المحكمة الجنائية الدولية .pdf


À propos / Télécharger Aperçu
Nom original: المحكمة الجنائية الدولية.pdf
Titre: Microsoft Word - ICC 1-102.doc
Auteur: jtowle

Ce document au format PDF 1.4 a été généré par PScript5.dll Version 5.2 / Acrobat Distiller 6.0.1 (Windows), et a été envoyé sur fichier-pdf.fr le 18/07/2014 à 16:07, depuis l'adresse IP 197.205.x.x. La présente page de téléchargement du fichier a été vue 594 fois.
Taille du document: 785 Ko (101 pages).
Confidentialité: fichier public


Aperçu du document


‫ﻣﻘﺪﻣــﺔ‬
‫ﺗﻤﺜﻞ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ ﻣﻨﺬ ﻇﻬﻮرهﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺴ ﺎﺣﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻓ ﻰ ﺻ ﻴﻒ‬
‫ﻋ ﺎم ‪ 1998‬اﻟﺮآﻴ ﺰة اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻴﺔ واﻟﻘ ﻮة اﻟﺪاﻓﻌ ﺔ ﻟﻤﺨﺘﻠ ﻒ اﻟﺘﻴ ﺎرات اﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳ ﻴﺔ‬
‫واﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮﻧﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺘ ﻰ ﺑﺎﺗ ﺖ ﺗ ﺪرك ﺟﻴ ﺪًا أن اﻟﻔ ﺮاغ اﻟﻮاﻗ ﻊ ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﺳ ﺎﺣﺔ اﻟﻌﺪاﻟ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ اﻟﺬى ﺷﻬﺪﺗﻪ اﻟﺒﺸﺮﻳﺔ ﻋﺒﺮ ﺗﺎرﻳﺨﻬﺎ اﻟﻄﻮﻳﻞ‪ ،‬ﻟ ﻢ ﻳﻌ ﺪ آﻤ ﺎ آ ﺎن‪ .‬ﻓﻔ ﻰ اﻟﺴ ﺎﺑﻊ‬
‫ﻋﺸ ﺮ ﻣ ﻦ ﻳﻮﻟﻴ ﻮ ﻣ ﻦ ﻋ ﺎم ‪ 1998‬ﺟ ﺎءت اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ راﺳ ﺨﺔ ﻓ ﻰ‬
‫ﻋﻤﺎدهﺎ ﻣﻌﺒﺮة ﺑﻮﺿﻮح ﻋﻦ اﻹرادة اﻷآﻴﺪة ﻷﻏﻠﺒﻴ ﺔ أﻋﻀ ﺎء اﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤ ﻊ اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ ﻓ ﻰ‬
‫إرﺳﺎء ﻗﻮاﻋﺪ ﻣﺘﻴﻨﺔ ﻟﻠﻌﺪاﻟﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ ﻣﺠﺴﺪة ﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫وﻟ ﺬا ﻓﻘ ﺪ رأﻳﻨ ﺎ ﻣﻮاآﺒ ﺔ ﺗﻠ ﻚ اﻟﻠﺤﻈ ﺎت اﻟﺘﺎرﻳﺨﻴ ﺔ ﺑﻜﺘﺎﺑ ﺔ ه ﺬا اﻟﻤﺆﻟ ﻒ اﻟ ﺬى‬
‫ﻧﺮﺻﺪ ﻣ ﻦ ﺧﻼﻟ ﻪ ﺗﻠ ﻚ اﻟﺘﻄ ﻮرات اﻟﺤﺜﻴﺜ ﺔ ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟﺼ ﻌﻴﺪﻳﻦ اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ واﻟ ﻮﻃﻨﻰ ﻣ ﻦ‬
‫أﺟﻞ إﻧﻔﺎذ أﺣﻜ ﺎم اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ‪ .‬وﻳﺮﺟ ﻊ اﻟﻔﻀ ﻞ ﻓ ﻰ‬
‫إﺻﺪار هﺬا اﻟﻜﺘﺎب إﻟ ﻰ اﻟﻤﻌﻬ ﺪ اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ ﻟﺤﻘ ﻮق اﻹﻧﺴ ﺎن ﺑﺠﺎﻣﻌ ﺔ دﻳﺒ ﻮل ﺑﺸ ﻴﻜﺎﻏﻮ‬
‫واﻟ ﺬى دأب ﻋﻠ ﻰ إﺻ ﺪار ﻧﺸ ﺮة دورﻳ ﺔ )ﺑ ﺎﻟﻠﻐﺘﻴﻦ اﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴ ﺔ واﻹﻧﺠﻠﻴﺰﻳ ﺔ( ﺣ ﻮل‬
‫اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ وﻣ ﺎ ﻳ ﺮﺗﺒﻂ ﺑﻬ ﺎ ﻣ ﻦ ﻣﻮﺿ ﻮﻋﺎت ﻣﺘﻌﻠﻘ ﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﺘﺼ ﺪﻳﻖ‬
‫واﻻﻧﻀ ﻤﺎم واﻹﻧﻔ ﺎذ اﻟ ﻮﻃﻨﻰ ﻷﺣﻜﺎﻣﻬ ﺎ‪ .‬وه ﻮ اﻷﻣ ﺮ اﻟ ﺬى دﻓﻌﻨ ﻰ إﻟ ﻰ اﻟﺒ ﺪء ﻓ ﻰ‬
‫ﺻ ﻴﺎﻏﺔ ه ﺬا اﻟﻜﺘ ﺎب ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟﻨﺤ ﻮ اﻟ ﺬى ﻳ ﺮاﻩ اﻟﻘ ﺎرئ ﺑ ﻴﻦ ﻳﺪﻳ ﻪ اﻵن ﺑﺤﻴ ﺚ ﻳﺘﺴ ﻨﻰ‬
‫ﻟﻠﺒﺎﺣﺚ وآﺬا ﻟﻠﻘﺎرئ اﻟﻌﺮﺑﻰ اﻟﻌﺎدى ﻓﻬ ﻢ واﺳ ﺘﻴﻌﺎب ﺗﻠ ﻚ اﻟﻤﺮﺣﻠ ﺔ اﻟﺘﺎرﻳﺨﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺘ ﻰ‬
‫ﻳﺘﻢ ﺧﻼﻟﻬﺎ ﺗﺸﻜﻴﻞ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ وﺗﺤﺪﻳ ﺪ ﻣﻌ ﺎﻟﻢ ﻋﻤﻠﻬ ﺎ اﻟﻤﺴ ﺘﻘﺒﻠﻰ‪ ،‬واﻟ ﺬى ﻳﻌﺘﻤ ﺪ ﺑﺸ ﻜﻞ‬
‫آﺒﻴﺮ ﻋﻠﻰ إرادة اﻟﺪول ورﻏﺒﺘﻬﺎ اﻟﺼﺎدﻗﺔ ﻓﻰ ﺗﻔﻌﻴﻞ دور ه ﺬﻩ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ ﻣ ﻦ ﺧ ﻼل‬
‫أﺣﻜﺎم اﻟﺘﻌﺎون اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ‪.‬‬
‫ﻞ ﻣ ﻦ اﻷﺳ ﺘﺎذ‬
‫وﻓﻰ هﺬا اﻟﺼﺪد ﻳﺴ ﻌﺪﻧﻰ أن أﻋ ﺮب ﻋ ﻦ ﺷ ﻜﺮى وﺗﻘ ﺪﻳﺮى ﻟﻜ ٍ‬
‫ﻧﻬ ﺎد اﻟﺠﻤ ﻞ اﻟﻤﻨﺴ ﻖ اﻟﻌ ﺎم ﻟﺒﺮﻧ ﺎﻣﺞ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻌﻬ ﺪ اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ‬
‫ﻟﺤﻘ ﻮق اﻹﻧﺴ ﺎن ﺑﺠﺎﻣﻌ ﺔ دى ﺑ ﻮل‪ ،‬واﻟﻘﺎﺿ ﻰ ﻣﺤﻤ ﺪ ﻋﺒ ﺪ اﻟﻌﺰﻳ ﺰ ﺟ ﺎد اﻟﺤ ﻖ‪ ،‬ﻟﻤ ﺎ‬
‫ﻗﺎﻣﺎ ﺑﻪ ﻣﻦ ﻣﺠﻬﻮدات ﻓﻰ ﺗﺮﺟﻤﺔ أﺟﺰاء ﻋﺪﻳﺪة ﻣﻦ هﺬا اﻟﻤﺆﻟﻒ وﻣﺮاﺟﻌ ﺔ أﺑﻮاﺑ ﻪ‬
‫وﻣﻌﺎوﻧﺘﻬﻤﺎ اﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ ﻓﻰ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ هﺬا اﻟﻤﺸﺮوع‪.‬‬
‫‪5‬‬

‫وﻗﺒ ﻞ أن ﻧﺘﻌ ﺮض ﻟﺘﻘﺴ ﻴﻢ اﻟﻜﺘ ﺎب‪ ،‬رأﻳﻨ ﺎ اﻟﺘﺄآﻴ ﺪ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﺒﺪاﻳ ﺔ ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻷهﻤﻴ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﻘﺼﻮى واﻟﺤﺎﺟ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ اﻷآﻴ ﺪة ﻓ ﻰ ﻋﺼ ﺮﻧﺎ اﻟﺤﺎﺿ ﺮ إﻟ ﻰ ﻣﺜ ﻞ ه ﺬﻩ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺘﻰ ﺗﻌﺪ آﻤﺎ أﺳﻠﻔﻨﺎ إﺣﺪى أهﻢ رآﺎﺋﺰ اﻟﻌﺪاﻟﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫اﻟﺤﺎﺟﺔ إﻟﻰ ﻣﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺟﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ دوﻟﻴﺔ‪:‬‬

‫"أدرآ ﺖ اﻷﻣﺎﻧ ﺔ اﻟﻌﺎﻣ ﺔ ﻣﻨ ﺬ ﺣ ﻮاﻟﻰ ﻧﺼ ﻒ ﻗ ﺮن أى ﻣﻨ ﺬ وﻗ ﺖ‬
‫إﻧﺸ ﺎء اﻷﻣ ﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤ ﺪة ﻣ ﺪى اﻻﺣﺘﻴ ﺎج ﻹﻧﺸ ﺎء ﻣﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ ﻣ ﻦ أﺟ ﻞ‬
‫ﻣﺤﺎآﻤ ﺔ وﻣﻌﺎﻗﺒ ﺔ اﻷﺷ ﺨﺎص اﻟﻤﺴ ﺌﻮﻟﻴﻦ ﻋ ﻦ ارﺗﻜ ﺎب ﺟ ﺮاﺋﻢ‬
‫آﺠﺮاﺋﻢ اﻹﺑ ﺎدة اﻟﺒﺸ ﺮﻳﺔ‪ .‬ﻓﻘ ﺪ اﻋﺘﻘ ﺪ اﻟﻜﺜﻴ ﺮون أن أه ﻮال اﻟﺤ ﺮب‬
‫اﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺜﺎﻧﻴ ﺔ وﻣ ﺎ أﺳ ﻔﺮت ﻋﻨ ﻪ ﻣ ﻦ ﻣﻌﺴ ﻜﺮات ووﺣﺸ ﻴﺔ‬
‫وﻣﺤﺎرق وإﺑﺎدة ﻟﻦ ﻳﺘﻜﺮر ﻣ ﺮة ﺛﺎﻧﻴ ﺔ‪ .‬ﻟﻜ ﻦ آ ﻞ ه ﺬا ﻗ ﺪ ﺗﻜ ﺮر ﻓ ﻰ‬
‫آﻤﺒﻮدﻳﺎ واﻟﺒﻮﺳﻨﺔ واﻟﻬﺮﺳﻚ ورواﻧ ﺪا‪ .‬ﻓ ﻰ وﻗﺘﻨ ﺎ ه ﺬا أﻇﻬ ﺮ ه ﺬا‬
‫اﻟﻌﻘ ﺪ أن ﻗ ﺪرة اﻹﻧﺴ ﺎن ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﻓﻌ ﻞ اﻟﺸ ﺮ ﻟ ﻴﺲ ﻟﻬ ﺎ ﺣ ﺪود‪ .‬ﻟﻘ ﺪ‬
‫أﺻ ﺒﺤﺖ اﻹﺑ ﺎدة اﻟﺒﺸ ﺮﻳﺔ آﻠﻤ ﺔ اﻟﻮﻗ ﺖ اﻟ ﺬى ﻧﻌ ﻴﺶ ﻓﻴ ﻪ‪ .‬ﻓﺘﻠ ﻚ‬
‫اﻟﺤﻘﻴﻘﺔ اﻟﺸﺎﺋﻨﺔ ﺗﺘﻄﻠﺐ اﺳﺘﺠﺎﺑﺔ ﺗﺎرﻳﺨﻴﺔ"‪.‬‬
‫اﻟﺴﻜﺮﺗﻴﺮ اﻟﻌﺎم ﻟﻸﻣﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة‬
‫آﻮﻓﻰ أﻧﺎن‬

‫آ ﺎن اﻟﻌ ﺎﻟﻢ ﻳﺄﻣ ﻞ ﻓ ﻰ أن ﺗﻜ ﻮن اﻟﺤ ﺮب اﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﻴ ﺔ اﻷوﻟ ﻰ ه ﻰ "اﻟﺤ ﺮب اﻟﺘ ﻰ‬
‫ﺳﻮف ﺗﻨﻬﻰ ﺟﻤﻴﻊ اﻟﺤﺮوب"‪ ،‬إﻻ أﻧﻪ وﺑﻤﺮور ﻓﺘﺮة ﻗﺼﻴﺮة ﻣﻦ اﻟﺰﻣﻦ وﺟﺪ اﻟﻌ ﺎﻟﻢ‬
‫ﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﻣﺘﻮرﻃ ًﺎ ﻓ ﻰ ﻧ ﺰاع ﺁﺧ ﺮ أآﺒ ﺮ ﻓ ﻰ أﺑﻌ ﺎدﻩ أﻻ وه ﻮ اﻟﺤ ﺮب اﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺜﺎﻧﻴ ﺔ ‪.‬‬
‫وﺑﻌﺪ إﻣﺎﻃﺔ اﻟﻠﺜﺎم ﻋﻦ أهﻮال ﺗﻠﻚ اﻟﺤﺮب ﺗﻌﻬﺪ اﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ "ﺑ ﺄﻻ ﻳﺘﻜ ﺮر ذﻟ ﻚ‬
‫ﻣﺮة أﺧﺮى‪ ، ".‬وﺑﺎﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ ذﻟﻚ ﻓﻘ ﺪ اﻧ ﺪﻟﻊ ﻣﻨ ﺬ ذﻟ ﻚ اﻟﺘ ﺎرﻳﺦ ﻣ ﺎ ﻳﻘ ﺮب ﻣ ﻦ ‪250‬‬
‫ﻧﺰاﻋ ًﺎ ﻣﺴ ﻠﺤًﺎ ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟﻤﺴ ﺘﻮﻳﺎت اﻟﻤﺤﻠﻴ ﺔ واﻹﻗﻠﻴﻤﻴ ﺔ واﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ)‪ (1‬ﻧ ﺘﺞ ﻋﻨﻬ ﺎ ـ ـ‬
‫‪(1) M. Cherif Bassiouni, Searching for Peace and Achieving Justice, 59 Law & Contemp.‬‬
‫‪Probs. 9, 10 (1996); see also Daniel Chirot, Modern Tyrants: The Power and Prevalence‬‬
‫‪of Evil in our Age (1994). Pierre Hassner, Violence and Peace: From the Atomic Bomb‬‬
‫‪to Ethnic Cleansing (1995); Rudolph J. Rummel, Death by Government (1994). See‬‬
‫;)‪also Erik Hobsbawm, The Age of Extremes: A History of the Word, 1914-1991 (1995‬‬
‫=‪See SIPRI Yearbooks 1975-1996. There were two reported studies in the PIOOM‬‬

‫‪6‬‬

‫ﺑﺎﻹﺿﺎﻓﺔ إﻟﻰ اﻧﺘﻬﺎآﺎت ﺣﻘﻮق اﻹﻧﺴﺎن واﻟﻤﺮﺗﻜﺒ ﺔ ﺑﻤﻌﺮﻓ ﺔ اﻷﻧﻈﻤ ﺔ اﻟﻘﻤﻌﻴ ﺔ‪ -‬رﻗ ﻢ‬
‫ﺗﻘﺪﻳﺮى ﻟﻠﻀ ﺤﺎﻳﺎ ﻳﺘ ﺮاوح ﻣ ﺎ ﺑ ﻴﻦ ‪ 70‬إﻟ ﻰ ‪ 170‬ﻣﻠﻴ ﻮن ﻗﺘﻴ ﻞ)‪ .(2‬وذﻟ ﻚ ﺑﺎﻹﺿ ﺎﻓﺔ‬
‫إﻟ ﻰ ﻏﻴ ﺮ ذﻟ ﻚ ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﻨﺘ ﺎﺋﺞ اﻟﻮﺧﻴﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺘ ﻰ ﻻ ﻳﻤﻜ ﻦ اﺳ ﺘﻴﻌﺎﺑﻬﺎ أو اﻟﺘﻌ ﻮﻳﺾ ﻋ ﻦ‬
‫أﺿ ﺮارهﺎ اﻟﻤﻔﺠﻌ ﺔ اﻟﻤﺎدﻳ ﺔ أو اﻟﻤﻌﻨﻮﻳ ﺔ‪ .‬وﻻ ﺷ ﻚ ﻓ ﻰ أﻧ ﻪ ﻣﻤ ﺎ ﺳ ﺎﻋﺪ ﻋﻠ ﻰ ذﻟ ﻚ‬
‫ﺿ ﻌﻒ اﻟ ﺮادع وأﺣﻴﺎﻧ ًﺎ ﻋ ﺪم وﺟ ﻮدﻩ ﻣﻄﻠﻘ ًﺎ ﻧﺘﻴﺠ ﺔ ﻟﺤﻘﻴﻘ ﺔ أن وﺳ ﺎﺋﻞ ﺗﺤﺪﻳ ﺪ‬
‫اﻟﻤﺴﺆوﻟﻴﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻨﻄﺎق اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ ﻣﺎ ﺗﺰال ﻗﻠﻴﻠﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻨﺬ اﻧﺘﻬﺎء ﻣﺤﺎآﻤﺎت ﻗﺎدة اﻟﻨﺎزى ﻓﻰ ﻧﻮرﻣﺒﺮج‪ ،‬دأﺑ ﺖ اﻟﺤﻜﻮﻣ ﺎت ﻓ ﻰ ﻣﻌﻈ ﻢ‬
‫اﻷﺣﻮال ﻋﻠﻰ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺔ واﻗﻌﻴﺔ ﻣﻼﺋﻤ ﺔ ﻳ ﺘﻢ ﻣ ﻦ ﺧﻼﻟﻬ ﺎ اﻟﺘﻔ ﺎوض ﺑﺎﻟﻤﺴ ﺆوﻟﻴﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ واﻟﻌﺪاﻟﺔ ﻓﻰ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ اﻟﻮﺻﻮل إﻟﻰ ﺣﻞ ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻰ)‪ .(3‬وﻧﺘﺎﺟﺎ ﻟﻬﺬﻩ اﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳ ﺔ ﻓ ﺈن‬
‫اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﻤﻨﺼ ﻮص ﻋﻠﻴﻬ ﺎ ﻓ ﻰ ﻗ ﻮاﻧﻴﻦ اﻟﺸ ﻌﻮب)‪ ،(4‬ﻣﺜ ﻞ اﻟﻌ ﺪوان‪ ،‬اﻹﺑ ﺎدة‬
‫‪=Newsletter and progress report in 1994 and 1995: A.J. Jongman & A.P. Schmid,‬‬
‫‪Contemporary Conflicts: A Global Survey of High and Lower Intensity Conflict and‬‬
‫)‪Serious Disputes, 7 PIOOM Newsletter and Progress Report 14 (Winter 1995‬‬
‫‪(Interdisciplinary Research Program on Causes of Human Rights violations, Leiden, The‬‬
‫‪Netherlands), and Study, 6 PIOOM Newsletter 17 (1994); Alex P. Schmid, Early‬‬
‫‪Warning of Violent Conflicts: Casual Approaches, in Violent Crime & Conflicts 47‬‬
‫‪(ISPAC 1997); PIOOM World Conflict Map 1994-1995, 7 PIOOM Newsletter, supra.‬‬

‫ﻣﺤﻤﻮد ﺷﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ‪ ،‬اﻟﺒﺤﺚ ﻋﻦ اﻟﺴﻼم وﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ اﻟﻌﺪل‪ 59 ،‬اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن وﻗﻀﺎﻳﺎ ﻣﻌﺎﺻﺮة‪10 ,9.‬‬
‫)‪(1996‬؛ اﻧﻈﺮ أﻳﻀﺎ داﻧﻴﺎل ﺷﻴﺮوت‪ ،‬اﻟﻄﻐﺎة اﻟﻤﻌﺎﺻﺮون‪ :‬اﻟﻘﻮة واﻧﺘﺸﺎر اﻟﺸﺮ ﻓﻰ ﻋﺼﺮﻧﺎ‬
‫)‪ .(1994‬ﺑﻴﻴﺮ هﺎﺳﻨﺮ‪ :‬اﻟﻌﻨﻒ واﻟﺴﻼم‪ :‬ﻣﻦ اﻟﻘﻨﺒﻠﺔ اﻟﻨﻮوﻳﺔ إﻟﻰ اﻟﺘﻄﻬﻴﺮ اﻟﻌﺮﻗﻰ )‪(1995‬؛‬
‫رودﻟﻒ ﺟﻴﻪ روﻣﻞ‪ ،‬اﻟﻘﺘﻞ ﻣﻦ ﻗﺒﻞ اﻟﺤﻜﻮﻣﺔ )‪ .(1994‬اﻧﻈﺮ أﻳﻀﺎ إﻳﺮﻳﻚ هﻮﺑﺴﺒﺎوم‪ ،‬ﻋﺼﺮ‬
‫اﻟﺘﻄﺮف‪ :‬ﺗﺎرﻳﺦ اﻟﻌﺎﻟﻢ‪(1995) 1991–1914،‬؛ اﻧﻈﺮ آﺘﺐ اﻟﻌﺎم ﺳﻴﺒﺮى ‪ .1996–1975‬و ﻗﺪ‬
‫ﺗﻢ ﺗﺴﺠﻴﻞ دراﺳﺘﻴﻦ ﺑﻤﺠﻠﺔ ‪ PIOOM Newsletter and Progress report‬ﻓﻰ ‪ 1994‬و ‪:1995‬‬
‫أ‪.‬ج‪ .‬ﺟﻮﻧﺠﻤﺎن و أ‪ .‬ب‪ .‬ﺷﻤﻴﺪ‪ ،‬اﻟﺼﺮاﻋﺎت اﻟﻤﻌﺎﺻﺮة‪ :‬ﺣﺼﺮ دوﻟﻰ ﻟﻠﻤﺴﺘﻮﻳﺎت اﻟﺪﻧﻴﺎ واﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻣﻦ‬
‫اﻟﺼﺮاﻋﺎت واﻟﻤﻨﺎزﻋﺎت اﻟﺨﻄﻴﺮة‪) 14 PIOOM Newsletter and Progress report 7 ،‬ﺷﺘﺎء‬
‫‪ ) (1995‬ﻧﻈﻢ اﻟﺒﺮﻧﺎﻣﺞ اﻟﺒﺤﺜﻰ ﺣﻮل أﺳﺒﺎب اﻧﺘﻬﺎآﺎت ﺣﻘﻮق اﻹﻧﺴﺎن‪ ،‬ﻟﻴﺪن‪ ،‬هﻮﻟﻨﺪا(‪ ،‬ودراﺳﺔ‬
‫‪(1994) 17 PIOOM Newsletter 6‬؛ أﻟﻴﻜﺲ ﺑﻰ‪ .‬ﺷﻤﻴﺪ‪ ،‬إﻧﺬار ﻣﺒﻜﺮ ﻟﻠﺼﺮاﻋﺎت اﻟﻌﻨﻴﻔﺔ‪ :‬ﻣﺪﺧﻞ‬
‫ﻋﻤﻠﻰ‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ ﻣﺠﻠﺔ ﺟﺮﻳﻤﺔ اﻟﻌﻨﻒ واﻟﺼﺮاﻋﺎت ‪(1997) 47‬؛ ‪ PIOOM‬ﺧﺮﻳﻄﺔ اﻟﺼﺮاع اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ‬
‫‪ PIOOM 7 ،1995–1994‬ﺳﺎﺑﻘًﺎ‪.‬‬
‫‪2‬‬
‫‪( ) See supra note 1.‬‬
‫اﻧﻈﺮ هﺎﻣﺶ ‪.1‬‬
‫)‪(3) M. Cherif Bassiouni, Impunity for International Crimes, 71 U. COLO. L. REV. 409 (2000‬‬

‫ﻣﺤﻤ ﻮد ﺷ ﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺴ ﻴﻮﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﻣﻮاﻧ ﻊ اﻟﻌﻘ ﺎب ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ‪ 71 ،‬ﻣﺠﻠ ﺔ ﺟﺎﻣﻌ ﺔ آﻠ ﻮرادو‬
‫اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮﻧﻴﺔ‪.(2000) 409.‬‬
‫‪(4) See M. Cherif Bassiouni, Sources of International Criminal Law, in 1 INTERNATIONAL‬‬
‫‪CRIMINAL LAW 38-46, 62-81 (M. Cherif Bassiouni ed., 2d ed. 1999)[AICL”].‬‬

‫‪7‬‬

‫ اﻟﻌﺒﻮدﻳﺔ واﻟﻤﻤﺎرﺳﺎت اﻟﻤﺮﺗﺒﻄ ﺔ‬،‫ ﺟﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺤﺮب‬،‫ ﺟﺮاﺋﻢ ﺿﺪ اﻹﻧﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ‬،‫اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ‬
‫ وﺑ ﺪﻻ ﻣ ﻦ أن ﺗﻘ ﻮم‬.‫ ﻗ ﺪ اﻧﺘﺸ ﺮت ﻓ ﻰ ﺟﻤﻴ ﻊ أرﺟ ﺎء اﻟﻤﻌﻤ ﻮرة‬،‫ﺑﻬ ﺎ واﻟﺘﻌ ﺬﻳﺐ‬
‫ ﻓﺈﻧﻬ ﺎ‬،‫اﻟﺤﻜﻮﻣ ﺎت ﺑﻤﻨ ﻊ واﻟﺤ ﺪ ﻣ ﻦ ﺗﻠ ﻚ اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﻤﺄﺳ ﺎوﻳﺔ وﻣﺘﺎﺑﻌ ﺔ ﺗﻨﻔﻴ ﺬ اﻟﻌﺪاﻟ ﺔ‬
‫ ﺑ ﻞ وﻓ ﻰ أﺣ ﻮال أﺧ ﺮى‬،‫وﻟﻸﺳﻒ اﺳﺘﻤﺮت ﺳﻠﺒﻴﺔ وﺑﻼ ﺗﻐﻴﻴﺮ ﻓ ﻰ ﻣﻌﻈ ﻢ اﻷﺣ ﻮال‬
.(5)‫ﻣﺴﺎﻧﺪة ﻟﺘﻠﻚ اﻻﻧﺘﻬﺎآﺎت‬
‫ وﺑ ﺪﻻ ﻣ ﻦ ﺗﻮﺟﻴ ﻪ اﻻﺗﻬ ﺎم ﻟﻤﺮﺗﻜﺒ ﻰ ﺗﻠ ﻚ اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻓﻘ ﺪ‬،‫ﺑﻨﺎء ﻋﻠﻰ ذﻟ ﻚ‬
de ‫ أو ﺑﺤﻜ ﻢ اﻟﻘ ﺎﻧﻮن‬defacto ‫أﻓﺎد ﻣﻌﻈﻤﻬﻢ ﻣﻦ ﻣﻮاﻧﻊ اﻟﻌﻘﺎب ﺳﻮاء ﺑﺤﻜ ﻢ اﻟﻮاﻗ ﻊ‬
‫( ورﻏ ﻢ ذﻟ ﻚ ﻓﻘ ﺪ أﺑ ﺪى اﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤ ﻊ اﻟﻤ ﺪﻧﻰ اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ ﻣﻌﺎرﺿ ﺔ ﻣﺘﺼ ﺎﻋﺪة إزاء‬6)jure
–38 ‫ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻰ اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ‬،‫ ﻣﺼﺎدر اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻰ اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ‬،‫اﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﺤﻤﻮد ﺷﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ‬
.[ ICL] (1999 ،‫ اﻹﺻﺪار اﻟﺜﺎﻧﻰ‬،‫ )ﻣﺤﻤﻮد ﺷﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ‬81–62 ،46
‫ وﻧﻜﺜ ﻪ ﻟﻌﻬ ﺪﻩ "ﻟﻌ ﺪم ﺗﻜ ﺮار‬،‫ﻻ ﺻ ﺎرﺧًﺎ ﻟﺴ ﻠﺒﻴﺔ اﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤ ﻊ اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ‬
ً ‫( ﺗﻌﺪ اﻹﺑﺎدة اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ ﺑﺮواﻧ ﺪا ﻣﺜ ﺎ‬5)
‫ ﻓ ﺈن‬،1994 ‫ وﺑﺮﻏﻢ اﻧﻌﻘﺎد اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﻓﻰ ﺑﺪاﻳﺎت اﻹﺑ ﺎدة واﻟﺘ ﻰ ﻇﻬ ﺮت ﻓ ﻰ ﻋ ﺎم‬."‫ذﻟﻚ ﻣﺮة أﺧﺮى‬
‫ أزﻣ ﺔ‬،‫ ﺟﻴ ﺮارد ﺑﺮوﻧﻴ ﺮ‬:‫ اﻧﻈ ﺮ ﻋﻤﻮ ًﻣ ﺎ‬.‫اﻟﻌ ﺎﻟﻢ ﻗ ﺪ ﺷ ﺎهﺪ اﻟﻤﺠ ﺰرة آﺎﻣﻠ ﺔ ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﻣ ﺪار ﻋ ﺎم آﺎﻣ ﻞ‬
‫ ﻧ ﻮد إﺧﺒ ﺎرك ﺑﺄﻧﻨ ﺎ ﺳ ﻮف ﻧﻘﺘ ﻞ ﻏ ﺪا‬،‫( ﻓﻴﻠﻴ ﺐ ﺟ ﻮرﻳﻔﻴﺘﺶ‬1997) ‫ ﺗﺎرﻳﺦ اﻹﺑﺎدة اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﻴ ﺔ‬:‫رواﻧﺪا‬
(1999 ‫ ﻳﻨ ﺎﻳﺮ‬1 ،‫ اﻟﺘﻠﻴﻔﺰﻳﻮﻧﻴﺔ‬PBS ‫ اﻧﺘﺼﺎر اﻟﺸﺮ )ﺑﺚ ﻗﻨﺎة‬:Frontline ‫(؛‬1998) ‫ﺻﺤﺒﺔ ﻋﺎﺋﻼﺗﻨﺎ‬
.(‫)إﻋﺎدة ﺣﺴﺎب اﻟﺴﻠﺒﻴﺔ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ ﻓﻰ أﺛﻨﺎء اﻹﺑﺎدة اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ ﺑﺮواﻧﺪا‬
(6) De facto impunity may occur either when the failure to investigate or prosecute is
intentional, though not sanctioned by law, or when a legal system is unable to meet its
obligations to investigate and prosecute. In some instances, a given state may be willing
but unable to carry out investigation and prosecution. This may occur in the aftermath
of conflict, when states are faced with many competing priorities. In these situations,
governments often fail to prioritize effective criminal justice and limit resources for
prosecutions or fail to ensure that positions are staffed with competent professionals
who pursue their functions with diligence and ethics. Thus, states without functioning
judicial systems impede the goals of international civil society to provide accountability
and justice. De jure impunity occurs when any of a number of appropriate
accountability mechanisms are preempted by the granting of amnesties or like measures.
These may include blanket amnesties covering a given period of time or applying to a
given group of persons or may be specifically given to an individual. The following
accountability mechanisms have been employed in the resolution of conflicts:
international prosecutions, international investigatory commissions, national
investigatory and truth commissions, national prosecutions, lustration mechanisms, civil
remedies, mechanisms for victim compensation. See Bassiouni, Searching for Peace,
supra note 1, at 18-22. It should also be noted that de jure impunity also can result
when a state selects an inappropriate accountability mechanism, given the nature of the
violation. This is especially true when the selection of a particular mechanism excludes
all other forms. Thus, for example, a state may be fostering a policy of impunity if it
opts for a truth commission as an accountability mechanism for genocide with an
absolute bar on prosecution. Cumbersome legal procedures or inadequate periods of
limitations that operate to frustrate prosecution or civil claims for damages are further
examples.

8

‫ﻣ ﻨﺢ ﻣﻨ ﻊ اﻟﻌﻘ ﺎب‪ ،‬ﺧﺎﺻ ﺔ ﻟﻠﻘ ﺎدة اﻟ ﺬﻳﻦ أﺻ ﺪروا اﻷواﻣ ﺮ ﺑﺎرﺗﻜ ﺎب ﺗﻠ ﻚ اﻟﻔﻈ ﺎﺋﻊ‬
‫وآﺬﻟﻚ اﻟﻀﺒﺎط اﻟﻤﺴﺆوﻟﻴﻦ ﻋﻦ ﺗﻨﻔﻴﺬ ه ﺬﻩ اﻷواﻣ ﺮ ﻏﻴ ﺮ اﻟﻤﺸ ﺮوﻋﺔ‪ .‬وﻧﺘﻴﺠ ﺔ ﻟﻬ ﺬﻩ‬
‫اﻟﻤﻌﺎرﺿﺔ ﺑﺪأت ﺑﻌﺾ اﻻﺗﻬﺎﻣﺎت ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﻟﻤﺮﺗﻜﺒﻰ هﺬﻩ اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ)‪.(7‬‬
‫ﻣﺎﻧﻊ اﻟﻌﻘﺎب ﺑﺤﻜﻢ اﻟﻮاﻗﻊ ﻗ ﺪ ﻳﻄ ﺮأ ﺳ ﻮاء ﻋﻨ ﺪﻣﺎ ﻳ ﺘﻢ إﻓﺸ ﺎل اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻘ ﺎت واﻻدﻋ ﺎء ﻋﻤ ﺪاً‪ ،‬رﻏ ﻢ أﻧ ﻪ‬
‫ﻏﻴ ﺮ ﻣﻌﺎﻗ ﺐ ﻋﻠﻴ ﻪ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻧ ﺎً‪ ،‬أو ﻋﻨ ﺪﻣﺎ ﻳﻜ ﻮن اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻟﻘﻀ ﺎﺋﻰ ﻏﻴ ﺮ ﻗ ﺎدر ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟﻮﻓ ﺎء ﺑﺎﻟﺘﺰاﻣﺎﺗ ﻪ‬
‫اﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ واﻻدﻋﺎء‪ .‬ﻓﻔﻰ ﺑﻌﺾ اﻟﺤﺎﻻت‪ ،‬ﻗﺪ ﺗﻜﻮن اﻟﺪوﻟﺔ راﻏﺒﺔ وﻟﻜﻨﻬ ﺎ ﻏﻴ ﺮ ﻗ ﺎدرة ﻋﻠ ﻰ‬
‫ﻣﺒﺎﺷﺮة اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎت واﻻدﻋﺎء‪ .‬وهﺬﻩ اﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺗﻈﻬﺮ ﺑﻌﺪ اﻧﺘﻬﺎء ﻧ ﺰاع‪ ،‬ﻋﻨ ﺪﻣﺎ ﺗﻮاﺟ ﻪ اﻟ ﺪول ﺑﺄوﻟﻮﻳ ﺎت‬
‫ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ‪ .‬ﻓﻔﻰ هﺬﻩ اﻟﻈﺮوف ﻏﺎﻟﺒًﺎ ﻣﺎ ﺗﻔﺸﻞ اﻟﺤﻜﻮﻣﺎت ﻓﻰ وﺿ ﻊ اﻟﻌﺪاﻟ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﻔﻌﺎﻟ ﺔ وﻣﺼ ﺎدر‬
‫اﻻدﻋ ﺎء اﻟﻤﺤ ﺪودة ﻟ ﺪﻳﻬﺎ ﺿ ﻤﻦ= =أوﻟﻮﻳﺎﺗﻬ ﺎ أو ﺗﻌﺠ ﺰ ﻋ ﻦ ﺗ ﻮﻓﻴﺮ اﻟﻜ ﻮادر اﻟﻼزﻣ ﺔ ﻟﺸ ﻐﻞ ﺗﻠ ﻚ‬
‫اﻟﻮﻇﺎﺋﻒ اﻟﻘﻀﺎﺋﻴﺔ وﻣﺒﺎﺷﺮة ﻣﻬﺎﻣﻬﺎ ﺑﺠﺪ وإﺧﻼص‪ .‬وهﻜ ﺬا‪ ،‬ﻓ ﺈن اﻟ ﺪول اﻟﺘ ﻰ ﺑ ﺪون ﻧﻈ ﻢ ﻗﻀ ﺎﺋﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻓﻌﺎﻟﺔ ﺗﺘﻌﺎرض ﻣ ﻊ أه ﺪاف اﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤ ﻊ اﻟﻤ ﺪﻧﻰ اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ ﻓ ﻰ ﺗ ﻮﻓﻴﺮ اﻟﻤﺴ ﺆوﻟﻴﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ واﻟﻌﺪاﻟ ﺔ‪ .‬أﻣ ﺎ‬
‫ﻣﺎﻧﻊ اﻟﻌﻘﺎب ﺑﺤﻜﻢ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن ﻓﻴﻈﻬﺮ ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ﻳﺘﻢ ﺗﻔﻀﻴﻞ ﻣﻨﺢ اﻟﻌﻔﻮ وﻣﺎ ﺷﺎﺑﻬﻪ ﻣ ﻦ إﺟ ﺮاءات ﻋﻠ ﻰ أى‬
‫ﻋﺪد ﻣﻼﺋﻢ ﻣﻦ وﺳ ﺎﺋﻞ اﻟﻤﺴ ﺆوﻟﻴﺔ‪ .‬وه ﺬﻩ اﻹﺟ ﺮاءات ﻗ ﺪ ﺗﻀ ﻢ ﻏﻄ ﺎء ﻣ ﻦ اﻹﻋﻔ ﺎءات ﺗﺸ ﻤﻞ ﻓﺘ ﺮة‬
‫زﻣﻨﻴ ﺔ ﻣﺤ ﺪدة أو ﺗﻄﺒ ﻖ ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋ ﺔ ﻣ ﻦ اﻷﺷ ﺨﺎص أو ﺷ ﺨﺺ ﻣﺤ ﺪد ﺑﺬاﺗ ﻪ‪ .‬ﻟﻘ ﺪ اﺳ ﺘﺨﺪﻣﺖ‬
‫وﺳ ﺎﺋﻞ اﻟﻤﺴ ﺆوﻟﻴﺔ اﻵﺗﻴ ﺔ ﻓ ﻰ ﺣ ﻞ اﻟﻤﻨﺎزﻋ ﺎت‪:‬اﻻدﻋ ﺎء اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ‪ ،‬ﻟﺠ ﺎن اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ‪ ،‬ﻟﺠ ﺎن‬
‫اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ وﺗﻘﺼ ﻰ اﻟﺤﻘ ﺎﺋﻖ اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻴ ﺔ‪ ،‬اﻻدﻋ ﺎء اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻰ‪،‬ﺁﻟﻴ ﺎت اﻟﺘﺼ ﻔﻴﺔ‪ ،‬اﻟﺘﻌ ﻮﻳﺾ اﻟﻤ ﺪﻧﻰ‪،‬ﺁﻟﻴﺎت‬
‫ﺗﻌﻮﻳﺾ اﻟﻤﺠﻨﻰ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﻢ‪ .‬اﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ‪ ،‬اﻟﺒﺤ ﺚ ﻋ ﻦ اﻟﺴ ﻼم‪ ،‬ه ﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 1‬ﻓﻴﻤ ﺎ ﺳ ﺒﻖ ص ‪.22 - 18‬‬
‫واﻟﺠﺪﻳﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺬآﺮ أن ﻣﺎﻧﻊ اﻟﻌﻘﺎب ﺑﺤﻜﻢ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن ﻗﺪ ﻳﻨﺸﺄ أﻳﻀًﺎ ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ﺗﻨﺘﻘﻰ اﻟﺪوﻟﺔ وﺳ ﻴﻠﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﺴ ﺆوﻟﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﻼﺋﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻘﺎرﻧﺔ ﻣﻊ اﻻﻧﺘﻬﺎك اﻟﺬى ﺗﻢ‪ .‬وهﺬا اﻟﻘ ﻮل ﺻ ﺤﻴﺢ ﺧﺎﺻ ﺔ ﻋﻨ ﺪﻣﺎ ﻳﻜ ﻮن ﻓ ﻰ اﻧﺘﻘ ﺎء‬
‫وﺳﻴﻠﺔ ﻣﺤﺪدة ﻣﻊ اﺳﺘﺒﻌﺎد ﻟﺒﺎﻗﻰ اﻷﺷﻜﺎل اﻷﺧﺮى‪ .‬وﻣﻦ هﺬا اﻟﻘﺒﻴﻞ ﺗﺒﻨﻰ دوﻟﺔ ﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳ ﺔ ﻣﻨ ﻊ اﻟﻌﻘ ﺎب‬
‫ﻋﻨﺪ اﺧﺘﻴﺎرهﺎ ﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ آﻮﺳﻴﻠﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﺴﺆوﻟﻴﺔ ﻋﻦ ﺟﺮﻳﻤﺔ اﻹﺑﺎدة اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ ﻣ ﻊ وﺟ ﻮد ﺣﺎﺋ ﻞ أآﻴ ﺪ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤﺤﺎآﻤ ﺔ‪ .‬وﻣ ﻦ اﻷﻣﺜﻠ ﺔ اﻷﺧ ﺮى‪ ،‬ﻋﺮﻗﻠ ﺔ اﻹﺟ ﺮاءات اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮﻧﻴ ﺔ أو اﺧﺘﻴ ﺎر ﻓﺘ ﺮات ﻏﻴ ﺮ ﻣﻼﺋﻤ ﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻠﺘﺤﺪﻳﺪ واﻟﺘﻰ ﺗﺴﻴﺮ ﻟﻜﻰ ﺗﺤﻮل دون اﻻدﻋﺎء أو اﻟﺪﻋﺎوى اﻟﻤﺪﻧﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﻌﻮﻳﺾ ﻋﻦ اﻷﺿﺮار‪.‬‬
‫‪(7) For example, the indictment of former and current leaders such as: (a) Augusto Pinochet‬‬
‫‪of Chile, see Regina v. Bartle and the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and‬‬
‫‪others, ex parte, Pinochet; Regina v. Evans and another and the Commissioner of Police‬‬
‫;‪for the Metropolis and others, ex parte, Pinochet, House of Lords, 24 March 1999‬‬
‫‪Warren Hoge, British Court Rules Pinochet Extraditable for Trial in Spain, N.Y. TIMES,‬‬
‫‪Oct. 8, 1999 (however, he was ultimately not extradited to stand trial in Spain when the‬‬
‫‪British Home Secretary found him to be too ill and allowed his return to Chile). On 8‬‬
‫‪August 2000, the Chilean Supreme Court announced its 14-6 decision to affirm the‬‬
‫‪Corte de Apelaciones’ decision to strip Pinochet of his immunity, thereby subjecting‬‬
‫‪him to trial and opening up the possibility of accountability for the 154 civil charges he‬‬
‫‪faces; (b) Slobodan Milosevic of Serbia, see Indictment of Slobodan Milosevic, No. IT‬‬‫‪99-93-I (24 May 99)(violations of the laws and customs of war and crimes against‬‬
‫‪humanity)(it should be noted however that he was not indicted prior to the Kosovo‬‬
‫‪conflict as a result of the Dayton Peace Accords); (c) Radovan Karadzic of the former‬‬
‫‪Republika Srpska in Bosnia, see Indictments of Radovan Karadzic, Nos. IT-95-18-1-I‬‬
‫‪(25 Jul. 95); IT-9505-I (16 Nov. 95)(Srebrenica)(grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva‬‬

