A Study of organizational principles and functions of international criminal justice

通过对前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭和国际刑事法院与国家管辖权之间关系的分析，可以明确以下几点。法庭《规约》赋予其高于国家管辖权的优先地位，并通过随后的判决和裁定阐述了其至高无上的地位。例如，法庭在Blaskic案中认定，法庭的命令对没有国家执行管辖权的国家境内的个人有直接影响，当国家立法妨碍法庭有效进行调查和审判时，法庭可以在境内采取强制措施（如现场调查）。相反，各国在传统意义上的国际法律的合作框架内制定了实施立法。许多国家在其立法中加入了与引渡程序相同的原则。例如，有许多规定， 关于我们 在立法中，允许一国的司法机关确定法庭是否对该国被要求移交的被告真正拥有管辖权，或者是否有可能的理由相信被告确实犯下了被指控的罪行。在这方面，国家立法含蓄地削弱了法庭的首要地位。国际刑事法院采用补充性原则，这可能意味着国家管辖权优先于法院。然而，对国际刑事法院立法历史的考察表明，根据《罗马规约》，国际刑事法院被赋予了决定国家当局的起诉或审判是否真正有效的权力，并且由于这一权力，国际刑事法院作为一个额外的上诉司法机构，审查国家检察官和法官的业绩。接下来，我将试图通过详细审查为批准《法院罗马规约》而将在不久的将来制定的执行立法，来分析法院的实际职能。少

From the analysis on the relation between the International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Court on one hand, and national jurisdiction on the other, the following points become clear.1. The Tribunal, which is given primacy over national jurisdiction under its Statute, has elaborated its supremacy through subsequent judgments and decisions. The Tribunal, for example, found in Blaskic case that its order had a direct effect on individuals in the territory of states without national implementing jurisdiction, and it can take forcible measures (such as on-site investigation) in the territory, when the national legislation impedes its effective conduct of investigation and trial.2. On the contrary, each state made an implementing legislation in the framework of international legal cooperation in a traditional sense. Many states inserted into their legislations the same principles as in extradition procedure. For example, there are many stipulations i … More n the legislations that allow a judicial organ of a state to determines whether the Tribunal really has jurisdiction on the accused whom thc state is requested to surrender, or whether there is probable cause to believe that the accused really committed the alleged crimes. In this respect, Tribunal's primacy is reduced implicitly by the national legislations.3. The International Criminal Court adopts the principle of complementarity, which may imply the primacy of national jurisdiction over the Court. Nevertheless, the examination of its legislative history makes it clear that under the Rome Statute, the Court is given a power to determine whether prosecution or trial by national authorities is really effective, and due to this power, it serves as an extra appellate judicial body to review the performance of national prosecutors and judges.On the basis of the researches above, I will next attempt to analyze practical function of the Court by examining in detail implementing legislations which will be made in the near future in order to ratify the Rome Statute of the Court. Less