نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسنده
دانشیار گروه حقوق، دانشکده علوم اجتماعی، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران
چکیده
شاهد در بازداشت با ادعای خطر جانی ناشی از ادای شهادت در دیوان کیفری بین‌المللی، متقاضی عدم استرداد به دولت متبوع و پناهندگی از دولت میزبان است. بر این اساس شعبه محاکمه دیوان کیفری بین‌المللی در وضعیت جمهوری دموکراتیک کنگو با تفسیر مقررات مواد (1)68 و (7)93 اساسنامه و ارتباط آنها با ماده (3)21 اساسنامه قائل به تداوم بازداشت شاهد تا پایان رسیدگی‌های دولت میزبان به تقاضای پناهندگی آنها می‌باشد. اما استمرار بازداشت شاهد نیز ناقض تعهدات بین‌المللی دولت میزبان در حمایت از آزادی‌های فردی است. بر این اساس شعبه بدوی دادگاه هلند صلاحیت تصمیم‌گیری راجع به بازداشت شاهد را از دیوان کیفری بین‌المللی سلب می‌کند و در صلاحیت دولت میزبان قرار می‌دهد. لیکن شعبه تجدیدنظر دادگاه هلند آن را تحت تاثیر رویه قضایی دیوان اروپایی حقوق بشر نقض می‌کند و در صلاحیت دیوان کیفری قرار می‌دهد. شعبه تجدیدنظر دیوان کیفری بین‌المللی نیز رویه شعبه تجدیدنظر دادگاه هلند را با در نظر گرفتن محدودیت‌های اساسنامه تایید می‌کند تا رسیدگی به اعتراض شاهد همچنان در صلاحیت دیوان کیفری بین‌المللی باشد. با وجود این، قضات شعبه تجدیدنظر دیوان کیفری قائل به الغاء بازداشت شهود و واگذاری امور آنها پس از ادای شهادت به دولت میزبان می‌باشند تا اینکه استرداد آنها را نیز دولت میزبان تا مشخص شدن نتیجه تقاضای پناهندگی آنها به تاخیر بیندازد.
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
Challenge of Detained Witnesses’ Applying for Asylum from Host Government in the Jurisdiction of International Criminal Court
نویسنده [English]
- Javad Salehi
Associate Professor, Department of Law , Faculty of Faculty of Social Sciences, Payam-e- Noor, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]
Detained witnesses of the Congolese government applied for non-extradition to their repective government, seeking asulum in the Netherlands and declaring illegal the continuation of the detention by claiming with the danger of life after their testimony against the government before the the International Criminal Court. The primary branch of the Court in the interpretation of articles 68(1) and 93(7) of the Statute and their relationship with article 21(3) of the Statute holds that the custody tribunal will continue to detain the witnesses until the end of the Dutch administration's application for their asylum. Nevertheless, the Court opens a prospect before the Dutch court in order to continue to detain the witnesses in contravention of the international commitments of the Dutch government to protect the freedom of individuals in its territory. Dutch primary branch disqualifies decision makers from arresting witnesses, but the Dutch court of appeal reverse the European Court of Human Rights' recent judicial review in its fourth witness case. Finally, the Court of appeal judges affirm proceedings of the European Court of Human Rights and the Dutch court of appeal, taking into account the provisions of the Statute.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
- Detained Witnesses
- Asylum
- International Criminal Court
- Dutch Court
- European Court of Human Rights
مقاله‌ها
- رضوی‌فرد، بهزاد و حسن فقیه‌محمدی، «تکامل حقوق بزه‌دیدگان از منظر مقررات موضوعه دیوان کیفری بین‌المللی»، مجله حقوقی بین‌المللی، شماره 45، (1390).
- شاکری، ابوالحسن و رضا رضایی، «سیاست جنایی تقنینی ایران در حمایت از شاهد»، آموزه‌های حقوق کیفری، شماره 10، (1394).
- صالحی، جواد، «آثار بزه‌دیده‌شناسی بر حق مشارکت بزه‌دیده در تحقیقات مقدماتی در پرتو رویه دیوان بین‌المللی کیفری»، مجله حقوقی بین‌المللی، شماره 52، (1394).
- فاخری، نریمان و جواد صالحی، «رویه شعب بدوی و تجدیدنظر دیوان کیفری بین المللی در اصلاح اتهامات لوبانگو: از هماهنگی تا تعارض میان آیین نامه دیوان با اساسنامه رُم»، مجله حقوقی بین المللی، شماره 51، (1393).
Books
- Easterday, J, Three Defense Witnesses Blame the DRC for Bogoro Attack, then Seek Asylum in the Netherlands, International Justice Monitor (Rechtbank Den Haag: 2011).
- Easterday, J, Dutch Court Rules that Witnesses Must Be Allowed Asylum Procedure, International Justice Monitor (Rechtbank Amsterdam: 2012).
- Gill, G. G., & J. McAdam, The Refugee in International Law, 4th Ed (Oxford University Press: 2021).
- Schabas, A. W., The International Criminal Court: A Commentary on the Rome Statute, 2th Ed (Oxford University Press: 2016).
- Wouters, K, International Legal Standards for the Protection from Refoulement (Intersentia: 2009).
Articles
- Arbia, S, “The International Criminal Court: Witness and Victim Protection and Support, Legal Aid and Family Visits”, Commonwealth Law Bulletin, No. 36, (2010).