‫‪9‬‬

‫ﻟﻘــ ـﺪ أدت اﻟﻤﻄﺎﻟﺒــ ـﺔ ﺑﺘﻄﺒــ ـﻴﻖ اﻟﻌﺪاﻟــ ـﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴــ ـﺔ ﻣﻨــ ـﺬ اﻧﺘﻬ ﺎء اﻟﺤ ﺮب‬
‫اﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﻴــﺔ اﻷوﻟ ﻰ إﻟــ ـﻰ إﻧﺸــ ـﺎء ﺧﻤــ ـﺲ ﻟﺠــ ـﺎن ﺗﺤﻘـــ ـﻴﻖ دوﻟــﻴــ ـﺔ)‪ (8‬وأرﺑــ ـﻊ‬
‫‪Conventions, violations of the laws and customs of war, genocide, and crimes against‬‬
‫‪humanity); (d) Habre Hissene, see Norimitsu Onishi, An African Dictator Faces Trial in‬‬
‫‪His Place of Refuge, N.Y. TIMES, March 1, 2000, at A3. (The former dictator of Chad‬‬
‫‪was arrested on charges of torture in Dakar, Senegal where he had been living in exile‬‬
‫=‪since his regime was toppled in 1990); and (e) Foday Sankoh and other members of the‬‬
‫‪=Revolutionary United Front (RUF), see UN SCOR, 4186th mtg., U.N. Doc‬‬
‫‪S/RES/1314 (2000) (The rebel leader and other members of the RUF could face‬‬
‫‪prosecution if an independent court is created as requested by the Security Council).‬‬

‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺳﺒﻴﻞ اﻟﻤﺜﺎل‪ ،‬ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ اﻻﺗﻬﺎم ﻟﺒﻌﺾ اﻟﻘﺎدة اﻟﺤﺎﻟﻴﻴﻦ واﻟﺴﺎﺑﻘﻴﻦ ﻣﺜﻞ‪) :‬أ( أوﺟﻮﺳﺘﻮ ﺑﻴﻨﻮﺷﻴﻪ‬
‫زﻋﻴﻢ ﺷﻴﻠﻰ‪ ،‬اﻧﻈﺮ رﺟﻴﻨﺎ ﺿﺪ ﺑﺎرﺗﻴﻞ وﻣﻔﺘﺶ اﻟﺸﺮﻃﺔ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﺪﻳﻨﺔ وﺁﺧﺮﻳﻦ‪ ،‬وﻣﻦ ﺟﺎﻧﺐ واﺣﺪ‪،‬‬
‫ﺑﻴﻨﻮﺷﻴﻪ؛ رﺟﻴﻨﺎ ﺿﺪ إﻳﻔﺎﻧﺰ وأﺧﺮ ﻣﺠﻠﺲ اﻟﻠﻮردات‪ 24 ،‬ﻣﺎرس ‪1999‬؛ وارﻳﻦ هﻮج‪ ،‬ﺣﻜﻢ‬
‫اﻟﻘﻀﺎء اﻟﺒﺮﻳﻄﺎﻧﻰ ﺑﺈﻣﻜﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﺗﺴﻠﻴﻢ ﺑﻴﻨﻮﺷﻴﻪ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﺎآﻤﺔ ﻓﻰ أﺳﺒﺎﻧﻴﺎ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﻮﻳﻮرك ﺗﺎﻳﻤﺰ‪ 8 ،‬أآﺘﻮﺑﺮ‬
‫‪) 1999‬ورﻏﻢ ذﻟﻚ ﻓﺈﻧﻪ ﻟﻢ ﻳﺴﻠﻢ ﻣﻄﻠﻘًﺎ ﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻤﺘﻪ ﻓﻰ أﺳﺒﺎﻧﻴﺎ ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ﻗﺮر وزﻳﺮ اﻟﺪاﺧﻠﻴﺔ اﻟﺒﺮﻳﻄﺎﻧﻰ‬
‫أﻧﻪ ﻣﺮﻳﺾ وﺣﺎﻟﺘﻪ اﻟﺼﺤﻴﺔ ﻻ ﺗﺴﻤﺢ ﺑﺬﻟﻚ وﺳﻤﺢ ﻟﻪ ﺑﺎﻟﻌﻮدة إﻟﻰ ﺷﻴﻠﻰ(‪ .‬ﻓﻰ ‪ 8‬أﻏﺴﻄﺲ ‪2000‬‬
‫أﻋﻠﻨﺖ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﻓﻰ ﺷﻴﻠﻰ ﺣﻜﻤﻬﺎ )‪14‬ــ‪ (6‬ﺗﺄﻳﻴﺪ ﻗﺮار اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺑﺮﻓﻊ اﻟﺤﺼﺎﻧﺔ ﻋﻦ ﺑﻴﻨﻮﺷﻴﻪ‪،‬‬
‫وﻣﻦ ﺛﻢ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻀﻪ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﺎآﻤﺔ وﻓﺘﺢ اﻟﻤﺠﺎل أﻣﺎم ﻣﺴﺌﻮﻟﻴﺘﻪ ﻋﻦ ‪ 154‬دﻋﻮى ﻣﺪﻧﻴﺔ ﻣﺮﻓﻮﻋﺔ ﺿﺪﻩ‪،‬‬
‫اﻧﻈﺮ‪:‬‬
‫‪El-Mercurio Electronico, Corte Suprema desfaro a pinochet por 14-6 , at‬‬
‫‪http : //www. Elmercurio. Cl/ noticias/ detalle noticia.asp?= 28769(8 August 2000).‬‬

‫)ب( ﺳﻠﻮﺑﻮدان ﻣﻴﻠﻮﺳﻮﻓﻴﺘﺶ زﻋﻴﻢ اﻟﺼﺮب‪ ،‬اﻧﻈﺮ ﺗﻮﺟﻴﻪ اﻻﺗﻬﺎم ﻟﺴﻠﻮﺑﻮدان ﻣﻴﻠﻮﺳ ﻮﻓﻴﺘﺶ‪،‬‬
‫‪ 24) IT-99-93-1‬ﻣ ﺎ ﻳ ﻮ ‪) (1999‬اﻧﺘﻬﺎآ ﺎت ﻗ ﻮاﻧﻴﻦ وأﻋ ﺮاف اﻟﺤ ﺮب وﺟ ﺮاﺋﻢ ﺿ ﺪ اﻹﻧﺴ ﺎﻧﻴﺔ(‬
‫)واﻟﺠﺪﻳﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﺬآﺮ أﻧﻪ ﻟﻢ ﻳﺘﻢ ﺗﻮﺟـــﻴﻪ اﻻﺗﻬــﺎم إﻟﻴــﻪ ﻗﺒــﻞ اﻟﻨﺰاع ﻓﻰ آﻮﺳﻮﻓﻮ وﻓﻘًﺎ ﻟﻤﻌﺎه ﺪة داﻳﺘ ﻮن‬
‫ﻟﻠﺴﻼم( ؛‬
‫)ج( رادوﻓﺎن آﺮازادﻳﺘﺶ زﻋﻴﻢ ﺟﻤﻬﻮرﻳ ﺔ ﺻﺮﺑﻴﺴ ﻜﺎ اﻟﺴ ﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﺒﻮﺳ ﻨﻪ‪ ،‬اﻧﻈ ﺮ ﺗﻮﺟﻴ ﻪ اﻻﺗﻬ ﺎم‬
‫ﻟﺮادوﻓ ﺎن آ ﺮازادﻳﺘﺶ‪Nos .IT-95-18-1-1(25 Jul.95) IT. –9505-1(16Nov. ) (Serbrenica) ،‬‬
‫)اﻻﻧﺘﻬﺎآ ﺎت اﻟﻜﺒ ﺮى ﻻﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴ ﺎت ﺟﻨﻴ ﻒ ﻟﻌ ﺎم ‪ ،1949‬اﻧﺘﻬﺎآ ﺎت ﻗ ﻮاﻧﻴﻦ وأﻋ ﺮاف اﻟﺤ ﺮب واﻹﺑ ﺎدة‬
‫اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ وﺟﺮاﺋﻢ ﺿﺪ اﻹﻧﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ(؛ د‪ .‬ﺣﺴﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﺑﺮى‪ ،‬اﻧﻈﺮ ﻧﻮرﻳﻤﻴﺘﺴﻮ أوﻧﺸﻰ‪ ،‬دﻳﻜﺘ ﺎﺗﻮر أﻓﺮﻳﻘ ﻰ‬
‫ﻳﻮاﺟﻪ اﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻤﺔ ﻓﻰ ﻣﺤﻞ ﻟﺠﻮﺋﻪ‪ ،‬ﻧﻴﻮﻳﻮرك ﺗ ﺎﻳﻤﺰ‪ 1 ،‬ﻣ ﺎرس ‪ 2000‬ﻓ ﻰ ‪0 A3‬أﻟﻘ ﻰ اﻟﻘ ﺒﺾ ﻋﻠ ﻰ‬
‫اﻟ ﺪﻳﻜﺘﺎﺗﻮر اﻷﺳ ﺒﻖ ﻟﺘﺸ ﺎد ﺑﺘﻬﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺘﻌ ﺬﻳﺐ ﻓ ﻰ داآ ﺎر ﺑﺎﻟﺴ ﻨﻐﺎل ﺣﻴ ﺚ آ ﺎن ﻳﻘ ﻴﻢ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻤﻨﻔ ﻰ ﻣﻨ ﺬ‬
‫اﻹﻃﺎﺣﺔ ﺑﻨﻈﺎﻣﻪ ﻓﻰ ‪.(1990‬‬
‫‪No.‬‬

‫‪(8 ) The five international investigative commissions are: (1) The 1919 Commission on the‬‬
‫‪Responsibilities of Authors of War and on the Enforcement of Penalties; (2) The 1943‬‬
‫)‪United Nations War Crimes Commission; (3) The 1946 Far Eastern Commission; (4‬‬
‫‪The 1992 Commission of Experts Established Pursuant to Security Council Resolution‬‬
‫‪780 (1992) to Investigate War Crimes and other Violations of International‬‬
‫‪Humanitarian Law in the Former Yugoslavia; and (5) The 1994 Independent‬‬
‫)‪Commission of Experts Established Pursuant to Security Council Resolution 935 (1994‬‬

‫‪10‬‬

‫ﻣﺤﺎآـــﻢ دوﻟﻴﺔ ﺧﺎﺻﺔ)‪ .(9‬ﺗﻠﻚ اﻟﻤﺆﺳﺴﺎت اﺳﺘﻔﺎدت ﻣﻦ دﻋﻢ اﻟﺤﻜﻮﻣ ﺎت اﻟﻤﺪﻓﻮﻋ ﺔ‬
‫ﺑﺄهﻤﻴ ﺔ اﻟﻘ ﻴﻢ اﻹﻧﺴ ﺎﻧﻴﺔ وآ ﺬﻟﻚ اﻟﺤﻜﻮﻣ ﺎت اﻟﺘ ﻰ أدرآ ﺖ أهﻤﻴ ﺔ وﺟ ﻮد ﺁﻟﻴ ﺎت‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤﺴﺆوﻟﻴﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ آﻮﺳ ﻴﻠﺔ ﻟﻠﺤﻔ ﺎظ ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ وﻹﻋ ﺎدة اﻟﺴ ﻼم‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﻠ ﻚ اﻟﺘﻄ ﻮرات ﺗﻌﻜ ﺲ ﻇﻬ ﻮر اﻟﻤﺴ ﺆوﻟﻴﺔ واﻟﻌﺪاﻟ ﺔ آﻘ ﻴﻢ دوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻣﻌﺘ ﺮف ﺑﻬ ﺎ أو‬
‫ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺎت ﺿﺮورﻳﺔ ﻟﻠﺤﻔﺎظ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ وإﻋﺎدة اﻟﺴﻼم)‪.(10‬‬
‫وﻣ ﻊ ذﻟ ﻚ ﻓ ﺈن ﻣﺒﺎﺷ ﺮة اﻟﻌﺪاﻟ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻋﻠ ﻰ أﺳ ﺎس ﻣﺤ ﺎآﻢ ﺧﺎﺻ ﺔ‬
‫ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﺮﺿﻴﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﺪر اﻟﻜﺎﻓﻰ‪ .‬وﻟﻴﺲ أدل ﻋﻠ ﻰ ذﻟ ﻚ ﻣ ﻦ أﻧ ﻪ ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟ ﺮﻏﻢ ﻣ ﻦ إﻧﺸ ﺎء‬
‫ﻣﺤ ﺎآﻢ ﻓ ﻰ أﺛﻨ ﺎء اﻟﺤ ﺮب اﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺜﺎﻧﻴ ﺔ‪ ،‬و ﺑﻤﻨﺎﺳ ﺒﺔ اﻟﻨ ﺰاع اﻟﻤﺴ ﻠﺢ ﻓ ﻰ‬
‫ﻳﻮﻏﻮﺳﻼﻓﻴﺎ اﻟﺴﺎﺑﻘﺔ واﻹﺑﺎدة اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ ﺑﺮواﻧ ﺪا‪ ،‬ﻓ ﺈن ذات اﻹﺟ ﺮاء اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ ﻟ ﻢ ﻳ ﺘﻢ‬
‫اﺗﺨ ﺎذﻩ ﺑﻌ ﺪ اﻧﺘﻬ ﺎء اﻟﻔﻈ ﺎﺋﻊ اﻟﺘ ﻰ ارﺗﻜﺒ ﺖ ﻓ ﻰ أﺛﻨ ﺎء اﻟﻨ ﺰاع ﻓ ﻰ ﺳ ﻴﺮاﻟﻴﻮن)‪ (11‬أو‬
‫‪to Investigate Grave Violations of International Humanitarian Law in the Territory of‬‬
‫‪Rwanda. See generally M. Cherif Bassiouni, From Versailles to Rwanda in Seventy‬‬‫‪Five Years: The Need to Establish a Permanent International Criminal Court, 10 HARV.‬‬
‫‪HUM. RTS. J. 11-49 (1997).‬‬

‫ﺧﻤﺲ ﻟﺠﺎن اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ هﻰ )‪ (1‬ﻟﺠﻨﺔ ‪ 1919‬اﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ ﺑﻤﺴﺆوﻟﻴﺔ اﻟﻤﺘﺴﺒﺒﻴﻦ ﻓﻰ اﻟﺤﺮب‬
‫وﺗﻨﻔﻴﺬ اﻟﻌﻘﻮﺑﺎت؛ )‪ (2‬ﻟﺠﻨﺔ اﻷﻣﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة ﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺤﺮب اﻟﻌﺎم ‪1943‬؛ )‪ (3‬ﻟﺠﻨﺔ اﻟﺸﺮق اﻷﻗﺼﻰ‬
‫ﻟﻌﺎم ‪1946‬؛ )‪ (4‬ﻟﺠﻨﺔ اﻟﺨﺒﺮاء ﻟﻌﺎم ‪ 1992‬اﻟﻤﻨﺸﺄة ﻧﻔﺎذًا ﻟﻘﺮار ﻣﺠﻠﺲ اﻷﻣﻦ رﻗﻢ ‪(1992) 780‬‬
‫ﻟﻠﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﻓﻰ ﺟﺮاﺋﻢ= =اﻟﺤﺮب واﻻﻧﺘﻬﺎآﺎت اﻷﺧﺮى ﻟﻠﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻹﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ ﻓﻰ ﻳﻮﻏﻮﺳﻼﻓﻴﺎ‬
‫اﻟﺴﺎﺑﻘﺔ؛ )‪ (5‬ﻟﺠﻨﺔ اﻟﺨﺒﺮاء اﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﻠﺔ ﻟﻌﺎم ‪ 1994‬اﻟﻤﻨﺸﺄة ﺗﻨﻔﻴﺬًا ﻟﻘﺮار ﻣﺠﻠﺲ اﻷﻣﻦ رﻗﻢ‬
‫‪ (1994)935‬ﻟﻠﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﻓﻰ اﻻﻧﺘﻬﺎآﺎت اﻟﺨﻄﻴﺮة ﻟﻠﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻹﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ ﻓﻰ أرض رواﻧﺪا‪ .‬اﻧﻈﺮ‬
‫ﺑﺼﻔﺔ ﻋﺎﻣﺔ ﻣﺤﻤﻮد ﺷﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ ﻣﻦ ﻓﺮﺳﺎى إﻟﻰ رواﻧﺪا ﻓﻰ ﺧﻤﺴﺔ وﺳﺒﻌﻴﻦ ﻋﺎﻣًﺎ‪ :‬اﻟﺤﺎﺟﺔ إﻟﻰ‬
‫إﻧﺸﺎء ﻣﺤﻜﻤﺔ دوﻟﻴﺔ داﺋﻤﺔ‪ 10 ،‬ﺟﺮﻳﺪة هﺎرﻓﺎرد ﻟﺤﻘﻮق اﻹﻧﺴﺎن ‪.(1997) 49 – 11‬‬
‫‪The four ad hoc international tribunals are: (1) The 1945 Internationl Millitary Tribunal‬‬
‫‪to Prosecute Major War Criminals of the European Theater; (2) The 1946 International‬‬
‫‪Military Tribunal to Prosecute the Major War Criminal of the Far East; (3) The 1993‬‬
‫‪Internation Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yuogoslavia; and (4) The 1994‬‬
‫‪International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. See generally Bassiouni, From Versailles‬‬
‫‪to Rwanda, supra note 8.‬‬
‫)‪(10‬‬

‫)‪(9‬‬

‫اﻧﻈﺮ ﺷﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﻣﻨﻈﻮر اﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳﺎت اﻟﺮاﻣﻴﺔ إﻟﻰ إﻧﺸﺎء ﻣﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺟﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ دوﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺟﺮﻳﺪة آﻠﻮﻣﺒﻴﺎ‬
‫ﻟﻠﺸﺌﻮن اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ ‪.(1999) 795‬‬

‫‪(11 ) Norimitsu Onishi, Survivors Sadly Say, Yes, Reward the Tormentors, N.Y. TIMES, Aug.‬‬
‫‪30, 1999, at A4.‬‬

‫ﻧﻮرﻳﻤﺴﻴﺘﻮ أوﻧﻴﺸﻰ‪ ،‬اﻟﻨﺎﺟﻮن ﻗﺎﻟﻮا ﺑﺤﺰن‪ :‬ﻧﻌﻢ‪ ،‬آﺎﻓﺌﻮا اﻟﺠﻼدﻳ ﻦ! ﻧﻴﻮﻳ ﻮرك ﺗ ﺎﻳﻤﺰ‪ 30،‬أﻏﺴ ﻄﺲ‪1999‬‬
‫ﻓﻰ‪.A4‬‬

‫‪11‬‬

‫آﻤﺒﻮدﻳ ﺎ)‪ .(12‬وﻟﺘﻔ ﺎدى ﺛﻐ ﺮات اﻟﻌﺪاﻟ ﺔ اﻟﺨﺎﺻ ﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓ ﺈن اﻟﻘﻀ ﺎء اﻟﺠﻨ ﺎﺋﻰ اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ‬
‫ﻳﻘﺘﻀﻰ وﺑﻮﺿﻮح إﻧﺸﺎء ﻗﺎﻋﺪة ﺗﻄﺒﻖ داﺋﻤﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼل ﻣﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺟﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ داﺋﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ‪:‬‬
‫ﻳﺘﺄﻟﻒ هﺬا اﻟﻜﺘﺎب ﻣﻦ ﺛﻼﺛﺔ أﺑﻮاب ﻧﻌﺮض ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼﻟﻬﺎ ﺑﺼﻮرة ﻣﻮﺟﺰة‪ ،‬ﻷه ﻢ‬
‫اﻟﺘﻄ ﻮرات اﻟﺘ ﻰ ﻟﺤﻘ ﺖ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻣﻨ ﺬ أن ﻇﻬ ﺮت ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟﺴ ﺎﺣﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻓ ﻰ ﺻ ﻴﻒ ﻋ ﺎم ‪ 1998‬آﺈﺣ ﺪى اﻟﻌﻼﻣ ﺎت اﻟﺒ ﺎرزة ﻓ ﻰ ﻃﺮﻳ ﻖ اﻟﻌﺪاﻟ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻳﺘﻨ ﺎول اﻟﺒ ﺎب اﻷول ﺑﺎﻟﺸ ﺮح واﻟﺘﻮﺿ ﻴﺢ ﻟﺨﺼ ﺎﺋﺺ وﻃﺒﻴﻌ ﺔ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻗﺒﻞ أن ﻧﻌﺮض وﺑﺸﻰء ﻣﻦ اﻟﺘﻔﺼﻴﻞ ﻟﻨﺼﻮص اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‪ .‬وﻗﺪ ﺳﺒﻖ وأن ﺗﻢ ﻧﺸ ﺮ أﺟ ﺰاء ﻣ ﻦ ه ﺬا اﻟﺒ ﺎب ﻓ ﻰ آﺘ ﺎب‬
‫اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ " ﻧﺸ ﺄﺗﻬﺎ وﻧﻈﺎﻣﻬ ﺎ اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻲ" واﻟ ﺬى ﺻ ﺪر ﻣﻨ ﻪ ﺛ ﻼث‬
‫ﻃﺒﻌﺎت ﺣﺘﻰ اﻵن‪.‬‬
‫وﻓﻰ اﻟﺒ ﺎب اﻟﺜ ﺎﻧﻰ ﻧﻌ ﺮض ﻟﻤﻮﻗ ﻒ دول اﻟﻌ ﺎﻟﻢ ﺑﻌﺎﻣ ﺔ وﻟﻠ ﺪول اﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴ ﺔ ودول‬
‫اﻟﻌﺎﻟﻢ اﻟﺜﺎﻟﺚ ﺑﺨﺎﺻﺔ ﻣﻦ اﻻﻧﻀﻤﺎم واﻟﺘﺼﺪﻳﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻴﺜﺎق روﻣﺎ‪ ،‬وذﻟﻚ ﻣﻦ ﺧ ﻼل‬
‫ﺗﻨﺎول اﻻﻋﺘﺒﺎرات واﻟﻤﺤﺎذﻳﺮ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮﻧﻴﺔ اﻟﻤﺜﺎرة ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻌ ﺎﻟﻢ اﻟﻌﺮﺑ ﻰ ﺑﺸ ﺄن اﻻﻧﻀ ﻤﺎم‬
‫إﻟ ﻰ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ‪ .‬وه ﻮ ﻣ ﺎ ﻳﺴ ﺘﺘﺒﻌﻪ ﺑﺎﻟﻀ ﺮورة ﺳ ﺮد ﻟﻠﺠﻬ ﻮد اﻟﺘ ﻰ ﺗﺒ ﺬﻟﻬﺎ اﻟﻤﻨﻈﻤ ﺎت‬
‫‪(12 ) THE UNITED NATIONS AND CAMBODIA 1991-1995 (1995); GENOCIDE AND DEMOCRACY IN‬‬
‫‪CAMBODIA: THE KHMER ROUGE, THE UNITED NATIONS, AND THE INTERNATIONAL‬‬
‫‪COMMUNITY (Ben Kiernan ed., 1993). The United Nations and Cambodia are pursuing‬‬
‫‪some semblance of a tribunal to prosecute a few of the purported leaders. See generally‬‬
‫‪Advisory Services and Technical Cooperation in the Field of Human Rights, Situation of‬‬
‫‪Human Rights in Cambodia, Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary‬‬‫‪general for Human Rights in Cambodia, Mr. Thomas Hammarberg, Submitted in‬‬
‫‪Accordance with Resolution 1999/76, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/2000/109 at para. 30-40 (13‬‬
‫= ‪Jan. 2000).‬‬

‫=اﻷﻣﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة وآﻤﺒﻮدﻳﺎ ‪ (1995) 1995 -1991‬اﻹﺑﺎدة اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ واﻟﺪﻳﻤﻮﻗﺮاﻃﻴﺔ ﻓﻰ آﻤﺒﻮدﻳﺎ‪:‬‬
‫اﻟﺨﻤﻴﺮ اﻟﺤﻤﺮ‪ ،‬اﻷﻣﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة واﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ )ﻃﺒﻌﺔ ﺑﻦ آﻴﺮﻧﺎن ‪ .(1993‬اﻷﻣﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة‬
‫وآﻤﺒﻮدﻳﺎ ﻳﺰﻣﻌﺎن إﻧﺸﺎء ﻣﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻬﺔ ﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻤﺔ ﻗﻠﺔ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻘﺎدة وﻟﻜﻦ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻮاﺿﺢ أﻧﻬﺎ ﺳﺘﻜﻮن‬
‫رﻣﺰﻳﺔ‪ .‬اﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﺼﻔﺔ ﻋﺎﻣﺔ ﺧﺪﻣﺔ اﻻﺳﺘﺸﺎرة واﻟﺘﻌﺎون اﻟﻔﻨﻰ ﻓﻰ ﻣﺠﺎل ﺣﻘﻮق اﻹﻧﺴﺎن ﻓﻰ آﻤﺒﻮدﻳﺎ‬
‫‪ ،‬ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺮ اﻟﻤﻤﺜﻞ اﻟﺨﺎص ﻟﻠﺴﻜﺮﺗﻴﺮ اﻟﻌﺎم ﻟﺤﻘﻮق اﻹﻧﺴﺎن ﻓﻰ آﻤﺒﻮدﻳﺎ ‪ ،‬اﻟﺴﻴﺪ ﺗﻮﻣﺎﺳﻬﺎﻣﺎرﺑﺮج‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﻘﺪم وﻓﻘ ًﺎ ﻟﻠﻘﺮار ‪UN Doc.E/CN.4/2000/109 at para. 30-40 (31 jan.2000). 1999/76‬‬

‫‪12‬‬

‫ﻏﻴ ﺮ اﻟﺤﻜﻮﻣﻴ ﺔ ﻣ ﻦ أﺟ ﻞ ﺣ ﺚ اﻟﺤﻜﻮﻣ ﺎت ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟﺘﺼ ﺪﻳﻖ واﻻﻧﻀ ﻤﺎم ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ‪.‬‬
‫وﻳﺄﺗﻰ ﻓﻰ ﻃﻠﻴﻌﺔ ﺗﻠﻚ اﻟﻤﻨﻈﻤﺎت واﻟﻬﻴﺌﺎت اﻟﻤﻌﻬﺪ اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ ﻟﺤﻘ ﻮق اﻹﻧﺴ ﺎن ﺑﺠﺎﻣﻌ ﺔ‬
‫دى ﺑ ﻮل‪ ،‬وآ ﺬا اﻟﻤﻌﻬ ﺪ اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ ﻟﻠﺪراﺳ ﺎت اﻟﻌﻠﻴ ﺎ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻌﻠ ﻮم اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ ﺑﺴ ﻴﺮاآﻮزا‬
‫واﻟﺬى اﺳﺘﻀﺎف اﻟﻌﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻨﺪوات واﻟﻤﺆﺗﻤﺮات اﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﺘﻮﻋﻴ ﺔ ﺑﺎﻟ ﺪور اﻟﻤﻬ ﻢ‬
‫اﻟﺬى ﺗﺆدﻳﻪ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬وﺗﻬﻴﺌﺔ اﻟﻌﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﻦ أﻋﻀ ﺎء وﻓ ﻮد دول اﻟﻌ ﺎﻟﻢ‬
‫اﻟﺜﺎﻟ ﺚ ﻟﻠﻤﺸ ﺎرآﺔ اﻟﻔﻌﺎﻟ ﺔ ﻓ ﻰ أﻋﻤ ﺎل اﻟﻠﺠ ﺎن اﻟﺘﺤﻀ ﻴﺮﻳﺔ وﻣ ﺎ ﺗﺒﻌﻬ ﺎ ﻣ ﻦ أﻋﻤ ﺎل‬
‫واﺟﺘﻤﺎﻋ ﺎت اﻟ ﺪورة اﻷوﻟ ﻰ ﻟﺠﻤﻌﻴ ﺔ اﻟ ﺪول اﻷﻃ ﺮاف‪ .‬وﻧﺸ ﺮح ﻋﻘ ﺐ ذﻟ ﻚ أﺑﻌ ﺎد‬
‫اﻟﺪور اﻟﺬى ﺗﺆدﻳﻪ اﻟﻮﻻﻳﺎت اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة اﻷﻣﺮﻳﻜﻴ ﺔ واﻟﻤﻌ ﺎرض ﻟﻔﻜ ﺮة اﻻﻧﻀ ﻤﺎم إﻟ ﻰ‬
‫اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ واﻟﺘﺄﺛﻴﺮ اﻟﺴﻠﺒﻰ ﻟﻬﺬا اﻟﺪور واﻟﻤﺘﻤﺜ ﻞ ﻓ ﻰ ﻋﻘ ﺪ اﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴ ﺎت ﺛﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ ﻣ ﻊ اﻟﻌﺪﻳ ﺪ‬
‫ﻣ ﻦ دول اﻟﻌ ﺎﻟﻢ ﺑﻬ ﺪف ﻣﻨ ﻊ ﻣﻼﺣﻘ ﺔ ﻣﻮاﻃﻨﻴﻬ ﺎ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻤﺴ ﺘﻘﺒﻞ ﻣ ﻦ ﻗﺒ ﻞ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ‪ ،‬واﻟﺘﺸ ﺮﻳﻌﺎت اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺘ ﻰ أﺻ ﺪرﺗﻬﺎ ﻓ ﻰ ه ﺬا اﻟﻤﻀ ﻤﺎر‪ ،‬وﻓ ﻰ‬
‫اﻟﻤﻘﺎﺑ ﻞ ﻧﻌ ﺮض ﻟ ﺮدود أﻓﻌ ﺎل اﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤ ﻊ اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ ﺳ ﻮاء اﻟﺘﻜ ﺘﻼت اﻹﻗﻠﻴﻤﻴ ﺔ ﻣﺜ ﻞ‬
‫اﻻﺗﺤﺎد اﻷوروﺑﻰ أو اﻟﺪول ﺑﻮﺟﻪ ﻋ ﺎم اﻟ ﺮاﻓﺾ ﻟﻬ ﺬا اﻟ ﺪور اﻟﺴ ﻠﺒﻰ اﻟ ﺬى ﺗﺤ ﺎول‬
‫اﻟﻮﻻﻳﺎت اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة اﻷﻣﺮﻳﻜﻴﺔ أن ﺗﺆدﻳﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺼﻌﻴﺪ اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ‪.‬‬
‫وأﺧﻴﺮا ﻗﻤﻨﺎ ﺑﺼ ﻴﺎﻏﺔ ﺑﻌ ﺾ اﻟﻨﺼ ﻮص اﻹرﺷ ﺎدﻳﺔ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﺒ ﺎب اﻟﺜﺎﻟ ﺚ ﺗﻴﺴ ﻴﺮًا‬
‫ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟﻤﺸ ﺮع ﻓ ﻰ ﻋﺎﻟﻤﻨ ﺎ اﻟﻌﺮﺑ ﻰ‪ ،‬وﺣﺘ ﻰ ﻳﺘﺴ ﻨﻰ ﻟ ﻪ اﻻﺧﺘﻴ ﺎر واﻟﻤﻔﺎﺿ ﻠﺔ ﻋﻠ ﻰ‬
‫ﺿﻮء اﻟﻘﺮار اﻷﺧﻴﺮ وإرادة آﻞ دوﻟ ﺔ ﻋﺮﺑﻴ ﺔ ﺳ ﻮاء ﺑﺎﻻﻧﻀ ﻤﺎم ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ أو اﻻآﺘﻔﺎء ﺑﻮﺿﻊ ﺗﺸﺮﻳﻊ وﻃﻨﻰ ﻳﻔﻰ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﺘﻄﻠﺒﺎت وﻣﻌﺎﻳﻴﺮ اﻟﻌﺪاﻟﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫وﺑﻌﺒﺎرة أﺧﺮى أردﻧﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺻﻴﺎﻏﺔ هﺬﻩ اﻟﻨﺼﻮص اﻹرﺷ ﺎدﻳﺔ ﺗﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ اﻷه ﺪاف‬
‫اﻵﺗﻴﺔ‪ :‬وﺿﻊ ﻧﺼ ﻮص ﺗﺠﺮﻳﻤﻴ ﺔ ﻣﻔﺼ ﻠﺔ ودﻗﻴﻘ ﺔ ﻻ ﻟ ﺒﺲ ﻓ ﻰ ﻣﻌﺎﻧﻴﻬ ﺎ أو ﻏﻤ ﻮض‬
‫ﻓﻰ ﻣﺮاﻣﻴﻬﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻠﺠﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ اﻟﺘ ﻰ ﺗ ﺪﺧﻞ ﻓ ﻰ اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻘﺎرﻧﺔ ﺑﻤﺎ هﻮ ﻗﺎﺋﻢ ﻓﻰ اﻟﺘﺸﺮﻳﻌﺎت اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻴﺔ؛ إدﻣﺎج ﺗﻠ ﻚ‬
‫اﻟﻨﺼﻮص اﻟﺘﺠﺮﻳﻤﻴﺔ ﻓﻰ ﺗﺸﺮﻳﻊ ﻣﻮﺣﺪ ﺑﺤﻴ ﺚ ﻳﺴ ﻬﻞ ﻋﻠ ﻰ رﺟ ﺎل اﻟﻘ ﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﻌ ﺮب‬
‫ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ أﺣﻜﺎﻣﻪ ؛ ﺟﻌﻞ اﻟﺪول اﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴ ﺔ ﻗ ﺎدرة داﺋﻤ ًﺎ ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﺗﺤﺮﻳ ﻚ اﻟ ﺪﻋﻮى اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ‬
‫وﻣﻼﺣﻘﺔ ﻣﺮﺗﻜﺒﻰ ﺗﻠ ﻚ اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺪاﺧﻠ ﺔ ﻓ ﻰ اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻟﻨﻈﺮ إﻟﻰ اﻟﻄﺒﻴﻌﺔ اﻟﺘﻜﻤﻴﻠﻴﺔ ﻟﺴﻠﻄﺎت واﺧﺘﺼﺎﺻﺎت ﺗﻠﻚ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻤﻼﺣﻘ ﺔ؛‬

‫‪13‬‬

‫وأﺧﻴﺮًا ﺗﺪﻋﻴﻢ أﺣﻜﺎم اﻟﻘ ﺎﻧﻮن اﻹﻧﺴ ﺎﻧﻰ اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ وﺗﻮﺳ ﻴﻊ ﻧﻄ ﺎق ﺳ ﺮﻳﺎﻧﻪ ﻣ ﻦ ﺧ ﻼل‬
‫إﻧﺸﺎء ﻋﻤﻞ ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻧﻰ ﻣﻮﺣﺪ‪.‬‬
‫وﺑﻨ ﺎء ﻋﻠ ﻰ ه ﺬﻩ اﻷه ﺪاف ﻗﻤﻨ ﺎ ﺑﺼ ﻴﺎﻏﺔ ﺑﻌ ﺾ اﻟﻨﺼ ﻮص اﻹرﺷ ﺎدﻳﺔ اﻟﺘ ﻰ‬
‫اﺳ ﺘﻤﺪت ﻋﻨﺎﺻ ﺮهﺎ وﺑﻨﻴﺎﻧﻬ ﺎ ﺑﺼ ﻮرة أﺳﺎﺳ ﻴﺔ ﻣﻤ ﺎ ورد ﺑﺄﺣﻜ ﺎم اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ وآﺬا ﻗﻮاﻋﺪ اﻹﺟ ﺮاء واﻟ ﺪﻟﻴﻞ اﻟﻤﻔﺴ ﺮة ﻟﻨﺼ ﻮص اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم‬
‫ﻼ ﻋﻦ اﻻﺳﺘﺮﺷﺎد ﺑﺘﺠﺎرب اﻟﺪول اﻷﺧﺮى اﻟﺘﻰ ﺷﺮﻋﺖ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌ ﻞ ﻓ ﻰ‬
‫اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ‪ ،‬ﻓﻀ ً‬
‫ﺻﻴﺎﻏﺔ ﺗﺸﺮﻳﻌﺎت وﻃﻨﻴﺔ ﺗﻔﻰ ﺑﺎﻟﺘﺰاﻣﺎﺗﻬﺎ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ ﻓﻰ هﺬا اﻟﻤﻀﻤﺎر‪.‬‬
‫أ‪.‬د‪ .‬ﻣﺤﻤﻮد ﺷﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ‬
‫‪2004/2/1‬‬

‫‪14‬‬

15

‫اﻟـﺒـﺎب اﻷول‬
‫ﺷﺮح اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‬

‫‪16‬‬

17

‫‪ -1‬ﺗﻘﺴﻴﻢ ‪:‬‬
‫ﻳﻘﺘﻀ ﻰ اﻟﺤ ﺪﻳﺚ ﻋ ﻦ اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺘﻌ ﺮض‬
‫ﻟﻠﺨﺼﺎﺋﺺ اﻟﻤﻤﻴﺰة ﻟﻬﺬﻩ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﻋﻦ ﻏﻴﺮهﺎ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻢ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ‪ ،‬وﻃﻨﻴ ﺔ آﺎﻧ ﺖ‬
‫أم دوﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬وذﻟﻚ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼل إﻟﻘﺎء اﻟﻀﻮء ﻋﻠﻰ ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺘﻬﺎ اﻟﺨﺎﺻ ﺔ ﺑﺎﻋﺘﺒﺎره ﺎ ﻣﺆﺳﺴ ﺔ‬
‫دوﻟﻴﺔ ﻣﻨﺸﺄة ﺑﻤﻮﺟﺐ ﻣﻌﺎهﺪة دوﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬وﻣﺎ ﺗﺴﺘﺘﺒﻌﻪ ﺗﻠﻚ اﻟﻄﺒﻴﻌﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺁﺛﺎر ﻓﻴﻤ ﺎ ﻳﺘﻌﻠ ﻖ‬
‫ﺑﻤﺒ ﺪإ اﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣ ﻞ ﺑ ﻴﻦ اﻻﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ واﻟ ﻮﻃﻨﻰ ﻓ ﻰ ﻣﺠ ﺎل اﻟﻤﻼﺣﻘ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ‬
‫وآﺬﻟﻚ ﻓﻰ ﺻﺪد اﻟﻘ ﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﻮاﺟ ﺐ اﻟﺘﻄﺒﻴ ﻖ أﻣ ﺎم اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ‪ ،‬وﺟﻤﻴﻌﻬ ﺎ ﻣﻮﺿ ﻮﻋﺎت‬
‫ﻧﻌﺮض ﻟﻬﺎ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻔﺼﻞ اﻷول ﺑﻌﻨﻮان‪ :‬ﺧﺼﺎﺋﺺ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫أﻣ ﺎ اﻟﻔﺼ ﻼن اﻟﺜ ﺎﻧﻰ واﻟﺜﺎﻟ ﺚ‪ ،‬ﻓﻨﺘﻌ ﺮض ﻣ ﻦ ﺧﻼﻟﻬﻤ ﺎ ﻟﻠﻘﻮاﻋ ﺪ اﻟﺤﺎآﻤ ﺔ ﻓ ﻰ‬
‫ﺻ ﺪد ﺗﺤﺪﻳ ﺪ اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ ﺳ ﻮاء ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﻨﺎﺣﻴ ﺔ اﻟﻤﻮﺿ ﻮﻋﻴﺔ أو اﻟﻤﻜﺎﻧﻴ ﺔ أو‬
‫اﻟﺰﻣﺎﻧﻴ ﺔ‪ ،‬ﺣﻴ ﺚ ﻧﺮآ ﺰ ﻓ ﻰ ه ﺬا اﻟﺨﺼ ﻮص ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﺑﻌ ﺾ إﺷ ﻜﺎﻟﻴﺎت اﻻﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص‪،‬‬
‫وﺧﺎﺻ ﺔ ﻓﻴﻤ ﺎ ﻳﺘﻌﻠ ﻖ ﺑﺘﻌﺮﻳ ﻒ وﺗﺤﺪﻳ ﺪ أرآ ﺎن اﻟﻤﺴ ﺌﻮﻟﻴﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ ﻋ ﻦ ﺟﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﻌﺪوان‪ ،‬وآﺬﻟﻚ ﻟﻠﻘﻮاﻋﺪ اﻹﺟﺮاﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ ﺑﺎﻹﺣﺎﻟﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ واﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫وﻧﺨﺼﺺ اﻟﻔﺼﻞ اﻟﺮاﺑﻊ ﻹﻟﻘﺎء اﻟﻀﻮء ﻋﻠﻰ هﻴﻜﻞ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ‬
‫وﻋﻼﻗﺎﺗﻬ ﺎ ﺑ ﺎﻷﻣﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤ ﺪة وﺑﺨﺎﺻ ﺔ ﻣﺠﻠ ﺲ اﻷﻣ ﻦ‪ ،‬وﻟﻤ ﺪى ﺣﺠ ﻢ اﻟﺘﻌ ﺪﻳﻞ اﻟ ﺬى‬
‫ﻳﻤﻜﻦ أن ﻳﻠﺤﻖ ﺑﺎﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫وأﺧﻴ ﺮًا ﻧﻌ ﺮض ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻔﺼ ﻞ اﻟﺨ ﺎﻣﺲ ﻟﻜﻴﻔﻴ ﺔ ﻣﺒﺎﺷ ﺮة اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﺧﺘﺼﺎﺻ ﻬﺎ‪،‬‬
‫وذﻟ ﻚ ﻣ ﻦ ﺧ ﻼل ﺗﻨ ﺎول اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻹﺟﺮاﺋ ﻰ أﻣﺎﻣﻬ ﺎ ﺳ ﻮاء ﻓ ﻰ ﻣﺮﺣﻠ ﺔ اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ أو‬
‫اﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻤﺔ أو اﻟﻄﻌﻦ ﻓﻰ اﻷﺣﻜﺎم أو ﺗﻨﻔﻴﺬهﺎ‪ ،‬ﺣﻴﺚ ﻳﺘﻢ إﻟﻘ ﺎء اﻟﻀ ﻮء ﺑﺼ ﻔﺔ ﺧﺎﺻ ﺔ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻀﻤﺎﻧﺎت اﻹﺟﺮاﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺘﻰ ﺗﻜﻔﻞ ﻷﻃﺮاف اﻟ ﺪﻋﻮى اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ أﻣﺎﻣﻬ ﺎ‪ ،‬وﻵﻟﻴ ﺎت‬
‫اﻟﺘﻌﺎون اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ ﻓﻰ ﺧﺼﻮص آﺸﻒ اﻟﺤﻘﻴﻘﺔ واﻟﺒﺤﺚ ﻋﻦ اﻷدﻟﺔ وﺗﻨﻔﻴﺬ اﻷﺣﻜﺎم‪.‬‬

