Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
9 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Rome Statute (2002)
|
This treaty establishes the International Criminal Court’s jurisdiction for member nations. You should remember that the ICC convicts criminals charged with crimes against humanity. No IC essay is complete without mentioning this. For brownie points, mention that Australia is a signatory, and that the treaty is enforced under theInternational Criminal Court Act 2002 (Cth) .
|
|
|
The Geneva Conventions (1949)
|
These conventions contain international standards regarding interstate (international) conflict. An essential mention when talking about international cooperation, and obviously easy to appraise. For something more tricky, you can talk about the fact that this is a piece of soft law , it cannot be enforced in any way.
|
|
|
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide
|
This convention imposes conditions on member states to prevent genocide. It would play the same role in an argument as the Geneva Conventions, but it is a bit more niche
|
|
|
Australian Federal Police Act 1919 (Cth)
|
I mentioned that domestic legislation is essential, and this is a nice one to include. This act is what gives federal police the powers they need to stop transnational crime. You can argue the usual stuff about police powers (see my other guides), or for a little more, pull in human rights and use the recent Bali executions as an example. Don’t go full human rights essay though, it’s easy to get confused. Also don’t forget to mention other agencies, like Australian Customs and Border Protection, for extra bonus marks.
|
|
|
Treaty on Extradition Between Australia and the United States (1974
|
A very sophisticated argument to make is that international crime can only be dealt with by cooperating nation states. This treaty represents cooperation between Australia and the US; they agree to extradite criminals back and forth to be prosecuted. It works nicely with that argument, or any argument concerning cooperation between nation states.
|
|
|
United States of America v Griffiths (2004)
|
The offender was extradited from Australia to the US and jailed for breach of US copyright. Awesome evidence of international cooperation, and absolutely works best for “this was effective” arguments.
|
|
|
Prosecutor v Dyilo (2012)/Prosecutor v Katanga (2014)
|
only two convictions made by the ICC. It is a big must to include these in any essay, and you can use it in any way you please. Argue that the ICC has shown success in prosecuting two prominent war criminals, thus evidencing the beginnings of an effective mechanism for combatting international crime. Or argue that high costs (over 1 billion US dollars, nice statistic to include) do not justify only two convictions, and that the ICC is essentially powerless due to state sovereignty anyway. Both work nicely, you could even weigh them against each other.
|
|
|
The Wonderland Club (1998)
|
Rather than a single case, this was actually a whole bunch of cases. A number of child pornographers were arrested simultaneously in almost half a dozen countries, evidencing effective cooperation between nation states.
|
|
|
R v Ho et al (2012)
|
This was a people trafficking case. The offender was charged under the Criminal Code in Australia, the Criminal Code (Trafficking in Persons Offences) Amendment Act 2005 (Cth) specifically. Shows a nice example of domestic laws working effectively to deal with transnational crime.
|
