Establishing strong chains of evidence in challenging wartime conditions, handling universal jurisdiction in absentia and the immunity granted to leaders, soldiers and other potential defendants are just a few of the issues involved in utilising the principle of universal jurisdiction. The recommendations contained in the Prague Statement outline ways for lawmakers and other key stakeholders to overcome these problems and improve the effectiveness of universal jurisdiction as an accountability measure. The recommendations are divided into four sections, covering the following topics: responding to legal challenges; building capacity; cooperation and coordination; and wider engagement. They include:

• supporting the establishment of a special tribunal for the crime of aggression targeted at Russia’s leaders in the context of the war in Ukraine;
• pursuing complementarity between national authorities and international bodies involved in the investigation and prosecution of international crimes;
• civil society engagement, including through public advocacy, evidence gathering and critical research on universal jurisdiction developments;
• educating the general public and other affected communities on the importance of justice and accountability for international crimes; and
• strengthening international legal frameworks through the ratification and adoption of benchmark treaties on war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, torture and enforced disappearances.

The Prague Statement on Universal Criminal Jurisdiction

Bron: www.ibanet.org