‫‪18‬‬

‫اﻟﻔـﺼـﻞ اﻷول‬
‫ﺧﺼﺎﺋﺺ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‬
‫اﻟـﻤـﺒﺤـﺚ اﻷول‬
‫ﻃﺒﻴﻌﺔ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‬
‫‪ .2‬اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ)‪ (13‬هﻰ ﻣﺆﺳﺴﺔ دوﻟﻴ ﺔ داﺋﻤ ﺔ‪ ،‬أﻧﺸ ﺌﺖ ﺑﻤﻮﺟ ﺐ‬
‫ﻣﻌﺎه ﺪة ﻟﻐ ﺮض اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ وﻣﺤﺎآﻤ ﺔ اﻷﺷ ﺨﺎص اﻟ ﺬﻳﻦ ﻳﺮﺗﻜﺒ ﻮن "أﺷ ﺪ اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ‬
‫ﺧﻄﻮرة ﺑﺤﻴﺚ ﺗﻜﻮن ﻣﻮﺿﻊ اﻻهﺘﻤﺎم اﻟﺪوﻟﻲ" ]ﻣﺎدة ‪ ،[1‬وهﻰ‪ :‬اﻹﺑ ﺎدة اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﻴ ﺔ‬
‫]ﻣﺎدة ‪ ،[6‬ﺟﺮاﺋﻢ ﺿﺪ اﻹﻧﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ ]ﻣﺎدة ‪ ،[7‬ﺟﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺤﺮب ]ﻣ ﺎدة ‪ .[8‬ه ﺬﻩ اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ‬
‫ﻣﻌﺮوﻓﺔ ﺟﻴ ﺪا ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻘ ﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺠﻨ ﺎﺋﻰ اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ‪ ،‬وﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻮﻗ ﺖ اﻟ ﺮاهﻦ هﻨ ﺎك اﻟﺘﺰاﻣ ﺎت‬
‫ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻧﻴ ﺔ دوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ وﻣﺤﺎآﻤ ﺔ أو ﺗﺴ ﻠﻴﻢ ه ﺆﻻء اﻷﺷ ﺨﺎص اﻟﻤﺘﻬﻤ ﻴﻦ ﺑﺎرﺗﻜ ﺎب‬
‫ﻣﺜ ﻞ ه ﺬﻩ اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ وﻟﻤﻌﺎﻗﺒ ﺔ ه ﺆﻻء اﻷﺷ ﺨﺎص ﻋﻨ ﺪ ﻣﺨ ﺎﻟﻔﺘﻬﻢ ه ﺬﻩ اﻟﻘﻮاﻋ ﺪ‬
‫اﻟﻤﻮﺿﻮﻋﺔ ﺟﻴﺪا‪.‬‬
‫اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ هﻰ ﻣﺆﺳﺴﺔ ﻗﺎﺋﻤﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻌﺎهﺪة ﻣﻠﺰﻣ ﺔ ﻓﻘ ﻂ‬
‫‪.3‬‬
‫ﻟﻠﺪول اﻷﻋﻀﺎء ﻓﻴﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﻓﻬﻰ ﻟﻴﺴﺖ آﻴﺎﻧًﺎ ﻓﻮق اﻟﺪول‪ ،‬ﺑﻞ هﻰ آﻴﺎن ﻣﻤﺎﺛﻞ ﻟﻐﻴ ﺮﻩ ﻣ ﻦ‬
‫‪(13) See generally Roy S. Lee, The Rome Conference and its Contributions to International‬‬
‫‪Law, in THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT: THE MAKING OF THE ROME STATUTE,‬‬
‫‪ISSUES, NEGOTIATIONS, RESULTS1-40 (Roy S. Lee ed., 1999) [hereinafter AMAKING OF‬‬
‫‪THE ROME STATUTE”]. For additional commentary on the Establishment of the Court,‬‬
‫‪see Otto Triffterer, Article 1: The Court, in COMMENTARY ON THE ROME STATUTE OF THE‬‬
‫‪INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT: OBSERVER'S NOTES, ARTICLE BY ARTICLE 51-64 (Otto‬‬
‫‪Triffterer ed., 1999) [hereinafter ACOMMENTARY ON ROME STATUTE”].‬‬

‫اﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﺼﻔﺔ ﻋﺎﻣﺔ روى س‪.‬ﻟﻰ‪ ،.‬ﻣﺆﺗﻤﺮ روﻣﺎ وإﺳﻬﺎﻣﺎﺗﻪ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‪ :‬ﻋﻤﻞ ﻧﻈﺎم روﻣﺎ اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ‪ ،‬اﻟﻤﻮﺿﻮﻋﺎت واﻟﻤﺒﺎﺣﺜﺎت واﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ ‪40-1‬‬
‫)روى‪.‬ﺳﻰ‪.‬ﻟﻰ ﻃﺒﻌﺔ ‪ ] (1999‬ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﺑﻌﺪ "ﻋﻤﻞ ﻧﻈﺎم روﻣﺎ اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ"[‪ .‬ﻟﻠﻤﺰﻳﺪ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻘﺎت‬
‫ﺣﻮل إﻧﺸﺎء اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ‪ ،‬اﻧﻈﺮ أوﺗﻮ ﺗﺮﻳﻔﺘﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎدة ‪ :1‬اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﺗﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻈﺎم روﻣﺎ اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ‬
‫اﻟﺨﺎص ﺑﺎﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‪ :‬ﻣﻼﺣﻈﺎت ﻣﺮاﻗﺐ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺟﻤﻴﻊ اﻟﻤﻮاد ‪) 64-51‬أوﺗﻮ ﺗﺮﻳﻔﺘﺮ‬
‫ﻃﺒﻌﺔ ‪] (1999‬ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﺑﻌﺪ "اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻈﺎم روﻣﺎ اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ"[‪.‬‬

‫‪19‬‬

‫اﻟﻜﻴﺎﻧ ﺎت اﻟﻘﺎﺋﻤ ﺔ‪ .‬ﻓﺎﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻟﻴﺴ ﺖ ﺑ ﺪﻳﻼ ﻋ ﻦ اﻟﻘﻀ ﺎء اﻟﺠﻨ ﺎﺋﻰ‬
‫اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻰ‪ ،‬وإﻧﻤﺎ هﻰ ﻣﻜﻤﻞ ﻟﻪ ]اﻟﻤﺎدﺗﻴﻦ ‪ .[1،17‬ﻓﺎﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﻻ ﺗﻘﻮم ﺑ ﺄآﺜﺮ ﻣﻤ ﺎ ﺗﻘ ﻮم‬
‫ﺑﻪ آﻞ دوﻟﺔ ﻣﻦ دول اﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ ﻓﻰ إﻃﺎر اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ اﻟﻘ ﺎﺋﻢ‪ .‬ﻓﻬ ﻰ ﺗﻌﺒﻴ ﺮ‬
‫ﻋﻦ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻣﺠﻤﻊ ﻟﻠﺪول اﻷﻋﻀﺎء ﻓ ﻰ ﻣﻌﺎه ﺪة أﻧﺸ ﺌﺖ ﺑﻤﻘﺘﻀ ﺎهﺎ ﻣﺆﺳﺴ ﺔ ﻟﻤﺒﺎﺷ ﺮة‬
‫ﻗﻀﺎء ﻣﺠﻤﻊ ﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ دوﻟﻴﺔ ﻣﺤﺪدة‪ .‬وﻣﻦ ﺛﻢ ﻓﺎﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ه ﻰ اﻣﺘ ﺪاد‬
‫ﻟﻼﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻰ اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻰ وﻣﻨﺸﺄة ﺑﻤﻮﺟ ﺐ ﻣﻌﺎه ﺪة‪ ،‬ﻋﻨ ﺪ اﻟﺘﺼ ﺪﻳﻖ ﻋﻠﻴﻬ ﺎ ﻣ ﻦ‬
‫ﻗﺒ ﻞ اﻟﺴ ﻠﻄﺔ اﻟﺒﺮﻟﻤﺎﻧﻴ ﺔ اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻴ ﺔ ﺗﺼ ﺒﺢ ﺟ ﺰءًا ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﻘ ﺎﻧﻮن اﻟ ﻮﻃﻨﻰ‪ .‬وﺑﻨ ﺎء ﻋﻠ ﻰ‬
‫ذﻟﻚ‪ ،‬ﻓﺎﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻻ ﺗﺘﻌ ﺪى ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟﺴ ﻴﺎدة اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻴ ﺔ أو ﺗﺘﺨﻄ ﻰ ﻧﻈ ﻢ‬
‫اﻟﻘﻀﺎء اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻰ ﻃﺎﻟﻤﺎ آﺎن اﻷﺧﻴ ﺮ ﻗ ﺎدرًا وراﻏﺒ ًﺎ ﻓ ﻰ ﻣﺒﺎﺷ ﺮة اﻟﺘﺰاﻣﺎﺗ ﻪ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮﻧﻴ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫اﻟـﻤـﺒﺤـﺚ اﻟﺜﺎﻧــﻰ‬
‫ﻣﺒﺪأ اﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﺑﻴـﻦ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‬
‫واﻟﻨﻈﻢ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮﻧﻴﺔ اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻴﺔ‬
‫‪ .4‬ﻳﻤﺘﺪ اﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻟﻴﺸ ﻤﻞ اﻟ ﺪول اﻷﻋﻀ ﺎء‪ .‬وﻳ ﺘﻢ‬
‫ﻣﻤﺎرﺳ ﺔ اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣ ﻞ)‪ (14‬ﻣ ﻊ اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص ﻧﻈ ﻢ اﻟﻘﻀ ﺎء اﻟ ﻮﻃﻨﻰ‬
‫ﻟﻠﺪول اﻷﻋﻀﺎء ] اﻟﻤﺎدﺗﻴﻦ ‪.[ 17 ،1‬‬
‫‪(14 ) The term Acomplementarity” does not exist in the English language. Rather, the 1995‬‬
‫‪Ad Hoc Committee and 1996 PrepCom selected the term, which is a transposition from‬‬
‫‪the french term Acomplementarité,” to describe the relationship between the ICC and‬‬
‫‪national systems. See M. Cherif Bassiouni, Observations Concerning the 1997-98‬‬
‫‪Preparatory Committee’s Work, 13 NOUVELLES ÉTUDES PNALES 5, 21 (1997). For a‬‬
‫‪discussion of the principle of complementarity, see generally John T. Holmes, The‬‬
‫‪Principle of Complementarity, in MAKING OF THE ROME STATUTE, supra note 13, at 41‬‬‫‪78. For additional commentary on Complementarity, see Sharon A. Williams, Article‬‬
‫‪17: Issues of admissibility, in COMMENTARY ON ROME STATUTE, supra note 13, at 383‬‬‫‪394.‬‬

‫ﻣﺼ ﻄﻠﺢ "‪ "Complementarity‬ﻏﻴ ﺮ ﻣﻮﺟ ﻮد ﺑﺎﻟﻠﻐ ﺔ اﻹﻧﺠﻠﻴﺰﻳ ﺔ‪ .‬إﻻ أن ﻟﺠﻨ ﺔ ‪ 1995‬اﻟﺘﺤﻀ ﻴﺮﻳﺔ‬
‫اﺧﺘﺎرت هﺬا اﻟﻤﺼﻄﻠﺢ‪ ،‬واﻟﻤﻨﻘﻮل ﻋ ﻦ اﻟﻤﺼ ﻄﻠﺢ اﻟﻔﺮﻧﺴ ﻰ "‪ "Complementarite‬ﻟﺸ ﺮح اﻟﻌﻼﻗ ﺔ‬
‫ﺑﻴﻦ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ واﻟ ﻨﻈﻢ اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻴ ﺔ‪ .‬اﻧﻈ ﺮ ﻣﺤﻤ ﻮد ﺷ ﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺴ ﻴﻮﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﻣﻼﺣﻈ ﺎت ﺑﺸ ﺄن‬
‫أﻋﻤ ﺎل اﻟﻠﺠﻨ ﺔ اﻟﺘﺤﻀ ﻴﺮﻳﺔ ﻟﻌ ﺎم ‪ 13 ،1998 – 1997‬دراﺳ ﺔ ﺟﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ ﺟﺪﻳ ﺪة ‪.(1997) 21 ،5‬‬

‫‪20‬‬

‫‪ .5‬اﻻﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟﺠﻨ ﺎﺋﻰ اﻟ ﻮﻃﻨﻰ داﺋﻤ ﺎ ﻳﻜ ﻮن ﻟ ﻪ اﻷوﻟﻮﻳ ﺔ ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص‬
‫اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ‪ ،‬وﻟﻜ ﻦ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ ﺗﺴ ﺘﻄﻴﻊ ﻣﻤﺎرﺳ ﺔ اﺧﺘﺼﺎﺻ ﻬﺎ ﻓ ﻰ‬
‫ﺣ ﺎﻟﺘﻴﻦ ﻓﻘ ﻂ ]ﻣ ﺎدة ‪ [17‬و هﻤ ﺎ‪ :‬اﻷوﻟ ﻰ ﻋﻨ ﺪ اﻧﻬﻴ ﺎر اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻟﻘﻀ ﺎﺋﻰ اﻟ ﻮﻃﻨﻰ؛‬
‫واﻟﺜﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﻋﻨﺪ رﻓﺾ أو ﻓﺸﻞ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻟﻘﻀﺎﺋﻰ اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻰ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻘﻴﺎم ﺑﺎﻟﺘﺰاﻣﺎﺗ ﻪ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮﻧﻴ ﺔ‬
‫ﺑ ﺎﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ وﻣﺤﺎآﻤ ﺔ اﻷﺷ ﺨﺎص اﻟﻤﺸ ﺘﺒﻪ ﻓ ﻰ ارﺗﻜ ﺎﺑﻬﻢ اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟ ﺜﻼث اﻟﻤﻮﺟ ﻮدة‬
‫ﺣﺎﻟﻴًﺎ ﻓﻰ اﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ أو ﺑﻤﻌﺎﻗﺒﺔ أوﻟﺌ ﻚ اﻟ ﺬﻳﻦ أدﻳﻨ ﻮا‪ .‬واﻟﺠ ﺪﻳﺮ ﺑﺎﻟ ﺬآﺮ أن‬
‫اﻟﻤﻌﺎﻳﻴﺮ اﻟﻼزﻣﺔ ﻟﺘﺤﺪﻳﺪ اﻧﻄﺒﺎق اﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻣ ﺬآﻮرة ﻓ ﻰ‬
‫اﻟﻤﺎدﺗﻴﻦ ]‪17‬و‪ [18‬ﻣﻦ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ‪) .‬اﻧﻈﺮ اﻟﺠﺪول رﻗﻢ ‪.(1‬‬
‫‪ .6‬ﺗﻈﻬ ﺮ ﻗﻮاﻋ ﺪ أﺳ ﺒﻘﻴﺔ اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص ﻧﻈ ﻢ اﻟﻘﻀ ﺎء اﻟ ﻮﻃﻨﻰ ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص‬
‫اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ ﻓﻰ ﻧﺼﻮص أﺧﺮى ﻣﻦ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ‪ .‬رﺑﻤﺎ أآﺜﺮ ه ﺬﻩ‬
‫اﻟﻘﻮاﻋﺪ وﺿﻮﺣﺎ هﻰ ﺗﻠﻚ اﻟﻮاردة ﻓﻰ ﻧﺼﻮص اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﺒ ﺎب اﻟﺘﺎﺳ ﻊ‬
‫واﻟﺬى ﻳﻨﺺ ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﻗﻴ ﺎم اﻟ ﻨﻈﻢ اﻟﻘﻀ ﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻴ ﺔ ﺑﻤﺒﺎﺷ ﺮة وﺗﻨﻔﻴ ﺬ ﻃﻠﺒ ﺎت اﻟﺘﻌ ﺎون‬
‫اﻟﻤﺸ ﺘﻤﻠﺔ ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟﻘ ﺒﺾ وﺗﺴ ﻠﻴﻢ اﻟﻤﺸ ﺘﺒﻪ ﻓ ﻴﻬﻢ وﺣﻤﺎﻳ ﺔ اﻷدﻟ ﺔ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﻹﺿ ﺎﻓﺔ إﻟ ﻰ ﺗﻠ ﻚ‬
‫اﻟﻘﻮاﻋﺪ‪ ،‬ﻓﻀﻤﺎﻧﺎت اﻟﻌﺪاﻟﺔ ﺛﺎﺑﺘﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎت وﻗﺮارات اﻹﺣﺎﻟﺔ اﻟﺼ ﺎدرة ﻣ ﻦ‬
‫اﻟﻤ ﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌ ﺎم ﺑﺎﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ‪] .‬ﻣ ﺎدة ‪) 15‬ﻓﻘ ﺮة ‪ [(4‬ﺗ ﻨﺺ ﻋﻠ ﻰ‬
‫ﺿﺮورة اﻟﺤﺼﻮل ﻋﻠ ﻰ إذن ﻣﺴ ﺒﻖ ﻣ ﻦ داﺋ ﺮة اﻟﺸ ﺆون اﻟﺨﺎﺻ ﺔ ﺑﻤﺮﺣﻠ ﺔ ﻣ ﺎ ﻗﺒ ﻞ‬
‫اﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻤﺔ ﻗﺒﻞ ﺑﺪء اﻟﻤﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌﺎم اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎت ﻣﻦ ﺗﻠﻘﺎء ﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﺧ ﻼف ﺑ ﻴﻦ ﻣ ﺎ إذا‬
‫آﺎﻧﺖ اﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﻣﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﻣﻦ دوﻟﺔ ﻋﻀﻮ أو ﻣﺠﻠﺲ اﻷﻣﻦ ]ﻣﺎدة ‪.[15‬‬

‫ﻟﻤﻨﺎﻗﺸﺔ ﻣﺒ ﺪإ اﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣ ﻞ‪ ،‬اﻧﻈ ﺮ ﺑﺼ ﻔﺔ ﻋﺎﻣ ﺔ ﺟ ﻮن ت‪ .‬ه ﻮﻟﻤﺰ‪ ،‬ﻣﺒ ﺪأ اﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣ ﻞ ﻓ ﻰ ﻋﻤ ﻞ ﻧﻈ ﺎم روﻣ ﺎ‬
‫اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ‪ ،‬هﺎﻣﺶ )‪ (13‬ﺳﺎﺑﻘًﺎ ﻓﻰ= =‪ . 78-41‬ﻟﻠﻤﺰﻳﺪ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻘﺎت ﺣﻮل اﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣﻞ‪ ،‬اﻧﻈﺮ ﺷ ﺎرون‬
‫أ‪ .‬وﻳﻠﻴﺎﻣﺰ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎدة ‪ :17‬اﻟﻤﺴﺎﺋﻞ اﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻘﺒﻮﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻈ ﺎم روﻣ ﺎ اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ‪ ،‬ه ﺎﻣﺶ‬
‫‪ 13‬ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺎً‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ ‪ .394–383‬اﻧﻈﺮ‪ ،‬ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻳﺨ ﺘﺺ ﺑﺎﻻﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟﺠﻨ ﺎﺋﻰ اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ واﻟﺤﺼ ﺎﻧﺎت‪ ،‬إﻟ ﻰ‬
‫أ‪ .‬د‪ .‬أﺣﻤﺪ ﻓﺘﺤﻰ ﺳﺮور‪ ،‬اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻰ اﻟﺪﺳﺘﻮرى‪.2001 ،‬‬

‫‪21‬‬

‫)اﻟﺠﺪول رﻗﻢ ‪ (1‬اﻻﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﺘﻜﻤﻴﻠﻰ وﻗﺒﻮل اﻟﺪﻋﻮى‬

‫)∗(‬

‫اﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ اﺧﺘﺼﺎص ﺗﻜﻤﻴﻠﻰ ﻟﻼﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻰ اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻰ )اﻟﻔﻘﺮة ‪ 10‬ﻣﻦ‬
‫اﻟﺪﻳﺒﺎﺟﺔ‪ ،‬اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪(1‬‬
‫وﻣﻦ ﺛﻢ ﻓﻘﺪ ﺗﻘﺮر اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ‪ ،‬اﺳﺘﻨﺎدًا ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺒﺪإ اﻻﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﺘﻜﻤﻴﻠﻰ‪ ،‬ﻋﺪم ﻗﺒﻮل اﻟﺪﻋﻮى وﻓﻘًﺎ ﻟﻠﺤﺎﻻت‬
‫اﻵﺗﻴﺔ‪:‬‬
‫* إذا آﺎﻧ ﺖ ﺗﺠ ﺮى * إذا آﺎﻧﺖ ﻗﺪ أﺟﺮت * إذا آﺎن اﻟﺸﺨﺺ اﻟﻤﻌﻨ ﻰ ﻗ ﺪ * إذا ﻟ ﻢ ﺗﻜ ﻦ‬
‫اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ أو اﻟﻤﻘﺎﺿ ﺎة اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟ ﺪﻋﻮى ﺳ ﺒﻖ أن ﺣ ﻮآﻢ ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟﺴ ﻠﻮك اﻟ ﺪﻋﻮى ﻋﻠ ﻰ‬
‫ﻓ ﻰ اﻟ ﺪﻋﻮى دوﻟ ﺔ ﻟﻬ ﺎ دوﻟﺔ ﻟﻬﺎ وﻻﻳ ﺔ ﻋﻠﻴﻬ ﺎ ﻣﻮﺿ ﻮع اﻟﺸ ﻜﻮى )اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ 17‬درﺟ ﺔ آﺎﻓﻴ ﺔ ﻣ ﻦ‬
‫وﻻﻳ ﺔ ﻋﻠﻴﻬ ﺎ )اﻟﻤ ﺎدة وﻗ ﺮرت اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ ﻋ ﺪم ﻓﻘﺮة ‪ 1‬ﺑﻨﺪ ج(‪ ،‬وﻻ ﻳﻜ ﻮن ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﺨﻄ ﻮرة ﺗﺒ ﺮر‬
‫‪ 17‬ﻓﻘﺮة ‪ 1‬ﺑﻨﺪ أ(‬

‫ﻣﻘﺎﺿ ﺎة اﻟﺸ ﺨﺺ اﻟﺠ ﺎﺋﺰ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ إﺟ ﺮاء اﺗﺨ ﺎذ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ‬

‫* ﻣ ﺎ ﻟ ﻢ ﺗﻜ ﻦ اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ اﻟﻤﻌﻨ ﻲ )اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ 17‬ﻣﺤﺎآﻤ ﺔ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻘ ﺎ ﻟﻤﺒ ﺪإ ﻋ ﺪم إﺟ ﺮاء ﺁﺧ ﺮ‪0‬‬
‫ﺟ ﻮاز ﻣﺤﺎآﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺸ ﺨﺺ ﻋ ﻦ )اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ 17‬ﻓﻘﺮة ‪1‬‬
‫ﺣﻘ ﺎ ﻏﻴ ﺮ راﻏﺒ ﺔ ﻓ ﻰ ﻓﻘﺮة ‪ 1‬ﺑﻨﺪ ب(‬
‫اﻻﺿ ﻄﻼع ﺑ ﺎﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ * ﻣ ﺎ ﻟ ﻢ ﻳﻜ ﻦ اﻟﻘ ﺮار ذات اﻟﺠ ﺮم ﻣ ﺮﺗﻴﻦ اﻟ ﻮارد ﺑﻨﺪ د(‬
‫أو اﻟﻤﻘﺎﺿ ﺎة )اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ﻧﺎﺗﺠﺎ ﻋﻦ ﻋ ﺪم رﻏﺒ ﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻘﺮة ‪ 3‬ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪.20‬‬
‫‪ 17‬ﻓﻘ ﺮة ‪ (2‬أو ﻏﻴ ﺮ اﻟﺪوﻟﺔ أو ﻋﺪم ﻗﺪرﺗﻬﺎ‬
‫ﻗ ﺎدرة ﻋﻠ ﻰ ذﻟ ﻚ‪ 0‬ﺣﻘﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻤﻘﺎﺿﺎة‪.‬‬
‫)اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ 17‬ﻓﻘﺮة ‪(3‬‬

‫ﻟﻤﺰﻳ ﺪ ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﺸ ﺮح ﺣ ﻮل ﻣﻌﻨ ﻰ "ﻋ ﺪم اﻟﺮﻏﺒ ﺔ" راﺟ ﻊ اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ 17‬ﻓﻘ ﺮة ‪2‬‬
‫وآﺬﻟﻚ اﻟﻘﺎﻋﺪة ‪ 51‬ﻣﻦ ﻗﻮاﻋﺪ اﻹﺟﺮاء واﻟﺪﻟﻴﻞ‪.‬‬
‫ﻟﻤﺰﻳﺪ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺸﺮح ﺣﻮل ﻣﻌﻨﻰ "ﻋﺪم اﻟﻘﺪرة" راﺟﻊ اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ 17‬ﻓﻘﺮة ‪ 3‬وآﺬﻟﻚ‬
‫اﻟﻘﺎﻋﺪة ‪ 51‬ﻣﻦ ﻗﻮاﻋﺪ اﻹﺟﺮاء واﻟﺪﻟﻴﻞ‪.‬‬

‫)∗( ﻳﺴﺘﺨﺪم اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ اﻟﻌﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﺼﻄﻠﺤﺎت اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮﻧﻴﺔ اﻟﻤﺘﺮﺟﻤﺔ ﻋﻦ‬
‫اﻟﻨﺼﻴﻦ اﻹﻧﺠﻠﻴﺰى واﻟﻔﺮﻧﺴﻰ‪ ،‬واﻟﺘﻰ ﻗﺪ ﻳﺠﺪهﺎ اﻟﻘﺎرئ ﻏﻴﺮ دارﺟﺔ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﺤﻴﻂ اﻟﻘ ﺎﻧﻮﻧﻰ اﻟﻌﺮﺑ ﻰ‪،‬‬
‫وﻣ ﻦ ه ﺬا اﻟﻘﺒﻴ ﻞ ﻣﺼ ﻄﻠﺢ "اﻟﻤﻘﺒﻮﻟﻴ ﺔ" ﻓ ﻰ ﺣ ﻴﻦ أن اﻟﻘ ﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﻤﺼ ﺮى ﻳﺴ ﺘﺨﺪم ﻣﺼ ﻄﻠﺢ "ﻗﺒ ﻮل‬
‫اﻟﺪﻋﻮى"‪.‬‬

‫‪22‬‬

‫اﻟـﻤـﺒﺤـﺚ اﻟﺜﺎﻟــﺚ‬
‫اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﻮاﺟﺐ اﻟﺘﻄﺒﻴﻖ أﻣﺎم اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‬
‫‪ .7‬ﺗﺘﻀ ﻤﻦ اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ 10‬ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ اﻟﻘﺎﻋ ﺪة اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻴﺔ اﻟﺨﺎﺻ ﺔ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﻮاﺟﺐ اﻟﺘﻄﺒﻴﻖ)‪ .(15‬وﺑﺸﻜﻞ ﻣﻼﺋﻢ ﻓ ﺈن اﻷﻣ ﺮ ﻳﺘﻄﻠ ﺐ ﺗﻄﺒﻴ ﻖ اﻟﻤﺼ ﺎدر‬
‫اﻷرﺑﻌ ﺔ ﻟﻠﻘ ﺎﻧﻮن اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ اﻟﻤ ﺬآﻮرة ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ 38‬ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ ﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﻌﺪل اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬وهﻰ‪:‬‬
‫أ‪ .‬اﻟﻤﻌﺎهﺪات اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺳﻮاء اﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ أو اﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ‪ ،‬اﻟﻤﺆﺳﺴﺔ ﻟﻘﻮاﻋﺪ ﻣﻌﺘ ﺮف‬
‫ﺑﻬﺎ ﻣﻦ ﻗﺒﻞ اﻟﺪول اﻟﻤﺘﻨﺎزﻋﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ب‪ .‬اﻟﻌﺮف اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ‪ ،‬آﻤﺎ ﻳﺘﻀﺢ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻤﺎرﺳﺔ اﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ اﻟﻤﻘﺒﻮﻟﺔ آﻘﺎﻧﻮن‪.‬‬
‫ج‪ .‬اﻟﻘﻮاﻋﺪ اﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ ﻟﻠﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﻤﻌﺘﺮف ﺑﻬﺎ ﻣﻦ ﻗﺒﻞ اﻷﻣﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤﻀﺮة‪.‬‬
‫د‪ .‬اﻷﺣﻜ ﺎم اﻟﻘﻀ ﺎﺋﻴﺔ واﻟﺪراﺳ ﺎت اﻟ ﻮاردة ﻓ ﻰ أآﺜ ﺮ اﻟﻤﺆﻟﻔ ﺎت ﻗﺒ ﻮﻻ ﻟ ﺪى‬
‫)‪(16‬‬
‫اﻷﻣﻢ اﻟﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ‪ ،‬آﻮﺳﺎﺋﻞ ﻣﻌﺎوﻧﺔ ﻟﺘﺤﺪﻳﺪ ﻗﻮاﻋﺪ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن‪.‬‬
‫وﺑﺎﻟﺘ ﺎﻟﻰ ﻓ ﺈن ذﻟ ﻚ ﻳﻌﻨ ﻰ أﻳﻀ ﺎ أن اﻟﻤﻌﺎه ﺪة ﻳﺠ ﺐ أن ﺗﻔﺴ ﺮ وﻓﻘ ﺎ ﻻﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴ ﺔ‬
‫)‪(17‬‬
‫ﻓﻴﻴﻨﺎ ﻟﻌﺎم ‪ 1969‬اﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ ﺑﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﻤﻌﺎهﺪات‪.‬‬
‫‪ .8‬أى ﻧﺺ وارد ﻓﻰ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻳﺘﻌ ﺎرض أو ﻻ ﻳ ﺘﻼءم ﺑﺼ ﻔﺔ ﻋﺎﻣ ﺔ‬
‫ﻣﻊ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ ﺳﻮف ﻳﻌﺪ أﻗﻞ ﻣﺮﺗﺒﺔ ﻣﻨﻪ‪ .‬ﺑﺎﻹﺿﺎﻓﺔ إﻟﻰ ذﻟﻚ ﻓﺈن أى ﺗﻨﺎزع أو‬
‫ﻋﺪم ﺗﻮاﻓ ﻖ ﺑ ﻴﻦ اﻟﺘﺰاﻣ ﺎت اﻟ ﺪول اﻷﻋﻀ ﺎء ﺑﻤﻮﺟ ﺐ اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ واﻟﺘﺰاﻣ ﺎت‬

‫‪(15 ) Per Saland, International Criminal Law Principles, in MAKING OF THE ROME STATUTE,‬‬
‫‪supra note 13, at 189-216. For additional commentary on Applicable law, see Margaret‬‬
‫‪McAuliffe de Guzman, Article 21: Applicable Law, in COMMENTARY ON ROME‬‬
‫‪STATUTE, supra note 13, at 435-446.‬‬

‫ﺑﻴﺮ ﺳﺎﻻﻧﺪ‪ ،‬ﻣﺒﺎدئ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻰ اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻧﻈﺎم روﻣﺎ اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ‪ ،‬هﺎﻣﺶ رﻗﻢ ‪13‬‬
‫ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺎً‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ ‪ .216-189‬ﻟﻠﻤﺰﻳﺪ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻘﺎت ﺣﻮل اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﻮاﺟﺐ اﻟﺘﻄﺒﻴﻖ‪ ،‬اﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﺎرﺟﺮﻳﺖ‬
‫ﻣﺎآﺄوﻟﻴﻒ دى ﺟﺰﻣﺎن‪ ،‬ﻣﺎدة ‪ :21‬اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﻮاﺟﺐ اﻟﺘﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﻓﻰ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻈﺎم روﻣﺎ اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ‪،‬‬
‫هﺎﻣﺶ رﻗﻢ ‪ 13‬ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺎً‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ ‪.446 – 435‬‬
‫)‪(16‬‬
‫اﻧﻈﺮ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﻌﺪل اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‪.4 UNYB 1983 ،‬‬
‫)‪ (17‬اﻧﻈﺮ اﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴﺔ ﻓﻴﻴﻨﺎ اﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ ﺑﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﻤﻌﺎهﺪات‪. 331 UNTS 1155 ،‬‬

‫‪23‬‬

‫ﻧﺎﺷﺌﺔ ﻋﻦ ﻣﻌﺎهﺪة أﺧﺮى ﺳﻮف ﺗﻜ ﻮن ﻣﻮﺿ ﻮع ﺗﻄﺒﻴ ﻖ ﻟﻤﺼ ﺎدر اﻟﻘ ﺎﻧﻮن اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ‬
‫اﻟﻤﺬآﻮرة ﻋﺎﻟﻴﻪ ﺛﻢ إﻟﻰ ]اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪) 21‬ﻓﻘﺮة ‪ ،(1‬ج[‪.‬‬
‫‪ .9‬ﺗﻀ ﻴﻒ اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ (18)21‬ﺗﺤﺪﻳ ﺪا ﻟﻸﺣﻜ ﺎم اﻟﻌﺎﻣ ﺔ اﻟ ﻮاردة ﺑﺎﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪. 10‬‬
‫وآﻤﺎ هﻮ وارد ﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ ،21‬ﻓﺈن اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﻮاﺟﺐ اﻟﺘﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ ﻳﻜﻮن‪ :‬أوﻻ )أ( ﻧﺺ اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ ذاﺗ ﻪ‪) ،‬ب( ﻋﻨﺎﺻ ﺮ اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ‪) ،‬ج(‬
‫ﻗﻮاﻋﺪهﺎ اﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ ﺑﺎﻹﺟﺮاءات واﻷدﻟﺔ ]ﻣﺎدة ‪ ،(1) 21‬أ[‪ .‬وﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﻘﺎم اﻟﺜﺎﻧﻰ ﺣﻴ ﺚ‬
‫ﻳﻜﻮن اﻟﻮﺿﻊ ﻣﻼﺋﻤﺎ ﺗﻄﺒ ﻖ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ اﻟﻤﻌﺎه ﺪات واﺟﺒ ﺔ اﻟﺘﻄﺒﻴ ﻖ‬
‫وﻣﺒﺎدئ وﻗﻮاﻋﺪ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ ]اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ ،(1) 21‬ب[‪ .‬وﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻤﻘ ﺎم اﻷﺧﻴ ﺮ ﺗﻄﺒ ﻖ‬
‫اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﻗﻮاﻋﺪ اﻟﻘ ﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﻌﺎﻣ ﺔ اﻟﻤﺴ ﺘﻤﺪة ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﻘ ﻮاﻧﻴﻦ اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻴ ﺔ ﻟﻸﻧﻈﻤ ﺔ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮﻧﻴ ﺔ‬
‫ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻌ ﺎﻟﻢ ﺑﻤ ﺎ ﻓ ﻰ ذﻟ ﻚ اﻟﻘ ﻮاﻧﻴﻦ اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻴ ﺔ ﻟﻠ ﺪول اﻟﺘ ﻰ ﺗﻤ ﺎرس اﺧﺘﺼﺎﺻ ﻬﺎ ﻋﻠ ﻰ‬
‫اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ )ﺑﺸ ﺮط أﻻ ﺗﺘﻌ ﺎرض ه ﺬﻩ اﻟﻘﻮاﻋ ﺪ ﻣ ﻊ ﻗ ﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ‬
‫واﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺪوﻟﻲ( ]اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ ،(1) 21‬ج[‪ ،‬وﻳﺠ ﻮز ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ أﻳﻀ ﺎ أن ﺗﻄﺒ ﻖ ﻣﺒ ﺎدئ‬
‫وﻗﻮاﻋﺪ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن آﻤﺎ ه ﻰ ﻣﻔﺴ ﺮة ﻓ ﻰ ﻗﺮاراﺗﻬ ﺎ اﻟﺴ ﺎﺑﻘﺔ ]اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ .[(2) 21‬وﺑﺼ ﻔﺔ‬
‫ﻋﺎﻣﺔ ﻳﺠﺐ أن ﻳﺘﺴﻖ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ وﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﻤﻄﺒﻖ ﺑﻤﻌﺮﻓ ﺔ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ ﻣ ﻊ ﺣﻘ ﻮق‬
‫اﻹﻧﺴ ﺎن اﻟﻤﻌﺘ ﺮف ﺑﻬ ﺎ دوﻟﻴ ﺎ وأن ﻳﻜﻮﻧ ﺎ ﺧ ﺎﻟﻴﻴﻦ ﻣ ﻦ أى ﺗﻤﻴﻴ ﺰ ﺿ ﺎر ﻳﺴ ﺘﻨﺪ إﻟ ﻰ‬
‫أﺳ ﺒﺎب ﻣﺜ ﻞ ﻧ ﻮع اﻟﺠ ﻨﺲ أو اﻟﺴ ﻦ أو اﻟﻌ ﺮق أو اﻟﻠ ﻮن أو اﻟﻠﻐ ﺔ أو اﻟﺪﻳﺎﻧ ﺔ أو‬
‫اﻟﻤﻌﺘﻘﺪات اﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳﻴﺔ أو اﻵراء اﻷﺧﺮى أو اﻟﻤﻨﺸﺄ اﻻﺟﺘﻤ ﺎﻋﻰ أو اﻟﺜ ﺮوة أو اﻟﻤ ﻴﻼد‬
‫أو أى وﺿﻊ ﺁﺧﺮ ]ﻣﺎدة ‪.[(3) 21‬‬
‫‪ .10‬ﻳﺒﺪو أن هﻨﺎك اﺣﺘﻤﺎﻻ ﻟﻠﺘﻌﺎرض ﻗﺪ ﻳﻨﺸﺄ ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﺼﺎدر اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﻮاﺟ ﺐ‬
‫اﻟﺘﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ 10‬واﻷوﺟﻪ اﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﺎدة ‪ .21‬وﻃﺒﻘﺎ ﻟﻘﻮاﻋ ﺪ ﺗﻔﺴ ﻴﺮ ﻣﻌﺎه ﺪة‬
‫ﻓﻴﻴﻨﺎ ﻟﺴﻨﺔ ‪ 1969‬ﺑﺸﺄن ﻗﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﻤﻌﺎهﺪات‪ ،‬ﻓ ﺈن ﻗﺼ ﺪ اﻷﻃ ﺮاف ه ﻮ اﻟ ﺬى ﻳ ﺘﺤﻜﻢ‪.‬‬
‫‪(18 ) Article 21 should have been merged with Article 10 but was not because Part 2, which‬‬
‫‪contains Article 10 was not submitted to the Drafting Committee. Rather, it was sent‬‬
‫‪directly to the Committee of the Whole. See M. Cherif Bassiouni, Negotiating the‬‬
‫‪Treaty of Rome on The Establishment of an International Criminal Court, 32 CORNELL‬‬
‫‪INT’L L. J. 443, 457-460 (1999).‬‬

‫آﺎن ﻳﺠﺐ دﻣﺞ اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ 21‬ﻣﻊ اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ ،10‬إﻻ أن ذﻟﻚ ﻟﻢ ﻳﺘﻢ ﺑﺴﺒﺐ أن ﻣﻮاد اﻟﺒﺎب اﻟﺜﺎﻧﻰ‪،‬‬
‫واﻟﻤﺘﻀﻤﻦ اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ 10‬ﻟﻢ ﺗﻘﺪم إﻟﻰ ﻟﺠﻨﺔ اﻟﺼﻴﺎﻏﺔ‪ ،‬و إﻧﻤﺎ أرﺳﻠﺖ ﻣﺒﺎﺷﺮة إﻟﻰ اﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ اﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ‪ .‬اﻧﻈﺮ‬
‫ﺷﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ‪ ،‬اﻟﻤﻔﺎوﺿﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻌﺎهﺪة روﻣﺎ اﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ ﺑﺈﻧﺸﺎء اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‪32 ،‬‬
‫ﺟﺮﻳﺪة آﻮرﻧﻴﻞ ﻟﻠﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ ‪.(1999) 460 – 457 ،443‬‬

