Abstract

The poster seeks to critique the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) classification of the emerging phenomenon of Internal Violence of a Political Nature (IVPN) as an Article 7 crime of the Rome Statute 1998.
The work highlights three significant issues that are present in the current legal framework. Firstly, it analyses the on-going gravity threshold problems associated with conflict classification at the ICC, both at the investigative and prosecutorial stages, and highlights the courts inconsistency in applying a robust framework for case selection.
Secondly, the work analyses the dissenting voices of the court itself, with respect to the inconsistencies of gravity threshold tests in relation to Crimes against Humanity. The Poster draws particular focus to the partial dissenting and dissenting opinions of Judge Georghious M. Pikis and Judge Hans-Peter Kaul on this matter.
Thirdly, the poster critiques the decision to authorise the investigation and prosecution of crimes at the ICC in relation to the post-election violence seen in Kenya from late 2007 to spring 2008 as Crimes Against Humanity, and discusses the justifications the ICC advocated in classifying the conflict as being of sufficient gravity to warrant its prosecution as an Article 7 crime.
Finally, the work asks what ramifications the Kenyan situation has for other conflicts of a similar nature. It explores how the ICCs handling of the Kenyan investigation could potentially undermine the legitimacy of the court in pursuing individuals that are believed to have orchestrated and/or perpetrated crimes that could conceivably fall in or out of the ICC’s remit, depending on the interpretation of the courts gravity threshold decisions.