If your old Town Hall is strung with light bulbs, it seems a good idea to turn them on sometimes (on this occasion, last week, it was just for the Kirchweih).

The Juristisches Internetprojekt at Saarbrücken University has a new link of the week: the site of the Bundeszentralregister in Bonn (it used to be in Berlin, but it moved the other way when the government and parliament moved from Bonn to Berlin). It’s all in German. Unfortunately it introduces itself with a gimmicky dwindling-circle effect, but when you leave it there are no special effects.

The Gewerbezentralregister is also there – Romain translates it as the Central Register of Trade and Industrial Offences.

There is a lot of information about criminal records and about the Führungszeugnis / Certificate of Good Conduct.

This is the courtroom where the Nuremberg War Crimes Trial took place. ICC judge Hans-Peter Kaul speaking, to his right Lee A. Casey, furthest right Dr. William Sheldon. Taken without flash. It was pretty dark. The crucifix looks more interesting on the photo – in reality the details are indistinguishable in the poor light.

Serious crimes (such as murder) are still tried here, with three professional judges and two lay judges sitting at the bench in the background. On the left wall, not visible in the photo, is the door to a lift to the prison corridor (one reason why the War Crimes Trials were held in this building). In 1945-46, the room was arranged differently. The judges were at a bench on the right, under the windows.

I have to post some entries to test some problems with my blog setup. So here’s some vocabulary for the International Criminal Court:

|appeal|Berufung|
|authentic texts|verbindliche Wortlaute|
|chambers |Kammern|
|communication|Mitteilung|
|complementarity|Komplementarität|
|core crimes|Kernverbrechen|
|crime of aggression|Verbrechen der Aggression|
|crimes against humanity|Verbrechen gegen die Menschlichkeit|
|custodial state|Gewahrsamsstaat|
|deferral of investigation or prosecution|Aufschub der Ermittlungen oder der Strafverfolgung|
|elements of crime|„Verbrechenselemente“ [sic]|
|escape|Flucht|
|excusing and disqualification of judges|Freistellung und Ausschluss von Richtern |
|forfeiture measures|Einziehungsanordnungen|
|genocide|Völkermord|
|International Criminal Court ICC|Internationaler Strafgerichtshof IStGh|
|jurisdiction ratione temporis|Gerichtsbarkeit ratione temporis|
|mental element|subjektive Tatbestandsmerkmale|
|misconduct before the Court|ordnungswidriges Verhalten vor Gericht|
|non-retroactivity ratione personae|Rückwirkungsverbot ratione personae|
|Office of the prosecutor|Anklagebehörde|
|preliminary ruling|vorläufige Entscheidung|
|prescription of law|gesetzliche Vorschriften|
|Presidency|Präsidium|
|Pre-Trial Chamber|Vorverfahrenskammer|
|prosecutor|Ankläger|
|Registry|Kanzlei|
|removal from office|Amtsenthebung|
|reparation to victims|Wiedergutmachung für die Opfer|
|revision|Wiederaufnahme|
|Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court|Römisches Statut des Internationalen Strafgerichtshofs|
|sentencing|Strafspruch|
|State Party|Vertragsstaat|
|superior orders|Anordnungen Vorgesetzter |
|trial|Hauptverfahren|
|Trial Chamber|Hauptverfahrenskammer|
|war crimes|Kriegsverbrechen|

There is a principle of complementarity – a bit like subsidiarity in the EU. It means that if a national court wants to try a case on one of the ICC crimes, it can, and the ICC will only try cases if the country (or countries?) in question don’t want to.

This explains why Germany enacted a Völkerstrafgesetzbuch (Code of International Criminal Law).

English version here:

This, of course, is very similar to the Statute of Rome.

(See October 19th entry)

The two really exciting speakers at Nuremberg were Hans-Peter Kaul, the German judge at the ICC, who talked about Das Vermächtnis von Nürnberg – The Legacy of Nuremberg, and Lee A. Casey, from Washington D.C., who talked about the Position of the U.S. Administration on the ICC.

Before them, Klaus Kastner talked about The Nuremberg Trials. Vom gerechten Krieg zur Ächtung des Krieges – From a just war to rejection (outlawing? scorning?) of war, and Christoph Safferling about comparative procedure in the Statute of Rome.

Dr. WilliamSheldon, the director of the Deutsch-Amerikanisches Institut in Nuremberg, presided. There was some discussion afterwards, but it was with the audience, not much between the speakers, who probably know each other’s opinions after many years of negotiating.

There’s a report in German in the Nürnberger Nachrichten. The talks will be available on the site of the Oberlandesgericht Nürnberg, which is a good site.

The symposium was held in the courtroom where the Nuremberg Trials took place. I counted only 29 in the audience at the beginning. Maybe there were 35 later. It was a pathetic turnout. I don’t know where these things are advertised. I heard as a member of the DAJV, the German-American Lawyers’ Association, and I think quite a lot of the audience came from the Amerikahaus, either employees or people who do English conversation courses there. There were at least two journalists there, because I talked to them in the break. There were at least two photographers – one of them had a large digital camera with huge lenses, which I greatly coveted. Obviously the speakers were speaking for a wider audience than us.

Hans-Peter Kaul was a superb speaker. He sounded as if he was speaking extempore on a subject he felt very strongly about.

There’s an article about him in Die Welt online, and an interview of a few months ago. He stated a number of facts about the American reasons for not signing the Statute of Rome, and mentioned a number of Americans who are not against the ICC. He also emphasized the limits of the Court’s powers, to do away with some misconceptions about it.

Lee A. Casey said he was speaking as a private person and merely about his own opinion. He believes the USA should never sign the Statute. His main argument was that America became a nation because its people wanted to govern themselves, and the ICC is not subject to review by the American people. It is neither dependent on the people nor answerable to them. Clinton recommended not ratifying the Statute, because it lacks enough safeguards. There have been over 600 complaints lodged with the Court, most of them relating to matters the Court has no jurisdiction over because they happened before July 1st, 2003. These complaints often refer to American actions in Iraq, and they show there is a politically motivated attempt to obtain convictions of American citizens. aother point: some of the (only) 92 States Parties to the Statute are not noted for their systems of justice and any of these could have a US citizen prosecuted if that citizen were on their territory.

There is a summary of the US arguments against the ICC in German here . They can also be seen in the American Service Members’ Protection Act. There is an excellent summary here, including a summary of steps that should be taken to prevent the ICC from being implemented.