‫‪24‬‬

‫وﻓ ﻰ ه ﺬﻩ اﻟﺤﺎﻟ ﺔ ﻓ ﺈن اﻷﻃ ﺮاف ﻟ ﻢ ﻳﻘﺼ ﺪوا أن ﻳﺤ ﺪدوا ﻣﺼ ﺎدر اﻟﻘ ﺎﻧﻮن اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ‬
‫اﻟﻤﺸﺎر إﻟﻴﻬﺎ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ 10‬واﻟﻮاردة ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ 38‬ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ ﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﻌﺪل اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬وﺑﻨﺎء ﻋﻠﻰ ذﻟﻚ ﻓﺈن اﻟﺘﺤﺪﻳﺪ اﻟﻮارد ﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ 21‬ﻳﺨﻀ ﻊ ﻟﻌﻤﻮﻣﻴ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ 10‬ﺑﺴ ﺒﺐ ﻗﺼ ﺪ ﻣ ﻦ ﺻ ﺎﻏﻮهﺎ )و إذا ﻟ ﻢ ﺗﻜ ﻦ اﻟﺤﺎﻟ ﺔ آ ﺬﻟﻚ ﻓ ﺈن اﻟﺘﺤﺪﻳ ﺪ‬
‫اﻟﻮارد ﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ 21‬ﻗﺪ ﻳﻘﻴﺪ اﻟﻌﻤﻮﻣﻴﺔ اﻟﻮاردة ﺑﺎﻟﻤﺎدة ‪.(19)(10‬‬
‫‪ .11‬ﻗ ﺪ ﻳﻨﺸ ﺄ ﺗﻌ ﺎرض ﺁﺧ ﺮ ﺑ ﻴﻦ اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ 21‬و اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ 9‬ﺑﺸ ﺄن ﻋﻨﺎﺻ ﺮ‬
‫اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ؛ ذﻟ ﻚ أن اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ 21‬ﺗ ﺪرج ﻋﻨﺎﺻ ﺮ اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ آﻤﺼ ﺪر ﻟﻠﻘ ﺎﻧﻮن واﺟ ﺐ‬
‫اﻟﺘﻄﺒﻴ ﻖ ﺑﻴﻨﻤ ﺎ ﺗ ﺬآﺮ اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ 9‬ﻋﻠ ﻰ وﺟ ﻪ اﻟﺘﺤﺪﻳ ﺪ أن ﻋﻨﺎﺻ ﺮ اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ ﻳﺠ ﺐ أن‬
‫ﺗﺴﺎﻋﺪ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﻓﻰ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ وﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ اﻟﻤﻮاد ‪ . 8 ،7 ،6‬وﻳﺠﺐ ﻣﻼﺣﻈﺔ أن ﻋﻨﺎﺻ ﺮ‬
‫اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺘ ﻰ "ﺗﺴ ﺎﻋﺪ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ" ﻳﺠ ﺐ أن ﺗﻌﺘﺒ ﺮ ﻣﺼ ﺪرا ﻟﻠﻘ ﺎﻧﻮن اﻟ ﺬى ﻳﻤﻜ ﻦ‬
‫ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻘﻪ ﺑﻄﺮﻳﻘﺔ ﺗﻌﺪل ﻣ ﻦ أﺣﻜ ﺎم اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ ]اﻟﻤ ﺎدﺗﻴﻦ ‪ ،[8– 6‬وﻳﺠ ﺐ ﺗﺒﻨ ﻰ‬
‫ﻋﻨﺎﺻ ﺮ اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ ﻣ ﻦ ﻗﺒ ﻞ ﺟﻤﻌﻴ ﺔ اﻟ ﺪول اﻷﻃ ﺮاف ]اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ [112‬ﻓ ﻰ ﺟﻠﺴ ﺘﻬﺎ‬
‫اﻷوﻟﻰ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺳﺮﻳﺎن اﻟﻤﻌﺎهﺪة‪ .‬وﺑﺼﻔﺔ ﻋﺎﻣﺔ ﻓﺈن ﺟﻤﻌﻴﺔ اﻟﺪول اﻷﻃ ﺮاف ﻻ ﻳﻤﻜﻨﻬ ﺎ‬
‫أن ﺗﻌ ﺪل اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ ﻋ ﻦ ﻃﺮﻳ ﻖ ﺗﺒﻨ ﻰ ﻋﻨﺎﺻ ﺮ اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ‪ ،‬ﺣﻴ ﺚ إن ﺗﻌ ﺪﻳﻞ‬
‫اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ ﻳﺘﻄﻠ ﺐ "أﻏﻠﺒﻴ ﺔ ﺛﻠﺜ ﻰ اﻟﺤﺎﺿ ﺮﻳﻦ واﻟ ﺬﻳﻦ ﻟﻬ ﻢ ﺣ ﻖ اﻟﺘﺼ ﻮﻳﺖ‬
‫ﺑﺸ ﺮط وﺟ ﻮد اﻷﻏﻠﺒﻴ ﺔ اﻟﻤﻄﻠﻘ ﺔ ﻣ ﻦ اﻟ ﺪول اﻷﻃ ﺮاف اﻟ ﺬﻳﻦ ﻳﺸ ﻜﻠﻮن اﻟﻨﺼ ﺎب‬
‫اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮﻧﻰ ﻟﻠﺘﺼﻮﻳﺖ" آﻤﺎ ورد ﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﺎدة‪.112‬‬

‫)‪ (19‬ﺑﺴﺒﺐ أﺳﻠﻮب ﺻﻴﺎﻏﺔ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻧﻪ ﻻ ﻳﻤﻜﻦ اﻟﻘﻮل إن أﺣﺪ اﻟﻨﺼﻮص ﻗﺪ ﺗﻤﺖ ﺻﻴﺎﻏﺘﻪ أو‬
‫ﺗﺒﻨﻴﻪ ﻗﺒﻞ اﻵﺧﺮ‪.‬‬

‫‪25‬‬

‫اﻟﻔـﺼـﻞ اﻟـﺜـﺎﻧــﻰ‬
‫اﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‬
‫اﻟـﻤـﺒﺤـﺚ اﻷول‬
‫اﻟﺸﺮوط اﻟﻤﺴﺒﻘﺔ ﻟﻤﻤﺎرﺳﺔ اﻻﺧﺘﺼﺎص‬
‫( ﺑﺸ ﺄن ﺟﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ ﻣ ﺎ ﻳﺠ ﺐ أن‬20)‫ ﻗﺒ ﻞ أن ﺗﻤ ﺎرس اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﺧﺘﺼﺎﺻ ﻬﺎ‬.12
‫ﺗﻜ ﻮن اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ ﻣﺤ ﻞ اﻻﺗﻬ ﺎم ﻗ ﺪ ارﺗﻜﺒ ﺖ ﻓ ﻰ إﻗﻠ ﻴﻢ دوﻟ ﺔ ﻃ ﺮف أو ﺑﻤﻌﺮﻓ ﺔ أﺣ ﺪ‬
‫ و ﺑﺎﻹﺿ ﺎﻓﺔ إﻟ ﻰ ذﻟ ﻚ ﻓﻠﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ أن‬،[(2) 12 ‫رﻋﺎﻳﺎه ﺎ ]اﻟﻤ ﺎدة‬
‫ﺗﻤ ﺎرس اﺧﺘﺼﺎﺻ ﻬﺎ ﻋﻨ ﺪﻣﺎ ﺗﻮاﻓ ﻖ دوﻟ ﺔ ﻟﻴﺴ ﺖ ﻃﺮﻓ ًﺎ ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ‬
‫وﺗﻜ ﻮن اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ ﻗ ﺪ ارﺗﻜﺒ ﺖ ﻓ ﻰ إﻗﻠ ﻴﻢ ه ﺬﻩ اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ أو ﻳﻜ ﻮن اﻟﻤ ﺘﻬﻢ أﺣ ﺪ رﻋﺎﻳﺎه ﺎ‬
.(21)[(3) 12 ‫]اﻟﻤﺎدة‬
(20 ) See generally Elizabeth Wilmshurst, Jurisdiction of the Court, in MAKING OF THE ROME
STATUTE, supra note 13, at 127-142. For additional commentary on Preconditions to
Jurisdiction, see Sharon A. Williams, Article 12: Preconditions to exercise of
jurisdiction, in COMMENTARY ON ROME STATUTE, supra note 13, at 329-342.

،‫ ﻓﻰ ﻋﻤﻞ ﻧﻈﺎم روﻣﺎ اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ‬،‫ اﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ‬،‫اﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﺼﻔﺔ ﻋﺎﻣﺔ إﻟﻴﺰاﺑﻴﺚ وﻳﻠﻤﺸﺎرﺳﺖ‬
‫ ﻟﻠﻤﺰﻳﺪ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻘﺎت ﺣﻮل اﻟﺸﺮوط اﻟﻤﺴﺒﻘﺔ ﻟﻼﺧﺘﺼﺎص‬.142 - 127 ‫ ﻓﻰ‬،ً‫ ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺎ‬13 ‫هﺎﻣﺶ‬
‫ ﻓﻰ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ‬،‫ اﻟﺸﺮوط اﻟﻤﺴﺒﻘﺔ ﻟﻤﻤﺎرﺳﺔ اﻻﺧﺘﺼﺎص‬:12 ‫ اﻟﻤﺎدة‬،‫ وﻟﻴﺎﻣﺰ‬.‫اﻧﻈﺮ ﺷﺎرون أ‬
.342 – 329 ‫ ﺁﻧﻔًﺎ ﻓﻰ‬13 ‫ﻧﻈﺎم روﻣﺎ اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ هﺎﻣﺶ‬
(21 ) Article 12(3) in connection with a referral to the ICC by a non state party uses the terms
Athe crime in question” instead of Aa situation in which one or more crimes within the
jurisdiction of the court appear to have been committed.” In all other referrals to the
ICC, by a state party or the security council, the statute uses the term “situation,” which
is intended to exclude a possible selectivity of instances or individuals to be referred to
the ICC on an exclusive basis. The drafting of Article 12(3)(which was part of the Part
2 package that was sent directly to the Committee of the whole and not to the Drafting
Committee, see Bassiouni, Negotiating the Treaty of Rome, supra note 17) did not
intend to deviate from other methods of referrals. Thus, Article 12(3) must be read in
pari materia with Article 13 (Aa situation in which one or more crimes within the
jurisdiction of the court appear to have been committed@).

‫( واﻟﻤﺘﺼﻠﺔ ﺑﺎﻹﺷﺎرة إﻟﻰ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼل دوﻟﺔ ﻟﻴﺴﺖ ﻃﺮﻓ ًﺎ‬3) 12 ‫اﻟﻤﺎدة‬
‫ﺗﺴﺘﺨﺪم ﻋﺒﺎرة "اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤﺔ ﻗﻴﺪ اﻟﺒﺤﺚ" ﺑﺪﻻ ﻣﻦ "ﺣﺎﻟﺔ ﻳﺒﺪو ﻓﻴﻬﺎ أن ﺟﺮﻳﻤﺔ أو أآﺜﺮ ﻣﻦ هﺬﻩ‬
‫" ﻓﻰ ﺟﻤﻴﻊ اﻹﺷﺎرات اﻷﺧﺮى ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ‬.‫اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺪاﺧﻠﺔ ﻓﻰ اﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﻗﺪ ارﺗﻜﺒﺖ‬
‫ ﻳﺴﺘﺨﺪم اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻟﻔﻆ "ﺣﺎﻟﺔ" و‬،‫ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼل دوﻟﺔ ﻃﺮف أو ﻣﺠﻠﺲ اﻷﻣﻦ‬،‫اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‬

26

‫‪ .13‬ﻳﻘ ﻮم اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﻣﺒ ﺪإ اﻻﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص‬
‫اﻟﺠﻨ ﺎﺋﻰ اﻹﻗﻠﻴﻤ ﻰ وﻟ ﻴﺲ ﻋﻠ ﻰ أﺳ ﺎس ﻧﻈﺮﻳ ﺔ ﻋﺎﻟﻤﻴ ﺔ اﻻﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟﺠﻨ ﺎﺋﻲ)‪.(22‬‬
‫وﻣﻦ اﻟﺜﺎﺑﺖ ﺑﻮﺿﻮح ﻓﻰ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ أﻧﻪ ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ﺗﺮﺗﻜﺐ ﺟﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ ﻓ ﻰ إﻗﻠ ﻴﻢ دوﻟ ﺔ‬
‫ﻣﺎ ﻓﺈﻧﻪ ﻳﻤﻜﻦ ﻣﺤﺎآﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﺎﻧﻰ ﺣﺘﻰ وﻟ ﻮ آ ﺎن ذﻟ ﻚ اﻟﺸ ﺨﺺ ﻟ ﻴﺲ أﺣ ﺪ رﻋﺎﻳ ﺎ ه ﺬﻩ‬
‫اﻟﺪوﻟﺔ)‪ ،(23‬وﺑﺴﺒﺐ ذﻟ ﻚ اﻟﻤﺒ ﺪإ ﻳﺠ ﻮز ﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ ﻣ ﺎ أن ﺗﻘ ﻮم ﺑﺘﺴ ﻠﻴﻢ ﺷ ﺨﺺ ﻟ ﻴﺲ ﻣ ﻦ‬
‫رﻋﺎﻳﺎهﺎ إﻟﻰ دوﻟﺔ أﺧﺮى ﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻤﺘﻪ‪ ،‬وﺑﻨﺎء ﻋﻠﻰ ذﻟﻚ ﻳﻜﻮن ﻟﻜﻞ دوﻟﺔ اﻟﺤ ﻖ –ﻃﺒﻘ ﺎ‬
‫ﻟﻤﻌﺎﻳﻴﺮه ﺎ اﻟﺪﺳ ﺘﻮرﻳﺔ– أن ﺗﻨﻘ ﻞ اﻻﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص إﻟ ﻰ دوﻟ ﺔ أﺧ ﺮى ﻳﻜ ﻮن ﻟﻬ ﺎ‬
‫اﻻﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﺷ ﺨﺺ ﻣ ﺘﻬﻢ ﺑﺎرﺗﻜ ﺎب ﺟﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ)‪ ،(24‬أو إﻟ ﻰ هﻴﺌ ﺔ دوﻟﻴ ﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤﺤﺎآﻤﺔ‪ ،‬وﻳﻜﻮن ﻧﻘﻞ اﻻﺧﺘﺼﺎص هﺬا ﻣﻤﺎرﺳﺔ ﺻﺤﻴﺤﺔ ﺗﻤﺎﻣ ﺎ ﻟﻠﺴ ﻴﺎدة اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻴ ﺔ‪.‬‬
‫وﺑﺼ ﻔﺔ ﻋﺎﻣ ﺔ ﻓ ﺈن ه ﺬا اﻟﻨﻘ ﻞ ﻳﺠ ﺐ أن ﻳ ﺘﻢ ﻃﺒﻘ ﺎ ﻟﻠﻤﻌ ﺎﻳﻴﺮ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻟﺤﻘ ﻮق‬
‫اﻹﻧﺴ ﺎن)‪ .(25‬وهﻜ ﺬا ﻓ ﺈن اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ – ﻓﻴﻤ ﺎ ﻳﺘﻌﻠ ﻖ ﺑﻤﺤﺎآﻤ ﺔ أﺣ ﺪ‬
‫اﻟﻤﺮاد ﻣﻦ ذﻟﻚ إﺧﺮاج وﻗﺎﺋﻊ أو= =أﺷﺨﺎص ﻣﺤﺘﻤﻞ اﻧﺘﻘﺎؤهﻢ ﻹﺣﺎﻟﺘﻬﻢ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ أﺳﺎس اﺳﺘﺜﻨﺎﺋﻰ‪ .‬ﺻﻴﺎﻏﺔ اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪) (3)12‬و اﻟﺘﻰ آﺎﻧﺖ ﺟﺰ ًءا ﻣﻦ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺔ اﻟﺒﺎب اﻟﺜﺎﻧﻰ‪،‬اﻟﺬى‬
‫أرﺳﻞ ﻣﺒﺎﺷﺮة إﻟﻰ اﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ اﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ و ﻟﻴﺲ إﻟﻰ ﻟﺠﻨﺔ اﻟﺼﻴﺎﻏﺔ‪ ،‬اﻧﻈﺮ ﺷﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ‪ ،‬اﻟﻤﻔﺎوﺿﺔ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻌﺎهﺪة روﻣﺎ‪ ،‬هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 18‬ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﺳﺒﻖ( ﻟﻢ ﻳﻜﻦ اﻟﻐﺮض ﻣﻨﻬﺎ اﻻﻧﺤﺮاف ﻋﻦ اﻷﺳﺎﻟﻴﺐ اﻷﺧﺮى‬
‫اﻟﻤﺸﺎر إﻟﻴﻬﺎ‪ .‬و ﻣﻦ ﺛﻢ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈﻧﻪ ﻳﺠﺐ ﻗﺮاءة اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ (3)12‬ﻓﻰ ذات اﻟﻤﻮﺿﻮع ﻣﻊ اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪") 13‬ﺣﺎﻟﺔ‬
‫ﻳﺒﺪو ﻓﻴﻬﺎ أن ﺟﺮﻳﻤﺔ أو أآﺜﺮ ﻣﻦ هﺬﻩ اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺪاﺧﻠﺔ ﻓﻰ اﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﻗﺪ ارﺗﻜﺒﺖ"(‪.‬‬
‫‪AND‬‬

‫‪(22 ) See M. CHERIF BASSIOUNI, INTERNATIONAL EXTRADITION: UNITED STATES LAW‬‬
‫‪PRACTICE 356-367 (3d ed. 1996).‬‬

‫اﻧﻈﺮ ﺷﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﺴﻠﻴﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﻬﻤﻴﻦ دوﻟﻴﺎ‪ :‬ﻗﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﻮﻻﻳﺎت اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة وﺗﻄﺒﻴﻘﻪ ‪367 - 356‬‬
‫)اﻟﻄﺒﻌﺔ اﻟﺜﺎﻟﺜﺔ ‪ (1996‬وﺑﺮﻏﻢ ﻋﺎﻟﻤﻴﺔ اﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ‪ ،‬إﻻ أﻧﻬﺎ ﻻ ﺗﻤﺜﻞ ﻧﻈﺮﻳﺔ اﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﻴﺔ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ‬
‫ﻋﺪا ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻺﺣﺎﻟﺔ ﻣﻦ ﻣﺠﻠﺲ اﻷﻣﻦ واﻟﺘﻰ ﻻ ﺗﺘﺼﻞ ﺑﺈﻗﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ أى دوﻟﺔ ﺳﻮاء آﺎﻧﺖ ﻃﺮﻓًﺎ أو ﻏﻴﺮ‬
‫ﻃﺮف‪.‬‬
‫‪(23 ) Id. at 357.‬‬
‫اﻟﻤﺮﺟﻊ اﻟﺴﺎﺑﻖ ﻓﻰ ‪.357‬‬
‫‪(24 ) See for example the European Convention on the Transfer of Proceedings in Criminal‬‬
‫‪Matters, ETS. No. 73, 30 (March 1978); EUROPEAN INTER-STATE CO-OPERATION IN‬‬
‫‪CRIMINAL MATTERS 831 (E.M. Rappard and M. Cherif Bassiouni eds., 1991). Surrender‬‬
‫‪of individuals by one state to another is commonly done by means of extradition. See‬‬
‫‪BASSIOUNI, INTERNATIONAL EXTRADITION 385, supra note 22.‬‬

‫اﻧﻈﺮ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺳﺒﻴﻞ اﻟﻤﺜﺎل اﻟﻤﻌﺎهﺪة اﻷوروﺑﻴﺔ ﻟﻨﻘﻞ اﻹﺟﺮاءات ﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﺴﺎﺋﻞ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ‪،‬‬
‫)‪30 (March 1978‬؛ اﻟﺘﻌﺎون اﻷوروﺑﻰ ﻋﺒﺮ اﻟﺪول ﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﺴﺎﺋﻞ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ ‪) 831‬أى أم راﺑﺎرد و‬
‫ﺷﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ ﻃﺒﻌﺔ ‪ .(1991‬ﺗﺴﻠﻴﻢ اﻷﻓﺮاد ﻋﻦ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ دوﻟﺔ إﻟﻰ أﺧﺮى ﻳﺘﻢ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻄﺎق واﺳﻊ‬
‫ﻋﻦ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﺗﺴﻠﻴﻢ اﻟﻤﺠﺮﻣﻴﻦ‪ .‬اﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﺴﻠﻴﻢ اﻟﻤﺠﺮﻣﻴﻦ دوﻟﻴﺎ ‪ ،385‬هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 22‬ﺳﺎﺑﻘًﺎ‪.‬‬

‫‪ETS. No. 73,‬‬

‫‪(25 ) International human rights law norms provide for certain substantive and procedural‬‬
‫‪guarantees. These norms also arise under regional conventions such as the European‬‬

‫‪27‬‬

‫اﻟﺮﻋﺎﻳ ﺎ ﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ ﻟﻴﺴ ﺖ ﻃﺮﻓ ًﺎ واﻟ ﺬى ﻳﺮﺗﻜ ﺐ ﺟﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ ﻓ ﻰ إﻗﻠ ﻴﻢ دوﻟ ﺔ ﻃ ﺮف– ﻻ‬
‫ﺗﺸﺘﺮط ﺷﻴﺌًﺎ أآﺜﺮ ﻣﻤﺎ هﻮ ﻗﺎﺋﻢ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌﻞ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﻤﺎرﺳﺔ اﻟﻤﻌﺘﺎدة ﻟﻠﺪول)‪.(26‬‬
‫‪ .14‬ﺣﻴ ﺚ إن اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻣﻜﻤﻠ ﺔ ﻟﻼﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟﺠﻨ ﺎﺋﻰ‬
‫اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻰ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈن ﺗﺴﻠﻴﻢ اﻟﺪول اﻷﻃﺮاف ﺷﺨﺼ ﺎ إﻟ ﻰ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﺗﻨﻔﻴ ﺬًا‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤﻌﺎهﺪة‪) :‬أ( ﻻ ﻳﻘﻠﻞ ﻣﻦ ﺳﻴﺎدﺗﻬﺎ اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻴ ﺔ؛ )ب( ﻻ ﻳﻨﺘﻬ ﻚ اﻟﺴ ﻴﺎدة اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻴ ﺔ ﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ‬
‫أﺧ ﺮى )ﻣﺜ ﻞ دوﻟ ﺔ ﺟﻨﺴ ﻴﺔ اﻟﺠ ﺎﻧﻰ أو اﻟﻤﺠﻨ ﻰ ﻋﻠﻴ ﻪ(؛ )ج( ﻻ ﻳﻨﺘﻬ ﻚ ﺣﻘ ﻮق‬
‫اﻟﺸ ﺨﺺ اﻟ ﺬى ﺗﻨﻘ ﻞ ﻣﺤﺎآﻤﺘ ﻪ إﻟ ﻰ اﻻﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟﺠﻨ ﺎﺋﻰ اﻟﻤﺨ ﺘﺺ )اﻟ ﺬى ﺳ ﻮف‬
‫ﻳﻤﺎرس وﻻﻳﺘﻪ وﻓﻘﺎ ﻟﻠﻤﻌﺎﻳﻴﺮ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﺤﻘﻮق اﻹﻧﺴﺎن(‪.‬‬
‫اﻟـﻤـﺒﺤـﺚ اﻟﺜﺎﻧــﻰ‬
‫اﻻﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﻮﺿﻮﻋﻰ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‬

‫‪Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. See THE PROTECTION OF‬‬
‫= ‪HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE: A COMPENDIUM OF UNITED‬‬
‫‪=NATIONS NORMS AND STANDARDS (M. Cherif Bassiouni ed., 1994); and M. Cherif‬‬
‫‪Bassiouni, Human Rights in the Context of Criminal Justice: Identifying International‬‬
‫‪Procedural Protections and Equivalent in National Constitutions, 3 DUKE JOURNAL OF‬‬
‫‪COMPARATIVE & INTERNATIONAL LAW 235-297(1993). See generally LES DROITS DE‬‬
‫‪L’HOMME A L’AUBE DU XXIe SIECLE (Karel Vasak ed., 1999).‬‬

‫ﻗﻮاﻋﺪ ﻗﺎﻧﻮن ﺣﻘﻮق اﻹﻧﺴﺎن اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ ﺗﺘﻀ ﻤﻦ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋ ﺔ ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﻀ ﻤﺎﻧﺎت اﻟﻤﻮﺿ ﻮﻋﻴﺔ و اﻹﺟﺮاﺋﻴ ﺔ‪.‬‬
‫وﺗﻈﻬﺮ ﺗﻠﻚ اﻟﻘﻮاﻋﺪ أﻳﻀﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼل اﻟﻤﻌﺎهﺪات اﻹﻗﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ ﻣﺜﻞ اﻟﻤﻌﺎهﺪة اﻷوروﺑﻴﺔ ﻟﺤﻘﻮق اﻹﻧﺴ ﺎن‬
‫واﻟﺤﺮﻳﺎت اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻴﺔ‪ .‬اﻧﻈﺮ ﺣﻤﺎﻳﺔ ﺣﻘﻮق اﻹﻧﺴﺎن ﻓﻰ إدارة اﻟﻌﺪاﻟﺔ‪ :‬ﻣﻠﺨﺺ ﻟﻘﻮاﻋﺪ وﻣﻌﺎﻳﻴﺮ اﻷﻣﻢ‬
‫اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة )ﻣﺤﻤﻮد ﺷﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺴ ﻴﻮﻧﻰ ﻃﺒﻌ ﺔ ‪(1994‬؛ وﻣﺤﻤ ﻮد ﺷ ﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺴ ﻴﻮﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﺣﻘ ﻮق اﻹﻧﺴ ﺎن ﻓ ﻰ‬
‫ﺳﻴﺎق اﻟﻌﺪاﻟﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ‪ :‬ﺑﻴﺎن إﺟﺮاءات اﻟﺤﻤﺎﻳﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ واﻟﺪﺳﺎﺗﻴﺮ اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻴﺔ اﻟﻤﻤﺎﺛﻠﺔ‪ 3 ،‬ﺟﺮﻳﺪة دﻳﻮك‬
‫ﻟﻠﻘ ﺎﻧﻮن اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ واﻟﻤﻘ ﺎرن‪ .(1993) 297 – 235‬اﻧﻈ ﺮ ﺑﺼ ﻔﺔ ﻋﺎﻣ ﺔ ﺣﻘ ﻮق اﻹﻧﺴ ﺎن ﻓ ﻰ ﻓﺠ ﺮ‬
‫اﻟﻘﺮن اﻟﻮاﺣﺪ واﻟﻌﺸﺮﻳﻦ )آﺎرل ﻓﺎﺳﻜﺎد ﻃﺒﻌﺔ ‪.(1999‬‬
‫‪(26 ) See BASSIOUNI, INTERNATIONAL EXTRADITION, supra note 22, at 357.‬‬

‫اﻧﻈﺮ ﺷﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﺗﺴﻠﻴﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﻬﻤﻴﻦ دوﻟﻴﺎ‪ ،‬ﺳﺎﺑﻘًﺎ هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 22‬ﻓﻰ ‪.357‬‬

‫‪28‬‬

،‫ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻮﻗ ﺖ اﻟ ﺮاهﻦ‬،(27)‫ ﻳﺸﻤﻞ اﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ‬.15
‫( ﺛ ﻼث ﺟ ﺮاﺋﻢ دوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻣﺤ ﺪدة ﺑﺸ ﻜﻞ‬5) ‫ﻣ ﻦ ﺣﻴ ﺚ اﻟﻤﻮﺿ ﻮع وﻓﻘ ﺎ ﻟ ﻨﺺ اﻟﻤ ﺎدة‬
‫ واﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ ﺿ ﺪ‬،(29)‫ وﺟ ﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺤ ﺮب‬،(28)‫ ﺟﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ اﻹﺑ ﺎدة اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﻴ ﺔ‬:‫ وه ﻰ‬،‫دﻗﻴ ﻖ‬

(27) See generally Herman von Hebel and Darryl Robinson, Crimes within the Jurisdiction of
the Court, in MAKING OF THE ROME STATUTE, supra note 13, at 79-126. For additional
commentary on Ratione Materia, see Andreas Zimmerman, Article 5: Crimes within the
jurisdiction of the Court, in COMMENTARY ON ROME STATUTE, supra note 13, at 97107.=

‫=اﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﺼﻔﺔ ﻋﺎﻣﺔ هﻴﺮﻣﺎن ﻓﻮن هﻴﺒﻞ ودارﻳﻞ روﺑﻨﺴﻦ – اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ داﺧﻞ ﻧﻄﺎق اﺧﺘﺼﺎص‬
‫ ﻟﻠﺘﻌﻠﻴﻘﺎت‬.126 – 79 ‫ﻓﻰ‬،13 ‫ هﺎﻣﺶ‬،‫ ﻓﻰ ﺻﻴﺎﻏﺔ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻻﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴﺔ روﻣﺎ‬،‫اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ‬
‫ اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ‬5 ‫"– ﻣﺎدة‬Andreas Zimmerman " ‫ اﻧﻈﺮ‬،‫اﻹﺿﺎﻓﻴﺔ ﺑﺸﺄن اﻟﻤﺴﺄﻟﺔ اﻟﻤﺸﻤﻮﻟﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﺒﺤﺚ‬
- 97 ‫ ﻓﻰ‬،13 ‫ هﺎﻣﺶ‬،‫ ﻓﻰ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻟﺮوﻣﺎ‬،‫داﺧﻞ ﻧﻄﺎق اﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ‬
.107
(28) For a discussion of the crime of genocide, see Matthew Lippman, Genocide, in 1 ICL,
supra note 4, at 589 - 613.

‫ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن‬-1 ‫ﻟﻤﻨﺎﻗﺸﺔ ﺟﺮﻳﻤﺔ اﻹﺑﺎدة اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ – اﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﺎﺛﻴﻮ ﻟﻴﺒﻤﺎن –ﺟﺮﻳﻤﺔ اﻹﺑﺎدة اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ– ﻓﻰ‬
.613 – 589 ‫ ص‬،ً‫ ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺎ‬4 ‫اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻰ اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ – هﺎﻣﺶ‬
(29) For a historical overview of the evolution of formal and informal limitations on the
conduct of war among Western states, see M. HOWARD, G. ANDREOPOULOS AND M.
SHULMAN, THE LAW OF WAR: CONSTRAINTS ON WARFARE IN THE WESTERN WORLD
(1994). See also generally THE LAW OF WAR CRIMES: NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL
APPROACHES (Timothy McCormack and Gerry Simpson eds., 1997); THE LAW OF
ARMED CONFLICT INTO THE NEXT MILLENNIUM (Michael Schmitt and Leslie Green eds.,
1998); ESSAYS ON THE MODERN LAW OF WAR (Leslie Green ed., 2d ed. 1999); Leslie C.
Green, International Regulation of Armed Conflicts, in 1 ICL, supra note 4, at 355-380;
Yves Sandoz, Penal Aspects of International Humanitarian Law, in 1 ICL, supra note 4,
at 393-416; Michael Veuthey, Non-International Armed Conflict and Guerilla Warfare,
in 1 ICL, supra note 4, at 417-438.

‫ﻹﻟﻘﺎء ﻧﻈﺮة ﺗﺎرﻳﺨﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺗﻄﻮر اﻟﻘﻴﻮد اﻟﺮﺳﻤﻴﺔ وﻏﻴﺮ اﻟﺮﺳﻤﻴﺔ ﺑﺸﺄن إدارة اﻟﺤﺮب ﺑﻴﻦ اﻟﺪول‬
‫ اﻻﺗﺠﺎهﺎت اﻟﻤﺤﻠﻴﺔ‬:‫ ﺷﻠﻤﺎن – ﻗﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺤﺮب‬.‫ ﺁﻧﺪروﺑﻮﻟﺲ و م‬.‫ ﺟﻰ‬،‫ هﺎوارد‬.‫اﻟﻐﺮﺑﻴﺔ – اﻧﻈﺮ م‬
‫ – ﻗﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺼﺮاع اﻟﻤﺴﻠﺢ ﻓﻰ‬1997 ‫واﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ )ﺗﻴﻤﻮﺛﻰ ﻣﻜﻮرﻣﺎك و ﺟﻴﺮى ﺳﻤﺒﺴﻮن( – ﻃﺒﻌﺔ‬
‫ – ﻣﻘﺎﻻت ﺑﺸﺄن اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺤﺪﻳﺚ‬1998 ‫اﻷﻟﻔﻴﺔ اﻟﻘﺎدﻣﺔ )ﻣﺎﻳﻜﻞ ﺷﻤﺖ و ﻟﺰﻟﻰ ﺟﺮﻳﻦ( – ﻃﺒﻌﺔ‬
‫ ﺟﺮﻳﻦ – اﻟﻘﻮاﻋﺪ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻨﺰاﻋﺎت اﻟﻤﺴﻠﺤﺔ‬.‫ ﻟﺰﻟﻰ ﺳﻰ‬1999 ‫ﻟﻠﺤﺮب )ﻟﺰﻟﻰ ﺟﺮﻳﻦ( – ﻃﺒﻌﺔ‬
‫ اﻟﺼﻔﺎت اﻟﻌﻘﻮﺑﻴﺔ‬،‫؛ إﻳﻔﺲ ﺳﺎﻧﺪوز‬380-355 ‫ ﻓﻰ‬،ً‫ ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺎ‬4 ‫ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻰ اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ هﺎﻣﺶ‬1 ‫ﻓﻰ‬
‫؛‬416-393 ‫ ﻓﻰ‬،ً‫ ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺎ‬4 ‫ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻰ اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ هﺎﻣﺶ‬1 ‫ ﻓﻰ‬،‫ﻓﻰ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ اﻹﻧﺴﺎﻧﻰ‬
،‫ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻰ اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ‬1 ‫ ﻓﻰ‬،‫ﻣﺎﻳﻜﻞ ﻓﻴﻮﺛﻠﻰ اﻟﻨﺰاع اﻟﻤﺴﻠﺢ ﻏﻴﺮ اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ وﺣﺮب اﻟﻌﺼﺎﺑﺎت‬
.438-417‫ ص‬،ً‫ ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺎ‬4 ‫هﺎﻣﺶ‬

29

‫اﻹﻧﺴ ﺎﻧﻴﺔ)‪ .(30‬ه ﺬﻩ اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟ ﺜﻼث اﻟﻤﻮﺟ ﻮدة ﺣﺎﻟﻴ ﺎ ﺿ ﻤﻦ اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴـﺔ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﻮاد ‪ ،7 ،6‬و‪ .8‬و هﻰ ﻣﺘﻮاﻓﻘﺔ ﻣ ﻊ اﻟﻘ ﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺠﻨ ﺎﺋﻰ‬
‫اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ اﻟﻘ ﺎﺋﻢ وآ ﺬا ﻣ ﻊ ﻣﻔﻬ ﻮم ﻗ ﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺸ ﻌﻮب‪ ،‬اﻟﻤﻠ ﺰم ﻟﺠﻤﻴ ﻊ اﻟ ﺪول وآﻘﻮاﻋ ﺪ‬
‫ﺗﺤﻤ ﻞ اﻟﺘﺰاﻣ ﺎت ﺑﺤﻴ ﺚ ﻻ ﻳﺠ ﻮز ﻟﻠﺪوﻟ ﺔ اﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴ ﻞ ﻣ ﻦ ﺷ ﺄﻧﻬﺎ)‪ .(31‬وﻳ ﺪرج اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم‬
‫اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ أﻳﻀ ًﺎ ﺟﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ اﻟﻌ ﺪوان واﻟﺘ ﻰ ﻳﺠ ﺐ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻔﻬ ﺎ‪ ،‬وﻣ ﻦ ﺛ ﻢ ﻓﻬ ﻰ ﺗﺨﻀ ﻊ‬
‫ﻻﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ‪ .‬وﻋ ﻼوة ﻋﻠ ﻰ ذﻟ ﻚ ﻓ ﺈن ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ أﻳﻀ ًﺎ‬
‫اﺧﺘﺼﺎﺻًﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺘﻰ ﺗﺮﺗﻜﺐ ﺿﺪ إﻗﺎﻣ ﺔ اﻟﻌﺪاﻟ ﺔ وﻟﻬ ﺎ أن ﺗﻘﻀ ﻰ ﺑﻌﻘﻮﺑ ﺎت ﻓ ﻰ‬
‫هﺬا اﻟﺨﺼﻮص آﻤﺎ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﺎدﺗﻴﻦ ‪) .(32)71 ، 70‬اﻧﻈﺮ اﻟﺠﺪول رﻗﻢ‪.(2‬‬
‫‪ .16‬اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ 6‬ﺗﻌ ﺮف اﻹﺑ ﺎدة اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﻴ ﺔ وﻓﻘ ًﺎ ﻻﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴ ﺔ ‪ 1948‬اﻟﺨﺎﺻ ﺔ ﺑﻤﻨ ﻊ‬
‫ﺟﺮﻳﻤﺔ اﻹﺑــﺎدة اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﻴـــﺔ واﻟﻤﻌﺎﻗﺒـــﺔ ﻋﻠﻴﻬــﺎ)‪ (33‬واﻟﺘﻰ ﺗــﻢ اﻟﺘﺼﺪﻳﻖ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻣ ﻦ‬
‫ﻗﺒﻞ ‪ 123‬دوﻟﺔ)‪.(34‬‬

‫‪(30) For a discussion of crimes against humanity see M. CHERIF BASSIOUNI, CRIMES AGAINST‬‬
‫‪HUMANITY IN INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW (2d rev. ed. 1999); Margaret McAuliffe‬‬
‫‪deGuzman, The Road from Rome: The Developing Law of Crimes Against Humanity, 22‬‬
‫‪HUM. RTS. Q. 335 (2000).‬‬

‫ﻟﻤﻨﺎﻗﺸﺔ اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ ﺿﺪ اﻹﻧﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ – اﻧﻈﺮ م ‪ .‬ﺷﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ – اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ ﺿﺪ اﻹﻧﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن‬
‫اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻰ اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ ) ﻃﺒﻌﺔ ﺛﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﻣﻨﻘﺤﺔ ‪ .(1999‬ﻣﺎرﺟﺮﻳﺖ ﻣﺎآﻠﻴﻔﻰ دى ﺟﻮزﻣﺎن – اﻟﻄﺮﻳﻖ ﻣﻦ‬
‫روﻣﺎ‪ :‬ﺗﻄﻮر ﻗﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ ﺿﺪ اﻹﻧﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ – ‪.HUM. RTS. Q .335 (2000) 22‬‬
‫‪(31) See Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, supra note 17, at arts. 53, 64; M. Cherif‬‬
‫& ‪Bassiouni, International Crimes: Jus Cogens and Obligatio Erga Omnes, 59 L.‬‬
‫‪CONTEMP. PROBS. 63 (1996).‬‬

‫اﻧﻈﺮ اﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴﺔ ﻓﻴﻴﻨﺎ ﺑﺸﺄن ﻗﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﻤﻌﺎهﺪات هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 17‬ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺎً‪ ،‬ص ‪ .64 ، 53‬م ﺷﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ‬
‫اﻟﺪوﻟﻴــﺔ‪ :‬اﻟﻮاﺟــــﺒﺎت اﻟﺪوﻟــــﻴﺔ اﻟﻨﺎﺗﺠـــﺔ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﺒﺎدئ اﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ واﻟﻘﻮاﻋﺪ اﻟﻤﻠﺰﻣﺔ ﻟﻬﺎ‪،‬‬
‫‪.(1996) 63 (&Contemp. Probs. L. 59‬‬
‫‪(32 ) See von Hebel and Robinson, supra note 32. For additional commentary on Offenses‬‬
‫‪against the administration of justice, see Kenneth Harris, Article 70: Offences against‬‬
‫‪the administration of justice, in COMMENTARY ON ROME STATUTE, supra note 13, at 917‬‬‫‪924; Otto Triffterer, Article 71: Sanctions for misconduct before the Court, in‬‬
‫‪COMMENTARY ON ROME STATUTE, supra note 13, at 925-936.‬‬

‫اﻧﻈﺮ ﻓﻮن هﻴﺒﻞ رﺑﻮﻧﻴﺴﻦ‪ ،‬ه ﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 32‬ﻟﻠﺘﻌﻠﻴ ﻖ اﻹﺿ ﺎﻓﻰ ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ ﺿ ﺪ إﻗﺎﻣ ﺔ اﻟﻌ ﺪل‪ ،‬اﻟﻤ ﺎدة‬
‫‪ :70‬ﺟﺮاﺋﻢ ﺿﺪ إﻗﺎﻣﺔ اﻟﻌﺪل‪ ،‬ﺗﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ اﻟ ﺬى ﺗ ﻢ إﻗ ﺮارﻩ ﻓ ﻰ روﻣ ﺎ‪ ،‬ه ﺎﻣﺶ ‪13‬‬
‫ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺎً‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ ‪ 924 - 917‬أوﺗﻮ ﺗﺮﻓﻴﺘﻴﺮ ‪ ،‬اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ : 71‬اﻟﻌﻘﻮﺑ ﺎت ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﺳ ﻮء اﻟﺴ ﻠﻮك أﻣ ﺎم اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ‪،‬‬
‫ﺗﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ اﻟﺬى ﺗﻢ إﻗﺮارﻩ ﻓﻰ روﻣﺎ‪ ،‬هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 13‬ﺳﺎﺑﻖ‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ ‪.936 - 925‬‬

