The Relevance of Erga Omnes Obligations in Prosecuting International Crimes

The need to regulate the potential for concurrent jurisdiction among States interested in prosecuting international crimes – such as genocide, crime against humanity, war crimes, and torture – might be satisfied by relying on the concept of erga omnes obligations. This concept is intended to protect fundamental community values by way of individual State action. The same values are undermined by international crimes. One of the means of erga omnes obligations enforcement is substitution between States less and less linked to a certain breach of community interests. It seems that contemporary international law is gradually coming to terms with this solution even in the field of international criminal justice. In fact, both in the relationship among States inter se and between States and international criminal tribunals, international law seems to distinguish primary from secondary claims to jurisdiction over international crimes and set the legal requirements for substitution among them. Within each class of relationship these requirements seem identical, but require further clarification by relevant practice.