Document Type : Research Paper
Authors
1 University of Slavic Azad in EsfahanPh.D Student in Public International Law, Department of International law, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch ,Islamic Azad University , Isfahan ,Iran
2 Associate Professor. Department of Law, University of Isfahan , Isfahan ,Iran
Abstract
"Obligation to extradition or prosecute" is one of the legal mechanisms to deal with international crimes such as genocide (genocide), war crimes and torture, as well as to combat the bribery of perpetrators of these acts internationally and not only to criminal justice but also as a means The deterrent implies ensuring non-repetition of these crimes in the future.In 2012, the International Court of Justice issued its ruling on the issue of prosecution or extradition in the Belgian case against Senegal. The Court reviewed the various aspects of this matter, including the customary status of an obligation to extradite or trial, to link this commitment to global jurisdiction and universal obligations. The Court refused to confirm the status of a customary obligation to extradite or prosecute, and considered universal jurisdiction a condition for the fulfillment of this obligation. Moreover, it stated that this commitment was a collective commitment of the group, and the Belgian government, not as a failed state, but as a non-government, has the right to invoke the responsibility of the Senegalese government. This research seeks to examine some of the important sections of the Court's judgment and its criticisms.
Keywords
)