‫‪30‬‬

‫‪ .17‬ﺗﻌﺮف اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ 7‬ﻣﻦ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ‬
‫ﻼ وﺗﺤﺪﻳ ﺪًا ﺑﻤ ﺎ ﻳﻌﻜ ﺲ اﻟﺘﻄ ﻮر اﻟﺴ ﺮﻳﻊ‬
‫ﺿ ﺪ اﻹﻧﺴ ﺎﻧﻴﺔ )‪ (35‬ﺑﻄﺮﻳﻘ ﺔ أآﺜ ﺮ ﺗﻔﺼ ﻴ ً‬
‫ﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﻌﺮف اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ وﻓﻘًﺎ ﻟﻠﻤﺎدة ‪)6‬ج( ﻣﻦ ﻣﻴﺜ ﺎق ﻧ ﻮرﻣﺒﺮج)‪ (36‬واﻟﻤـ ـﺎدة ‪ 5‬ﻣ ﻦ‬
‫اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻴﻮﻏﻮﺳﻼﻓﻴﺎ اﻟﺴﺎﺑﻘﺔ)‪ (37‬واﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ 3‬ﻣ ﻦ‬
‫اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻟﺮواﻧ ﺪا)‪ .(38‬واﻟﺘﻔﺼ ﻴﻞ اﻟ ﻮارد ﺑ ﻨﺺ‬
‫ﻣ ﺎدة اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻳﻌﻄ ﻰ ﻣﺰﻳ ﺪًا ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﺪﻗ ﺔ وﻳﻌﻜ ﺲ‬
‫اﻟﺘﻄﻮر اﻟﻤﻠﺤﻮظ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﻌﺮﻓﻰ اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ)‪ .(39‬آﻤﺎ ﻗﺪﻣﻨﺎ‪.‬‬
‫‪(33 ) Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 78 U.N.T.S.‬‬
‫‪277 (New York, United Nations: 9 December 1948) reprinted in M.CHERIF BASSIOUNI,‬‬
‫‪INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW CONVENTIONS AND THEIR PENAL PROVISIONS 247-250‬‬
‫‪1997)[hereinafter ABASSIOUNI, CONVENTIONS@]. See also Lippman, Genocide, supra‬‬
‫‪note 33.‬‬

‫اﻻﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴﺔ اﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ ﺑﻤﻨﻊ وﻣﻌﺎﻗﺒﺔ ﺟﺮﻳﻤﺔ اﻹﺑﺎدة اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ‪ ) 227U.N.T.S. 78 ،‬ﻧﻴﻮﻳﻮرك ‪،‬‬
‫اﻷﻣﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة‪ 9 :‬دﻳﺴﻤﺒﺮ ‪ ( 1948‬وأﻋﻴﺪ ﻃﺒﻌﻬﺎ ﻓﻰ م‪ .‬ﺷﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ‪ ،‬اﻻﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴﺎت اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻰ وأﺣﻜﺎﻣﻬﺎ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ ‪] (1997) 250 -247‬ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﺑﻌﺪ “ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ‪،‬‬
‫اﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴﺎت”[‪ .‬اﻧﻈﺮ أﻳﻀًﺎ ﻟﻴﺒﻤﺎن‪ ،‬اﻹﺑﺎدة اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ‪ ،‬هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 33‬ﺳﺎﺑﻖ‪.‬‬
‫)‪ (34‬ﺑﺪءًا ﻣﻦ ﺷﻬﺮ دﻳﺴﻤﺒﺮ ‪.1997‬‬
‫‪(35) ICC Statute, supra note 13, at art. 7. See BASSIOUNI, CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY, supra‬‬
‫‪note 35, at 243-275.‬‬

‫اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 13‬ﺳﺎﺑﻖ‪ ،‬اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ .7‬اﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﺟﺮاﺋﻢ‬
‫ﺿﺪ اﻹﻧﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ‪ ،‬هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 35‬ﺳﺎﺑﻖ‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ ‪.275-243‬‬
‫‪(36) BASSIOUNI, CONVENTIONS, supra note 38, at 457-494.‬‬

‫ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ‪ ،‬اﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴﺎت‪ ،‬هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 38‬ﺳﺎﺑﻖ‪ ،‬ﻣﻮاد ‪.494 – 457‬‬
‫‪37‬‬

‫‪( ) Agreement for the Protection and Punishment of the Major War Criminals of the‬‬
‫‪European Axis, Charter of the International Military Tribunal, 59 Stat. 1544, 82‬‬
‫‪U.N.T.S. 279 (New York: United Nations, 8 August 1945).‬‬

‫اﻻﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴﺔ اﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ ﺑﺤﻤﺎﻳﺔ وﻣﻌﺎﻗﺒﺔ آﺒﺎر ﻣﺠﺮﻣﻰ اﻟﺤﺮب ﻟﺪول اﻟﻤﺤﻮر اﻷوروﺑﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻣﻴﺜﺎق اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ‬
‫اﻟﻌﺴﻜﺮﻳﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ ‪)279 U.N.T.S 82 ،1544 ،59‬ﻧﻴﻮﻳﻮرك‪ :‬اﻷﻣﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة ‪8‬‬
‫أﻏﺴﻄﺲ ‪.(1945‬‬
‫)‪(38) Statute of the International Tribunal for Rwanda, Security Council Resolution 955 (1994‬‬
‫‪49th Sess., U.N. Doc. S/RES/955, (New York: United Nations, 8 November 1994).‬‬

‫اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ ﻓﻰ رواﻧﺪا‪ ،‬ﻗﺮار ﻣﺠﻠﺲ اﻷﻣﻦ ‪ (1994) 955‬اﻟﺠﻠﺴﺔ ‪،49‬‬
‫ﻣﺴﺘﻨﺪات اﻷﻣﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة ‪) ،S/RES / 955‬ﻧﻴﻮﻳﻮرك‪ :‬اﻷﻣﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة‪ 8 ،‬ﻧﻮﻓﻤﺒﺮ ‪.(1994‬‬
‫‪(39) Article 7(1) requires that an “attack upon a civilian population” be “systematic” or‬‬
‫‪“widespread” as does Article 3 of the Statute of the ICTR, but Article 7(2) requires that‬‬

‫‪31‬‬

‫وهﻨﺎ ﺗﺠﺪر ﻣﻼﺣﻈﺔ أﻧﻪ ﻳﺠﺐ أن ﺗﺘﻮاﻓﺮ اﻷرآﺎن اﻟﺘﺎﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ ﺿ ﺪ‬
‫اﻹﻧﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ‪:‬‬
‫أ‪ .‬أن ﺗﻜ ﻮن هﻨ ﺎك ﺳﻴﺎﺳ ﺔ دوﻟ ﺔ أو ﺳﻴﺎﺳ ﺔ ﻣ ﻦ ﻗﺒ ﻞ ﻣﻨﻈﻤ ﺔ ﻏﻴ ﺮ ﺣﻜﻮﻣﻴ ﺔ‬
‫)اﻟﻤﺎدة‪.((2)7‬‬
‫ب‪ .‬أن ﺗﻜﻮن اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤﺔ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﻤ ﺬآﻮرة واﻟﻤﺤ ﺪدة ﺣﺼ ﺮًا ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪7‬‬
‫)‪.(1‬‬
‫ج‪ .‬أن ﺗﺮﺗﻜ ﺐ ه ﺬﻩ اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﻧﻄ ﺎق واﺳ ﻊ أو أﺳ ﺎس ﻣﻨﻬﺠ ﻰ اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪7‬‬
‫)‪.(1‬‬
‫وهﻮ ﻣﺎ ﻳﺒﺮز أهﻤﻴﺔ رآﻦ اﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳﺔ ﺣﻴﺚ ﻳﻌﺪ اﻟﻤﺤ ﻚ ﻓ ﻰ ﺗﺤﺪﻳ ﺪ اﻻﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص‬
‫واﻟﺬى ﻗﺪ ﻳﺆدى إﻟﻰ ﺗﺤﻮﻳﻞ اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ ﻣﻦ ﺟﺮﻳﻤﺔ وﻃﻨﻴﺔ إﻟﻰ ﺟﺮﻳﻤﺔ دوﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬وﻣﻦ ﺛ ﻢ‬
‫ﻓﻬ ﻮ رآ ﻦ أﺳﺎﺳ ﻲ– ﺿ ﺮورى‪ ،‬وﻗ ﺪ ورد ﺿ ﻤﻦ ﻋﻨﺎﺻ ﺮ اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ آﻤ ﺎ أﻋﺪﺗ ﻪ‬
‫اﻟﻠﺠﻨ ﺔ اﻟﺘﺤﻀ ﻴﺮﻳﺔ واﻟ ﺬى ورد ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻔﻘ ﺮة اﻟﺜﺎﻟﺜ ﺔ ﻣﻨ ﻪ " أن اﻟﻬﺠ ﻮم اﻟﻤﻮﺟ ﻪ ﺿ ﺪ‬
‫ﺳﻜﺎن ﻣﺪﻧﻴﻴﻦ" هﻮ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻘﺼﺪ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻜﺮار ارﺗﻜﺎب اﻷﻋﻤﺎل اﻟﻤﺸﺎر إﻟﻴﻬ ﺎ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪7‬‬
‫اﻟﻔﻘ ﺮة "‪ "1‬ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ ﺿ ﺪ اﻟﺴ ﻜﺎن اﻟﻤ ﺪﻧﻴﻴﻦ ووﻓﻘ ًﺎ ﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ أو‬
‫اﻟﻤﻨﻈﻤ ﺔ اﻟﻬﺎدﻓ ﺔ ﻻرﺗﻜ ﺎب ه ﺬا اﻟﻬﺠ ﻮم‪ .‬وه ﺬا اﻟﻔﻌ ﻞ ﻻ ﻳﻘﺘﻀ ﻰ ﺗﻀ ﻤﻨﻪ هﺠﻮﻣ ًﺎ‬
‫ﻋﺴﻜﺮﻳّﺎ ﻣﻤ ﺎ ﻳﻌﻨ ﻰ أن "ﺳﻴﺎﺳ ﺔ ارﺗﻜ ﺎب ذﻟ ﻚ اﻟﻬﺠ ﻮم" ﺗﺘﻄﻠ ﺐ أن ﺗﻘ ﻮم اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ أو‬
‫اﻟﻤﻨﻈﻤ ﺔ ﺑﺸ ﻜﻞ ﻓﻌ ﺎل ﻋﻠ ﻰ دﻋ ﻢ أو ﺗﺸ ﺠﻴﻊ ذﻟ ﻚ اﻟﻬﺠ ﻮم ﺿ ﺪ اﻟﺴ ﻜﺎن اﻟﻤ ﺪﻧﻴﻴﻦ‬
‫)هﺎﻣﺶ ‪.(40)(1‬‬

‫‪such an “attack” be the product of a state’s “policy”. Thus, the element of “policy” is a‬‬
‫‪prerequisite. See BASSIOUNI, CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY, supra note 35, at 243-275.‬‬

‫اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ (1) 7‬ﺗﺘﻄﻠﺐ "اﻟﻬﺠﻮم ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺴﻜﺎن اﻟﻤﺪﻧﻴﻴﻦ" ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﺤﻮ "ﻣﻨﻈﻢ وﻣﻨﻬﺠﻲ" أو "واﺳﻊ‬
‫اﻟﻨﻄﺎق" آﻤﺎ هﻮ اﻟﺤﺎل ﻓﻰ ﻧﺺ اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ 3‬ﻣﻦ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﺮواﻧﺪا‪،‬‬
‫إﻻ أن اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ (2) 7‬ﺗﻘﺘﻀﻰ أن ﻳﻜﻮن "اﻟﻬﺠﻮم" ﻧﺎﺗﺠًﺎ ﻋﻦ "ﺳﻴﺎﺳﺔ" دوﻟﺔ‪ .‬وﻣﻦ ﺛﻢ رآﻦ‬
‫"اﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳﺔ" هﻮ ﻋﻨﺼﺮ أﺳﺎﺳﻰ‪ .‬اﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ‪ ،‬ﺟﺮاﺋﻢ ﺿﺪ اﻹﻧﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ‪ ،‬هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 35‬ﺳﺎﺑﻖ‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ ‪243‬‬
‫– ‪.275‬‬
‫‪(40 ) See Report of the Preparatory Commission of the International Criminal Court, Finalized‬‬
‫‪Draft of the Elements of Crimes, U.N. Doc. PCNICC/2000/INF/3/Add.2 (30 June 2000).‬‬

‫اﻧﻈﺮ‪ :‬ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺮ اﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ اﻟﺘﺤﻀﻴﺮﻳﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻧﺴﺨﺔ ﻧﻬﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﻷرآﺎن اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﻣﺴﺘﻨﺪ‬
‫اﻷﻣﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة ‪ / 3 /INF / 2000 / PCNICC‬إﺿﺎﻓﻰ ‪ 30) 2‬ﻳﻮﻧﻴﻮ ‪.(2000‬‬

‫‪32‬‬

‫وﻗﺪ ورد ﻓ ﻰ ﻧﻬﺎﺑ ﺔ ه ﺎﻣﺶ ه ﺬﻩ اﻟﻔﻘ ﺮة‪ :‬أن اﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳ ﺔ اﻟﻤﻮﺟﻬ ﺔ ﺿ ﺪ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋ ﺔ‬
‫ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﺴ ﻜﺎن اﻟﻤ ﺪﻧﻴﻴﻦ واﻟﺘ ﻰ ﺗﺒﺎﺷ ﺮهﺎ اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ أو ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋ ﺔ ﻣﻨﻈﻤ ﺔ‪ .‬وﻗ ﺪ ﺗﻘ ﻮم ه ﺬﻩ‬
‫اﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳﺔ ﻓﻰ ﻇﺮوف اﺳﺘﺜﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ أﺳ ﺎس اﻹﺣﺠ ﺎم ﻋ ﻦ اﻟﻘﻴ ﺎم ﺑﻔﻌ ﻞ ﻣﻌ ﻴﻦ ﺑﻘﺼ ﺪ‬
‫ﺗﺸﺠﻴﻊ ارﺗﻜﺎب هﺬا اﻟﻬﺠﻮم‪ .‬وﻻ ﻳﻤﻜﻦ اﻻﺳﺘﺪﻻل ﻋﻠﻰ وﺟﻮد ﺗﻠ ﻚ اﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳ ﺔ ﺑﺼ ﻔﺔ‬
‫ﻣﻨﻔﺮدة ﻓﻰ ﻏﻴﺎب اﻟﻌﻤﻞ اﻟﺤﻜﻮﻣﻰ أو اﻟﻌﻤﻞ اﻟﺘﻨﻈﻴﻤﻰ)‪.(41‬‬
‫وﺗﺒﻌ ًﺎ ﻟ ﺬﻟﻚ ﻓ ﺈن ﺳﻴﺎﺳ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ اﻟﺘ ﻰ ﺗﺸ ﻤﻠﻬﺎ اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪) 7‬اﻻﻧﺘﺸ ﺎر اﻟﻮاﺳ ﻊ أو‬
‫اﻟﻤﻨﻬﺠﻲ( ﻳﺠﺐ أن ﻳﺴﺘﺪل ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺑﻮاﺳ ﻄﺔ "اﻟﺘﺸ ﺠﻴﻊ" أو اﻟ ﺪﻋﻢ اﻹﻳﺠ ﺎﺑﻰ‪ .‬وﻳﺠ ﺐ‬
‫ﻣﻼﺣﻈﺔ أن اﻟﻔﺸﻞ ﻓﻰ ﻣﻨﻊ اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ ﻻ ﻳﺨﻠﻖ ﻣﺮﺟﻌًﺎ ذاﺗ ّﻴﺎ‪ ،‬ﻟﻠﺘﺸﺠﻴﻊ أو اﻟﺘﺄﻳﻴﺪ‪ ،‬ﻟﻜ ﻦ‬
‫إﻟﻰ ﺣ ﺪ ﻣ ﺎ ﻓﻘ ﻂ "ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻈ ﺮوف اﻻﺳ ﺘﺜﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ" ﻳ ﺆدى ه ﺬا اﻟﻔﺸ ﻞ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻤﻨ ﻊ إﻟ ﻰ ﻣ ﺎ‬
‫ﻳﻌﺎدل "اﻟﺘﺸﺠﻴﻊ أو اﻟﺪﻋﻢ اﻹﻳﺠﺎﺑﻰ"‪.‬‬
‫‪ .18‬أﻣﺎ ﺑﺨﺼﻮص ﺟﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺤﺮب ﻓﻘﺪ ﺗﻀﻤﻨﺖ اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪:(42) 8‬‬
‫أ‪" .‬اﻻﻧﺘﻬﺎآﺎت اﻟﺠﺴﻴﻤﺔ")‪ (43‬اﻟﻤﻨﺼﻮص ﻋﻠﻴﻬ ﺎ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ 3‬ﻣ ﻦ اﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴ ﺎت‬
‫ﺟﻨﻴﻒ ‪ 1949‬اﻟﺘﻰ ﺗﻢ اﻟﺘﺼﺪﻳﻖ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻣﻦ ﻗﺒﻞ ‪ 186‬دوﻟﺔ‪.‬‬

‫اﻟﻤﺮﺟﻊ اﻟﺴﺎﺑﻖ‪.‬‬
‫اﻟﻤﺮﺟﻊ اﻟﺴﺎﺑﻖ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ 7‬ﻓﻘﺮة ‪.3‬‬

‫‪(41) Id.‬‬

‫‪(42) Id. at intro. to art. 7 para. 3.‬‬

‫‪(43 ) Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in‬‬
‫‪Armed Forces in the Field, 6 U.S.T. 3114, 75 U.N.T.S. 31, Article 50 (New York,‬‬
‫‪United Nations: 12 August 1949); Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the‬‬
‫‪condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed forces at Sea, 6‬‬
‫‪U.D.T. 3217, 75 U.N.T.S. 85, 6 U.S.T. 3316, 75 U.N.T.S. 135, Article 51 (New York,‬‬
‫‪United Nations: 12 August 1949); Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of‬‬
‫‪Prisoners of War, art. 130 (Geneva, United Nations: 12 August 1949); and Geneva‬‬
‫‪Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Person in Times of War, 6 U.S.T.‬‬
‫‪3516, 75 U.N.T.S. 287. art. 147 (New York: United Nations, 12 August 1949). See also‬‬
‫‪authorities mentioned supra note 34.‬‬

‫اﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴ ﺔ ﺟﻨﻴ ﻒ اﻟﺘ ﻰ ﺗﺘﻌﻠ ﻖ ﺑﺘﺤﺴ ﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ اﻟﺠﺮﺣ ﻰ واﻟﻤﺮﺿ ﻰ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻘ ﻮات اﻟﻤﺴ ﻠﺤﺔ‪6 ،‬‬
‫‪ ،31U.N.T.S.75 ،3114U.S.T‬اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪) 50‬ﻧﻴﻮﻳﻮرك ‪ ،‬اﻷﻣ ﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤ ﺪة‪ 12 :‬أﻏﺴ ﻄﺲ ‪(1949‬؛‬
‫اﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴ ﺔ ﺟﻨﻴ ﻒ ﻟﺘﺤﺴ ﻴﻦ ﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ اﻟﻤﺮﺿ ﻰ واﻟﺠﺮﺣ ﻰ وأﻓ ﺮاد اﻟﻘ ﻮات اﻟﻤﺴ ﻠﺤﺔ اﻟﻤﺼ ﺎﺑﻴﻦ ﻓ ﻰ ﺣﻄ ﺎم‬
‫ﺳ ﻔﻴﻨﺔ ‪ ،135 U.N.T.S. 75 .3316 U.S.T. 6 , 85 U.N.T.S. 75 , 3217 U.D.T. 6.‬اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪) 51‬‬
‫ﻧﻴﻮﻳ ﻮرك ‪ ،‬اﻷﻣ ﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤ ﺪة‪ 12 :‬أﻏﺴ ﻄﺲ ‪( 1949‬؛ اﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴ ﺔ ﺟﻨﻴ ﻒ اﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘ ﺔ ﺑﻤﻌﺎﻣﻠ ﺔ ﻣﺴ ﺠﻮﻧﻰ‬
‫اﻟﺤ ﺮب‪ ،‬اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ ) 130‬ﺟﻨﻴ ﻒ ‪ ،‬اﻷﻣ ﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤ ﺪة‪ 12 :‬أﻏﺴ ﻄﺲ ‪( 1949‬؛ واﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴ ﺔ ﺟﻨﻴ ﻒ أوﻗ ﺎت‬
‫اﻟﺤ ﺮب‪ 287 U.N.T.S. 75 ، 3516 U.S.T. 6 ،‬اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪) 147‬ﻧﻴﻮﻳ ﻮرك ‪ :‬اﻷﻣ ﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤ ﺪة ‪12 ،‬‬
‫أﻏﺴﻄﺲ ‪ .(1949‬اﻧﻈﺮ أﻳﻀًﺎ‪ :‬اﻟﺜﻘﺎت اﻟﻤﺬآﻮرة‪ ،‬هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 34‬ﺳﺎﺑﻖ‪.‬‬

‫‪33‬‬

‫ب‪" .‬اﻻﻧﺘﻬﺎآ ﺎت اﻟﺠﺴ ﻴﻤﺔ" اﻟﻤﻨﺼ ﻮص ﻋﻠﻴﻬ ﺎ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﺒﺮوﺗﻮآ ﻮل اﻷول‬
‫ﻟﻌ ﺎم)‪ 1977 (44‬واﻟﺒﺮوﺗﻮآ ﻮل اﻟﺜ ﺎﻧﻲ)‪ ،(45‬واﻟﻠ ﺬﻳﻦ ﻳﻌ ﺪان ﺟ ﺰ ًءا ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﻘ ﺎﻧﻮن‬
‫اﻟﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﺎزﻋﺎت اﻟﻤﺴﻠﺤﺔ)‪ .(46‬وﺗ ﻢ اﻟﺘﺼ ﺪﻳﻖ ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟﺒﺮوﺗﻮآ ﻮل اﻷول ﻣ ﻦ ﻗﺒ ﻞ‬
‫‪ 147‬دوﻟﺔ‪ ،‬واﻟﺒﺮوﺗﻮآﻮل اﻟﺜﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﻦ ﻗﺒﻞ ‪ 139‬دوﻟﺔ)‪. (47‬‬
‫وﺑﺎﻹﺿ ﺎﻓﺔ إﻟ ﻰ ذﻟ ﻚ ﻓ ﺈن اﻟﻤ ﺎدة "‪ "8‬ﺗﺸ ﻤﻞ‪ ،‬ﺟﺰﺋّﻴ ﺎ‪ ،‬ﻣ ﺎ ﻳﻌ ﺮف ﺑﺎﻟﻘ ﺎﻧﻮن‬
‫اﻟﻌﺮﻓﻰ ﻟﻠﻨﺰاع اﻟﻤﺴﻠﺢ وﻳﺸﻤﻞ ﺗﺤﺮﻳﻢ أﺳﻠﺤﺔ ﻣﻌﻴﻨﺔ ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .19‬وﺣﻴ ﺚ إن آ ﻼ ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟ ﺜﻼث اﻟﺪاﺧﻠ ﺔ ﻓ ﻰ اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ ﻳﺘﻀ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌ ﻞ اﻟﻘ ﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺠﻨ ﺎﺋﻰ اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ‪ ،‬ﻓ ﺈن اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻢ ﺗﺸﺮع ﺟﺮاﺋﻢ ﺟﺪﻳﺪة وﻟﻜﻨﻬﺎ ﺗﺒﻨﺖ ﻣ ﺎ ﺳ ﻠﻒ وﺟ ﻮدﻩ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻘ ﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺠﻨ ﺎﺋﻰ‬
‫اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ‪ .‬وﺑﺎﻹﺿ ﺎﻓﺔ إﻟ ﻰ ذﻟ ﻚ ﻓ ﺈن اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ه ﻰ ﻧﺘ ﺎج ﻣﻌﺎه ﺪة‬

‫‪(44 )Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the‬‬
‫‪Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts of 8 June 1977 (1977 Protocol I),‬‬
‫‪Annex I U.N. Doc A/32/144 (1977), reprinted in 16 I.L.M. 139. See YVES SANDOZ,‬‬
‫‪COMMENTARY ON THE 1977 ADDITIONAL PROTOCOLS (1986).‬‬

‫ﺑﺮوﺗﻮآﻮل إﺿﺎﻓﻰ ﻻﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴﺎت ﺟﻨﻴﻒ ﻓﻰ ‪ 12‬أﻏﺴﻄﺲ ‪ 1949‬واﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ ﺑﺤﻤﺎﻳﺔ ﺿﺤﺎﻳﺎ اﻟﻨﺰاﻋﺎت‬
‫اﻟﻤﺴﻠﺤﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ ﻓﻰ ‪ 8‬ﻳﻮﻧﻴﻮ ‪ 1977) 1977‬ﺑﺮوﺗﻮآﻮل( ﻣﻠﺤﻖ ‪ 1‬اﻷﻣﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة ﻣﺴﺘﻨﺪ‬
‫أ‪ (1977) 144/32/‬واﻟﺬى أﻋﻴﺪ ﻃﺒﻌﻪ ﻓﻰ ‪ 16‬ال ﻣﻴﻢ ‪ .139‬اﻧﻈﺮ إﻳﻔﺲ ﺳﺎﻧﺪوز‪ ،‬ﺗﻌﻠﻴﻘﺎت ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫اﻟﺒﺮوﺗﻮآﻮﻻت اﻹﺿﺎﻓﻴﺔ ‪.(1986) 1977‬‬
‫‪(45) Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the‬‬
‫‪Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts (1977 Protocol II) Annex‬‬
‫‪II, U.N. Doc A/32/144 (1977), reprinted in 16 I.L.M. 1391. See SANDOZ, COMMENTARY,‬‬
‫= ‪supra note 49.‬‬

‫=ﺑﺮوﺗﻮآﻮل إﺿﺎﻓﻰ ﻻﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴﺎت ﺟﻨﻴﻒ واﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﺑﺤﻤﺎﻳﺔ ﺿﺤﺎﻳﺎ ﻏﻴﺮ اﻟﻨﺰاﻋﺎت اﻟﻤﺴﻠﺤﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‬
‫)‪ 1977‬اﻟﺒﺮوﺗﻮآﻮل ‪ ( 2‬ﻣﻠﺤﻖ ‪ ،2‬اﻷﻣﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة ‪ ،‬ﻣﺴﺘﻨﺪ أ‪ ( 1977) 144/320/‬وأﻋﻴﺪ ﻃﺒﻌﺔ‬
‫ﻓﻰ ‪ .1 16‬ال‪.‬ﻣﻴﻢ ‪ .1391‬اﻧﻈﺮ ﺳﺎﻧﺪوز‪ ،‬ﺗﻌﻠﻴﻖ‪ ،‬هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 49‬ﺳﺎﺑﻖ‪.‬‬
‫‪(46) See also Convention Respecting the Laws of Customs of War on Land (Second Hague‬‬
‫)‪IV), 36 Stat. 2277 (The Hague: 18 October 1907‬‬

‫اﻧﻈﺮ أﻳﻀًﺎ اﻻﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴﺔ اﻟﺘﻰ ﺗﺮاﻋﻰ ﻗﻮاﻧﻴﻦ أﻋﺮاف اﻟﺤﺮب اﻟﺒﺮﻳﺔ )ﻻهﺎى اﻟﺜﺎﻧﻴﺔ ‪ 36 ( 4‬اﻟﻨﻈﺎم‬
‫اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ ‪) 2277‬ﻻهﺎى ‪ 18:‬أآﺘﻮﺑﺮ ‪.(1907‬‬
‫‪(47) For ratifications of the two protocols to the four Geneva Conventions, see BASSIOUNI,‬‬
‫‪CONVENTIONS, supra note 38, at 457-494‬‬

‫ﻟﻠﺘﺼﺪﻳﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺒﺮوﺗﻮآﻮﻟﻴﻦ اﻟﺨﺎﺻﻴﻦ ﺑﺎﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴﺎت ﺟﻨﻴﻒ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‪ ،‬اﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ‪ ،‬اﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴﺎت‪ ،‬هﺎﻣﺶ‬
‫‪ 38‬ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺎ‪ ،‬اﻟﻤﻮاد ‪.494-457‬‬

‫‪34‬‬

‫وﺗﻨﻬﺾ ﺑﺄﻋﺒﺎء اﻟﺘﻄﺒﻴ ﻖ اﻟﻤﺴ ﺘﻘﺒﻠﻲ)‪ (48‬وأى ادﻋ ﺎء ﺑ ﺄن اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ‬
‫ﺗﺴ ﺘﻨﺪ إﻟ ﻰ ﻧ ﺺ ﻟ ﻢ ﻳﺴ ﺒﻖ ﺗﺸ ﺮﻳﻌﻪ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻘ ﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺠﻨ ﺎﺋﻰ اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ ه ﻮ ﻗ ﻮل ﻏﻴ ﺮ‬
‫ﺻﺤﻴﺢ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .20‬إن ﻋﻤ ﻞ اﻟﻠﺠﻨ ﺔ اﻟﺘﺤﻀ ﻴﺮﻳﺔ اﻟﻤﻨﺸ ﺄة ﺑﻤﻮﺟ ﺐ اﻟﻘ ﺮار )أف( ﻣ ﻦ ﻗﺒ ﻞ‬
‫اﻟﻤﺆﺗﻤﺮ اﻟﺪﺑﻠﻮﻣﺎﺳﻰ هﻮ اﻟﻨﻬﻮض ﺑﺘﻌﺮﻳ ﻒ أو ﺗﺤﺪﻳ ﺪ أرآ ﺎن اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ وﻓﻘ ﺎ ﻟﻠﻤ ﺎدة‬
‫"‪ "9‬ﻣﻦ اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ‪ ،‬وه ﺬﻩ اﻷرآ ﺎن ﻻ ﺗﻌﻤ ﻞ ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﺗﻌ ﺪﻳﻞ اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ‬
‫وﻻ ﺗﻘﻮم ﺑﺘﺤﺪﻳﺪ اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺘ ﻰ ﺗﺸ ﺘﻤﻞ ﻋﻠﻴﻬ ﺎ اﻟﻤ ﻮاد ‪ 8 ،7 ،6‬ﺣﺎﻟﻴ ﺎً‪ ،‬ﻓﻘ ﺪ وﺿ ﻌﺖ‬
‫ﻓﻘﻂ "ﻟﻤﺴﺎﻋﺪة" اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﻓﻰ إﺛﺒﺎت ﺗﻠﻚ اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .21‬إن أرآ ﺎن اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ اﻟﻤﺸ ﺎر إﻟﻴﻬ ﺎ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﺠﻠﺴ ﺔ اﻟﺨﺎﻣﺴ ﺔ ﻣ ﻦ ﺟﻠﺴ ﺎت‬
‫اﻟﻠﺠﻨ ﺔ اﻟﺘﺤﻀ ﻴﺮﻳﺔ )اﻟﺘ ﻰ آ ﺎن ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﻮاﺟ ﺐ ﺗﺒﻨﻴﻬ ﺎ ﻣ ﻦ ﻗﺒ ﻞ اﻟ ﺪول اﻷﻃ ﺮاف(‬
‫أوﺿ ﺤﺖ ﻋﻠ ﻰ درﺟ ﺎت ﻣﺘﻔﺎوﺗ ﺔ ﻣ ﺎ ه ﻮ اﻟﻤ ﺮاد إﺛﺒﺎﺗ ﻪ‪ .‬وﻓ ﻰ اﻹﺑ ﺎدة اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﻴ ﺔ ﻟ ﻢ‬
‫ﺗﻀ ﻒ أرآ ﺎن اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ أى ﺷ ﻲء ذا ﻃﺒﻴﻌ ﺔ ﺧﺎﺻ ﺔ ﻟﻠﻔﻬ ﻢ اﻟﻌ ﺎم ﻟﺘﻌﺮﻳ ﻒ اﻹﺑ ﺎدة‬
‫اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﻴ ﺔ‪ .‬وﻓ ﻰ ﺟ ﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺤ ﺮب ﻗ ﺪﻣﺖ أرآ ﺎن اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ ﻣﻔ ﺎهﻴﻢ ﻣﺜ ﻞ اﻟﻀ ﺮورة‬
‫اﻟﻌﺴﻜﺮﻳﺔ‪ ،‬واﻟﻌﻘﻼﻧﻴﺔ واﻟﺘﺼﺮف ﻏﻴ ﺮ اﻟﻘ ﺎﻧﻮﻧﻰ دون وﺿ ﻊ ﻣﻌﻴ ﺎر واﺿ ﺢ ﻳﻤﻜ ﻦ‬
‫أن ﻳﻜ ﻮن ﻣ ﺪﺧ ً‬
‫ﻼ ﻟﺘﻠ ﻚ اﻹﺿ ﺎﻓﺎت‪ (49).‬وﻣ ﻦ ﺛ ﻢ ﻓ ﺈن ذﻟ ﻚ ﺳ ﻮف ﻳﺘ ﺮك ﻟﻘ ﺮارات‬
‫واﺟﺘﻬﺎدات اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ أﺳﺎس اﻟﻤﺼﺎدر اﻟﻤﻤﺎﺛﻠﺔ اﻟﻮاﺟﺒﺔ اﻟﺘﻄﺒﻴﻖ واﻟﻤﻨﺼ ﻮص‬
‫ﻋﻠﻴﻬ ﺎ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻤ ﺎدﺗﻴﻦ ‪ .21، 10‬إن اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ ﺿ ﺪ اﻹﻧﺴ ﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﺗﻘ ﺪم إﻃ ﺎرًا ذا ه ﺎﻣﺶ‬
‫ﺗﻔﺴ ﻴﺮى‪ .‬وﻣ ﻊ ﻣﻼﺣﻈ ﺔ أن أرآ ﺎن اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ ﺿ ﺪ اﻹﻧﺴ ﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﺗﺘﻄﻠ ﺐ إﺛﺒ ﺎت ﺳﻴﺎﺳ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ أو ﺳﻴﺎﺳ ﺔ أﺷ ﺨﺎص ﻏﻴ ﺮ اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ ﻣ ﻦ ﺧ ﻼل إﻇﻬ ﺎر اﻟﺘﺸ ﺠﻴﻊ واﻟ ﺪﻋﻢ‬
‫اﻹﻳﺠﺎﺑﻰ واﻟﻤﺘﻀﻤﻦ اﻟﻔﺸﻞ ﻓﻰ أو اﻻﻣﺘﻨﺎع ﻋﻦ ﻣﻨ ﻊ ارﺗﻜ ﺎب اﻟﻔﻌ ﻞ )اﻧﻈ ﺮ اﻟﻔﻘ ﺮة‬
‫‪ .(28‬وﻳﺠﺐ ﻣﻼﺣﻈﺔ أن اﻟﻤﺒﺎدئ اﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ ﻟﻠﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻰ اﻟﺬى ﺗﺸﺘﻤﻞ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻣﻌﻈ ﻢ‬
‫اﻟﻨﻈﻢ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮﻧﻴﺔ ﺗﺴ ﻠﻢ ﺑ ﺄن اﻟﻔﺸ ﻞ اﻟﻤﻘﺼ ﻮد أو اﻟﻌﻤ ﺪى ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﺘﺼ ﺮف ﻋﻨ ﺪﻣﺎ ﻳﻜ ﻮن‬
‫هﻨ ﺎك اﻟﺘ ﺰام ﻗ ﺎﻧﻮﻧﻰ ﺳ ﺎﺑﻖ ﻟﻠﺘﺼ ﺮف‪ ،‬ﻳﻌ ﺪ ﺟ ﺰءًا ﻣ ﻦ اﻟ ﺮآﻦ اﻟﻤ ﺎدى ﻟﻠﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ‬
‫اﻟﺮﺋﻴﺴﻴﺔ‪ .‬وﺗﺒﻌًﺎ ﻟ ﺬﻟﻚ ﻓﺈﻧ ﻪ ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﻤﻤﻜ ﻦ اﻧﺘﻬ ﺎج ﺳﻴﺎﺳ ﺔ ﻣ ﻦ ﻗﺒ ﻞ دوﻟ ﺔ أو أﺷ ﺨﺎص‬
‫‪(48) Articles 11 and 24 expressly state that ICC jurisdiction is prospective.‬‬

‫اﻟﻤﺎدﺗﺎن ‪ 24 ، 11‬ﺗﻘﺮران ﺑﻮﺿﻮح أن اﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻴﺲ ﻟﻪ أﺛﺮ رﺟﻌﻰ‪.‬‬
‫‪49‬‬

‫‪( ) See Report of the Working Group on Elements of Crimes, supra note 45.‬‬

‫اﻧﻈﺮ ﺗﻘﺮﻳﺮ ﻟﺠﻨﻪ ﻋﻤﻞ أرآﺎن اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﺁﻧﻔًﺎ هﺎﻣﺶ ‪.45‬‬

‫‪35‬‬

‫ﻏﻴ ﺮ اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ ﻣ ﻦ ﺧ ﻼل اﻟﻔﺸ ﻞ اﻟﻤﻘﺼ ﻮد أو اﻟﻌﻤ ﺪى ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﺘﺼ ﺮف‪" .‬اﻟﺘﺸ ﺠﻴﻊ‬
‫واﻟ ﺪﻋﻢ اﻹﻳﺠ ﺎﺑﻲ" ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﻮاﺿ ﺢ أﻧ ﻪ ﻳﺸ ﺘﻤﻞ ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟﺘ ﺪﺧﻞ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﺘﺼ ﺮف ﻣ ﻦ ﻗﺒ ﻞ‬
‫دوﻟ ﺔ أو أﺷ ﺨﺎص ﻏﻴ ﺮ اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ وه ﻮ ﻣ ﺎ ﻳﻨ ﺘﺞ ﻋﻨ ﻪ ارﺗﻜ ﺎب ﺟ ﺮاﺋﻢ ﺿ ﺪ اﻹﻧﺴ ﺎﻧﻴﺔ‬
‫وﻓﻰ آﻠﺘﺎ اﻟﺤﺎﻟﺘﻴﻦ ﺳﻮاء ﺑﺎﻻرﺗﻜﺎب أو ﺑﺎﻻﻣﺘﻨ ﺎع ﻋ ﻦ )أو اﻟﻔﺸ ﻞ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﺘﺼ ﺮف أو‬
‫اﻟﻔﻌﻞ اﻟﺴﻠﺒﻲ( ﻳﺠﺐ أن ﻳﻘﺘﺮن ذﻟﻚ ﺑﺮآﻦ اﻟﻌﻠﻢ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .22‬ﻳﺮاﻋ ﻰ ﻓ ﻰ ﺷ ﺄن آ ﻞ اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟ ﺜﻼث وﺟ ﻮب ﺗ ﻮاﻓﺮ اﻟ ﺮآﻦ اﻟﻤﻌﻨ ﻮى‬
‫اﻟﻤﻨﺼ ﻮص ﻋﻠﻴ ﻪ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪) 30‬واﻟﺘ ﻰ ﺗﻄﺒ ﻖ ﻓﻴﻤ ﺎ ﻋ ﺪا اﻟ ﺮآﻦ اﻟﻤﻌﻨ ﻮى‬
‫ﺻ ﺎ(‪.‬‬
‫اﻟﻤﻨﺼ ﻮص ﻋﻠﻴ ﻪ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪) 6‬اﻹﺑ ﺎدة اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﻴ ﺔ( اﻟ ﺬى ﻳﺘﻄﻠ ﺐ ﻗﺼ ﺪًا ﺧﺎ ّ‬
‫وﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﺤﺘﻤ ﻞ أن ﺗﻈﻬ ﺮ أرآ ﺎن اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ ﺑﻌ ﺾ اﻟﻠ ﺒﺲ ﺑ ﻴﻦ اﻟﻘﺼ ﺪ اﻟﻌ ﺎم واﻟﻘﺼ ﺪ‬
‫اﻟﺨﺎص‪ .‬وﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﻤﻜ ﻦ إزاﻟ ﺔ ه ﺬا اﻟﻠ ﺒﺲ ﻋ ﻦ ﻃﺮﻳ ﻖ وﺿ ﻊ ﻣﻌﻴ ﺎر ﺁﺧ ﺮ ﻟﺼ ﺎﻧﻌﻰ‬
‫اﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳ ﺔ‪ ،‬ﻗﺼ ﺪ ﻋ ﺎم ﺷ ﺎﻣﻞ ﻳﺘﻀ ﻤﻦ اﻟﻌﻠ ﻢ‪ ،‬ﻷن ﻣﻘ ﺪرة ه ﺆﻻء اﻷﺷ ﺨﺎص ﻋﻠ ﻰ‬
‫اﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓ ﺔ أو اﻟﺘﻨﺒ ﺆ ﺑﻨﺘ ﺎﺋﺞ أﻋﻤ ﺎﻟﻬﻢ ﺗﺮﺟ ﻊ إﻟ ﻰ اﺗﺼ ﺎﻟﻬﻢ اﻟﻤﺒﺎﺷ ﺮ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻌﻠﻮﻣ ﺎت‬
‫وﻗﺪراﺗﻬﻢ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺘﺤﻜﻢ ﻓﻰ ﺟﻬﺎز اﻟﺪوﻟﺔ‪ ،‬وﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻔﺬﻳﻦ اﻷﻗﻞ ﻓﺈﻧ ﻪ ﻳﺠ ﺐ ﺗ ﻮاﻓﺮ‬
‫اﻟﻘﺼ ﺪ اﻟﺨ ﺎص ﻋ ﻦ ﻃﺮﻳ ﻖ ﻣﻌﺮﻓ ﺔ اﻟﺴﻴﺎﺳ ﺔ اﻟﻌﺎﻣ ﺔ اﻟﺘ ﻰ ﻳﻘﻮﻣ ﻮن ﺑﺘﻨﻔﻴ ﺬهﺎ أو‬
‫ﻣﻨﺎﺻﺮﺗﻬﺎ‪ .‬وﻟﻦ ﺗﻜﻮن هﺬﻩ اﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﻣﻄﻠﻮﺑﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ ذﻟﻚ ﻻرﺗﻜ ﺎب ﺟ ﺮاﺋﻢ‬
‫ﺻﺎ‪.‬‬
‫اﻟﺤﺮب )اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ (8‬ﻷن هﺬﻩ اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ ﻻ ﺗﺘﻄﻠﺐ ﻗﺼﺪًا ﺧﺎ ّ‬
‫‪ .23‬ﺗﺘﺪاﺧﻞ اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺜﻼث ﻓﻰ أرآﺎﻧﻬﺎ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮﻧﻴﺔ وﻟﻜﻦ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ ﻻ‬
‫ﺼ ﺎ ﻋ ﻦ آﻴﻔﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺘﻌﺎﻣ ﻞ ﺳ ﻮاء ﻣ ﻊ اﻟﺘ ﺪاﺧﻞ اﻟﻘ ﺎﻧﻮﻧﻰ أو اﻟﺘ ﺪاﺧﻞ ﻓ ﻰ‬
‫ﻳﺘﻀ ﻤﻦ ﻧ ّ‬
‫اﻟﻮﻗﺎﺋﻊ)‪ ،(50‬وﺑﺼﻮرة ﻣﺸﺎﺑﻬﺔ ﻓﺈﻧﻪ ﻻ ﻳﻮﺟﺪ ﻣ ﺎ ﻳﺘﻌﻠ ﻖ ﺑﺎﻟﻌﻘﻮﺑ ﺎت اﻟﺘ ﻰ ﺗﺘﻌﺎﻣ ﻞ ﻣ ﻊ‬
‫اﻟﺘﺪاﺧﻞ ﺑﻴﻦ هﺬﻩ اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ ]اﻟﻤﺎدﺗﻴﻦ ‪ [80، 70‬ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ﻳﻜﻮن هﻨ ﺎك ﺷ ﺨﺺ ﻗ ﺪ أدﻳ ﻦ‬
‫ﺑﺎرﺗﻜﺎب ﻋﺪة ﺟﺮاﺋﻢ )واﻟﺘﻰ ﻟ ﺪﻳﻬﺎ أرآ ﺎن ﻗﺎﻧﻮﻧﻴ ﺔ ﻣﻤﺎﺛﻠ ﺔ( ﻧﺎﺗﺠ ﺔ ﻋ ﻦ ذات اﻟﻔﻌ ﻞ‪.‬‬
‫إن ﻣﺸﻜﻼت ﺗﺪاﺧﻞ اﻟﻨﺼ ﻮص اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮﻧﻴ ﺔ‪ ،‬ﺧﺼﻮﺻ ًﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴ ﺒﺔ ﻟﻠﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﻤﻨﺼ ﻮص‬
‫ﻋﻠﻴﻬ ﺎ ﻓ ﻰ ]اﻟﻤ ﻮاد ‪ ،[7،8 ،6‬ﻻﺳ ﻴﻤﺎ أن اﻷرآ ﺎن اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮﻧﻴ ﺔ ﺗﺘﻀ ﻤﻦ اﻟﻌﺪﻳ ﺪ ﻣ ﻦ‬
‫‪(50 ) See M. Cherif Bassiouni, The Normative Framework of International Humanitarian‬‬
‫‪Law: Overlaps, Gaps, and Ambiguities, 8 TRANSNATIONAL L. & CONTEP. PROBS. 199‬‬
‫‪(1998).The civilist legal systems address this problem as a Concours ideal d’infractions.‬‬

