Several individuals or groups known as parties to the crime may play a distinct role in committing international crimes. The involvement of some of them in the commission of the crime is so close, direct, and active. These persons impose greater danger to society as a whole. The participation of others in the commission of international crime may be indirect by incitement and conspiracy. It supports and legitimizes acts of violence and Persecutory measures against victims. A review of mass crimes, both from the past and the present reveals that incitement and conspiracy generally precede and accompany mass crimes such as genocide, persecution, and extermination.

ሳፔቶ ሩባቲኖ የተባለ ኩባንያን በማቋቋም ወዲያው የባህር ንግዱን ማጧጧፍ ጀመረ፡፡ ከአሥራ ሁለት ዓመታት በኋላ የኢጣሊያ መንግሥት የጂቡቲን ጠረፋማ አካባቢ እንዲሁ በገንዘብ በመግዛት ከራስ ዱሜራ እስከ ራስ አሊ ከተቆጣጠረችው ፈረንሣይ ጋር ለመሻማት ኩባንያውን ከነካፒታሉ በመግዛት የአሰብን ጠረፋማ አካባቢዎች ተቆጣጠረ፡፡

World Trade Organization (WTO) was established with the main objective of liberalizing multilateral trade, based on the belief that trade liberalization brings multiple benefits to the world population. To this end, the preamble to the Agreement Establishing the WTO (Marrakesh Agreement), provides that “[t]he Parties to this Agreement, recognizing that their relations in the field of trade and economic [endeavor] should be conducted to raise standards of living, ensure full employment and a large and steadily growing volume of real income and effective demand.”

Human rights are to be respected and protected by States through all appropriate measures, so goes the rhetoric.  States must also make solutions available at the domestic level to any citizen who claims his/her rights were violated. Individual victims of human rights violations also have the right to seek justice from regional or international institutions. In some countries, such violations are committed so grossly & systematically that the normal procedures through domestic justice appear insufficient to address them.

Abreha Z. Mesele has written (ICC and African Union: Selective Justice?) an informative piece on the recently inflamed ICC-African Union altercation, or rather African Union’s ringing condemnations of the practice of ICC, calling it big powers instrument of ‘pummelling the weak ones’.  In this piece I would like to offer some of my views on the issue by responding to Abreha’s paper. Abreha has accomplished laying out the essential introductory ground-work, so I will refrain from any redundancy and delve straight into discussing the issues that I think are overlooked or misrepresented in the general discussion on the topic and in Abreha’s piece specifically.

Before I embarked upon the merit of the issue, some preliminary issues should be discussed to see whether the International Criminal Court (hereinafter called ICC) is targeting Africans. To arrive at a fair and balanced conclusion, there is a need to discuss how the ICC exercises jurisdiction over the most heinous crimes by taking the ICC Statute (Rome Statute). Here, membership, complementarity, referral, and treaty obligations should first be addressed to ascertain the claim that the ICC is selective and targeting Africans. Most, if not all, cases filed in the ICC in the year 2008 were cases from African soil; the issues, whether it was deliberate and targetfull, is going to be determined case by case and issue by issue bases later on.

The implementation of the International Humanitarian Law (hereinafter referred to as IHL) mainly rests upon the effort of the state parties. International humanitarian law is currently accepted by every country in the world. Still, the absence of a comprehensive and meticulous mechanism to enforce the rules embodied in IHL is an Achilles’ heel fuelled by the very nature of IHL, which is meant to regulate the issues that arise out of armed conflict.

Failure to implement IHL is a central problem in contemporary armed conflict laws in general and Ethiopia in particular. However, it must be noted that difficulties regarding securing compliance are not unique to the law of armed conflict but also an issue in international law. This problem by large is related to the lack of a central enforceable organ that looks after the implementation of those laws. Although the lack of a central enforceable organ is one of the central problems with the implementation of international law in general and IHL in particular, there are other inimitable reasons that are typically credited for the failure of IHL being observed. These are the very nature of armed conflict, the inapplicability, and inefficiency of the international mechanism of implementation. These typical features will be explained in the following pages.  

ኢትዮጵያ በተፈጥሮ ፀጋ የተከበበች ውብ ሀገር ብትሆንም በድህነት አዘቅት ውስጥ ተዘፍቃ የምትኖር፤ ባደጉ ሀገራት ተረፈ ምርትና የአየር ብክለት ገፈት ቀማሽነት፤ በሚጠጣ ንጹህ ውኃ እጥረት ተጠቂነት የምትነሳ ሀገር ነች፡፡ ኢትዮጵያ በመአድን፣ በለም መሬት፣ በእንስሳት፣ በውኃ ኃብት እንዲሁም በሌሎች አላቂና አላቂ ያልሆኑ የተፈጥሮ ሀብቶች ባለፀጋ መሆኗን የሚካድ ባይሆንም በተፈጥሮ የታደለችውን ኃብት ጥቅም ላይ ከማዋል ረገድ ግን እምብዛም አይደለችም፡፡ ሜዳዋንና ተራሯን የሚሸፍን የተፈጥሮ ዝናብ እየተቀበለች ይህ ዝናብ አፈሯንና ወርቋን ጠራርጎ በመውሰድ ለጎረቤት ሀገራት ነፃ ስጦታና ችሮታ እንዲሆን ከመፍቀድ ውጪ የልማት መንገዱን አልተገለጠላትም፡፡ ወንዞች በደራሽ ውኃ ተጥለቅልቀው የገበሬ ማሳ የጎርፍ ሲሳይ ሲያደርጉ ማየት ክረምት በመጣ ቁጥር የምንገነዘበው መራራ እውነት ነው፡፡ አባይን የሚያክል ግዙፍ የውሀ ኃብት ከጉሮሮዋ እየፈለቀቁ የራሳቸው ከርሰ ምድር ሲሞሉ ኢትዮጵያ  የበይ ተመልካች ሆና መኖሯን ግርምት ይፈጥራል፡፡

“Whoever ill-treats a citizen indirectly injures the State, which must protect that citizen.” Vattel, on ‘The Law of Nations’ The corpus of international law is the most controversial area of law opened for legal battles, when different actors interpret it to favor their interest while taking actions. This regime of law has faced criticism for not having enforcement mechanisms which can be consider as an area of law like a lion without having a teeth. Leaving this behind, this piece assess the US drone strike of Iranian commander which took place in 3 January 2020 in light of international law through doctrinal analysis of different sources.