC, complemented by a U.N. effort to confront the harboring of those wanted for crimes against humanity. It is through this balance of international enforcement of justice and the empowerment of sovereign states, exemplified by the model developed in the French Republic, that a measured, global method can be employed to ensure that humanity’s most abhorrent criminals do not escape justice.