‫اﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﺤﻤﻮد ﺷﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ‪ ،‬اﻹﻃﺎر اﻟﻤﻮﺿﻮﻋﻰ ﻟﻠﻘ ﺎﻧﻮن اﻹﻧﺴ ﺎﻧﻰ اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻲ‪ :‬اﻟﺘ ﺪاﺧﻞ‪ ،‬اﻟﺜﻐ ﺮات‬
‫واﻟﻐﻤﻮض‪ 8 ،‬اﻟﻘﻀﺎﻳﺎ اﻟﻤﻌﺎﺻﺮة وﻋﺒﺮ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‪ .(1998) 199 ،‬اﻟﻨﻈﻢ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮﻧﻴﺔ اﻟﻼﺗﻴﻨﻴ ﺔ ﻋﺮﻓ ﺖ‬
‫هﺬﻩ اﻟﻘﻀﻴﺔ ﺑـ "ﺗﻄﺎﺑﻖ اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻔﺲ اﻟﻔﻌﻞ‪".‬‬

‫‪36‬‬

‫اﻟﺘﺸ ﺎﺑﻪ اﻟ ﺬى ﺳ ﻮف ﻳﻈﻬ ﺮ ﻋﻨ ﺪﻣﺎ ﺗﺤ ﺪد اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ ﻋ ﺪم ﺟ ﻮاز اﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻤ ﺔ ﻋ ﻦ‬
‫اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤﺔ ذاﺗﻬﺎ ﻣﺮﺗﻴﻦ ]اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ ،[20‬هﺬﻩ اﻟﻤﺸﻜﻼت ﺳﻮف ﺗﻈﻬﺮ ﻓﻰ ﻣﺤ ﺎآﻢ اﻟ ﺪول‬
‫اﻷﻃ ﺮاف‪ ،‬ﻓﻜﻴ ﻒ ﺳ ﻴﺘﻨﺎول ﻗﻀ ﺎة اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ واﻟﻘﻀ ﺎة اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻴ ﻮن‬
‫هﺬﻩ اﻟﻤﺸﻜﻼت ﻏﻴﺮ اﻟﻘﺎﻃﻌﺔ؟‬
‫)اﻟﺠﺪول رﻗﻢ ‪ (2‬ﻗﻮاﻋﺪ اﻻﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﻮﺿﻮﻋﻰ‬

‫اﻟﻐﺮض‪ :‬ﺗﻤﺎرس اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﺧﺘﺼﺎﺻﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻷﺷﺨﺎص اﻟﺬﻳﻦ ﻳﺮﺗﻜﺒﻮن أﺷ ﺪ‬
‫اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ ﺧﻄﻮرة واﻟﺘﻰ هﻰ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ اﻻهﺘﻤﺎم اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ )اﻟﻤﺎدة‪.(1‬‬
‫اﻻﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص‪ :‬ـ ـ ﻳﻘﺘﺼ ﺮ اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ ﻋﻠ ﻰ أﺷ ﺪ اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ ﺧﻄ ﻮرة‬
‫واﻟﺘﻰ هﻰ ﻣﻮﺿﻊ اهﺘﻤﺎم اﻟﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ ﺑﺄﺳﺮﻩ )اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪.(5‬‬
‫ ﻣﻜﻤﻞ ﻟﻠﻘﻀﺎء اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻰ اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻰ )اﻟﻔﻘﺮة ‪ 10‬ﻣﻦ اﻟﺪﻳﺒﺎﺟﺔ(‪.‬‬‫ ﻻ ﻳﻤﻜﻦ ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻘﻪ ﺑﺄﺛﺮ رﺟﻌﻰ )اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪.(11‬‬‫اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺪاﺧﻠﺔ ﻓﻰ ﻧﻄﺎق اﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ )اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪(5‬‬
‫ﺎدة‬

‫اﻹﺑ‬
‫اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ‬
‫ــ ﻣﻌﺮﻓ ﺔ ﻓ ﻰ‬
‫اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪.6‬‬
‫ــ ﺗﺄﺧﺬ ﺑﻨﻔﺲ‬
‫ﻧﻬﺞ اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪2‬‬
‫ﻣ ﻦ اﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴ ﺔ‬
‫ﺎدة‬
‫اﻹﺑ‬
‫اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫ﺪ ﺟﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺤﺮب‬

‫ﺟ ﺮاﺋﻢ ﺿ‬
‫اﻹﻧﺴﺎﻧﻴﺔ‬
‫ــ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﺎدة‬
‫‪.7‬‬
‫ـ ـ اﻟﻘﺎﻋ ﺪة اﻟﻌﺎﻣ ﺔ‬
‫ﺗﻘﺘﻀ ﻰ أن ﺗﻜ ﻮن‬
‫اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ ﻗ ﺪ‬
‫ارﺗﻜﺒ ﺖ ﻓ ﻰ إﻃ ﺎر‬
‫هﺠ ﻮم واﺳ ﻊ‬
‫اﻟﻨﻄ ﺎق أو ﻣ ﻨﻈﻢ‬
‫ﺿﺪ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋ ﺔ ﻣ ﻦ‬
‫اﻟﻤ ﺪﻧﻴﻴﻦ ﻣ ﻊ اﻟﻌﻠ ﻢ‬
‫ﺑﻬﺬا اﻟﻬﺠﻮم‪.‬‬

‫ــ ﻣﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪.8‬‬
‫ــ اﻟﻘﺎﻋﺪة اﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ ﺗﻀ ﻊ‬
‫ﺑﻌ ﺾ اﻟ ﺪﻻﺋﻞ ﻋﻠ ﻰ‬
‫ارﺗﻜﺎب اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤﺔ ﻋﻠ ﻰ‬
‫ﺳ ﺒﻴﻞ اﻟﻤﺜ ﺎل ﻻ‬
‫اﻟﺤﺼ ﺮ ﻣﺜ ﻞ وﺟ ﻮد‬
‫ﺳﻴﺎﺳ ﺔ وﺧﻄ ﺔ أو‬
‫ﺗﺮﺗﻜ ﺐ اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ ﻋﻠ ﻰ‬
‫ﻧﻄﺎق واﺳﻊ‪.‬‬
‫ــ اﻻﻧﺘﻬﺎآﺎت اﻟﺠﺴ ﻴﻤﺔ‬
‫ﻻﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴ ﺎت ﺟﻨﻴ ﻒ ﻟﻌ ﺎم‬
‫‪) 1949‬اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ 8‬ﻓﻘ ﺮة‬
‫‪ 2‬ﺑﻨﺪ أ(‪.‬‬
‫ــ اﻻﻧﺘﻬﺎآﺎت اﻟﺠﺴ ﻴﻤﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻘ ﻮاﻧﻴﻦ واﻷﻋ ﺮاف‬

‫اﻟﻌﺪوان‬
‫ـ ـ ﺳ ﻮف ﻳﻨﻌﻘ ﺪ‬
‫اﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺑﻌ ﺪ‬
‫وﺿ ﻊ ﺻ ﻴﺎﻏﺔ ﻣﺤ ﺪدة‬
‫ﻟﻠﺠﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ وﻟﻀ ﻮاﺑﻂ‬
‫اﻧﻌﻘ ﺎد اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص‬
‫اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ )اﻧﻈﺮ اﻟﻤﺎدﺗﻴﻦ‬
‫‪ 123 ،121‬ﻣﺮاﺟﻌ ﺔ‬
‫ﺎم‬
‫ﺪﻳﻞ اﻟﻨﻈ‬
‫وﺗﻌ‬
‫اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ(‪.‬‬
‫ﺗﺒﻨ ﻰ ﻧﺼ ﻮص ﻣﺘﻮاﻓﻘ ﺔ‬
‫ﻣ ﻊ اﻟﻨﺼ ﻮص اﻟ ﻮاردة‬
‫ﺑﻤﻴﺜﺎق اﻷﻣﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة‪.‬‬

‫‪37‬‬

‫اﻟﻤﻄﺒﻘﺔ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻨﺰاﻋ ﺎت‬
‫اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ اﻟﻤﺴ ﻠﺤﺔ‬
‫)اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ 8‬ﻓﻘ ﺮة ‪ 2‬ﺑﻨ ﺪ‬
‫ﺎت‬
‫ب(‪ ،‬واﻟﻨﺰاﻋ‬
‫اﻟﻤﺴ ﻠﺤﺔ اﻟﺪاﺧﻠﻴ ﺔ‬
‫)اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ 8‬ﻓﻘﺮة ‪ 2‬ﺑﻨﺪى‬
‫ج ‪ ،‬ﻩ (‪.‬‬
‫ـ ـ ﻳﻌ ﺎد اﻟﻨﻈ ﺮ ﻓ ﻰ‬
‫أﺣﻜ ﺎم ه ﺬﻩ اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ﺑﻌ ﺪ‬
‫ﺳ ﺒﻊ ﺳ ﻨﻮات )اﻟﻤ ﺎدة‬
‫‪.(124‬‬

‫ﻣﻠﺤﻮﻇﺔ‪ :‬ﻻ ﻳﻮﺟﺪ ﻓﻰ اﻟﺒﺎب اﻟﺜﺎﻧﻰ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻤﻜﻦ أن ﻳﻔﺴﺮ ﻋﻠﻰ أﻧﻪ ﻳﻘﻴﺪ ﺑ ﺄى‬
‫ﻃﺮﻳﻘﺔ ﻗﻮاﻋﺪ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ اﻟﻤﻮﺟﻮدة أو ﺗﻠﻚ اﻟﺘﻰ ﻓﻰ ﻃ ﻮر اﻟﺘﻄ ﻮﻳﺮ ﻵى‬
‫ﻏﺮض ﺁﺧﺮ ﺧﺎرج هﺬا اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ )اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪.(10‬‬

‫‪38‬‬

‫اﻟـﻤﺒـﺤـﺚ اﻟﺜﺎﻟــﺚ‬
‫ﻗﻮاﻋﺪ اﻻﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﺰﻣﺎﻧﻰ واﻟﻤﻜﺎﻧﻰ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‬

‫أو ًﻻ‪ :‬ﻣﻦ ﺣﻴﺚ اﻟﺰﻣﺎن‪:‬‬
‫‪ .24‬إن اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻣﺴ ﺘﻘﺒﻠﻰ ﻓﻘ ﻂ)‪] (51‬اﻟﻤﺎدﺗ ﺎن‬
‫‪ (52)،[(1) 42 ،11‬وﻟﺬﻟﻚ ﻻ ﻳﺴﺮى اﺧﺘﺼﺎﺻﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺘ ﻰ ارﺗﻜﺒ ﺖ ﻗﺒ ﻞ‬
‫ﺳﺮﻳﺎن اﻟﻤﻌﺎه ﺪة‪ .‬وﻓﻴﻤ ﺎ ﻳﺘﻌﻠ ﻖ ﺑﺎﻟ ﺪول اﻟﺘ ﻰ ﺗﻨﻀ ﻢ إﻟ ﻰ اﻟﻤﻌﺎه ﺪة ﻓ ﺈن اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص‬
‫اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻳﻨﻄﺒ ﻖ ﻓﻘ ﻂ ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺘ ﻰ ﺗﺮﺗﻜ ﺐ ﺑﻌ ﺪ اﻧﻀ ﻤﺎم‬
‫اﻟﺪوﻟﺔ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .25‬ﻳﺴﺮى اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻋﻨ ﺪﻣﺎ ﻳ ﺘﻢ اﻟﺘﺼ ﺪﻳﻖ‬
‫ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻻﻧﻀ ﻤﺎم ﻟﻠﻤﻌﺎه ﺪة ﺑﻤﻌﺮﻓ ﺔ ‪ 60‬دوﻟ ﺔ ـ ـ وﻋﻠ ﻰ وﺟ ﻪ اﻟﺘﺤﺪﻳ ﺪ ـ ـ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻴ ﻮم‬
‫اﻷول ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﺸ ﻬﺮ ﺑﻌ ﺪ اﻟﻴ ﻮم اﻟﺴ ﺘﻴﻦ اﻟﺘ ﺎﻟﻰ ﻹﻳ ﺪاع وﺛﻴﻘ ﺔ اﻟﺘﺼ ﺪﻳﻖ اﻟﺴ ﺘﻴﻦ ]ﻣ ﺎدة‬
‫‪.[(1) 126‬‬
‫‪(51) See generally Saland, supra note 15. For additional commentary on Ratione Temporis,‬‬
‫‪see Sharon A. Williams, Article 11: Jurisdiction ratione temporis, in COMMENTARY ON‬‬
‫‪ROME STATUTE, supra note 13, at 323-328. For additional commentary on the treaty's‬‬
‫‪entry into force, see Roger S. Clark, Article 126: Entry into force, in COMMENTARY ON‬‬
‫‪ROME STATUTE, supra note 13, at 1289-1291.‬‬

‫اﻧﻈﺮ ﺑﺼﻔﺔ ﻋﺎﻣﺔ ﺳﺎﻻﻧﺪ هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 15‬ﺳﺎﺑﻖ‪ .‬ﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻘﺎت إﺿﺎﻓﻴﺔ ﺣﻮل اﻻﺧﺘﺼﺎص ﻣﻦ ﺣﻴﺚ‬
‫اﻟﺰﻣﺎن‪ ،‬اﻧﻈﺮ ﺷﺎرون أ وﻳﻠﻴﺎﻣﺰ‪ ،‬ﻣﺎدة ‪ :11‬اﻻﺧﺘﺼﺎص ﻣﻦ ﺣﻴﺚ اﻟﺰﻣﺎن‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻈﺎم‬
‫روﻣﺎ اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ‪ ،‬هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 13‬ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺎً‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ ‪ .328 -323‬ﻟﻠﻤﺰﻳﺪ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻘﺎت ﺣﻮل دﺧﻮل اﻟﻤﻌﺎهﺪة‬
‫ﺣﻴﺰ اﻟﺘﻨﻔﻴﺬ‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻈﺎم روﻣﺎ اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ‪ ،‬هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 13‬ﺳﺎﺑﻖ‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ ‪.1291 -1289‬‬
‫‪(52) Article 11 should have been merged with Article 24. Article 11 overlaps with Article 24,‬‬
‫‪but as stated above, because Article 11 was contained in Part 2, it went directly to the‬‬
‫‪Committee of the whole and not to the Drafting Committee, see Bassiouni, Negotiating‬‬
‫‪the Treaty of Rome, supra note 18. In the event of a possible inconsistency, Article 24‬‬
‫‪should control as it is elaborated in Part 3, which concerns general criminal law‬‬
‫‪principles.‬‬

‫آﺎن ﻳﺠﺐ دﻣﺞ اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ 11‬ﻣﻊ اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ .24‬اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ 11‬ﺗﺘﺪاﺧﻞ ﻣﻊ اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ ،24‬و ﻟﻜﻦ آﻤﺎ ذآﺮﻧﺎ ﺁﻧﻔ ًﺎ‬
‫أﻧﻪ ﺑﺴﺒﺐ وﺟﻮد اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ 11‬ﺿﻤﻦ اﻟﺒﺎب اﻟﺜﺎﻧﻰ‪ ،‬اﻟﺬى أرﺳﻞ ﻣﺒﺎﺷﺮة إﻟﻰ اﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ اﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ وﻟﻴﺲ إﻟﻰ‬
‫ﻟﺠﻨﺔ اﻟﺼﻴﺎﻏﺔ‪ ،‬اﻧﻈﺮ ﺷﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ‪ ،‬اﻟﻤﻔﺎوﺿﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻌﺎهﺪة روﻣﺎ‪ ،‬هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 18‬ﺳﺎﺑﻖ‪ .‬ﻓﻰ ﺣﺎﻟﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺘﻨﺎﻗﺾ اﻟﻤﺤﺘﻤﻞ‪ ،‬ﻓﻴﺠﺐ اﻻرﺗﻜﺎن إﻟﻰ اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ 24‬ﻷﻧﻬﺎ ﺻﻴﻐﺖ ﺑﺈﺣﻜﺎم ﻓﻰ اﻟﺒﺎب اﻟﺜﺎﻟﺚ‪ ،‬و‬
‫اﻟﻤﺘﻀﻤﻦ ﻣﺒﺎدئ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻰ اﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪39‬‬

‫ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻠﺪول اﻟﺘﻰ ﺗﻨﻀﻢ ﺑﻌﺪ ﺳﺮﻳﺎن اﻟﻤﻌﺎهﺪة‪ ،‬ﻓ ﺈن اﻟﺘ ﺎرﻳﺦ اﻟﻔﻌﻠ ﻰ ﻟﻠﺴ ﺮﻳﺎن‬
‫ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﺘﻠﻚ اﻟﺪول هﻮ اﻟﻴ ﻮم اﻷول ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﺸ ﻬﺮ اﻟ ﺬى ﻳﻠ ﻲ‪ 60‬ﻳﻮﻣ ﺎ ﻣ ﻦ إﻳ ﺪاع ﺗﻠ ﻚ‬
‫اﻟﺪول وﺛﺎﺋﻖ اﻟﺘﺼﺪﻳﻖ ]ﻣ ﺎدة ‪ .[(2) 126‬ﻳ ﻨﺺ اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ ﻋﻠ ﻰ أﻧ ﻪ ﻳﺠ ﻮز‬
‫ﻟﻠﺪوﻟ ﺔ –ﻋﻨ ﺪﻣﺎ ﺗﺼ ﺒﺢ ﻃﺮﻓ ًﺎ – أن ﺗﺨﺘ ﺎر ﺗﺄﺟﻴ ﻞ ﺗﻄﺒﻴ ﻖ اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻓﻴﻤ ﺎ ﻳﺘﻌﻠ ﻖ ﺑﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺤ ﺮب ]ﻣ ﺎدة ‪ [8‬ﻟﻤ ﺪة ﺳ ﺒﻊ ﺳ ﻨﻮات ]ﻣ ﺎدة‬
‫‪.[124‬‬
‫ﺛﺎﻧﻴ ًﺎ ‪ :‬ﻣﻦ ﺣﻴﺚ اﻷﺷﺨﺎص‬
‫‪ .26‬ﻳﻄﺒ ﻖ اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻓﻘ ﻂ ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻷﻓ ﺮاد‬
‫]اﻟﻤﺎدﺗ ﺎن ‪ [(1) 25 ،1‬اﻟ ﺬﻳﻦ ﻳﺮﺗﻜﺒ ﻮن ﺟﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ ﺑﻌ ﺪ ﺑﻠ ﻮغ ﺳ ﻦ ‪ 18‬ﺳ ﻨﺔ‬
‫]ﻣﺎدة‪.(53)[26‬‬
‫ﻟ ﻴﺲ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟ ﺪول أو اﻟﻬﻴﺌ ﺎت‬
‫اﻻﻋﺘﺒﺎرﻳﺔ)‪.(54‬‬
‫ﻋ ﻼوة ﻋﻠ ﻰ ذﻟ ﻚ ﻻ ﻳﺴ ﺘﺜﻨﻰ ﺷ ﺨﺺ ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﻤﺴ ﺆوﻟﻴﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ ﺑﺴ ﺒﺐ ﺻ ﻔﺘﻪ‬
‫اﻟﺮﺳﻤﻴﺔ ﻣﺜﻠﻤﺎ ﻗﺪ ﻳﻜﻮن واردا ﻓﻰ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺪاﺧﻠﻰ ]اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪.(55)[27‬‬

‫‪(53) See Lee, supra note 13, at 32. For additional commentary on Ratione Personae, see Kai‬‬
‫‪Ambos, Article 25: Individual criminal responsibility, in COMMENTARY ON ROME‬‬
‫‪STATUTE, supra note 13, at 475-493. On the subject of Individual criminal‬‬
‫‪responsibility, see generally Farhad Malekian, International Criminal Responsibility, in‬‬
‫‪INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW, VOL. I 153-222 (M. Cherif Bassiouni, ed. 1999).‬‬

‫اﻧﻈﺮ " ﻟﻰ " اﻟﻤﻠﺤﻮﻇﺔ ﺳﺎﺑﻘًﺎ ‪ 13‬ص ‪ – 32‬ﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻘﺎت إﺿﺎﻓﻴﺔ ﺑﺸﺄن اﻟﻤﺴﺆوﻟﻴﺔ اﻟﻔﺮدﻳﺔ – اﻧﻈﺮ‬
‫آﺎى ﺁﻣﺒﻮس ﻣﺎدة ‪ 25‬اﻟﻤﺴﺆوﻟﻴﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﻔﺮدﻳﺔ – ﻓﻰ " اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻻﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴﺔ‬
‫روﻣﺎ – هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 13‬ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺎً‪ – ،‬ص ‪ .493 – 475‬ﻓﻰ ﻣﻮﺿﻮع اﻟﻤﺴﺆوﻟﻴﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﻔﺮدﻳﺔ – اﻧﻈﺮ‬
‫ﺑﺼﻔﺔ ﻋﺎﻣﺔ ﻓﺎرهﺎد ﻣﺎﻟﻜﻴﺎن اﻟﻤﺴﺆوﻟﻴﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻰ اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ –ﻣﺠﻠﺪ ‪-1‬ص‬
‫‪) 222 – 153‬ﺷﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ – ﻃﺒﻌﺔ ‪.(1999‬‬
‫‪(54) For a discussion of the criminal responsibility of states and organizations under‬‬
‫‪international criminal law, see Bassiouni, Sources of International Criminal Law, supra‬‬
‫‪note 4, at 24-31.‬‬

‫ﻟﻤﻨﺎﻗﺸﺔ اﻟﻤﺴﺆوﻟﻴﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ ﻟﻠ ﺪول واﻟﻤﻨﻈﻤ ﺎت ﻃﺒﻘ ًﺎ ﻟﻠﻘ ﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺠﻨ ﺎﺋﻰ اﻟ ﺪوﻟﻰ‪ ،‬اﻧﻈ ﺮ ﺑﺴ ﻴﻮﻧﻰ‪،‬‬
‫ﻣﺼﺎدر اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻰ اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ‪ ،‬هﺎﻣﺶ‪ 4‬ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺎً‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ ‪.31-24‬‬

‫‪40‬‬

‫اﻟـﻤـﺒﺤـﺚ اﻟﺮاﺑــﻊ‬
‫إﺷﻜﺎﻟﻴﺎت اﻟﺘﻮﺳﻊ اﻟﻤﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻰ ﻻﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ‬
‫)‪(56‬‬

‫أو ًﻻ‪ :‬ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ ﺟﺮﻳﻤﺔ اﻟﻌﺪوان وﻏﻴﺮهﺎ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ اﻷﺧﺮى‬
‫ﺗﺪﺧﻞ ﻓﻰ اﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ‪:‬‬

‫اﻟﺘﻰ ﻳﻤﻜﻦ أن‬

‫‪ .27‬اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤﺔ اﻟﺮاﺑﻌﺔ‪ ،‬اﻟﻌﺪوان‪ ،‬واﻟﻤﺬآﻮرة ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪) (1)5‬د( ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم‬
‫اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻟﻢ ﻳ ﺘﻢ ﺗﺤﺪﻳ ﺪهﺎ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ آ ﺎﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟ ﺜﻼث اﻷﺧ ﺮى اﻟﺪاﺧﻠ ﺔ‬
‫ﺿ ﻤﻦ اﺧﺘﺼﺎﺻ ﻬﺎ‪ ،‬وه ﻰ اﻹﺑ ﺎدة اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﻴ ﺔ )اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ ،(6‬وﺟ ﺮاﺋﻢ ﺿ ﺪ اﻹﻧﺴ ﺎﻧﻴﺔ‬
‫)اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ (7‬وﺟ ﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺤ ﺮب )اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ ،(8‬وﻟﻜ ﻦ اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ (2)5‬ﺗﺤﻴ ﻞ إﻟ ﻰ اﻟﺘﻌﺮﻳ ﻒ‬
‫اﻟﺮاهﻦ ﻟﻠﻌﺪوان ﻓﺘﻨﺺ ﻋﻠﻰ أﻧﻪ‪:‬‬
‫ﺗﻤ ﺎرس اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻻﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﺟﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ اﻟﻌ ﺪوان ﻣﺘ ﻰ اﻋﺘﻤ ﺪ ﺣﻜ ﻢ ﺑﻬ ﺬا‬
‫اﻟﺸ ﺄن وﻓﻘ ﺎ ﻟﻠﻤ ﺎدﺗﻴﻦ ‪121‬و‪ 123‬ﻳﻌ ﺮف ﺟﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ اﻟﻌ ﺪوان وﻳﻀ ﻊ اﻟﺸ ﺮوط اﻟﺘ ﻰ‬
‫ﺑﻤﻮﺟﺒﻬﺎ ﺗﻤﺎرس اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﺧﺘﺼﺎﺻﻬﺎ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻳﺘﻌﻠﻖ ﺑﻬﺬﻩ اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤﺔ‪ .‬وﻳﺠ ﺐ أن ﻳﻜ ﻮن‬
‫هﺬا اﻟﺤﻜﻢ ﻣﺘﺴﻘﺎ ﻣﻊ اﻷﺣﻜﺎم ذات اﻟﺼﻠﺔ ﻣﻦ ﻣﻴﺜﺎق اﻷﻣﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة‪.‬‬
‫‪(55) See Saland, supra note 15, at 202. For additional commentary on Immunity, see Otto‬‬
‫‪Triffterer, Article 27: Irrelevance of official capacity, in COMMENTARY ON ROME‬‬
‫‪STATUTE, supra note 13, at 501-515.‬‬

‫اﻧﻈﺮ ﺳﺎﻻﻧﺪ هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 15‬ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺎً‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ ‪ .202‬ﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻘﺎت إﺿﺎﻓﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺤﺼﺎﻧﺔ‪ ،‬اﻧﻈﺮ اوﺗﻮ ﺗﺮﻳﻔﺘﻴﺮﻳﺮ‪،‬‬
‫اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ :27‬ﻻ ﻋﻼﻗﻴﺔ اﻟﺼﻔﺔ اﻟﺮﺳﻤﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻈﺎم روﻣﺎ اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ‪ ،‬هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ ،13‬ﻓﻰ‬
‫‪.515-501‬‬
‫‪(56 ) See von Hebel and Robinson, supra note 32, at 81-85. For additional commentary on‬‬
‫‪jurisdiction over the crime of aggression, see Zimmerman, supra note 32, at 102-106.‬‬
‫‪For additional commentary on amending the treaty, see Roger S. Clark, Article 121:‬‬
‫‪Amendments, in COMMENTARY ON ROME STATUTE, supra note 13, at 1265-1273. See‬‬
‫‪also BENJAMIN FERENCZ, DEFINING INTERNATIONAL AGGRESSION (1975); M. Cherif‬‬
‫‪Bassiouni and Benjamin B. Ferencz, The Crime Against Peace, in 1 ICL, supra note 4,‬‬
‫‪at 313-354.‬‬

‫اﻧﻈﺮ ﻓﻮن هﻴﺒﻞ و روﻧﻴﺴﻮن‪ ،‬هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 32‬ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺎً‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ ‪ .85-81‬وﻟﺘﻔﺴﻴﺮ أوﺿﺢ ﻟﻠﻨﻈﺮ ﻓﻰ اﻟﺪﻋﺎوى‬
‫ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻠﺠﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻌﻨﻒ‪ ،‬اﻧﻈﺮ زﻳﻤﺮﻣﺎن‪ ،‬هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 32‬ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺎً‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ ‪.106– 102‬‬
‫وﻟﻠﺘﻮﺿﻴﺢ ﺑﺼﻮرة أآﺜﺮ ﻟﺘﻌﺪﻳﻞ اﻻﺗﻔﺎﻗﻴﺔ اﻧﻈﺮ روﺟﺮ‪ .‬إس‪ .‬آﻼرك‪ ،‬ﻣﺎدة )‪ :(121‬ﺗﻌﺪﻳﻼت ‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ‬
‫اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻈﺎم روﻣﺎ اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ‪ ،‬هﺎﻣﺶ‪ 13‬ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺎً‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ ‪ .1273- 1265‬اﻧﻈﺮ أﻳﻀًﺎ ﺑﻨﻴﺎﻣﻴﻦ‬
‫ﻓﻴﺮﻧﻴﺰ‪ ،‬ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻒ اﻟﻌﻨﻒ اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ )‪(1975‬؛ م‪ .‬ﺷﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ وﺑﻨﻴﺎﻣﻴﻦ ﺑﻰ ﻓﻴﺮﻧﺰ‪ ،‬اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤﺔ ﺿﺪ‬
‫اﻟﺴﻼم‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ ‪ ،ICL 1‬هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 4‬ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺎً‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ ‪.354- 313‬‬

‫‪41‬‬

‫‪ .28‬وهﻮ ﻣﺎ ﻳﻌﻨﻰ أن هﺬﻩ اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤﺔ ﺳ ﻮف ﺗﺼ ﺒﺢ ﻣﺤ ﻞ اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ‬
‫ﺑﻌﺪ ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻔﻬﺎ واﻟﻤﻮاﻓﻘﺔ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻣﻦ ﻗﺒ ﻞ ﺟﻤﻌﻴ ﺔ اﻟ ﺪول اﻷﻃ ﺮاف ]اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ [(2)5‬إﻣ ﺎ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻹﺟﻤ ﺎع أو ﺑﺄﺻ ﻮات ﺛﻠﺜ ﻰ أﻏﻠﺒﻴ ﺔ اﻟ ﺪول اﻷﻃ ﺮاف ﻓ ﻰ ﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ ﻣ ﺎ ﻟ ﻢ ﻳﻜ ﻦ هﻨ ﺎك‬
‫ﻼ ﻟﻠﺘﻄﺒﻴ ﻖ ﻋﻠ ﻰ‬
‫إﺟﻤ ﺎع‪ .‬وﺑﻌ ﺪ اﻟﻤﻮاﻓﻘ ﺔ ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﺗﻌﺮﻳ ﻒ اﻟﻌ ﺪوان ﻓﺈﻧ ﻪ ﺳﻴﺼ ﺒﺢ ﻗ ﺎﺑ ً‬
‫اﻟﺪول اﻷﻃﺮاف اﻟﺘﻰ ﻗﺎﻣﺖ ﺑﺎﻟﺘﺼﺪﻳﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺘﻌﺪﻳﻞ ﺑﻌ ﺪ ﻋ ﺎم ﻣ ﻦ إﻳ ﺪاع ﻣﺴ ﺘﻨﺪات‬
‫اﻟﺘﺼ ﺪﻳﻖ ]اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ [(5) 121‬وﻟ ﻦ ﺗﺼ ﺒﺢ ﺟﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ اﻟﻌ ﺪوان ﻗﺎﺑﻠ ﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﻄﺒﻴ ﻖ ﻋﻠ ﻰ‬
‫اﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣ ﻦ ذﻟ ﻚ ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴ ﺒﺔ ﻟﻠ ﺪول اﻷﻃ ﺮاف اﻟﺘ ﻰ ﻟ ﻢ ﺗﻮاﻓ ﻖ ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟﺘﻌ ﺪﻳﻞ وﻋﻠ ﻰ أى‬
‫ﺣﺎل ﻓﺈن ﺟﺮﻳﻤﺔ اﻟﻌﺪوان ﺳﻮف ﺗﺴﺮى ﺑﺼﻮرة ﻣﺴﺘﻘﺒﻠﻴﺔ ]اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪.[(1)22‬‬
‫‪ .29‬وﺗﺒﺎﻋًﺎ ﻟﺬﻟﻚ ﻓﺈن اﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﻳﻤﻜﻦ أن ﻳﺸﻤﻞ ﺟﺮاﺋﻢ أﺧﺮى وﻓﻘ ًﺎ‬
‫ﻟﻶﻟﻴﺔ اﻟﻤﺬآﻮرة ﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ ،121‬ﻓﺎﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ ﻣﺜﻞ اﻻﺗﺠﺎر ﺑﺎﻟﻤﺨﺪرات واﻹره ﺎب ﻗ ﺪ‬
‫ﺗﻢ ﻣﻨﺎﻗﺸ ﺘﻬﺎ ﻟﻀ ﻤﻬﺎ وﺗﻀ ﻤﻦ ﻗ ﺮار ﻟﻠﺘﺄآﻴ ﺪ ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﻣﺮاﺟﻌ ﺔ ذﻟ ﻚ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻤﺴ ﺘﻘﺒﻞ)‪،(57‬‬
‫وﺟﺮاﺋﻢ ﺟﺪﻳﺪة ﻗﺎﺑﻠﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﺑﻌﺪ ﻋﺎم ﻣ ﻦ إﻳ ﺪاع ﻣﺴ ﺘﻨﺪات اﻟﺘﺼ ﺪﻳﻖ ﺑﻘﺒ ﻮل اﻟ ﺪول‬
‫اﻷﻃ ﺮاف‪ .‬ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟ ﺮﻏﻢ ﻣ ﻦ ذﻟ ﻚ ﻓﻠ ﻦ ﺗﻤ ﺎرس اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ‬
‫اﻻﺧﺘﺼﺎص ﻓﻴﻤ ﺎ ﻳﺘﻌﻠ ﻖ ﺑﺠﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ ﺟﺪﻳ ﺪة ﺗﺨﻀ ﻊ ﻟﻠﺘﻌ ﺪﻳﻞ ﻋﻨ ﺪﻣﺎ ﻳﺮﺗﻜﺒﻬ ﺎ ﻣﻮاﻃﻨ ﻮ‬
‫اﻟﺪوﻟﺔ اﻟﻄ ﺮف اﻟﺘ ﻰ ﻟ ﻢ ﺗﻮاﻓ ﻖ ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟﺘﻌ ﺪﻳﻞ أو ﺑﺠﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ ﺗﺮﺗﻜ ﺐ ﻓ ﻰ إﻗﻠ ﻴﻢ اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﻄﺮف اﻟﺘﻰ ﻟﻢ ﺗﻮاﻓﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ اﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ ﻓﻰ ﺗﻠﻚ اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺠﺪﻳﺪة‪.‬‬
‫ﺛﺎﻧﻴ ًﺎ‪ :‬أﺣﻜ ﺎم اﻟﻤﺴ ﺆوﻟﻴﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ وﺗﺤﺪﻳ ﺪ ﻣﻀ ﻤﻮن اﻟ ﺮآﻦ اﻟﻤ ﺎدى ﻟﻠﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ‪:‬‬
‫)‪(58‬‬
‫"اﻟﻘﺴﻢ اﻟﻌﺎم"‬
‫‪(57 ) See von Hebel and Robinson, supra note 32, at 85-87.‬‬

‫اﻧﻈﺮ ﻓﻮن هﻴﺒﻴﻞ و روﺑﻴﻨﺴﻮن‪ ،‬هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 32‬ﺳﺎﺑﻖ‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ ‪.87 -85‬‬
‫‪) See generally Per Saland, supra note 15. For additional commentary on Criminal‬‬
‫‪Responsibility, see Raul C. Pangalangan, Article 25: Individual criminal responsibility,‬‬
‫‪in COMMENTARY ON ROME STATUTE, supra note 13, at 475-492. For additional‬‬
‫‪commentary on Exoneration of Criminal Responsibility, see Albin Eser, Article 31:‬‬
‫‪Grounds for excluding criminal responsibility, in COMMENTARY ON ROME STATUTE,‬‬
‫‪supra note 13, at 537-554; Otto Triffterer, Article 32: Mistake of fact or mistake of law,‬‬
‫‪in COMMENTARY ON ROME STATUTE, supra note 13, at 555 -572; Otto Triffterer, Article‬‬
‫‪33: Superior order and prescription of law, in COMMENTARY ON ROME STATUTE, supra‬‬
‫‪note 13, at 573-588. See generally Bassiouni, Sources, supra note 4, at 3-126. For‬‬
‫‪discussion on general principles of International Law, see M. Cherif Bassiouni, A‬‬
‫‪Functional Approach to >General Principles of International Law’, 11 MICH. J. INT’L L.‬‬
‫‪768 (1990).‬‬

‫‪58‬‬

‫(‬

‫اﻧﻈﺮ ﻋﻤﻮﻣًﺎ ﺳﺎﻻﻧﺪ اﻟﻤﻠﺤﻮﻇﺔ ‪ 15‬ﻟﻤﺰﻳﺪ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻘﺎت ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻤﺴﺆوﻟﻴﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﻔﺮدﻳﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ‬

‫‪42‬‬

‫‪ .30‬ﻳﺘﻀﻤﻦ اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ أرآ ﺎن اﻟﻤﺴ ﺆوﻟﻴﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﻔﺮدﻳ ﺔ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻤ ﺎدة‬
‫‪ 25‬وﺷ ﺮوط اﻹﻋﻔ ﺎء ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﻤﺴ ﺆوﻟﻴﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻤ ﺎدﺗﻴﻦ ‪ (59) 33 -31‬وﻋﻠ ﻰ‬
‫)‪(60‬‬
‫اﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ ذﻟﻚ ﻓﺈن ه ﺬﻩ اﻟﻨﺼ ﻮص ﻟ ﻢ ﺗﺘﻀ ﻤﻦ ﺗﺤﺪﻳ ﺪ "اﻟ ﺮآﻦ اﻟﻤ ﺎدى"‬
‫‪actus‬‬
‫‪ reus‬اﻟﻤﻄﻠﻮب‪.‬‬
‫ﻻ‬
‫‪ .31‬ووﻓﻘ ًﺎ ﻟﻠﻤ ﺎدة ‪ 25‬ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ ﻓ ﺈن اﻟﺸ ﺨﺺ ﻳﻜ ﻮن ﻣﺴ ﺆو ً‬
‫ﺟﻨﺎﺋّﻴﺎ ﻋﻦ "اﻟﺴﻠﻮك" اﻟﺬى ﻳﺘﻀ ﻤﻦ اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺪاﺧﻠ ﺔ ﺿ ﻤﻦ اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ‬
‫ﺑﻐ ﺾ اﻟﻨﻈ ﺮ ﻋ ﻦ ارﺗﻜﺎﺑﻬ ﺎ ﺑﺸ ﻜﻞ ﻓ ﺮدى أو ﺟﻤ ﺎﻋﻰ‪ ،‬وﻓ ﻰ ﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ إذا آ ﺎن ذﻟ ﻚ‬
‫اﻟﺸﺨﺺ‪:‬‬
‫أ‪ -‬أﻣﺮ أو أﻏﺮى ﺑﺎرﺗﻜ ﺎب أو ﺣ ﺚ ﻋﻠ ﻰ ارﺗﻜ ﺎب‪ ،‬ﺟﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ وﻗﻌ ﺖ ﺑﺎﻟﻔﻌ ﻞ أو‬
‫ﺷﺮع ﻓﻴﻬﺎ‪.‬‬

