Originally published on the CGS blog on June 11, 2010.
By: Ariela Blatter
For the last 48 hours here in Kampala, I have been on tenderhooks with the knowledge that a deal on the crime of aggression was imminent. With Brazil and the non-aligned movement on one side, rumored to have Euorpean country support, and the P5 on the other (two of which, UK and France are state parties to the ICC), the trans-continental dance has been a frustratingly slow waltz and of late, more of a clumsy stumble. However, according to the Chairman over the proceedings, consensus is almost here– which is the preferred method of amending the Rome Statute. What States seem to have agreed on so far is the way the amendment will come into force- by about 2/3rds of state parties, the definition of aggression, and how to prosecute the crime; the jurisdiction resting in the dominant hands of the UN Security Council, and to a lesser extent by the independent prosecutor and state parties. If the UN Security Council wants to stop the prosecutor from acting, it can do so but only if it acts affirmatively to delay the proceedings by a year. It also seems to be settled that this crime of aggression will not apply to non-state parties to the Rome Statute, or those who opt out, or as it seems “lodge a declaration” that the crime does not apply to them. What is not clear right now is when this deal will enter into force. The outstanding issue, besides if this will pass or not (or if anyone of us here in Kampala will get any sleep tonight) is if in seven years from now, in 2017 or so, states have to meet again and 2/3rds of countries need to vote in favor again for the crime to take affect, or in seven years the court can tackle this crime free and clear.
