Implementation of the Principle of Complementarity in Light of the Practice and Historical Background of the International Criminal Court
Abstract
The present article examines the implementation of the principle of complementarity in the International Criminal Court (ICC), with a particular focus on its jurisprudential practice and historical development. Complementarity is one of the emerging concepts in international law that, alongside ensuring the effective functioning of the Court, also recognizes and preserves the independence and sovereignty of states. This principle is designed in such a manner that the Court may exercise its jurisdiction only when states are unable or unwilling to conduct genuine investigations or prosecutions. By clarifying the procedural mechanisms related to the initiation of investigations, the referral mechanisms to the Court, and the role of the United Nations Security Council in this regard, the article demonstrates that the International Criminal Court, through its supervisory systems and procedural regulations, seeks to establish a balance between international considerations and the preservation of national sovereignty. This research, conducted using a descriptive–analytical method, analyzes situations such as Uganda and Darfur to explain how the Prosecutor of the Court determines admissibility and exercises prosecutorial discretion, and also highlights the role of the Security Council and its limitations in referring cases. The findings indicate that although Security Council referrals and other legal mechanisms are effective in advancing international criminal justice, the importance of respecting the principles of national sovereignty and ensuring state cooperation within the international legal system remains evident.