‫اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻈﺎم روﻣﺎ اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ‪ ،‬اﻟﻤﻠﺤﻮﻇﺔ ‪ 13‬ﻓﻰ ص ‪ ،492 -475‬ﻟﻤﺰﻳﺪ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻘﺎت ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫اﻹﻋﻔﺎء ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﺴﺆوﻟﻴﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ‪ ،‬اﻧﻈﺮ أﻟﺒﻦ إﻳﺴﺮ‪ ،‬اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ :31‬أﺳﺲ اﻹﻋﻔﺎء ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﺴﺆوﻟﻴﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻈﺎم روﻣﺎ اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 13‬ﺳﺎﺑﻘًﺎ‪554 – 537 .‬؛ أوﺗﻮ ﺗﺮﻳﻔﺘﺮ‪،‬‬
‫اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ ،32‬ﺧﻄﺄ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻮﻗﺎﺋــﻊ أو =‬
‫= اﻟﺨﻄﺄ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮن‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻈﺎم روﻣﺎ اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 13‬ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺎً‪،588 – 573 ،‬‬
‫اﻧﻈﺮ ﻋﻤﻮﻣًﺎ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ‪ ،‬اﻟﻤﺼﺎدر‪ ،‬ﻣﻠﺤﻮﻇﺔ‪ 4‬ﻓﻰ ‪ – 126 – 3‬ﻟﻤﻨﺎﻗﺸﺔ اﻟﻤﺒﺎدئ اﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ ﻟﻠﻘﺎﻧﻮن‬
‫اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ‪ ،‬اﻧﻈﺮ م‪ .‬ﺷﺮﻳﻒ ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ‪ ،‬اﻟﻤﻨﻬﺞ اﻟﻮﻇﻴﻔﻰ ﻟﻠﻤﺒﺎدئ اﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ ﻟﻠﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ‪ 11 ،‬ﻣﻴﻚ ﺟﻴﻪ‬
‫إﻧﺘﺮﻧﺎﺷﻴﻮﻧﺎل ‪.(1990) 768‬‬
‫‪(59 ) These elements reflect general principles of criminal law contained in the world’s major‬‬
‫‪criminal justice system. The codification contained in these ICC provisions may not‬‬
‫‪however be in full conformity with the requirements of all national legal systems, but‬‬
‫‪they are not thereby in conflict with what is called the Ageneral part@ of criminal law‬‬
‫‪of most legal systems.‬‬

‫هﺬﻩ اﻟﻌﻨﺎﺻﺮ ﺗﻌﻜﺲ اﻟﻤﺒﺎدئ اﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ ﻟﻠﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻰ اﻟﻤﺘﻀﻤﻨﺔ ﻓﻰ ﻧﻈﺎم اﻟﻌﺪاﻟﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺮﺋﻴﺴﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻌﺎﻟﻢ‪ .‬وﻣﻦ اﻟﺠﺎﺋﺰ أﻻ ﻳﻜﻮن اﻟﺘﺼﻨﻴﻒ اﻟﻮارد ﻓﻰ أﺣﻜﺎم اﻟـ ‪ ICC‬ﻣﻊ ذﻟﻚ‪ ،‬ﻣﺘﻔﻘًﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﻜﺎﻣﻞ ﻣﻊ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻄﻠﺒﺎت اﻷﻧﻈﻤﺔ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮﻧﻴﺔ اﻟﻤﺤﻠﻴﺔ آﺎﻓﺔ ‪ ،‬وﻟﻜﻨﻬﺎ ﻟﻴﺴﺖ ﻣﺘﻌﺎرﺿﺔ ﻣﻊ ﻣﺎ ﻳﺴﻤﻰ "اﻟﺠﺎﻧﺐ اﻷﻋﻢ"‬
‫ﻟﻠﻘﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻰ ﻷﻏﻠﺐ اﻷﻧﻈﻤﺔ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮﻧﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫‪(60) The reason for the absence of such a provision was the failure of the delegates of the‬‬
‫‪Diplomatic Conference to reach consensus on a failure to act or an omission as part of‬‬
‫‪the material element. Bassiouni, Negotiating the Treaty of Rome, supra note 18, at 464.‬‬

‫ﺳﺒﺐ ﻏﻴﺎب ﻣﺜﻞ هﺬا اﻟﺤﻜﻢ هﻮ ﻓﺸﻞ اﻟﻮﻓﻮد ﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﺆﺗﻤﺮ اﻟﺪﺑﻠﻮﻣﺎﺳﻰ ﻟﻠﻮﺻﻮل إﻟﻰ ﻣﻮاﻓﻘﺔ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻹﺟﻤﺎع ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﺪم اﻟﻘﺪرة ﻟﻠﺘﺼﺮف أو اﻟﺘﻘﺼﻴﺮ آﺠﺰء ﻣﻦ اﻟﻌﻨﺼﺮ اﻟﻤﺎدى‪ .‬ﺑﺴﻴﻮﻧﻰ‪" ،‬اﻟﺘﻔﺎوض‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻌﺎهﺪة روﻣﺎ"‪ ،‬هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ ،18‬ص ‪.464‬‬

‫‪43‬‬

‫ب‪ -‬ﻗﺪم اﻟﻌ ﻮن أو ﺣ ﺮض أو ﺳ ﺎﻋﺪ ﺑ ﺄى ﺷ ﻜﻞ ﺁﺧ ﺮ ﻟﻐ ﺮض ﺗﻴﺴ ﻴﺮ ارﺗﻜ ﺎب‬
‫هﺬﻩ اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤﺔ أو اﻟﺸﺮوع ﻓﻰ ارﺗﻜﺎﺑﻬﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ُﻳ َﻌ ّﺪ اﻟﺸ ﺨﺺ أﻳﻀ ًﺎ ﻣ ﺬﻧﺒًﺎ إذا ﻗ ﺎم ذﻟ ﻚ اﻟﺸ ﺨﺺ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﺴ ﺎهﻤﺔ ﻓ ﻰ ارﺗﻜ ﺎب‬
‫اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤﺔ ﻓﻌﻠﻴﺎ ﺑﻮاﺳ ﻄﺔ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋ ﺔ ذات ﻗﺼ ﺪ ﻣﺸ ﺘﺮك ]اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪)(25‬د([ وﻳﺠ ﺐ أن‬
‫ﻳﻜﻮن ﺳﻠﻮك اﻟﻔﺮد ﻣﺘﻌﻤﺪًا وأن ﻳﻜ ﻮن ﻗ ﺪ ﺗ ﻢ إﻣ ﺎ ﺑﻬ ﺪف ﻣﻌﺎوﻧ ﺔ اﻟﻨﺸ ﺎط اﻹﺟﺮاﻣ ﻰ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤﺠﻤﻮﻋ ﺔ ﺣﻴ ﺚ ﻳﻜ ﻮن ه ﺬا اﻟﻨﺸ ﺎط أو اﻟﻐ ﺮض ﻣﻨﻄﻮﻳ ًﺎ ﻋﻠ ﻰ ارﺗﻜ ﺎب ﺟﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ‬
‫داﺧﻠﺔ ﺿﻤﻦ اﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ أو ﻳﻜ ﻮن ﻗ ﺪ ﺗ ﻢ ﻣ ﻊ اﻟﻌﻠ ﻢ ﺑﻘﺼ ﺪ اﻟﻤﺠﻤﻮﻋ ﺔ ﻓ ﻰ‬
‫ارﺗﻜﺎب ﺟﺮﻳﻤﺔ ] اﻟﻤﺎدة‪ )25‬د( )‪.[(2 -1‬‬
‫‪.32‬‬

‫وﻓﻰ ﺟﻤﻴﻊ اﻷﺣﻮال ﻓﺈن اﻟﻤﺴﺆوﻟﻴﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﻻ ﻳﻤﻜﻦ ﺗﺠﻨﺒﻬﺎ ﺑﺎدﻋﺎء‪:‬‬

‫أ ‪ -‬اﻟﺼﻔﺔ اﻟﺮﺳﻤﻴﺔ ﻟﻤﺮﺗﻜﺐ اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤﺔ ]اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪.[27‬‬
‫ب‪ -‬أى ﻣﺪد زﻣﻨﻴﺔ ﻟﺴﻘﻮط اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﺘﻘﺎدم ] اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪.[ 29‬‬
‫ج‪ -‬اﻟﺨﻄ ﺄ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻘ ﺎﻧﻮن ﻣ ﺎ ﻟ ﻢ ﻳﻜ ﻦ ه ﺬا اﻟﺨﻄ ﺄ ﻣﺨﺎﻟﻔ ﺎ ﻟﻠ ﺮآﻦ اﻟﻤﻌﻨ ﻮى‬
‫]ﻣﺎدة ‪.(61)[(2)32‬‬
‫‪ .33‬آﻤﺎ ﻻ ﻳﺴﺘﻄﻴﻊ اﻟﻘﺎﺋﺪ اﻟﺤﺮﺑﻰ ﺗﺠﻨ ﺐ اﻟﻤﺴ ﺆوﻟﻴﺔ ﻋ ﻦ اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺘ ﻰ ﻳ ﺘﻢ‬
‫ارﺗﻜﺎﺑﻬﺎ ﺗﺤﺖ رﺋﺎﺳﺘﻪ إذا ﻋﻠﻢ هﺬا اﻟﺤﺪث أو آﺎن ﻳﺠﺐ أن ﻳﻌﻠﻢ أو ﻳﻜﻮن ﻗﺪ أﺧﻔ ﻖ‬
‫ﻓﻰ ﻣﻨﻊ ﺣﺪوث ﺗﻠﻚ اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ ﺑﺼﻮرة ﻣﻼﺋﻤ ﺔ )ﻣ ﺎدة ‪) 28‬أ(( وه ﺬا ﻳﺸ ﻤﻞ اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ‬
‫اﻟﺘ ﻰ ﻳﺮﺗﻜﺒﻬ ﺎ اﻟﻤﺮءوﺳ ﻮن إذا ﻋﻠ ﻢ رﺋﻴﺴ ﻬﻢ أو ﻳﻔﺘ ﺮض أن ﻳﻜ ﻮن ﻗ ﺪ ﻋﻠ ﻢ ﺑﻮﻗ ﻮع‬

‫‪) For additional commentary on official capacity of offender, see Otto Triffterer,‬‬
‫‪Article27: Irrelevance of official capacity, in COMMENTARY ON ROME STATUTE, supra‬‬
‫‪note 13, at 501-514. For additional commentary on the Period of limitations, see William‬‬
‫‪A. Schabas, Article 29: Non-applicability of statute of limitations, in COMMENTARY ON‬‬
‫‪ROME STATUTE, supra note 13, at 523-527. See Christine Van den Wyngaert, War‬‬
‫‪Crimes, Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity -- Are States Taking National‬‬
‫‪Prosecutions Seriously?, in 3 ICL, supra note 4, at 227-238.‬‬

‫‪(61‬‬

‫ﻟﻤﺰﻳ ﺪ ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻘ ﺎت ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻷهﻠﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺮﺳ ﻤﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﺠ ﺮم اﻧﻈ ﺮ أوﺗ ﻮ ﺗﺮﻳﻔﺘ ﺮ‪ ،‬اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ :27‬ﻻ ﻋﻼﻗﻴ ﺔ‬
‫اﻷهﻠﻴﺔ اﻟﺮﺳﻤﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻈﺎم روﻣﺎ اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ‪ .‬ﻣﻠﺤﻮﻇﺔ ‪، 13‬ص ‪ .514 – 501‬ﻟﻤﺰﻳ ﺪ‬
‫ﻣﻦ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻘﺎت ﻋﻠﻰ ﻓﺘﺮة اﻟﺘﻘﺎدم‪ ،‬اﻧﻈﺮ وﻳﻠﻴﺎم ا‪.‬ﺷﺎﺑﺎس‪ ،‬اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪" :29‬ﻋ ﺪم ﺗﻄﺒﻴ ﻖ ﻗ ﺎﻧﻮن اﻟﺘﻘ ﺎدم "‪،‬‬
‫ﻓﻰ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻈﺎم روﻣﺎ اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ‪ ،‬اﻟﻤﻠﺤﻮﻇﺔ ‪ ،13‬ﻓﻰ ‪ .527 - 523‬اﻧﻈﺮ آﺮﻳﺴﺘﻴﻦ ﻓ ﺎن دﻳ ﻦ‬
‫واﻳﻨﺠ ﺎرت‪ ،‬ﺟ ﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺤ ﺮب‪ ،‬اﻟﻤ ﺬاﺑﺢ اﻟﺠﻤﺎﻋﻴ ﺔ واﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ ﺿ ﺪ اﻹﻧﺴ ﺎﻧﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ه ﻞ ﺗﺄﺧ ﺬ اﻟ ﺪول‬
‫اﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻤﺎت اﻟﻤﺤﻠﻴﺔ ﻣﺄﺧﺬ اﻟﺠﺪ؟ ﻓﻰ ‪ ICL 3‬اﻟﻤﻠﺤﻮﻇﺔ ‪ ،4‬ﻓﻰ ‪.238-227‬‬

‫‪44‬‬

‫ﺗﻠﻚ اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ أو آ ﺎن ﻳ ﺘﺤﻜﻢ ﻓﻴﻬ ﺎ ﺑﻔﺎﻋﻠﻴ ﺔ‪ .‬أو ﻳﻜ ﻮن ﻗ ﺪ أﺧﻔ ﻖ ﻓ ﻰ اﺗﺨ ﺎذ إﺟ ﺮاءات‬
‫ﺣﺎﺳﻤﺔ ﻟﻤﻨﻊ ﺗﻠﻚ اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ ]ﻣﺎدة ‪) 28‬ب([)‪.(62‬‬
‫‪.34‬‬

‫ﻻ ﺟﻨﺎﺋّﻴﺎ ﻓﻰ ﻇﻞ ﻇﺮوف ﻣﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﻣﺜﻞ‪:‬‬
‫وﻻ ﻳﻜﻮن اﻟﺸﺨﺺ ﻣﺴﺆو ً‬

‫)أ( إذا آﺎن هﺬا اﻟﺸﺨﺺ ﻳﻌﺎﻧﻰ ﻣ ﻦ ﻣ ﺮض ﻋﻘﻠ ﻰ أو أى ﻇ ﺮوف أﺧ ﺮى‬
‫ﺗﻌﻮق دون ﺗﺤﻜﻢ هﺬا اﻟﺸﺨﺺ ﻓﻰ ﺳﻠﻮآﻪ‪.‬‬
‫)ب( اﻟﺘﺼﺮف ﻓﻰ ﺣﺎﻟﺔ اﻟﺪﻓﺎع ﻋﻦ اﻟﻨﻔﺲ‪.‬‬
‫)ج( أو إذا آﺎن ﺗﺤﺖ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ إآﺮاﻩ ]اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪.[31‬‬

‫‪(62 ) For additional commentary on Command responsibility, see William J. Fenrick, Article‬‬
‫‪28: Responsibility of commanders and other superiors, in COMMENTARY ON ROME‬‬
‫‪STATUTE, supra note 13, at 515-523. See Jordan J. Paust, Superior Orders and‬‬
‫‪Command Responsibility, in 1 ICL, supra note 4, at 223-238.‬‬

‫ﻟﻤﺰﻳ ﺪ ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻘ ﺎت ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﻣﺴ ﺆوﻟﻴﺔ اﻵﻣ ﺮ‪ ،‬اﻧﻈ ﺮ وﻳﻠﻴ ﺎم ﺟﻴ ﻪ ﻓﻴﻨﺮﻳ ﻚ‪ ،‬اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ :28‬ﻣﺴ ﺆوﻟﻴﺔ‬
‫اﻵﻣﺮﻳﻦ وﻏﻴﺮهﻢ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﺴﺆوﻟﻴﻦ‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻈﺎم روﻣﺎ اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 13‬ﺳ ﺎﺑﻘًﺎ ‪– 515‬‬
‫‪ .523‬اﻧﻈ ﺮ ﺟ ﻮردك ﺟﻴ ﻪ ﺑﺎوﺳ ﺖ‪ ،‬اﻷواﻣ ﺮ اﻟﻌﻠﻴ ﺎ وﻣﺴ ﺆوﻟﻴﺔ اﻵﻣ ﺮ‪ ،‬ﻓ ﻰ ‪ ، ICL 1‬ه ﺎﻣﺶ ‪،4‬‬
‫‪.238 - 223‬‬

‫‪45‬‬

‫اﻟﻔـﺼـﻞ اﻟﺜﺎﻟــﺚ‬
‫ﺗﺤﺮﻳﻚ اﻟﺪﻋﻮى اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ أﻣﺎم اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‬
‫‪ .34‬ﻳﺘﻢ ﺗﺤﺮﻳ ﻚ اﻟ ﺪﻋﻮى اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ أﻣ ﺎم اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﺑﺈﺣ ﺪى‬
‫وﺳﻴﻠﺘﻴﻦ‪ :‬اﻷوﻟﻰ وﻳﻄﻠﻖ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ إﺣﺎﻟﺔ "اﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ"‪ ،‬ﺣﻴﺚ ﺗﺪﺧﻞ اﻟﺪﻋﻮى أو "اﻟﺤﺎﻟ ﺔ"‪،‬‬
‫ﺑﺤﺴﺐ اﻟﺘﻌﺒﻴﺮ اﻟﻮارد ﻓﻰ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ‪ ،‬ﺑﻨﺎء ﻋﻠﻰ ﻃﻠﺐ ﻳﺘﻘﺪم ﺑﻪ ﻣﺠﻠ ﺲ اﻷﻣ ﻦ‬
‫أو إﺣﺪى اﻟﺪول اﻷﻃﺮاف أو ﻏﻴﺮ اﻷﻃﺮاف ﺑﻨﺎء ﻋﻠﻰ ﺷ ﺮوط وإﺟ ﺮاءات ﻣﺤ ﺪدة‬
‫ﺑﺸ ﻜﻞ دﻗﻴ ﻖ‪ .‬أﻣ ﺎ اﻟﻮﺳ ﻴﻠﺔ اﻟﺜﺎﻧﻴ ﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻘﻮاﻣﻬ ﺎ ه ﻮ ﺗﺤ ﺮك اﻟﻤ ﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌ ﺎم ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ وﺗﺪﺧﻠﻪ ﻣ ﻦ ﺗﻠﻘ ﺎء ﻧﻔﺴ ﻪ ﻹﺟ ﺮاء ﺗﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ ودوﻧﻤ ﺎ إﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ‪ ،‬وﻗ ﺪ ﺗﻜﻔ ﻞ‬
‫اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﺑﺘﺤﺪﻳﺪ ﺿﻮاﺑﻂ وإﺟﺮاءات هﺬا اﻟﺘﺪﺧﻞ‪.‬‬
‫وﻓﻴﻤ ﺎ ﻳﻠ ﻰ ﻧﻌ ﺮض ﻟﻬ ﺎﺗﻴﻦ اﻟﻮﺳ ﻴﻠﺘﻴﻦ ﻓ ﻰ ﻣﺒﺤﺜ ﻴﻦ أول وﺛ ﺎن‪ ،‬ﻗﺒ ﻞ أن‬
‫ﻧﻌﺮض ﻟﻘﻮاﻋﺪ ﻗﺒﻮل أو ﻋﺪم ﻗﺒﻮل اﻟﺪﻋﻮى أﻣﺎم اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﻓﻰ ﻣﺒﺤﺚ ﺛﺎﻟﺚ وأﺧﻴﺮ‪.‬‬
‫اﻟـﻤـﺒﺤـﺚ اﻷول‬
‫إﺣﺎﻟﺔ »ﺣﺎﻟﺔ« إﻟـﻰ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ‬
‫‪ .35‬ﻗﺪ ﺗﻤﺎرس اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ اﺧﺘﺼﺎﺻﻬﺎ )‪ ،(63‬ﻋﻨﺪ ﺣ ﺪوث ﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ‬
‫ﺣﻘﻴﻘﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻳﺪﻋﻰ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ﺑﺎرﺗﻜﺎب ﺟﺮﻳﻤﺔ أو أآﺜﺮ ﻣﻦ ﺗﻠﻚ اﻟﻤﻮﺿ ﺤﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ‬

‫‪(63 ) See generally Lionel Yee, The International Criminal Court and The Security Council,‬‬
‫‪in MAKING OF THE ROME STATUTE, supra note 13, at 143-152. For additional‬‬
‫‪commentary on Referring ASituations@ to the Court, see Williams, Article 12, supra‬‬
‫‪note 20; Sharon Williams, Article 13: Exercise of Jurisdiction, in COMMENTARY ON‬‬
‫‪ROME STATUTE, supra note 13, at 343-352; Antonio Marchesi, Article 14: Referral of a‬‬
‫‪situation by a State Party, in COMMENTARY ON ROME STATUTE, supra note 13, at 329‬‬‫‪359.‬‬

‫اﻧﻈ ﺮ ﻋﻤﻮﻣ ًﺎ ﻟﻴﻮﻧﻴ ﻞ ﻳ ﻰ‪ ،‬اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ وﻣﺠﻠ ﺲ اﻷﻣ ﻦ‪ ،‬ﻓ ﻰ ﺻ ﻴﺎﻏﺔ ﻧﻈ ﺎم روﻣ ﺎ‬
‫اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ‪ ،‬ه ﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 13‬ﺳ ﺎﺑﻘًﺎ ‪ .152 - 143‬ﻟﻤﺰﻳ ﺪ ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻘ ﺎت ﻋﻠ ﻰ إﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ "اﻟﻤﻮاﻗ ﻒ" إﻟ ﻰ‬
‫اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ‪ ،‬اﻧﻈ ﺮ وﻳﻠﻴ ﺎﻣﺰ‪ ،‬اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ 212‬ﻣﻠﺤﻮﻇ ﺔ ‪ ،20‬ﺷ ﺎرون وﻳﻠﻴ ﺎﻣﺰ اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ :13‬ﻣﻤﺎرﺳ ﺔ‬
‫اﻻﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص‪ ،‬ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴ ﻖ ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﻧﻈ ﺎم روﻣ ﺎ اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ ه ﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 13‬ﺳ ﺎﺑﻘًﺎ ‪ ،352- 343‬أﻧﺘﻮﻧﻴ ﻮ‬
‫ﻣﺎرﺷﻴﺰى اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪" :14‬إﺣﺎﻟﺔ ﺣﺎﻟﺔ ﻣﻦ ﻗﺒﻞ دوﻟﺔ ﻃﺮف"‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴ ﻖ ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﻧﻈ ﺎم روﻣ ﺎ اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ‬
‫هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 13‬ﺳﺎﺑﻘﺎ‪.‬‬

‫‪46‬‬

‫ﺣﻴﺚ ﺗﺤﺎل ﻟﻠﻤﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌ ﺎم ﻋ ﻦ ﻃﺮﻳ ﻖ )أ( اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ اﻟﻄ ﺮف ]اﻟﻤ ﻮاد ‪ 13‬ب ‪[14 ،‬؛‬
‫)ب( ﻣﺠﻠﺲ اﻷﻣﻦ؛ ]ﻣﺎدة ‪) 13‬ب([؛ )ج( اﻟﺪوﻟﺔ ﻏﻴﺮ اﻟﻄﺮف ]ﻣﺎدة ‪.[(3) 12‬‬
‫‪ .36‬ﺗ ﺘﻢ اﻹﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ ﻋ ﻦ ﻃﺮﻳ ﻖ دوﻟ ﺔ ﻃ ﺮف ﺑ ﺄن ﺗﺤ ﺪد ه ﺬﻩ اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ اﻟﻈ ﺮوف‬
‫اﻟﻤﺤﻴﻄﺔ وﺗﺮﻓﻖ ﺑﻬﺎ اﻟﻤﺴﺘﻨﺪات ﻣﺪﻋﻤﺔ )ﻣﺎدة ‪.((2) 14‬‬
‫‪ .37‬ﻋﻨ ﺪﻣﺎ ﻳ ﺘﻢ إﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ "ﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ" إﻟ ﻰ اﻟﻤ ﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌ ﺎم ﻋ ﻦ ﻣﺠﻠ ﺲ اﻷﻣ ﻦ ووﻓﻘ ًﺎ‬
‫ﻟﻠﺒ ﺎب اﻟﺴ ﺎﺑﻊ ﻣ ﻦ ﻣﻴﺜ ﺎق اﻷﻣ ﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤ ﺪة‪ ،‬ﻳﺠ ﺐ أن ﺗﺘﻀ ﻤﻦ ﺗﻠ ﻚ "اﻟﺤﺎﻟ ﺔ" ﺗﻬﺪﻳ ﺪًا‬
‫ﻟﻠﺴﻠﻢ واﻷﻣﻦ‪ .‬وﻋﻨﺪ إﺣﺎﻟﺔ ﻣﺠﻠﺲ اﻷﻣﻦ ﻟـ"ﺣﺎﻟﺔ" ﻣﻌﻴﻨﺔ إﻟ ﻰ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ وﻓﻘ ًﺎ ﻟﻠﺒ ﺎب‬
‫اﻟﺴﺎﺑﻊ‪ ،‬ﻓﺈن اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﻻ ﺗﺤﺘﺎج إﻟﻰ اﻟﺘﻘﻴﺪ ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮوط اﻟﻤﺬآﻮرة ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ]‪[(2)12‬‬
‫وه ﻰ‪ :‬ارﺗﻜ ﺎب اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ ﺑﻤﻌﺮﻓ ﺔ أﺣ ﺪ ﻣ ﻮاﻃﻨﻰ دوﻟ ﺔ ﻃ ﺮف أو ﻋﻠ ﻰ إﻗﻠ ﻴﻢ ﺗﻠ ﻚ‬
‫اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ‪ .‬وﻟﻜ ﻦ ﻳﺠ ﺐ أن ﺗﺘﻀ ﻤﻦ ﺗﻠ ﻚ اﻟﺤﺎﻟ ﺔ "ﺗﻬﺪﻳ ﺪا ﻟﻠﺴ ﻠﻢ واﻷﻣ ﻦ‪ ".‬وﻳﺠ ﺪر‬
‫ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻼﺣﻈﺔ أن ﻣﺠﻠ ﺲ اﻷﻣ ﻦ ﻳﺘﻤﺘ ﻊ ﺑﺴ ﻠﻄﺔ ﺗﺄﺟﻴ ﻞ اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ واﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻤ ﺔ ﻟﻠ ـ"ﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ"‬
‫اﻟﺘﻰ ﺗﻤﺖ إﺣﺎﻟﺘﻬﺎ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ‪ ،‬إﻣ ﺎ ﻋ ﻦ ﻃﺮﻳ ﻖ اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ اﻟﻄ ﺮف ]ﻣ ﺎدة ‪) 13‬أ([ وإﻣ ﺎ‬
‫ﺑﻤﻌﺮﻓ ﺔ اﻟﻤ ﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌ ﺎم ﻣ ﻦ ﺗﻠﻘ ﺎء ﻧﻔﺴ ﻪ )ﻣ ﺎدة ‪ (15‬ﻟﻤ ﺪة اﺛﻨ ﻰ ﻋﺸ ﺮ ﺷ ﻬﺮًا ﻣ ﺎدة‬
‫)‪ .(16‬وهﺬا اﻟﺘﺄﺟﻴﻞ ﻳﺤﺪث وﻓﻘًﺎ ﻟﻘﺮار ﻣﻦ ﻣﺠﻠﺲ اﻷﻣﻦ ﺗﻨﻔﻴﺬًا ﻟﻤ ﺎ ه ﻮ ﻣﻨﺼ ﻮص‬
‫ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﻓﻰ اﻟﺒﺎب اﻟﺴﺎﺑﻊ ﻣﻦ ﻣﻴﺜﺎق اﻷﻣﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة ر ّدا ﻋﻠﻰ "ﺗﻬﺪﻳﺪ اﻷﻣﻦ واﻟﺴﻼم‪".‬‬
‫‪ .38‬ﺑﺎﻹﺿﺎﻓﺔ إﻟ ﻰ ذﻟ ﻚ ﻳﺠ ﻮز ﻟﻠﻤ ﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌ ﺎم ﻣﺒﺎﺷ ﺮة اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ ﻓ ﻰ ارﺗﻜ ﺎب‬
‫اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺘﻰ ﻳﺤﺪدهﺎ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﺑﻌﺪ اﻟﺤﺼﻮل ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﻣﻮاﻓﻘ ﺔ "داﺋ ﺮة اﻟﺸ ﺆون‬
‫اﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ ﺑﻤﺎ ﻗﺒﻞ اﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻤﺔ" ]آﻤﺎ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﺎدﺗﻴﻦ ‪) 13‬ج( و‪) [15‬اﻧﻈﺮ اﻟﻔﻘ ﺮات ‪52‬‬
‫و‪ 54‬اﻟﺘﺎﻟﻴﺔ(‪.‬‬
‫‪" .39‬اﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ" هﻰ اﻟﻨﺺ اﻟﻔﻌﻠﻰ اﻟﻌﺎم اﻟﺬى ﻳﻌﺘﻘ ﺪ ﺑﻤﻮﺟﺒ ﻪ أن ﺟﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ داﺧﻠ ﺔ‬
‫ﻓ ﻰ اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ]ﻣ ﺎدة ‪ [5‬ﻗ ﺪ ﺗ ﻢ ارﺗﻜﺎﺑﻬ ﺎ)‪ .(64‬وﺑﻬ ﺬا ﻳﺘﻀ ﺢ أن اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻻ ﻳﻤﻜﻨﻬ ﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻴ ﻪ ﺳ ﻴﻒ اﻻﺗﻬ ﺎم ﺿ ﺪ ﺷ ﺨﺺ ﻣﻌ ﻴﻦ وﺑﺎﻟﺘ ﺎﻟﻰ‬
‫ﻳﺼﻌﺐ اﺳﺘﺨﺪام اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ أداة ﺳﻴﺎﺳﻴﺔ ﻗﺒﻞ أى ﻓﺮد‪.‬‬

‫‪(64 ) For additional commentary on crimes within the jurisdiction of the court, see Andreas‬‬
‫‪Zimmerman, supra note 32.‬‬

‫ﻟﻤﺰﻳﺪ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻘﺎت ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺠﺮاﺋﻢ اﻟﺪاﺧﻠﺔ ﻓﻰ اﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ‪ ،‬اﻧﻈﺮ أﻧﺪرﻳﺎس زﻣﺮﻣﺎن‪،‬‬
‫ﺳﺎﺑﻘًﺎ هﺎﻣﺶ ‪.32‬‬

‫‪47‬‬

‫اﻟﻠﻔﻆ "ﺣﺎﻟﺔ" ﻻ ﻳﻤﻜ ﻦ ﺗﻔﺴ ﻴﺮﻩ ذﻟ ﻚ اﻟﺘﻔﺴ ﻴﺮ اﻟﻤﺤ ﺪود أو اﻟﻀ ﻴﻖ اﻟ ﺬى ﻳﻌﻨ ﻰ‬
‫ﻗﻴﺎم ﻧﺰاع ﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺔ أو ﻓﺮد أو وﺣﺪة ﻋﺴ ﻜﺮﻳﺔ‪ ،‬أو أن ﻳﻔﺴ ﺮ ﻟﻴﺸ ﻴﺮ إﻟ ﻰ ﺣ ﺪث‬
‫ﻣﻌ ﻴﻦ دون اﻟﺮﺟ ﻮع إﻟ ﻰ اﻟﺴ ﻴﺎق اﻟﻌ ﺎم ﻟﻠ ﻨﺺ‪ .‬وه ﺬا اﻟﻤﻌﻨ ﻰ اﻟﻤﻘﺼ ﻮد ﻟﻠﻔ ﻆ‬
‫"اﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ" ﺳﻮف ﻳﻜ ﻮن ﺑ ﺎﻟﻄﺒﻊ ﻣﺨﺘﻠﻔ ًﺎ ﻣ ﻦ واﻗﻌ ﺔ إﻟ ﻰ أﺧ ﺮى‪ ،‬وﻟﻜ ﻦ ﻳﺠ ﺐ أن ﻳ ﺘﻢ‬
‫ﺗﻌﺮﻳﻔ ﻪ ﻋ ﻦ ﻃﺮﻳ ﻖ اﻟﻤ ﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌ ﺎم ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ وﺑﺎﻟﺘ ﺎﻟﻰ ﻳﺨﻀ ﻊ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤﺮاﺟﻌﺔ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮﻧﻴ ﺔ ﻣ ﻦ ﻗﺒ ﻞ داﺋ ﺮة ﻣﻜﻮﻧ ﺔ ﻣ ﻦ ﺛﻼﺛ ﺔ ﻗﻀ ﺎة ]ﻣ ﺎدة ‪ [61‬وﻣﺮاﺟﻌ ﺔ‬
‫ﻧﻬﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ ﻣ ﻦ داﺋ ﺮة اﻻﺳ ﺘﺌﻨﺎف )ﻣ ﺎدة ‪ ،(82‬وﺗﻜ ﻮن ه ﺬﻩ اﻟﻤﺮاﺟﻌ ﺔ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮﻧﻴ ﺔ ﻋﻠ ﻰ‬
‫درﺟﺘﻴﻦ ﺗﺘﻜﻮﻧﺎن ﻓﻰ ﻣﺠﻤﻠﻬﻤﺎ ﻣﻦ ﺛﻤﺎﻧﻴﺔ ﻗﻀﺎة ﻟﻀﻤﺎن ﺗﻜﺎﻣﻞ اﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮﻧﻴﺔ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .40‬ه ﺬا وﺗﺠ ﺪر اﻹﺷ ﺎرة إﻟ ﻰ أن آﻠﻤ ﺔ "ﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ" اﻟﺘ ﻰ ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﻤﻤﻜ ﻦ إﺣﺎﻟﺘﻬ ﺎ‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤ ﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌ ﺎم ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻋ ﻦ ﻃﺮﻳ ﻖ ﻣﺠﻠ ﺲ اﻷﻣ ﻦ أو اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﻄﺮف‪ ،‬هﻰ ذاﺗﻬﺎ اﻟﻤﻘﺼﻮدة ﻋﻨﺪ اﻹﺣﺎﻟﺔ ﻣﻦ دوﻟﺔ ﻏﻴﺮ ﻃﺮف وذﻟﻚ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺮﻏﻢ‬
‫ﻣ ﻦ اﺳ ﺘﺨﺪام ﻟﻔ ﻆ ﺟﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ ﻓ ﻰ ]اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ [(3)12‬اﻟﺘ ﻰ ﺗﺘﻨ ﺎول ﻗﺒ ﻮل اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص‬
‫اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻣ ﻦ ﻗﺒ ﻞ دوﻟ ﺔ ﻏﻴ ﺮ ﻃ ﺮف ﻓ ﻰ ﺣ ﺪود "اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ ﻣﺤ ﻞ‬
‫اﻟﻤﺴ ﺎءﻟﺔ‪ ".‬ﺣﻴ ﺚ ﻳﺒ ﺪو أن اﻟﻠﻔ ﻆ "ﺟﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ" ﻗ ﺪ اﺳ ﺘﺨﺪم ﺧﻄ ﺄ ﻋ ﻦ ﻃﺮﻳ ﻖ اﻟ ﺬﻳﻦ‬
‫ﺻﺎﻏﻮا هﺬا اﻟﻨﺺ ﺑﻄﺮﻳﻘﺔ ﻏﻴﺮ رﺳﻤﻴﺔ ﺑﺪﻻ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻠﻔﻆ "ﺣﺎﻟﺔ" اﻟ ﺬى ﺗ ﻢ اﺳ ﺘﺨﺪاﻣﻪ‬
‫ﺑﺼﺪد اﻹﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ ﻣ ﻦ ﻣﺠﻠ ﺲ اﻷﻣ ﻦ أو اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ اﻟﻄ ﺮف)‪ ،(65‬وآ ﺎن اﻟﻐ ﺮض ﻣ ﻦ ه ﺬا‬
‫‪(65 ) The small group of delegates worked with the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole‬‬
‫”‪to develop the text. It is clear that they did not intend to alter the essence of a “referral,‬‬
‫‪namely a “situation.” See Bassiouni, Negotiating the Treaty of Rome, supra note 17, at‬‬
‫‪443, 453, 457-458 (1999). It is difficult to ascertain the view of the negotiating‬‬
‫‪conditions, and the drafting of this provision by a few delegates and not by the Drafting‬‬
‫‪Committee (that was not referred the provisions in Part 2), what the appropriate‬‬
‫‪formulation was to be. Most likely it was intended to be “a situation giving rise to a‬‬
‫‪crime within the jurisdiction of the court.” Even though most of these words are absent‬‬
‫‪from the text, it is surely construed that way. Any other construction would absurdly‬‬
‫‪result in non-parties having the ability to select which Acrimes@ are to be investigated‬‬
‫‪and which ones should not, and by implication also predetermine which party is to be‬‬
‫‪investigated. Such a situation would fly in the face of all the basic principles on which‬‬
‫‪the ICC’s jurisdiction is founded.‬‬

‫ﻋﻤﻠﺖ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺔ ﺻﻐﻴﺮة ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﻨﺪوﺑﻴﻦ ﻣﻊ رﺋﻴﺲ اﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ آﻠﻬﺎ ﻟﺘﻄﻮﻳﺮ اﻟ ﻨﺺ‪ ،‬وﻣ ﻦ اﻟﻮاﺿ ﺢ أﻧﻬ ﻢ‬
‫ﻟﻢ ﺗﺘﺠﻪ ﻧﻴﺘﻬﻢ ﻟﺘﺒﺪﻳﻞ ﺟﻮهﺮ آﻠﻤﺔ "إﺣﺎﻟﺔ" إﻟ ﻰ "ﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ"‪ .‬واﻧﻈ ﺮ ﺑﺴ ﻴﻮﻧﻰ اﻟﺘﻔ ﺎوض ﻟﻤﻌﺎه ﺪة روﻣ ﺎ‬
‫هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 17‬وﻓﻰ ‪ 458 -457 ،443‬ﻃﺒﻌﺔ ‪ .1999‬وﻣ ﻦ اﻟﺼ ﻌﺐ ﺗﺄآﻴ ﺪ ﻧﻈ ﺮ اﻟﺸ ﺮوط اﻟﺘﻔﺎوﺿ ﻴﺔ‬
‫وﻣﺴﻮدة هﺬا اﻟﻨﺺ آﻌﻤﻞ ﺗﺤﻀﻴﺮى وﺿﻌﻪ ﻗﻠﺔ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﻨﺪوﺑﻴﻦ وﻟﻴﺲ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻠﺠﻨﺔ اﻟﺘﺤﻀ ﻴﺮﻳﺔ )ﻣﻤ ﺎ‬

‫‪48‬‬

‫اﻟﻨﺺ هﻮ أن ﻳﻜﻮن ﻟﻠﺪوﻟﺔ ﻏﻴﺮ اﻟﻄﺮف اﻟﺤﻖ ﻓ ﻰ إﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ "ﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ" واﻟﺘ ﻰ ﻗ ﺪ ﺗﺸ ﻜﻞ‬
‫"ﺟﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ ﺗ ﺪﺧﻞ ﺿ ﻤﻦ اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ‪ ".‬وﻻ ﻳﻌﺘﻘ ﺪ أن ه ﺬا اﻟﺨﻄ ﺄ اﻟﻤ ﺎدى‬
‫اﻟﻮارد ﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ (3)12‬ﺳﻮف ﻳﻜﻮن ﺳﺒﺒًﺎ ﻓﻰ أن ﺗﻘ ﻮم اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ‬
‫ﺑﺘﻔﺴﻴﺮ هﺬا اﻟﻨﺺ ﺑﻄﺮﻳﻘﺔ ﻻ ﺗﺘﻤﺎﺷﻰ ﻣﻊ ﻣﺎ ورد ﺳﻠﻔﺎ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .41‬ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ﺗﺘﻢ إﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ اﻟﻘﻀ ﻴﺔ إﻟ ﻰ اﻟﻤ ﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌ ﺎم ﺑﺎﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ‬
‫ﺳﻮاء ﻋﻦ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ ﻣﺠﻠ ﺲ اﻷﻣ ﻦ أو اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ اﻟﻄ ﺮف أو اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ ﻏﻴ ﺮ اﻟﻄ ﺮف‪ ،‬ﻳﻘ ﻮم‬
‫اﻟﻤﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌﺎم ﺑﺎﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﺑﻤﺒﺎﺷﺮة اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎت ﻋﻨﺪ اﻟﺘﺄآﺪ ﻣﻦ وﺟﻮد "أﺳ ﺒﺎب‬
‫ﻣﻌﻘﻮﻟ ﺔ" ﻟﻠﺴ ﻴﺮ ﻓ ﻰ اﻹﺟ ﺮاءات وﻓﻘ ًﺎ ﻟﻠﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ ]ﻣ ﺎدة‪) [(1) 53‬اﻧﻈ ﺮ‬
‫اﻟﻔﻘﺮات ‪ 55-53‬ﻟﻠﻤﺰﻳﺪ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﻨﺎﻗﺸﺎت ﺣﻮل إﺟﺮاءات اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ(‪.‬‬
‫‪ .42‬ﻋﻨ ﺪ "إﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ ﻗﻀ ﻴﺔ" ﻋ ﻦ ﻃﺮﻳ ﻖ ﻣﺠﻠ ﺲ اﻷﻣ ﻦ أو اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ اﻟﻄ ﺮف أو‬
‫اﻟﺪوﻟﺔ ﻏﻴﺮ اﻟﻄﺮف ﺗﻜﻮن ﺗﻠﻚ "اﻹﺣﺎﻟﺔ" ﻓﻰ ﻧﻔﺲ اﻟﻤﺴﺘﻮى‪ .‬وﻻ ﻳﻔﻬﻢ ﻣﻦ ذﻟ ﻚ أن‬
‫"اﻹﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ" ﻣ ﻦ ﻗﺒ ﻞ ﻣﺠﻠ ﺲ اﻷﻣ ﻦ ﺗﻤﺜ ﻞ اﻟﺘﺰاﻣ ﺎ ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟﻤ ﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌ ﺎم ﺑﺎﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ ﻟﻤﺒﺎﺷﺮة إﺟﺮاءات اﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻤﺔ‪ .‬وهﺬﻩ اﻟﻤﺼﺎدر اﻟﺜﻼﺛ ﺔ ﻟﻺﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ ﻓﻘ ﻂ‬
‫ﺗﻠﻔﺖ اﻧﺘﺒﺎﻩ اﻟﻤﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌ ﺎم ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ إﻟ ﻰ وﻗ ﺎﺋﻊ ﻗ ﺪ ﺗﺴ ﺘﻠﺰم إﺟ ﺮاء‬
‫ﻻ"‬
‫اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ‪ .‬وﻣﺎ ﻳﻘﺪﻣ ﻪ ذﻟ ﻚ اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ ﻣ ﻦ أدﻟ ﺔ آﺎﻓﻴ ﺔ ه ﻮ ﻣ ﺎ ﻳﺸ ﻜﻞ "أﺳﺎﺳ ًﺎ ﻣﻌﻘ ﻮ ً‬
‫ﻟﻠﻤﺤﺎآﻤ ﺔ وه ﻮ ﻣ ﺎ ﻳﺘﻮﻗ ﻒ ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﻣ ﺎ ﻳﺴ ﻔﺮ ﻋﻨ ﻪ ذﻟ ﻚ اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ ]ﻣ ﺎدة ‪) .[61‬اﻧﻈ ﺮ‬
‫اﻟﺠﺪول رﻗﻢ ‪.(3‬‬

