Index
actively participate in hostilities
7, 10, 56, 93, 111, 124–128, 136–137, 190, 193
Additional Protocol i
71, 77, 93, 115, 125–126, 155, 200, 222, 225–226
Additional Protocol ii
21, 114, 126, 132, 164–165, 180–188, 197, 206–207, 209–210, 216, 221–226, 229, 233, 235, 242
Al Hassan Case
140–152, 154, 162, 167–169, 194–195, 200–202, 213–214, 240, 242–243, 245, 253
Ali Kushayb Case
8, 35
analogous reasoning
49–53
Asylum Case
13
Bemba Case
3, 10, 41, 49–50, 54, 108, 112, 118–124, 131, 134–136, 252
contextually dependent hierarchy of evidence
94–101, 229–231
contrary practice as a breach of custom
92–94
contrary state practice
87–101
Cyprus v Turkey Case
203–204
Deducing custom
14–15, 60, 77–80, 82–92, 101–102
Delacic Case
93
differentiated responsibilities of nsags
232–241
direct participation in hostilities
56, 125–127, 137
drafting of the Rome Statute
1–3, 6–7, 10, 32–37, 39–42, 54, 57, 59–60, 62–65, 111, 116, 119, 145, 167, 219, 244
Elements of Crimes
37–45, 111–123, 162–168, 241, 252–254
European Court of Human Rights
30, 50–52, 148, 159–163, 195, 203–204
fragmentation
4, 8–13, 16, 29, 36, 45, 58, 65, 105–106, 120–121, 133, 135, 139, 166, 168, 245, 248–252
Furundzija Case
77, 93–94, 100, 102
Geneva Conventions
33–35, 62, 71, 84–85, 93, 115, 125–127, 129–130, 132, 134, 141, 145, 150, 155–157, 163–164, 169, 183, 194, 198, 219, 222–223, 226–229
Hamdan Case
157–158
icj
65–79
icrc commentary
114–115, 126–127, 132, 137, 150, 155, 164, 171, 176, 182–188, 194, 197, 209, 213, 234, 253
icrc customary ihl study
76, 82, 114–115, 126, 132, 148–149, 156, 158, 160, 162–163, 216, 221–231, 242, 253
icty
59–63, 75–79
ilc Draft Conclusions
5, 15, 19–20, 28, 33, 61, 65, 69–71, 75–87, 94–102, 133, 134, 233, 246–247
independence and impartiality of courts
141, 143–144, 146–155, 162–169, 179, 183, 195–196
in dubio pro reo
53–56, 145, 220
judicial guarantees
215–243
Katanga Case
3, 23, 41, 52, 54–56, 106, 108–109, 112–118, 120–124, 134
Kunarac Case
77
Kupreskic Case
76, 78, 90–91
Lubanga Case
44, 124–127, 133–138
Martic Case
117
methodological inconsistency
7, 26, 247–249
Namibia Advisory Opinion
30, 72, 204
Ngudjolo Case
54
Nicaragua Case
13, 84, 92–93, 98–100
non-state courts
170–242
non-state law
182–194
North-Sea Continental Shelf Case
13, 66
Ntaganda Case
44, 123–124, 127–139, 253–254
object and purpose interpretation
23, 54–58, 107–109, 143–146, 168, 217, 219, 221, 242
occupation law
198–203, 205, 211
Odjanic Case
51
Oil Platforms Case
30
opinio juris paradox
19, 72–74, 80–82, 102
paradox of international criminal law
1–2, 26–27
pillage as a war crime
10, 115–123, 127, 131, 135–136, 249, 251–252
principle of legality
2, 8, 19–21, 35, 43, 45, 50–52, 57, 64, 105, 112–113, 120–129, 217, 238
rape as a war crime
99, 115–116, 118–121, 123, 127–131, 136, 138, 142–143, 250
regularly constituted court
140–213
representative state practice
14, 61, 67–72, 74, 76, 80
Ruto Case
31, 41
Sakhanh Case
195–198
Security Council
8, 34–36, 190–191, 212, 250
sliding-scale theory of custom
87–91
strict construction
2–4, 18–20, 24–27, 45–56, 104–105, 118, 124, 143, 147, 168, 217–221
systemic integration
3–8, 12–13, 17–21, 23–38, 41–42, 45–46, 49–50, 53, 56–58, 61, 65, 102–144, 147, 151–152, 154–155, 165, 168, 170–171, 213, 215–216, 244–254
Tadic Case
75–76, 78, 200–201
torture
14–15, 89, 93–94, 97–99, 143, 175, 179, 210, 220, 230
The Justice Case
152–154
Vienna Convention
3–6, 16, 18–19, 23–24, 34, 41–58, 104–113, 118–120, 144–147, 217–218