Проблемы универсальной юрисдикции и экстрадиции в международном уголовном праве. Международный уголовный суд в качестве альтернативного решения

Abstract

The article analyses the universal jurisdiction as a special type of exterriyorial jurisdiction which does not reguire 'personal' connection of the state establishing jurisdiction with the crime. The universal jurisdiction follows the general condemnation of lhat crime and bears a contractual character. The universal jurisdiction is an exception concerning common crimes. In the case of crimes of international character the universal jurisdiction is the rule. It follows from the general condemnation of these crimes and the criminality of the activities of many states. The rule today is the universal jurisdiction including the international crimes. Here though the criminality in the international criminal law is not a condition, in this case the universal jurisdiction appears to be a type of international criminal jurisdiction. The system of the universal jurisdiction presupposes the use of internal mechanisms by the states for the the court prosecution of the criminals according to their legislation or extraditing them to another state for the prosecution. The extradition is one of the two basic components of the universal jurisdiction and the effectiveness of the whole system depends on its effectiveness. The article gives the definition of the extradition, reviews the restrictions, which hinder its implementation and makes a conclusion about their inapplicability to international crimes. In any case the traditional institution of criminals' extraditions from one state to another is not the optimal variant of prosecution mechanism for the international crimes. It is very difficult to provide the uniformity of penalty in the system of universal jurisdiction and also the respect of the principle NON BIS IN IDEM. In order to improve the situation in the mechanism of universal jrisdiction it is necessary to turn to the alternative prosecution mechanism - the international criminal court. The states should be given the freedom of choice between the international criminal court and extradition to another state or trials in their own courts. The article concludes by a model for an international criminal court with the parallel jurisdiction and suggests the solution of a number of jurisdictional issues, concerning its establishment.