‫ﻟﻢ ﺗﺮﺟﻊ إﻟﻴﻪ اﻟﻨﺼﻮص ﻓﻰ اﻟﻘﺴﻢ ‪ (2‬اﻷﻣﺮ اﻟﺬى آﺎن ﻳﻨﺒﻐ ﻰ أن ﺗﻜ ﻮن ﻋﻠﻴ ﻪ اﻟﺼ ﻴﺎﻏﺔ اﻟﻤﻼﺋﻤ ﺔ‪،‬‬
‫واﻷﻗ ﺮب إﻟ ﻰ اﻟﻈ ﻦ واﻻﺣﺘﻤ ﺎل أن اﻟﻨﻴ ﺔ ﻗ ﺪ اﺗﺠﻬ ﺖ إﻟ ﻰ "ﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ" ﺗﺤ ﺪث ﺟﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ ﺗ ﺪﺧﻞ ﺿ ﻤﻦ‬
‫اﻻﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟﻘﻀ ﺎﺋﻰ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ‪ .‬ورﻏ ﻢ ذﻟ ﻚ ﻓﻘ ﺪ ﻏﺎﺑ ﺖ ﻣﻌﻈ ﻢ ه ﺬﻩ اﻟﻜﻠﻤ ﺎت ﻋ ﻦ اﻟ ﻨﺺ‪ ،‬وﻣ ﻦ‬
‫اﻟﻤﺆآﺪ أﻧﻬﺎ ﺗﻔﺴﺮ ﻋﻠﻰ ذﻟﻚ اﻟﻨﺤﻮ‪ ،‬وﺳﻴﺆدى أى ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ ﺁﺧــﺮ ــ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﺤ ﻮ ﻣﻐ ﺎﻳﺮ ﻟﻠﻌﻘ ﻞ ـ ـ إﻟ ﻰ أن‬
‫ﺗﻜ ﻮن ﻟ ﺪى اﻟ ﺪول ﻏﻴ ﺮ اﻷﻃ ﺮاف ﻗ ﺪرة ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﺧﺘﻴ ﺎر أى ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﺠ ﺮاﺋﻢ= =ﻳﺠ ﺐ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻘﻬ ﺎ وأﻳﻬ ﺎ ﻻ‬
‫ﻳﺠ ﺐ ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻘﻬ ﺎ‪ ،‬وﻳﻘ ﺪر ﺿ ﻤﻨًﺎ أى ﻃ ﺮف ﺳ ﻴﻘﻮم ﺑ ﺎﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ‪ ،‬وﺳ ﺘﺘﺤﺪى ﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ آﻬ ﺬﻩ ﺟﻤﻴ ﻊ اﻟﻤﺒ ﺎدئ‬
‫اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻴﺔ اﻟﺘﻰ ﺗﺄﺳﺲ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﻧﻈﺎم اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‪.‬‬

‫‪49‬‬

‫)اﻟﺠﺪول رﻗﻢ ‪ (3‬اﻹﺣﺎﻟﺔ إﻟﻰ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ‬
‫اﻟﻮاﻗﻌ ﺔ اﻟﻤُﺤﺎﻟ ﺔ ﻣ ﻦ ﻣﺠﻠ ﺲ اﻟﻮاﻗﻌ ﺔ اﻟﻤُﺤﺎﻟ ﺔ ﻣ ﻦ دوﻟ ﺔ ﻃ ﺮف اﻟﻮاﻗﻌ ﺔ اﻟﺘ ﻰ ﻳﺒ ﺪأ‬
‫اﻷﻣﻦ‬
‫إﻟﻰ اﻟﻤﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌﺎم‬
‫اﻟﻤ ﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌ ﺎم ﻣﺒﺎﺷ ﺮة‬
‫اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ‬
‫)اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ 13‬ﻓﻘﺮة أ(‬
‫)اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ 13‬ﻓﻘﺮة أ(‬
‫)اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ 13‬ﻓﻘﺮة ب(‬
‫ﺑﻨﺎء ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺼ ﻼﺣﻴﺎت اﻟﻤﺨﻮﻟ ﺔ ﻳﺠ ﺐ أن ﺗﺸ ﻤﻞ اﻹﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ ﺳ ﻮف ﻳﺒﺎﺷ ﺮ اﻟﻤ ﺪﻋﻰ‬
‫ﻟﻤﺠﻠ ﺲ اﻷﻣ ﻦ وﻓﻘ ًﺎ ﻟﻠﻔﺼ ﻞ اﻟﻤﻼﺑﺴﺎت اﻟﻤﺤﻴﻄﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻮاﻗﻌ ﺔ ﺑﻤ ﺎ اﻟﻌ ﺎم اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ وﻓﻘ ًﺎ‬
‫اﻟﺴﺎﺑﻊ ﻣﻦ ﻣﻴﺜﺎق اﻷﻣ ﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤ ﺪة ﻓ ﻰ ذﻟ ﻚ اﻟﻮﺛ ﺎﺋﻖ اﻟﺪاﻟ ﺔ ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﻟﻠﻀ ﻮاﺑﻂ اﻟﻤﻮﺿ ﻮﻋﺔ‬
‫)اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ 13‬ﻓﻘﺮة ب(‬
‫وﻗﻮﻋﻬ ﺎ )اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ 14‬اﻟﻔﻘ ﺮﺗﻴﻦ ‪ ،1‬ﺑﺎﻟﻤﺎدة ‪15‬‬
‫‪(2‬‬
‫ﻻ ﻳﺘﻄﻠ ﺐ اﻷﻣ ﺮ ﻣﻮاﻓﻘ ﺔ دوﻟ ﺔ اﻟﺸ ﺮوط اﻟﻤﺴﺒﻘـ ـﺔ ﻟﻤﻤﺎرﺳ ﺔ اﻻﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص )اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ 12‬ﺑﻨ ﺪ‬
‫‪.(2‬‬
‫ﻣﻌﻴﻨﺔ‬
‫ﻳﺠﻮز ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ أن ﺗﻤ ﺎرس اﺧﺘﺼﺎﺻ ﻬﺎ إذا آﺎﻧ ﺖ واﺣ ﺪة أو‬
‫أآﺜ ﺮ ﻣ ﻦ اﻟ ﺪول اﻟﺘﺎﻟﻴ ﺔ ﻃﺮﻓ ﺎ ﻓ ﻰ ه ﺬا اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ أو‬
‫ﻗﺒﻠﺖ ﺑﺎﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ‪:‬‬
‫‪ .‬اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ اﻟﺘ ﻰ وﻗ ﻊ ﻓ ﻰ إﻗﻠﻴﻤﻬ ﺎ اﻟﺴ ﻠﻮك ﻗﻴ ﺪ اﻟﺒﺤ ﺚ أو دوﻟ ﺔ‬
‫ﺗﺴ ﺠﻴﻞ اﻟﺴ ﻔﻴﻨﺔ أو اﻟﻄ ﺎﺋﺮة إذا آﺎﻧ ﺖ اﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤ ﺔ ﻗ ﺪ ارﺗﻜﺒ ﺖ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺘﻦ ﺳﻔﻴﻨﺔ أو ﻃﺎﺋﺮة ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .‬اﻟﺪوﻟﺔ اﻟﺘﻰ ﻳﻜﻮن اﻟﺸﺨﺺ اﻟﻤﺘﻬﻢ ﺑﺎﻟﺠﺮﻳﻤﺔ أﺣﺪ رﻋﺎﻳﺎهﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﻣﻠﺤﻮﻇﺔ‪ :‬ﻻ ﻳﺠﻮز اﻟﺒﺪء أو اﻟﻤﻀﻰ ﻓﻰ ﺗﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ أو ﻣﻘﺎﺿ ﺎة ﺑﻤﻮﺟ ﺐ ه ﺬا اﻟﻨﻈ ﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳ ﻰ‬
‫ﻟﻤﺪة اﺛﻨﻰ ﻋﺸﺮ ﺷﻬﺮا إذا ﻃﻠ ﺐ ﻣﺠﻠ ﺲ اﻷﻣ ﻦ إﻟ ﻰ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ ذﻟ ﻚ ﺑﻨ ﺎء ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﻗ ﺮار ﻳﺼ ﺪر ﻋ ﻦ‬
‫اﻟﻤﺠﻠﺲ ﺑﻤﻮﺟﺐ اﻟﻔﺼﻞ اﻟﺴﺎﺑﻊ ﻣﻦ ﻣﻴﺜ ﺎق اﻷﻣ ﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤ ﺪة؛ وﻳﺠ ﻮز ﻟﻠﻤﺠﻠ ﺲ ﺗﺠﺪﻳ ﺪ ه ﺬا اﻟﻄﻠ ﺐ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻟﺸﺮوط ذاﺗﻬﺎ )اﻟﻤﺎدة‪.(16‬‬

‫‪50‬‬

‫اﻟـﻤـﺒﺤـﺚ اﻟﺜﺎﻧــﻰ‬
‫ﺗﺤﺮﻳﻚ اﻟﺪﻋﻮى ﺑﻘﺮار ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌﺎم ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ‬
‫‪ .43‬وﻓﻘ ًﺎ ﻟﻠﻤ ﺎدة )‪ (15‬ﻗ ﺪ ﻳﻘ ﻮم اﻟﻤ ﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌ ﺎم ﻣ ﻦ ﺗﻠﻘ ﺎء ﻧﻔﺴ ﻪ)‪ (66‬ﺑﻤﺒﺎﺷ ﺮة‬
‫اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ دون اﻹﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ ﻣ ﻦ ﻗﺒ ﻞ إﺣ ﺪى اﻟ ﺪول اﻷﻃ ﺮاف )ﻣ ﺎدة ‪)13‬أ( ‪ (14،‬أو‬
‫ﻣﺠﻠﺲ اﻷﻣﻦ ]ﻣﺎدة ‪)13‬ب([ أو دوﻟﺔ ﻏﻴﺮ ﻃﺮف ]ﻣﺎدة ‪ ،[(3)12‬وﻣ ﻊ ذﻟ ﻚ ﻓﺈﻧ ﻪ‬
‫ﻗﺒﻞ اﻟﺒﺪء ﻓﻰ إﺟﺮاءات اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﻳﻘﻮم اﻟﻤﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌﺎم ﺑﺘﻘﺪﻳﻢ ﻃﻠﺐ ﻣ ﺪﻋﻢ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﺴ ﺘﻨﺪات‬
‫اﻟﻤﺎدﻳﺔ ﻟﻠﺪاﺋﺮة اﻟﺘﻤﻬﻴﺪﻳﺔ )ﻣﺎدة ‪ ((2)15‬واﻟﺤﺼﻮل ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﻣﻮاﻓﻘﺘﻬ ﺎ )ﻣ ﺎدة ‪((4)15‬‬
‫ﺑﺄﻏﻠﺒﻴﺔ اﻷﺻﻮات اﻟﺘﻰ ﻻ ﺗﻘﻞ ﻋﻦ )‪ 2‬ﻣﻦ واﻗﻊ ‪ 3‬أﺻﻮات(‪.‬‬
‫‪ .44‬ﻋﻨ ﺪ ﺟﻤ ﻊ اﻟﻤﺴ ﺘﻨﺪات اﻟﻤﺪﻋﻤ ﺔ وﺗﻘ ﺪﻳﺮ ﻣﻼءﻣ ﺔ ﺗﻘ ﺪﻳﻢ ه ﺬا اﻟﻄﻠ ﺐ ﻳﻘ ﻮم‬
‫اﻟﻤ ﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌ ﺎم ﺑﺠﻤ ﻊ اﻟﻤﻌﻠﻮﻣ ﺎت ﻋ ﻦ ﻃﺮﻳ ﻖ ﻣﺼ ﺎدر ﻣﻮﺛ ﻮق ﺑﻬ ﺎ‪ ،‬ﻣﺜ ﻞ اﻟ ﺪول‪،‬‬
‫اﻷﺟﻬﺰة اﻟﺘﺎﺑﻌﺔ ﻟﻸﻣﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤﺪة‪ ،‬أو اﻟﺠﻬﺎت اﻟﺤﻜﻮﻣﻴﺔ واﻟﻤﻨﻈﻤﺎت ﻏﻴ ﺮ اﻟﺤﻜﻮﻣﻴ ﺔ‪،‬‬
‫وﻳﻘﻮم اﻟﻤﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌﺎم أﻳﻀًﺎ ﺑﺘﻠﻘﻰ ﺷ ﻬﺎدة ﺷ ﻔﻬﻴﺔ أو ﺗﺤﺮﻳﺮﻳ ﺔ ﺑﻤﻘ ﺮ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ أو ﻓ ﻰ‬
‫أى ﺟﻬﺔ أﺧﺮى )ﻣﺎدة ‪ ((1)15‬وﻳﺠﻮز أﻳﻀﺎ ﻟﻠﻤﺠﻨ ﻰ ﻋﻠ ﻴﻬﻢ اﻟﻤﺮاﻓﻌ ﺔ أﻣ ﺎم داﺋ ﺮة‬
‫اﻟﺸﺆون اﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ ﺑﻤﺎ ﻗﺒﻞ اﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .45‬ﻻ ﻳﻘ ﻮم اﻟﻤ ﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌ ﺎم ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴ ﺔ ﺑﻤﺒﺎﺷ ﺮة اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ إﻻ‬
‫ﺑﻌﺪ ﻗﻴﺎم داﺋ ﺮة اﻟﺸ ﺆون اﻟﺨﺎﺻ ﺔ ﺑﻤ ﺎ ﻗﺒ ﻞ اﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻤ ﺔ ﺑ ﺈﻗﺮار وﺟ ﻮد أﺳ ﺎس ﻣﻌﻘ ﻮل‬
‫ﻟﻠﺸ ﺮوع ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ وأن اﻟﺤﺎﻟ ﺔ ﺗﻘ ﻊ ﻓ ﻰ داﺋ ﺮة اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ )ﻣ ﺎدة‬
‫‪ ((4)15‬وإذا ﻟﻢ ﺗﺄذن داﺋﺮة اﻟﺸﺆون اﻟﺨﺎﺻ ﺔ ﺑﻤ ﺎ ﻗﺒ ﻞ اﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻤ ﺔ ﺑ ﺈﺟﺮاء اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ‬
‫ﺟ ﺎز ﻟﻠﻤ ﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌ ﺎم ﺗﻘ ﺪﻳﻢ ﻃﻠﺒ ﺎت أﺧ ﺮى ﻋﻨ ﺪ ﻇﻬ ﻮر وﻗ ﺎﺋﻊ أو دﻟﻴ ﻞ ﺟﺪﻳ ﺪ )ﻣ ﺎدة‬
‫‪) .((5)15‬اﻧﻈﺮ اﻟﺠﺪول رﻗﻢ ‪.(4‬‬
‫‪) See generally Silvia A. Fernandez de Gurmendi, The Role of the International‬‬
‫‪Prosecutor, in MAKING OF THE ROME STATUTE, supra note 13, at 175-188. For‬‬
‫‪additional commentary on Proprio motu, see Morten Bergsmo and Jelena Pejic, Article‬‬
‫‪15: Prosecutor, in COMMENTARY ON ROME STATUTE, supra note 13, at 359-373.‬‬

‫‪(66‬‬

‫اﻧﻈﺮ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﻮﻣﺎً‪ ،‬ﺳﻴﻠﻔﻴﺎ ﻓﻴﺮﻧﺎﻧﺪﻳﺰ دى ﺟﺮﻣﻨﺪى‪ ،‬دور اﻟﻤﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌﺎم اﻟﺪوﻟﻰ‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ ﺻﻴﺎﻏﺔ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم‬
‫اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻟﺮوﻣﺎ هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 13‬ﻓﻰ ‪ .188-175‬وﻟﺘﻔﺴﻴﺮ إﺿﺎﻓﻰ ﺣﻮل ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ اﻟﻤﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌﺎم ﻣﻦ ﺗﻠﻘﺎء‬
‫ﻧﻔﺴﻪ اﻧﻈﺮ‪ ،‬ﻣﻮرﺗﻴﻦ ﺑﺮﺟﺴﻤﻮ وﺟﻴﻠﻴﻨﺎ ﺑﻴﺠﻴﻚ‪ ،‬اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ :15‬اﻟﻤﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌﺎم‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻨﻈﺎم‬
‫اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻟﺮوﻣﺎ هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 13‬ﻓﻰ ‪.373-359‬‬

‫‪51‬‬

‫)اﻟﺠﺪول رﻗﻢ ‪ (4‬ﺗﺤﺮﻳﻚ اﻟﺪﻋﻮى اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ ﻣﻦ ﻗﺒﻞ اﻟﻤﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌﺎم )اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪(15‬‬
‫اﻟﺒﺪء ﻓﻰ اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ‬
‫* ﻟﻠﻤﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌﺎم أن ﻳﺒﺎﺷﺮ اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻘﺎت ﻣﻦ ﺗﻠﻘﺎء ﻧﻔﺴﻪ ﻋﻠﻰ أﺳﺎس اﻟﻤﻌﻠﻮﻣﺎت اﻟﻤﺘﻌﻠﻘﺔ‬
‫ﺑﺠﺮاﺋﻢ ﺗﺪﺧﻞ ﻓﻰ اﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ‪0‬‬
‫* ﻳﻘ ﻮم اﻟﻤ ﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌ ﺎم ﺑﺘﺤﻠﻴ ﻞ ﺟﺪﻳ ﺔ اﻟﻤﻌﻠﻮﻣ ﺎت اﻟﻤﺒﻠ ﻎ ﻋﻨﻬ ﺎ ‪ 0‬وﻳﺠ ﻮز ﻟ ﻪ ‪ ،‬ﻟﻬ ﺬا‬
‫اﻟﻐ ﺮض ‪ ،‬اﻟﺘﻤ ﺎس ﻣﻌﻠﻮﻣ ﺎت إﺿ ﺎﻓﻴﺔ ﻣ ﻦ اﻟ ﺪول ‪ ،‬أو أﺟﻬ ﺰة اﻷﻣ ﻢ اﻟﻤﺘﺤ ﺪة ‪ ،‬أو‬
‫اﻟﻤﻨﻈﻤﺎت اﻟﺤﻜﻮﻣﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ أو ﻏﻴﺮ اﻟﺤﻜﻮﻣﻴﺔ ‪ ،‬أو أى ﻣﺼﺎدر أﺧ ﺮى ﻣﻮﺛ ﻮق ﺑﻬ ﺎ‬
‫ﻳﺮاهﺎ ﻣﻼﺋﻤﺔ ‪ 0‬وﻳﺠﻮز ﻟﻪ ﺗﻠﻘﻰ اﻟﺸﻬﺎدة اﻟﺘﺤﺮﻳﺮﻳﺔ أو اﻟﺸﻔﻮﻳﺔ ﻓﻰ ﻣﻘﺮ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫* إذا اﺳﺘﻨﺘﺞ اﻟﻤﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌﺎم أن هﻨﺎك أﺳﺎﺳﺎ ﻣﻌﻘ ﻮﻻ ﻟﻠﺒ ﺪء ﻓ ﻰ إﺟ ﺮاء ﺗﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ ‪ ،‬ﻳﻘ ﺪم‬
‫إﻟﻰ اﻟﺪاﺋﺮة اﻟﺘﻤﻬﻴﺪﻳﺔ ﻃﻠﺒﺎ ﻟﻺذن ﺑﺈﺟﺮاء ﺗﺤﻘﻴﻖ ‪ ،‬ﻣﺸﻔﻮﻋﺎ ﺑﺄى ﻣﻮاد ﻣﺆﻳﺪة ﻳﺠﻤﻌﻬ ﺎ‬
‫‪ 0‬وﻳﺠ ﻮز ﻟﻠﻤﺠﻨ ﻰ ﻋﻠ ﻴﻬﻢ إﺟ ﺮاء ﻣﺮاﻓﻌ ﺎت ﻟ ﺪى اﻟ ﺪاﺋﺮة اﻟﺘﻤﻬﻴﺪﻳ ﺔ وﻓﻘ ﺎ ﻟﻠﻘﻮاﻋ ﺪ‬
‫اﻹﺟﺮاﺋﻴﺔ وﻗﻮاﻋﺪ اﻹﺛﺒﺎت‪0‬‬
‫)‪(8‬‬
‫ﺗﻘﻴﻴﻢ اﻟﻤﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌﺎم ﻟﻸﺳﺒﺎب اﻟﻤﻌﻘﻮﻟﺔ‬
‫ﻓ ﻰ ﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ ﺗ ﻮاﻓﺮ اﻷﺳ ﺒﺎب ﻓ ﻰ ﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ ﻋ ﺪم ﺗ ﻮاﻓﺮ اﻷﺳ ﺒﺎب اﻟﻤﻌﻘﻮﻟ ﺔ ﻳﺒﻠ ﻎ اﻟﻤ ﺪﻋﻰ‬
‫اﻟﻤﻌﻘﻮﻟﺔ‬
‫اﻟﻌ ﺎم أوﻟﺌ ﻚ اﻟ ﺬﻳﻦ أﺧﻄ ﺮوا ﺑﺎﻟﻮاﻗﻌ ﺔ ﺑﻌ ﺪم اﻟﻤﻀ ﻰ ﻓ ﻰ‬
‫إﺟﺮاءات اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻴﺪ أن ﻟﻪ اﻟﺤﻖ ﻓﻰ ﻓﺘﺢ ﺑﺎب اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ‬
‫ﻣﺮة أﺧﺮى إذا ﻣﺎ ﺗﻮاﻓﺮت وﻗﺎﺋﻊ أو أدﻟﺔ ﺟﺪﻳﺪة‪.‬‬
‫اﻟﺪاﺋﺮة اﻟﺘﻤﻬﻴﺪﻳﺔ‬
‫* ﻳﻘﺪم اﻟﻤﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌ ﺎم ﻃﻠﺒ ﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﺴ ﻤﺎح ﻟ ﻪ ﺑﺒ ﺪء اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻘ ﺎت ﻟﻠ ﺪاﺋﺮة اﻟﺘﻤﻬﻴﺪﻳ ﺔ‪ ،‬ﻣﺸ ﻔﻮﻋًﺎ‬
‫ﺑﺎﻷدﻟﺔ اﻟﺘﻰ ﻓﻰ ﺣﻮزﺗﻪ‪.‬‬
‫* ﻳﺠﻮز ﻟﻠﻀﺤﺎﻳﺎ اﻟﺘﻘﺪم ﻟﻠﺪاﺋﺮة وﻓﻘًﺎ ﻟﻘﻮاﻋﺪ اﻹﺟﺮاء واﻟﺪﻟﻴﻞ‬
‫ﻟﻠ ﺪاﺋﺮة اﻟﺘﻤﻬﻴﺪﻳ ﺔ اﻟﺤ ﻖ ﻓ ﻰ ﺗﺤﺪﻳ ﺪ ﻣ ﺎ إذا آ ﺎن هﻨ ﺎك أﺳ ﺒﺎب ﻣﻌﻘﻮﻟ ﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻀ ﻰ ﻓ ﻰ‬
‫اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻘ ﺎت ﻣ ﻦ ﻋﺪﻣ ﻪ وذﻟ ﻚ دون اﻟﻤﺴ ﺎس ﺑﻤ ﺎ ﺗﻘ ﺮرﻩ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ ﻓﻴﻤ ﺎ ﺑﻌ ﺪ ﺑﺸ ﺄن‬
‫اﻻﺧﺘﺼﺎص أو ﻗﺒﻮل اﻟﺪﻋﻮى‪.‬‬
‫ﻗﺮار اﻟﺪاﺋﺮة اﻟﺘﻤﻬﻴﺪﻳﺔ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﻳﺘﻌﻠﻖ ﺑﺎﻷﺳﺒﺎب اﻟﻤﻌﻘﻮﻟﺔ‬
‫ﻓ ﻰ ﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ ﺗ ﻮاﻓﺮ اﻷﺳ ﺒﺎب‬
‫ﻓﻰ ﺣﺎﻟﺔ ﻋﺪم ﺗﻮاﻓﺮ اﻷﺳﺒﺎب اﻟﻤﻌﻘﻮﻟﺔ‬
‫اﻟﻤﻌﻘﻮﻟﺔ‬
‫* ﻋﺪم اﻟﻤﻀﻰ ﻓ ﻰ إﺟ ﺮاءات اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ‪ ،‬ﺑﻴ ﺪ أن ﻟﻠﻤ ﺪﻋﻰ‬
‫* اﻟﻤﻮاﻓﻘ ﺔ ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟﺒ ﺪء ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﻌﺎم اﻟﺤﻖ ﻓﻰ اﻟﺘﻘﺪم ﺑﻄﻠﺐ ﺟﺪﻳﺪ ﻟﻔﺘﺢ ﺑﺎب اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﻣﺮة‬
‫إﺟﺮاءات اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ‪.‬‬
‫أﺧﺮى إذا ﻣﺎ ﺗﻮاﻓﺮت وﻗﺎﺋﻊ أو أدﻟﺔ ﺟﺪﻳﺪة‪.‬‬
‫* اﻟﻘﺮار اﻟﺼﺎدر ﻣﻦ اﻟﺪاﺋﺮة‬
‫اﻟﺘﻤﻬﻴﺪﻳ ﺔ ﻏﻴ ﺮ ﻗﺎﺑ ﻞ‬
‫ﻟﻼﺳ ﺘﺌﻨﺎف وﻓﻘ ﺎ ﻷﺣﻜ ﺎم‬
‫)‪ (8‬راﺟﻊ اﻷﺳﺒﺎب اﻟﻤﻌﻘﻮﻟﺔ اﻟﻤﺬآﻮرة ﻓﻰ اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ 53‬وآﺬا ﻗﻮاﻋﺪ اﻹﺟﺮاء واﻟﺪﻟﻴﻞ أرﻗﺎم ‪،105 ،104‬‬
‫‪.110 ،109 ،108 ،107 ،106‬‬

‫‪52‬‬

‫اﻟﻨﻈﺎم اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ‪.‬‬

‫اﻟـﻤـﺒﺤـﺚ اﻟﺜﺎﻟــﺚ‬
‫ﻗﻮاﻋﺪ ﻗﺒﻮل اﻟﺪﻋﻮى أﻣﺎم اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ‬
‫‪ .46‬ﻗﺒ ﻞ اﺗﺨ ﺎذ أى ﻣ ﻦ إﺟ ﺮاءات اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ وﻗﺒ ﻞ إﺻ ﺪار أى ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﻘ ﺮارات‬
‫اﻟﻤﺎﺳ ﺔ ﺑﺤﻘ ﻮق و ﺣﺮﻳ ﺎت اﻟﻤﺘﻬﻤ ﻴﻦ آ ﺄﻣﺮ اﻟﻘ ﺒﺾ)‪ ،(67‬ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟﻤ ﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌ ﺎم‬
‫اﻟﺤﺼﻮل ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻮاﻓﻘﺔ اﻟﻐﺮﻓﺔ اﻟﻤﺨﺘﺼﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﻋﻦ اﻷﻣ ﻮر اﻟﺴ ﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﺎآﻤ ﺔ‪،‬‬
‫أى داﺋﺮة اﻟﺸﺆون اﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ ﺑﻤﺎ ﻗﺒﻞ اﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻤ ﺔ )ﻣ ﺎدة ‪ .(68)(58‬وﺗﻘ ﺮر ﺗﻠ ﻚ اﻟ ﺪاﺋﺮة‬
‫ﻣﺎ إذا آﺎﻧﺖ هﻨﺎك أﺳﺲ ﻣﻌﻘﻮﻟﺔ ﻟﻼﻋﺘﻘﺎد ﺑﺄن اﻟﺸﺨﺺ اﻟﻤﻄﻠ ﻮب اﻟﻘ ﺒﺾ ﻋﻠﻴ ﻪ ﻗ ﺪ‬
‫ﻗﺎم ﺑﺎرﺗﻜﺎب ﺟﺮﻳﻤﺔ ﺗﺪﺧﻞ ﻓﻰ اﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ‪ .‬وﻋﻼوة ﻋﻠﻰ ذﻟ ﻚ ﻋﻨ ﺪ ﺗﺴ ﻠﻴﻢ‬
‫اﻟﺸﺨﺺ إﻟﻰ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ ﻳﺠ ﺐ أن ﻳ ﺘﻢ اﻟﺘﺄآ ﺪ ﻣ ﻦ اﻟ ﺘﻬﻢ اﻟﻤﻮﺟ ﻪ إﻟﻴ ﻪ‬
‫ﻋﻦ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ داﺋﺮة اﻟﺸﺆون اﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ ﺑﻤﺎ ﻗﺒﻞ اﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻤﺔ ]ﻣ ﺎدة ‪ .[61، (2)60‬وﺑ ﺬﻟﻚ‬
‫ﻓ ﺈن أى ﺗﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ ﺗﻘ ﻮم ﺑﻄﻠﺒ ﻪ إﺣ ﺪى اﻟﺠﻬ ﺎت اﻟ ﺜﻼث اﻟﻤﻨ ﻮط ﻟﻬ ﺎ ﺑﺎﻹﺣﺎﻟ ﺔ ]اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﻄ ﺮف اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪)13‬أ( أو اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ ﻏﻴ ﺮ اﻟﻄ ﺮف )ﻣ ﺎدة ‪ ((3) 12‬أو ﻣﺠﻠ ﺲ اﻷﻣ ﻦ‬
‫)ﻣﺎدة ‪)13‬ب([ أو ﻋﻦ ﻃﺮﻳﻖ اﻟﻤ ﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌ ﺎم ﻣ ﻦ ﺗﻠﻘ ﺎء ﻧﻔﺴ ﻪ ]ﻣ ﺎدة ‪ [15‬ﻻ ﻳﻤﻜ ﻦ‬
‫أن ﻳﻨﺸﺄ ﻋﻦ هﺬا اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﻣﺤﺎآﻤ ﺔ‪ ،‬ﻣ ﺎ ﻟ ﻢ ﻳ ﺘﻢ اﻋﺘﻤ ﺎد اﻟ ﺘﻬﻢ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴ ﺔ اﻟ ﻮاردة ﺑ ﺄﻣﺮ‬

‫‪(67 ) See generally Fabricio Guariglia, Investigation and Prosecution, in MAKING OF THE‬‬
‫‪ROME STATUTE, supra note 13, at 227-237. For additional commentary on admissibility‬‬
‫‪of a case, see Williams, Article 17, supra note 22; Christopher K. Hall, Article 19:‬‬
‫‪Challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court or the admissibility of a case, in‬‬
‫‪COMMENTARY ON ROME STATUTE, supra note 13, at 405-419.‬‬

‫اﻧﻈﺮ‪ ،‬ﻋﻤﻮﻣﺎً‪ ،‬ﻓﺎﺑﺮﻳﺘﺸﻴﻮ ﺟﻮارﻳﺠﻠﻴﺎ اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ وﻣﺒﺎﺷﺮة اﻟﻄﻘﻮس اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ ﺻﻴﺎﻏﺔ ﻧﻈﺎم روﻣﺎ‬
‫اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ اﻟﻬﺎﻣﺶ رﻗﻢ ‪ 13‬ﻓﻰ ‪ ،237-227‬وﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻖ إﺿﺎﻓﻰ ﻋﻦ ﻗﺒﻮل اﻟﺪﻋﻮى‪ ،‬اﻧﻈﺮ وﻳﻠﻴﺎﻣﺰ‬
‫اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ 17‬واﻟﻬﺎﻣﺶ رﻗﻢ ‪ 22‬آﺮﻳﺴﺘﻮﻓﺮ هﻮل واﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ :19‬اﻟﺘﺤﺪﻳﺎت اﻟﻤﻮﺟﻬﺔ ﻟﻼﺧﺘﺼﺎص‬
‫اﻟﻘﻀﺎﺋﻰ ﻟﻠﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ أو ﻋﺪم ﻗﺒﻮل اﻟﺪﻋﻮى‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻈﺎم روﻣﺎ اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 13‬ﻓﻰ‬
‫‪.419 - 405‬‬
‫‪(68 ) For additional commentary on the Pre-Trial Chamber and arrest warrants, see Angelika‬‬
‫‪Schlunk, Article 58: Issuance by the Pre-trial Chamber of a Warrant of Arrest or a‬‬
‫‪Summons to Appear, in COMMENTARY ON ROME STATUTE, supra note 13, at 753-764.‬‬

‫ﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻖ إﺿﺎﻓﻰ ﻋﻠﻰ داﺋﺮة اﻟﺸﺆون اﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ ﺑﻤﺎ ﻗﺒﻞ اﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻤﺔ وأواﻣﺮ اﻟﺤﺠﺰ‪ ،‬اﻧﻈﺮ أﻧﺠﻴﻠﻴﻜﺎ‬
‫ﺷﻼﻧﻚ‪ ،‬اﻟﻤﺎدة ‪ :58‬اﻟﺼﺎدر ﻣﻦ ﻗﺒﻞ داﺋﺮة اﻟﺸﺆون اﻟﺨﺎﺻﺔ ﺑﻤﺎ ﻗﺒﻞ اﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻤﺔ ﻷﻣﺮ ﺣﺒﺲ أو‬
‫اﻟﺘﻜﻠﻴﻒ ﺑﺎﻟﺤﻀﻮر ﻓﻰ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻖ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻈﺎم روﻣﺎ اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ 13‬ﻓﻰ ‪.764 - 753‬‬

‫‪53‬‬

‫اﻹﺣﺎﻟﺔ اﻟﺼﺎدر ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌﺎم ]ﻣﺎدة‪ (69)[61‬ﻣ ﻦ ﻗﺒ ﻞ داﺋ ﺮة اﻟﺸ ﺆون اﻟﺨﺎﺻ ﺔ‬
‫ﺑﻤﺎ ﻗﺒﻞ اﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻤﺔ‪.‬‬
‫‪ .47‬ﻗﺪ ﺗﻘﺮر اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ أن اﻟﺪﻋﻮى ﻏﻴﺮ ﻣﻘﺒﻮﻟﺔ ﻷﺣﺪ اﻷﺳـﺒﺎب اﻵﺗﻴﺔ‪:‬‬
‫)أ( إذا آﺎن اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ أو اﻟﻤﻘﺎﺿﺎة ﺗﻘﻮم ﺑﻪ دوﻟ ﺔ ﻟﻬ ﺎ اﺧﺘﺼ ﺎص ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟ ﺪﻋﻮى‬
‫)اﻷوﻟﻮﻳﺔ ﻟﻸﻧﻈﻤﺔ اﻟﻘﺎﻧﻮﻧﻴﺔ اﻟﻮﻃﻨﻴﺔ ﻃﺒﻘًﺎ ﻟﻤﺒ ﺪإ اﻟﺘﻜﺎﻣ ﻞ ‪ ،‬ﻣ ﺎ ﻟ ﻢ ﺗﻜ ﻦ اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ ﺣﻘ ﺎ‬
‫ﻏﻴﺮ راﻏﺒﺔ أو ﻏﻴﺮ ﻗﺎدرة ﻋﻠﻰ ﺗﻨﻔﻴﺬ اﻟﺘﺰاﻣﺎﺗﻬﺎ ﻓﻰ اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ واﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻤ ﺔ ]ﻣ ﺎدة ‪17‬‬
‫)‪،(1‬أ[؛‬
‫)ب( إذا آﺎﻧﺖ إﺣﺪى اﻟﺪول ذات اﻻﺧﺘﺼﺎص ﻗﺪ أﺟﺮت اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻖ ﻓﻰ اﻟﺪﻋﻮى‬
‫وﻗﺮرت ﻋ ﺪم اﻟﺤﻜ ﻢ ﻓ ﻰ ه ﺬﻩ اﻟﻘﻀ ﻴﺔ ‪ ،‬ﻣ ﺎ ﻟ ﻢ ﻳﻜ ﻦ اﻟﻘ ﺮار ﻧﺎﺗﺠ ًﺎ ﻋ ﻦ ﻋ ﺪم رﻏﺒ ﺔ‬
‫اﻟﺪوﻟﺔ أو ﻋﺪم ﻗﺪرﺗﻬﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻤﻘﺎﺿﺎة ])ﻣﺎدة ‪)17‬أ( ‪ ،‬ب[؛‬
‫)ج( إذا آ ﺎن اﻟﺸ ﺨﺺ ﻗ ﺪ ﺳ ﺒﻖ ﻣﺤﺎآﻤﺘ ﻪ ﻋﻠ ﻰ اﻟﺴ ﻠﻮك ﻣﻮﺿ ﻮع اﻟﺸ ﻜﻮى‬
‫]ﻣﺎدة ‪) (1)17‬ج([؛‬
‫)د( إذا ﻟﻢ ﺗﻜﻦ اﻟﺪﻋﻮى ﻋﻠﻰ درﺟﺔ آﺎﻓﻴﺔ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺨﻄﻮرة ﺗﺒ ﺮر اﺗﺨ ﺎذ اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤ ﺔ‬
‫إﺟﺮاء ﺁﺧ ﺮ ]ﻣ ﺎدة ‪)17‬أ()د([‪ .‬وإذا اﻗﺘﻀ ﺖ اﻟﺤﺎﺟ ﺔ أن ﻳﻘ ﺪر اﻟﻤ ﺪﻋﻰ اﻟﻌ ﺎم ﻋ ﺪم‬
‫ﻣﻼءﻣ ﺔ إﺟ ﺮاء اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ ﺟ ﺎز ﻟ ﻪ أن ﻳﻄﻠ ﺐ ﻣ ﻦ اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ إﻣ ﺪادﻩ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﺰﻳ ﺪ ﻣ ﻦ‬
‫اﻟﻤﻌﻠﻮﻣﺎت اﻟﺘﻰ ﺗﺘﻌﻠﻖ ﺑﺎﻹﺟﺮاءات اﻟﻤﺤﻠﻴﺔ ]ﻣﺎدة ‪.[(11)19‬‬
‫‪ .48‬ﺗﻘﻮم اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ ﺑﺘﺤﺪﻳﺪ ﻣﺎ إذا آﺎﻧﺖ اﻟﺪوﻟﺔ ﻏﻴﺮ راﻏﺒﺔ ﺣﻘًﺎ ﻓﻰ اﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴ ﻖ أو‬
‫اﻟﻤﻘﺎﺿﺎة‪ ،‬ﻓﻰ اﻷﺣﻮال اﻟﺘﺎﻟﻴﺔ‪:‬‬
‫) أ ( ﻗﻴ ﺎم اﻟﺪوﻟ ﺔ ﺑﺎﺗﺨ ﺎذ إﺟ ﺮاءات ﻣ ﻦ ﺷ ﺄﻧﻬﺎ ﺣﻤﺎﻳ ﺔ اﻟﺸ ﺨﺺ و ﺗﺠﻨﻴﺒ ﻪ‬
‫اﺧﺘﺼﺎص اﻟﻤﺤﻜﻤﺔ اﻟﺠﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ اﻟﺪوﻟﻴﺔ ]ﻣﺎدة ‪ (2)17‬أ[‪.‬‬
‫)ب( أن ﻳﻜ ﻮن هﻨ ﺎك ﺗﺄﺟﻴ ﻞ ﻻ ﻣﺒ ﺮر ﻟ ﻪ ﻓ ﻰ ﺳ ﻴﺮ إﺟ ﺮاءات اﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻤ ﺔ ﺑﻤ ﺎ‬
‫ﻳﺘﻌﺎرض ﻣﻊ ﻧﻴﺔ ﻣﺜﻮل اﻟﺸﺨﺺ أﻣﺎم اﻟﻌﺪاﻟﺔ ]ﻣﺎدة ‪ (2)17‬ب[‪.‬‬
‫‪(69 ) For additional commentary on the Pre-Trial Chamber and prosecution, see Kuniji‬‬
‫‪Shibahara, Article 61: Confirmation of the charges before trial, in COMMENTARY ON‬‬
‫= ‪ROME STATUTE, supra note 13, at 783-792.‬‬

‫= ﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴ ﻖ إﺿ ﺎﻓﻰ ﻋﻠ ﻰ داﺋ ﺮة اﻟﺸ ﺆون اﻟﺨﺎﺻ ﺔ ﺑﻤ ﺎ ﻗﺒ ﻞ اﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻤ ﺔ واﻹدﻋ ﺎء اﻟﺠﻨ ﺎﺋﻰ‪ ،‬اﻧﻈ ﺮ‬
‫آ ﻮﻧﻴﺠﻰ ﺷ ﻴﺒﺎهﺎر‪ ،‬اﻟﻤ ﺎدة ‪ 61‬ﻟﺘﺄآﻴ ﺪ اﻻﺗﻬﺎﻣ ﺎت ﻗﺒ ﻞ اﻟﻤﺤﺎآﻤ ﺔ ﻓ ﻰ اﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴ ﻖ ﻋﻠ ﻰ ﻧﻈ ﺎم روﻣ ﺎ‬
‫اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻰ هﺎﻣﺶ ‪ ،13‬ص ‪.792-783‬‬

‫‪54‬‬


Aperçu du document المحكمة الجنائية الدولية.pdf - page 1/101

 
المحكمة الجنائية الدولية.pdf - page 2/101
المحكمة الجنائية الدولية.pdf - page 3/101
المحكمة الجنائية الدولية.pdf - page 4/101
المحكمة الجنائية الدولية.pdf - page 5/101
المحكمة الجنائية الدولية.pdf - page 6/101
 




Télécharger le fichier (PDF)




Sur le même sujet..





Ce fichier a été mis en ligne par un utilisateur du site. Identifiant unique du document: 00255542.
⚠️  Signaler un contenu illicite
Pour plus d'informations sur notre politique de lutte contre la diffusion illicite de contenus protégés par droit d'auteur, consultez notre page dédiée.