Nr. 08/00142 Mr Machielse Zitting 8 juli 2008 Conclusie inzake: [verdachte] 1. Het Gerechtshof te 's-Gravenhage heeft op 17 december 2007 het openbaar ministerie niet-ontvankelijk verklaard in de verv
artikel 212-1, pp. 288-
- In een andere overdrachtszaak aan Frankrijk heeft het tribunaal nog geen beslissing genomen (zie: Prosecutor v. L. Bucyibaruta, ICTR-05-85-I, Designation of a Trial Chamber for the referral of the case to a state, 11 juni 2007). 56 Rwanda-tribunaal, Prosecutor v. Y. Munyakazi (ICTR-97-36-R11bis), Decision on the Prosecutor's request for referral of case to the Republic of Rwanda, Rule 11bis of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence), 28 mei
- 57 Y.G.M. Baaijens-van Geloven, 'Overdracht en overname van strafvervolging', Gouda Quint 1996, p.
- 58 Trb. 2001,
- De originele Engelse tekst luidt: "Should the Security Council consider that measures provided for in Article 41 would be inadequate or have proved to be inadequate, it may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security. Such action may include demonstrations, blockade, and other operations by air, sea, or land forces of Members of the United Nations." 59 B. Simma (Ed.), 'The Charter of the United Nations, a commentary', 2nd edition (Oxford: OUP, 2002),
Art. 42, pp.
749-760. 60 "Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, 1.Decides hereby, having received the request of the Government of Rwanda (S/1994/1115), to establish an international tribunal for the sole purpose of prosecuting persons responsible for genocide and other serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in the territory of Rwanda and Rwandan citizens responsible for genocide and other such violations committed in the territory of neighbouring States, between 1 January 1994 and 31 December 1994 and to this end to adopt the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda annexed hereto; 2.Decides that all States shall cooperate fully with the International Tribunal and its organs in accordance with the present resolution and the Statute of the International Tribunal and that consequently all States shall take any measures necessary under their domestic law to implement the provisions of the present resolution and the Statute, including the obligation of States to comply with requests for assistance or orders issued by a Trial Chamber under Article 28 of the Statute, and requests States to keep the Secretary-General informed of such measures; (...)" 61 B. Simma (Ed.), 'The Charter of the United Nations, a commentary', 2nd edition (Oxford: OUP, 2002),
Art. 41, p.
- 62 Joegoslavië-tribunaal, Prosecutor v. Tadic, 'Decision on the defence motion for interlocutory appeal on jurisdiction', 2 oktober
- Simma merkt op dat onduidelijk is of zulke vergaande maatregelen zoals het aanhouden van verdachten door internationale organen in betrokken landen een voldoende legitieme basis hebben, zie: B. Simma (Ed.), 'The Charter of the United Nations, a commentary', 2nd edition (Oxford: OUP, 2002),
Art. 41, p. 743. 63 Zie eveneens het standpunt van de Nederlandse regering in de Mv
T op de Instellingswet van het Joegoslavië-tribunaal in Kamerstukken II 1993 - 1994, 23542, nr. 3, p. 6: "Evenals voor de overlevering het geval is, kan onzes inziens het handvest van de Verenigde Naties, waarop Resolutie 827 van de Veiligheidsraad en het Statuut van het Tribunaal is gebaseerd, als de wettelijk vereiste verdragsgrondslag worden opgevat." 64 Vgl. B. Swart, 'General problems', in: A. Cassese, P. Gaeta and J.R.W.D. Jones, 'The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: a commentary', Volume II (Oxford: OUP, 2002), p. 1592: "This duty has been imposed on States by decisions of the Security Council acting under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter." 65 H. van der Wilt, 'Internationaal strafrecht', in: N. Horbach, R. Lefeber en O. Ribbelink, 'Handboek Internationaal Recht', T.M.C. Asser Press 2007, p.
- 66 HR 11april 2006, NJ 2006, 393, m.nt. YB. r.ov. 3.
- 67 Vgl. HR 18 april 2006, LJN: AV2377; HR 18 april 2006, NJ 2006, 394 m.nt. Buruma; HR 16 mei 2006, LJN: AV 1581; HR 16 mei 2006, LJN: AU8266; HR 4 juli 2006, LJN: AW
- 68 H. van der Wilt, 'Internationaal strafrecht', in: N. Horbach, R. Lefeber en O. Ribbelink, 'Handboek Internationaal Recht', T.M.C. Asser Press 2007, pp. 540-541, waarin hij verwijst naar: Joegoslavië-tribunaal, Prosecutor v. Blaškic, Case No. IT-95-14-AR 108bis, Judgement on the request of the Republic of Croatia for review of the decision of Trial Chamber II of 18 July 1997, ICTY Appeals Chamber, 29 October 1997, para. 26-
- Vgl. A. Cassese, International Criminal Law (Oxford: OUP, 2003), p. 357; B. Swart, 'International Cooperation and Judicial Assistance - General Problems' in: Cassese, Gaeta and Jones, ICC Commentary, Vol. II, pp. 1590-
- 69 Vgl. C.M. Joubert,
artikel 9 van de Uitvoeringswet Joegoslavië-tribunaal in Tekst & Commentaar 2007, p.
- 70 Rechtbank 's-Gravenhage, 14 februari 2002, LJN: AD9260 onder r.ov. 3.
- 71 Zie het aan het proces-verbaal van de terechtzitting in hoger beroep d.d. 3 december 2007 gehechte stuk getiteld 'Relationship between Rule 11bis of het Rules and Article 28 of het Statute', p.
- 72 Joegoslavië-tribunaal, Prosecutor v. Stankovic, Case No. IT-96-23/2-ARbis 1, Decision on Rule 11bis Referral, Appeals Chamber, 1 September
- 73 Security Council Resolution 1503
(2003): (...) "Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, 1. Calls on the international community to assist national jurisdictions, as part of the completion strategy, in improving their capacity to prosecute cases transferred from the ICTY and the ICTR and encourages the ICTY and ICTR Presidents, Prosecutors, and Registrars to develop and improve their outreach programme; (...)"; en Security Council Resolution 1534
(2004): (...) "Calls on the ICTY and ICTR Prosecutors to review the case load of the ICTY and ICTR respectively in particular with a view to determining which cases should be proceeded with and which should be transferred to competent national jurisdictions, as well as the measures which will need to be taken to meet the Completion Strategies referred to in resolution 1503
(2003)and (...)". 74 Vgl. E. van Sliedregt, 'Rechtsmachtgrenzen voor onbegrensde misdrijven - 'Neerlands dualisme' bestendigd', DD mei 2008, onder 19: "De wetgever had de overname van strafvervolging door Nederland moeten regelen; resoluties 1503
(2003)en 1434
(2004)en de Completion Strategy hadden in Nederland tot aanpassing van de wet moeten leiden"; C. Ryngaert, 'Universal jurisdiction over genocide and wartime torture in Dutch cases: An appraisal of the Afghan and Rwandan cases
(2007)', Hague Justice Journal Volume 2
(2007), p. 32: "These resolutions do clearly not require that Member States provide for jurisdiction over ICTR-transferred cases which they could not prosecute under existing municipal law."