Highlights: The Court of Cassation confirmed on Friday 12 May the jurisdiction of the French judiciary to judge war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Syria. Two Syrian nationals were trying to argue that the France could not try them for such crimes, as these crimes do not exist in Syrian law. In reality, so many countries have not ratified the Statute of the International Criminal Court and have not codified war crimes in their domestic laws. Nearly half of the cases opened in France on the basis of universal jurisdiction that would have been stopped purely and simply if the Court ofCassation had not ruled in our favour.

The Court of Cassation confirmed on Friday 12 May the jurisdiction of the French judiciary to judge war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Syria. Two Syrian nationals were trying...

Crimes against humanity and war crimes: France's 'universal jurisdiction' confirmed

The Court of Cassation, seized by two Syrians arrested in France, on Friday, May 12, 2023, enshrined the principle of universal jurisdiction of French justice to prosecute foreign perpetrators of crimes against humanity and war crimes committed outside France on foreigners. AP - Martin Bureau

Text by: RFI Follow

2 min

The Court of Cassation confirmed on Friday 12 May the jurisdiction of the French judiciary to judge war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Syria. Two Syrian nationals were trying to argue that the France could not try them for such crimes, as these crimes do not exist in Syrian law. Finally, the highest French court has enshrined a non-restrictive interpretation of the conditions for the application of the "universal jurisdiction" of the France. A decision that allows the continuation of investigations concerning these two Syrians, but also many other procedures.

Advertising

In order for the France to be able to judge war crimes and crimes against humanity committed abroad, when neither the perpetrators nor the victims are French, the law provides for several conditions, including that "these acts are punishable by the law of the State where they were committed".

But does this mean that war crimes and crimes against humanity must appear "identically" in the laws of the foreign country, as the two Syrians claimed, or that it is "sufficient" that the offences constituting these crimes, such as murder, rape, torture, are provided for in the ordinary law of the country in question, as the International Federation for Human Rights maintained?

The Court of Cassation ruled for this second interpretation, to the relief of Clémence Bectarte, FIDH lawyer: "These were two Syrian cases that were threatened, but beyond that, it was nearly half of the cases opened in France on the basis of universal jurisdiction that would have been stopped purely and simply if the Court of Cassation had not ruled in our favour. I am thinking of Libya, Sri Lanka, even Ukraine. In reality, so many countries have not ratified the Statute of the International Criminal Court and have not codified crimes against humanity or war crimes in their domestic laws.

The threat hanging over these cases, on which investigators, judges and prosecutors have sometimes been working for years, weighed heavily in the decision, said Raphael Kempf, a lawyer for one of the Syrians. A decision that therefore seems to him "more marked by criminal policy than legal arguments".

Crimes against humanity and war crimes: France's 'universal jurisdiction' confirmed

Crimes against humanity and war crimes: France's 'universal jurisdiction' confirmed

Trends 24h

Latest