رویکرد دیوان کیفری بین‌المللی نسبت به اهداف مجازات

نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری حقوق بین‌الملل، دانشکده حقوق، الهیات و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، تهران، ایران.

2 استاد گروه حقوق عمومی و بین‌الملل، دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

نظام حقوق بین‌الملل، فاقد یک روش خاص در رابطه با مجازات و ارزیابی اهداف آن است. درحالی‌که برخی سیستم‌های ملّی*** با گذر از مرحله نظام سنتی تعیین مجازات به مقوله عدالت ترمیمی توجه دارند، نظام کیفری بین‌المللی، اهدافی آرمان‌گرایانه را از مجازات به سبک نظام کلاسیک داخلی تعقیب می‌نماید. دادگاه‌های کیفری بین‌المللی و ازجمله دیوان کیفری بین‌المللی، هرکدام بنا به شرایط ویژه‌ای که در چهارچوب آن به‌وجود آمده‌اند، رویکردی خاص یعنی صلح و سازش و درعین‌حال، عام که همان اهداف کلاسیک در سیستم‌های ملّی است، نسبت به اهداف مجازات داشته‌اند. هدف نوشتار حاضر، استخراج و استنباط اهداف مجازات با روش تفسیری ـ تحلیلی در پرتو اسناد و رویه قضایی دیوان کیفری بین‌المللی است. نتایج تحقیق نشان می‌دهد که رویکرد دیوان را می‌توان متأثر از رویه سایر دادگاه‌های کیفری بین‌المللی و مقدمه اساسنامه رم دانست. دیوان همچنین تلاش نموده است تا عناصری از سیستم عدالت ترمیمی در حقوق داخلی را از حیث هنجاری و عملی وارد سیستم عدالت کیفری بین‌المللی نماید هرچند که جبران خسارت در دیوان از آثار مجازات است نه جزئی از اهداف مجازات.



*** در رابطه با مقوله عدالت ترمیمی، دولت‌های نیوزیلند، استرالیا، کانادا و ایالات‌متحده را می‌توان از دولت‌های پیشگام نام برد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The International Criminal Court Approach to Punishment Objectives

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mahdireza Sadeghi 1
  • Seyyed Ghasem Zamani 2
1 Ph.D. Student in International Law, Faculty of Divinity and Law, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran.
2 Professor, Department of Public and International Law, Faculty of Law and Political Sciences, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده [English]

