AN EXAMINATION OF JURISDICTION, TRIALS AND APPLICABLE LAWS IN THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURTS

In its different deliberations since the conclusion of the Second World War, the United Nations has deliberated on multiple occasions on the possibility of establishing a permanent international criminal court. It established two special tribunals in 1993 and 1994 to try those responsible for egregious violations of international humanitarian law that had occurred, respectively, in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. A series of negotiations to establish a permanent international criminal court that would have jurisdiction over serious international crimes regardless of where they were committed began in 1994. These negotiations led to the adoption of the Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in July 1998 in Rome, which established the international criminal court. Since its inception, the international criminal court has prosecuted individuals accused of the most serious international crimes regardless of where they were committed. This achievement represents the result of years of effort and demonstrates the determination of the world community to guarantee that those who commit serious crimes are brought to justice and that they do not go free. As a result, the jurisdiction, trials, and applicable laws in the international criminal courts was examined in this research work. The doctrinal method of research was utilised by the researcher in order to conduct an analysis of the myriad of problems connected to the topic of study. The researcher believes that the most significant contribution made by the ICC is procedural. However, the prerequisites to the exercise of jurisdiction depend greatly on the willingness of all state's parties concerned in the prosecution to cooperate with the court, which the research has pointed out to be a major setback. The Statute has established a complex judicial body with detailed regulations governing all the stages of the criminal adjudication process. The research found, among other things, that the provisions of Article 12 have led to the development of selective justice, which has the potential to significantly reduce the efficiency of the court.