国际刑事法院对侵略罪行使管辖权的困境及我国的对策  

The Exercise of the International Criminal Court’s Jurisdiction over the Crime of Aggression: Difficulties and Strategies for China

作　　者：朱丹 ZHU Dan(School of Law,Fudan University,Shanghai 200438,China)

机构地区：[1]复旦大学法学院

出　　处：《现代法学》2019年第6期176-193,共18页Modern Law Science

基　　金：2018年度国家社会科学基金重点项目“‘人类命运共同体’国际法理论与实践研究”(18AFX025);2018年度国家社会科学基金重大项目“‘构建人类命运共同体’国际法治创新研究”(18ZDA153)

摘　　要：国际刑事法院2018年正式启动了对侵略罪的管辖权,然而,由于侵略罪自身的性质以及《罗马规约》修正案有关规定的模糊性,国际刑事法院对侵略罪行使管辖权仍面临着一系列困境。除了侵略罪定义的不确定性、与联合国集体安全机制的冲突以外,作为国际刑事法院基石的补充性管辖权机制,在侵略罪问题的运行方面也面临着受害国国内法院对侵略“不能够”和“不愿意”管辖的双重困境。国际刑事法院对侵略罪行使管辖权的困境,在一定程度上反映了作为非成员国的我国对《罗马规约》和侵略罪修正案的保留,因此,应结合本国立场,适时评估侵略罪相关问题对我国自卫权、维护国际和平与安全特殊职能的行使以及我国与国际刑事法院的关系可能带来的挑战,并采取相应的对策。In 2018,the International Criminal Court(ICC)activated its jurisdiction over the crime of aggression.However,due to the very nature of the crime and some ambiguities under the Kampala Amendment,there are some difficulties in prosecuting the crime of aggression by the Court.Apart from the uncertainties surrounding the definition of the crime of aggression and its conflicts with the UN collective security system,the crime of aggression also poses two-fold difficulties upon the ICC’s complementary jurisdiction:domestic courts of victim states would be“unable”or“unwilling”to exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression.The barriers of the ICC’s exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression to some extent mirror China’s reservations over the Rome Statute and its amendments.As such,China should make timely re-evaluations of the possible challenges posed by the crime of aggression upon its right of self-defence,its special responsibility of safeguarding international peace and security,as well as its future relationship with the ICC,and develop proper strategies accordingly.

关 键 词：国际刑事法院 侵略罪 安理会 补充性管辖权 

分 类 号：DF979[政治法律—国际法学]