The International law system lacks a specific method in relation to punishment and the evaluation of its objectives. As some national systems, with the transition from the traditional system of punishment to the category of restorative justice, are concerned, the international criminal system pursues an idealistic goal of punishment in the style of the classical internal system. International criminal tribunals, including the ICC, in accordance with the special conditions created within the framework of it, have a special namely peace and reconciliation and at the same time general approach namely classic aims to the aims of punishment. The ICC's approach can be influenced by the procedural law of other international criminal tribunals and preamble of Rome statute. The ICC has also tried to integrate elements of the restorative justice of domestic Legal system into the international criminal justice system in a normative and practical manner. However, reparation in the iCC is not part of the punishments objective but it is effect of punishment.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Punishment Objectives
  • The International Criminal Court
  • Restorative justice
  • International Crimes
  • Criminal Justice
  • Classical and Modern Approaches of Punishment
فهرست منابع
الف. منابع فارسی
آقایی جنت‌مکان، حسین. حقوق کیفری بین‌المللی، مجموعه اسناد بین‌المللی. چاپ اول. تهران: انتشارات جنگل، 1393.
پریس، ارنا. خورشید آهسته بالا می‌آید، عدالت در عصر امپراتوری آویکا. ترجمة سیّد خلیل خلیلیان. چاپ اول. تهران: انتشارات شرکت سهامی انتشار، 1390.
رضوی‌فرد، بهزاد. «از کارکرد سنتی کیفر در حقوق داخلی تا کارکردهای نوین آن در حقوق بین‌الملل کیفری با تأکید در رویه قضایی». فصلنامه مطالعات پیشگیری از جرم 21 (1390): 38-9.
فلسفی، هدایت‌الله. حقوق بین‌الملل معاهدات. چاپ اول. تهران: فرهنگ نشر نو، 1379.
کیتی شیایزری، کریانگ ساک. حقوق بین‌المللی کیفری. ترجمة بهنام یوسفیان و محمد اسماعیلی. چاپ دوم. تهران: انتشارات سمت، 1391.
ب. منابع انگلیسی
A/conF.183/13(VOL II) United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishement of an International Criminal Court, Rome 15 June - 17 July 1998, Official Records, Summary Records of the Plenary Meetings and of the Meeting of the Committee of the whole.
Ashworth, Andrew. “European Sentencing Traditions.” In Sentencing and Society: International Perspective, edited by Cyrus Tata and Neil Hutton, 219-232. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2002.
Bassiouni, Cherif. Introduction to International Criminal Law. Ardsley, New York: Translational Publishers, 2003.
Bassiouni, Cherif: “The Philosophy and Policy of International Criminal Justice.” In Man’s Inhumanity to Man – Essays on International Law in Honour of Antonio Cassese, edited by L.C. Vorah; F. Pocar; Y. Featherstone, 65-126. The Hague: Kluwer Law International, London, 2003.
Criminal Code of the Freneh Republic (2005).
Danner, Allison Marston. “Constructing a Hierarchy of Crimes in International Criminal Law Sentencing.” Virginia Law Review 87 (May 2001): 415-501.
DeGuzman, Margaret. “Proportionat Sentencing at ICC.” In The Law and Practice of the International Criminal Court, edited by Carsten Stahn, First Published, 932-962. New York: Oxford University Press, 2015.
Draft Statute of an International Criminal Court, Article 47 and Commentary, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 1994, vol.II. part 2, undoc.A/49/10.
Hermann, Donald H.J. “Restorative Justice and Retributive Justice: An Opportunity for Cooperation or an Occasion for Conflict in the Search for Justice.”Seattle Journal for Social Justice 16 (2017): 71-103.
Hoel, Adrian. “The Sentencing Provision of the International Criminal Court: Common Law, Civil Law or Both?” Monash University Law Review 33(2) (2009): 264-289.
ICC Judgement, Decision on Sentence Pursuant to Article 76 of the Statute, the Prosecutor v.Germain Katanga T.ch II, No.ICC-01/04-01/07, 23 May 2014.
ICC Judgement, Decision on the Confirmation of Charges against Ahmad Al Faqi Al Mahdi, No.ICC-01/12-01/15, 24 March 2016.
ICC Judgement, Decision on the Review Concerning Reduction of Sentence of Mr Germain Katanga Three Judges of the Appeals Chamber Appointment for the Review Concerning Reduction of Sentence, No.ICC-01/04/01/07,13 November 2015.
ICC Judgement, Decision on the Sentence Pursuant to Article 76 of the Statute, the Prosecutor v. Germain Katanga, T.CH II,No.ICC-01/04-01/07, 23 May 2014.
ICC Judgement, Order for Reparations Pursuant to Article 75 of the Statute With one Public Annex (Annex I) and One Confidential Annex Ex Parte, Common Legal Representative of the Victims, Office of Public Counsel for Victims and Defence team for Germain Katanga, T.ch II, (Annex II), No. ICC-01/04-01/07, 24 March 2017.
ICC Judgement, Prosecutor v. Ahmad Al Faqi Al Mahdi, Judgement and Sentence, T.CH VIII, No. ICC-01/12-01/15, 27 September 2016.
ICC Judgement, Prosecutor v. Ahmad Al Faqi Al Mahdi, Judgement and Sentence, 27 September 2016.
ICC Judgement, Prosecutor v. Germain Katanga, Judgement Pursuant to Article 74 of the Statute, No.ICC-01/04-01/07, 7 March 2014.
ICC Judgement, Prosecutor v.Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, Decision Establishing the Principles and Procedures to be Applied to Reparations, 7 August 2012.
