CYIL Vol. 6, 2015

ŠTEFAN VIEDENSKÝ CYIL 6 ȍ2015Ȏ The first part covers two studies: “Metamorphoses of international crimes: an open-ended story” (Pavel Šturma) and “What is ‘international crime’?” (Veronika Bílková). Both describe difficulties resulting from different views of the doctrine of international law regarding the use of precise terminology ( e.g. : international crime, crime under international law, transnational crimes) and differences in the use of this terminology by different institutions, lawyers and in international law documents. The term “international crime” is relatively widely used, yet there is no consensus on its precise definition. Predominantly it is used in two contexts – the denomination of a serious breach of key norms ( jus cogens ) of international law by a State (under the responsibility of the state), on the one hand, and, in particular, serious breaches committed by individuals (in the context of individual criminal responsibility), on the other. The result is that at present the expression “international crime” is most often associated with areas of individual criminal responsibility for certain particularly serious breaches (genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, aggression). Czech doctrine to a certain extent defies this rule (prof. Šturma and others), and for these breaches uses the expression “crimes under international law”; and the term “international crime” thus remains reserved for the area of responsibility of States. Nevetheless, it seems to be crucial that the international community shows a common approach concerning these issues, and there are common values and the protection of the whole international community through justice and responsibility. The second part covers several procedural issues: “The Role of International Organizations in the Fight against International Crime” (Martin Faix) and “Immunity for the breach of ius cogens – quod licet Jovi, non licet bovi ” What is permissible for Jove is not permissible for an ox (Vladimír Balaš). The first study pointed out the essential need for cooperation and coordination of State activities within international organizations, or through them. Without wide and professional cooperation effective combat of international crime is impossible. On the other hand, the study showed a certain paradox where, despite the efforts and cooperation of institutions such as the UN, ICC, EU or Interpol, existing practice still does not show desired outcomes in the fight against international crime. Doc. Balaš devoted his study to the question of the status of high-ranking foreign state oficials before national courts and international tribunals, in the case where they are accused of breach of peremptory ( jus cogens ) rules of international law. The conclusion is: as future development of these issues depends on the principal actors of international relations and creators of the international legal system – the sovereign states, it depends only on them to set up clear rules and give a clear note about what the international community intends to tolerate. Will the international community find enough courage and power to enforce what almost every individual regards as self-evident?

430