- Cantor, D. J., & S. E., Barichello, “The Inter-American Human Rights System: a New Model for Integrating Refugee and Complementary Protection?”, The International Journal of Human Rights, No. 15, (2013).
- Cupido, M, & J. V. Wijk, “Testifying Behind Bars: Detained ICC Witnesses and Human Rights Protection”, SSRN Electronic Journal, (2014), Available at; SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2374678.
- Eikel, M, “Witness Protection Measures at the International Criminal Court: Legal Framework and Emerging Practice”, Criminal Law Forum, No, 23, (2012).
- Frolich, R, “Current Developments at the International Criminal Court”, Journal of International Criminal Justice, No. 9, (2011).
- Irving, E, “The Relationship between the International Criminal Court and its Host State; Impact on Human Rights”, Leiden Journal of International Law, Vol. 27, No. 2, (2014).
- Kalin, W, & M., Caroni and L. Heim (2011), “Article 33”, in; A. Zimmermann et al. (eds), The 1951Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol: A Commentary, Oxford University Press.
- Kendall, S, “Defense Witnesses Claim Asylum in the Netherlands: Implications for State Cooperation”, (2011), Available at http://www.katangatrial.org/20n/08/defense-witnesses-claim-asylum-in-the-netherlands-implications-for-state-cooperation/.
- Moore, B, & J. V, Wijk, “Asylum Seekers Falsely Implicating Themselves in International Crimes: Should They be Informed of the Existence of Article 1F of the Refugee Convention?”, Migration Letters, Vol. 12, No. 1, (2015).
- Sluiter, G, “Shared Responsibility in International Criminal Justice. The ICC and Asylum”, Journal of International Criminal Justice, No. 10, (2012).
- Stoyanova, V, “The Principle of Non-Refoulement and the Right of Asylum-seekers to Enter State Territory”, Interdisciplinary Journal of Human Rights Law, Vol. 3, No.1, (2009).
- Svacek, O, “Review of the International Criminal Court’s Case Law 2013”, International and Comparative Law Review, Vol. 13, No. 2, (2013).
- Wijk, J. V, “When International Criminal Justice Collides with Principles of International Protection: Assessing the Consequences of ICC Witnesses Seeking Asylum, Defendants Being Acquitted, and Convicted Being Released”, Leiden Journal of International Law, No. 26, (2013).
- Wijk, J. V, & M, Cupido, “Testifying behind Bars; Detained ICC Witnesses and Human Rights Protection”, in; Carsten Stahn (ed.), the Law and Practice of the International Criminal Court, Oxford University Press, (2015).
- Yabasun, D, & M, Holvoet “Seeking Asylum before the International Criminal Court; Another Challenge for a Court in Need of Credibility”, International Criminal Law Review, No. 13, (2013).
Cases, Reports and Declarations
- District Court of Hague, Decision, Case No. LJN: BU9492, 28 December 2011.
- District Appeal Court of Hague, Decision, Case No. LJN: BU9492, 18 December 2012.
- European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, 1956.
- European Court of Human Rights, Longa v. Netherlands, Decision, Application No. 33917/12, 9 October 2012.
- Headquarters Agreement between the International Criminal Court and the Host State, Doc No. ICC-BD/04-01-08, 2008.
- International Criminal Court, Prosecutor v. Katanga and Ngudjolo, Decision on the Application for the Interim Release of Detained Witnesses, Case No. ICC-01/04-01/07-3405-tENG, 1 October 2013.
- International Criminal Court, Prosecutor v. Katanga and Ngudjolo, Dissenting Opinion of Judge Christine van Wyngaert, Case No. ICC-01/04-01/07-3405-Anx, 1 October 2013.
- International Criminal Court, Prosecutor v. Katanga and Ngudjolo, Decision on an Amicus Curiae Application, Case No. ICC-01/04-01/07, 9 June 2011.
- International Criminal Court, Prosecutor v. Katanga and Ngudjolo, Urgent Request for Convening a Status Conference on the Detention of Witnesses, 30 January 2012.
- International Criminal Court, Prosecutor v. Katanga and Ngudjolo, Decision on the Security Situation of three Detained Witnesses in Relation to their Testimony before the Court (Art. 68 of the Statute) and Order to Request Cooperation from the Democratic Republic of the Congo to Provide Assistance in Ensuring their Protection in Accordance with Article 93(1)(j) of the Statute, Case No. ICC-01/04-01/07-3033, 22 June 2011.
- International Criminal Court, Prosecutor v. Katanga and Ngudjolo, Case No. ICC-01/04-02/12-158, 20 January 2014.
- International Criminal Court, Prosecutor v. Katanga and Ngudjolo, Public Redacted Version of ICC-01/04-02/12-69-Conf-Exp, Case No. ICC-01/04-02/12-69-Red, 3 June 2013.
- International Criminal Court, Prosecutor v. Katanga and Ngudjolo, Decision on the Security Situation of witnesses, 24 August 2011.
- International Criminal Court, Prosecutor v. Lubanga, Redacted Decision on the Request by DRC for Special Protective Measures Relating to his Asylum Application, Case No. ICC-01/04-01/06-2766-Red, 5 August 2011.
- United Nations, Convention to the Status of Refugees, 1951.
)