ICC Judgement, Situation in the Democratic Republic of Congoin, the Case of the Prosecutor V. Germain Katanga, T.Ch Ii, No. Icc-01/04-01/07, 14 May 2015.
ICC Judgement, Situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo IN THE Case of the Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubango Dyilo, Judgement Pursuant to Article 74 of the Statute T.CHI, Case No.ICC-01/04-01/04-01/06, 14 March 2012.
ICC Judgement, Situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo in the Case of the Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, Decision Establishing the Principles and Procedures to be Applied to Reparations,T.chI,ICC, 01/04-01/06, 7 August 2012.
ICC Judgement, Situation in the Democratic Republic on the Congo in the Case of The Prosecutor v.Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, on the Appeals against the “Decision Establishing the Principles and Procedures to be Applied to Reparations” of 7 August 2012 with Amended Order for Reparations (Annex A) and Public Annexes 1 and 2, A.CH,No.ICC-01/04-01/06 AA2A3,3 March 2015.
ICC Judgement, The Appeals of the Prosecutor and Mr Thomas Lubanga Dyilo against the “Decision on Sentence Pursuant to Article 76 of the Statute,” Case No,ICC-01/04-01/06 A4A6, 1 December 2014.
ICC, Judgement, Charge Brought by Prosection against Ahmad Al Faqi Al Mahdi, ICC-01/12-01/15-70-AnxA, 17 December 2015.
ICTY Judgement, Prosecutor v. Delalic, Case No, IT-96-21-A, A.Ch, 20 February 2001.
ICTY Judgement, Prosecutor v. Enver Hadzi Hasanovic, Amir Kubura, Case No.IT-02-47-T-15,T.Ch.15 March 2006.
ICTY Judgement, Prosecutor v. Kordic and Cerkea, Case No, IT-95-14/2-A, A.Ch, 17 December 2004.
ICTY Judgement, Prosecutor v. Milorand Krnojelac, T.ch II, cace no. IT- 09-25-T, 15 March 2002.
ICTY Judgement, Prosecutor v. Radovan Karadzic, case No- IT-95-5/18-T, T.Ch, 24 March 2016.
ICTY Judgement, Prosecutor v. Stakic, Case No, IT-97-24-A, A.Ch, 22 March 2006.
McGonigle, Leyh Brianne. “Victim-Oriented Measures at the Intenational Criminal Institutions: Participation and its Pitfalls.” International Law Review 12 (2012): 375-408.
Moffett, Luke. “Elaborating Justice for Victims at the International Criminal Court, Beyond Rhetoric and Hague.” Journal of International Criminal Justice 13 (2015): 281-311.
Muttukumara, Christopher. “Reparations to Victims.” In The International Criminal Court: The Making of the Rome Statute: Issues, Negotiations and Results, edited by Roys Lee, 262-269. The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 1999.
Pace R., William. “statement of world federalist movement on behalf of the Coalition for an International Criminal Court, United Nations.” Last Accessed August 27, 2019. www.un.org/icc/sPeeches/n 717wfm.html, 17 July 1998
Permanent Court of International Justice, Case Concerning the Factory at Chorzow, 1998, PCIJ Series, No 17.
Regulations of the Trust Fund for Victims, Resolution ICC-ASP/4/Res3 Adopted at the 4th Plenary Meeting on 3 December 2005.
Report of the Court on the Revised Strategy in Relation to Victim; Past, Present and Future, ICC-ASP/11/40, 5 November 2012.
Report of the Preparatory Committee on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, vol.II (Compilation of Proposals), General Assembly Official Records, Fifty-first Session Supplement No.22A, undoc A/51/22, 13 September 1996.
Schabas, Mria William A. An Introduction to the International Criminal Court. Second Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
Schabas, Mria William A. Unimaginable Atrocities: Justice, Politics, and Right at the War Crimes Tribunals. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012.
Trust Fund for Victims, Programme Progress Report 2015.
Trust Fund for Victims. “Making Reparative Justice, a Reality for Victims.” Last Accessed October 5, 2019. www.trustfundforvictims.org.
Un.doc.A/CinF.183 (vol II), 15 June 1998, 2nd Plen, mtg.II 63.
United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, Article 73, Reparations to Victims: Proposal Submitted by the Delegations of France and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, in doc. A/Conf.183/c.1/WGPM/L-28,26 June 1998.
United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, Draft Statute of an International Criminal Court, Article 73(2)(a), in Report of the Preparatory Committee on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, Draft Statute and Final Act, undoc, A/conF.183/2/Add.1,14 April 1998.
Villiger, Mark E. Commentary on the 1969 Viena Convention on the the Law of Treaties. Leiden, Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2009.
Wyngaert Hon, Christine Van den. “Victims Before International Criminal Courts: Some Views and Concerns of an ICC Trial Judge.” Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law 44 (2011): 476-494.
Yung Song, Sang-H. “Speech Remarks to the Board of Directors of Trust Fund for Victims.” 18 March 2014, www.trustfundforvictims/sites/default/files/Media-library/documents/pdf/140318-ICC-President-Remarks-to-11th-Board-of-Directors-Meeting-for-web-1-pdf.
Zernova, Margarita. Restorative Juctice, Ideals and Realities. Aldershot, Hants, England: Asghate Publishing, 2007.