International Law Review

International Law Review

An Analysis of the Ineffectiveness of of the Legal Framework in Addressing the Crime of Aggression: An Exploration of the Evolution of the Concept of Aggression in International Criminal Law

Document Type : academic

Authors
Seyyed Fazlollah Mousavi 1
Amir Lohrasbi 2
1 Professor, Public Law Department, Faculty of Law and Political Sciences, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
2 Ph.D. Student in International Law, Faculty of Law and Political Sciences, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
10.22066/cilamag.2025.2067930.2769
Abstract
Abstract
In the third decade of the twenty-first century, international criminal law faces fundamental challenges in addressing the crime of aggression. While aggression is regarded as the gravest threat to international peace and security, in practice it remains deprived of effective deterrence and accountability due to conceptual ambiguities and structural limitations. The central problem of this study lies in explaining the inherent paradox between the normative status of aggression at the apex of international crimes and the practical ineffectiveness of its prosecution and enforcement of criminal responsibility. The research hypothesis suggests that unlawful uses of force may fall within the framework of crimes against humanity, and that such a reconceptualization—grounded in the theory of convergence between the law on the use of force (jus ad bellum) and international humanitarian law (jus in bello)—can address existing gaps and mitigate the dominance of politics over law. The findings—derived from a descriptive-analytical methodology and based on library sources—demonstrate that although the definition adopted in General Assembly Resolution 3314 marked an important normative step, the political compromises underlying its drafting produced serious ambiguities and rendered it a flexible instrument in the hands of the Security Council. Consequently, the predominance of realist state-centered approaches has undermined accountability, while the limited jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court has perpetuated the immunity of senior officials. Nevertheless, linking aggression both conceptually and operationally with crimes against humanity, and applying the principles of necessity and proportionality within the convergence of these two branches of international law, provides a promising pathway for strengthening the prospects of criminal prosecution. Moreover, the expansion of non-judicial accountability mechanisms, as complements to judicial institutions, offers the potential to foster normative consensus and enhance the effectiveness of international justice in responding to aggression.
Keywords
Aggression
Jus ad Bellum
International Law on the Use of Force
International Criminal Law
International Humanitarian Law
Self-Defense
Subjects
References
- Books
1.         Asgari, Yadollah. Responsibility to Protect: The Evolution of Sovereignty in Light of Human Rights Movements. Tehran: Mizan Publishing, 2017. (In Persian)
2.         Boister, Neil, and Robert Cryer. The Tokyo International Military Tribunal: A Reappraisal. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.
3.         Falsafi, Hedayatollah. The Course of Reason in the System of International Law. Tehran: Farhang-e Nashr-e No, 2020. (In Persian)
4.         O’Connell, Mary Ellen. "Historical Development and Legal Basis". In The Handbook of International Humanitarian Law, 3rd ed., edited by Dieter Fleck, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
5.         Elohi Nazari, Hamid. Humanitarian Approach in the Judgments of the International Court of Justice. Tehran: Dadgostar Publishing, 2010. (In Persian)
6.         Rieff, David. "The Hypocrisy of Humanitarian Intervention". In International Peacekeeping: The Yearbook of International Peace Operations, vol.7, ed. Michael Bothe and Boris Kondoch, The Netherlands and Boston, Brill | Nijhoff, 2011
7.         Sadat, Leila Nadya. Seeking Accountability for the Unlawful Use of Force. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018.
8.         Sellars, Kirsten. Crimes against Peace and International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013.
9.         Tibori-Szabó, Kinga. “The Relationship of the Law on the Use of Force with the Law of Armed Conflict and Human Rights Law”. In The Use of Force and the International Legal System, edited by Terry D. Gill and Kinga Tibori-Szabó, 315–346. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2023.
 
- Articles
1.         Aghaee Janatmakan, Hossein. “Definition, Elements, and Conditions for the Exercise of the International Criminal Court’s Jurisdiction over the Crime of Aggression with a Focus on the Kampala Agreement.” International Law Review 28, no. 44 (2011). (In Persian)
2.         Barriga, Stefan, and Leena Grover. "A Historic Breakthrough on the Crime of Aggression." American Journal of International Law 105, no. 3 (2011).
3.         Bassiouni, M. Cherif. "World War I: 'The War to End All Wars' and the Birth of a Handicapped International Criminal Justice System." Denver Journal of International Law and Policy 30 (2002).
4.         Blokker, Niels, and Claus Kreß. "A Consensus Agreement on the Crime of Aggression: Impressions from Kampala." Leiden Journal of International Law 23, no.4 (2010).
5.         Ečer, Bohuslav. "The Crime of Aggressive War." In London International Assembly, Reports on Punishment of War Crimes (1943).
6.         Federica D’Alessandra, “UN Accountability Mandates in International Justice,” Journal of International Criminal Justice 21, no. 3 (2023).
7.         Ferencz, Benjamin B. "Ending Impunity for the Crime of Aggression." Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law 41, no.1 (2009).
8.         Helal, Mohamed S. "Justifying War and the Limits of Humanitarianism." Fordham International Law Journal 37 (2014).
9.         Heydarian, Mohammad Javad Dowlatabadi, and Rasoul Mazaheri Kouhanestani. “Limitations of National Courts in Exercising Universal Jurisdiction over the Crime of Aggression.” Culmination of Law 5, no. 2 (2019): 29–53. (In Persian)
10.     Luban, David. “The Crime of Aggression: Its Nature, the Leadership Clause, and the Paradox of Immunity.” Georgetown University Law Center Research Paper no. 29 (2024).
11.     McMahan, Jeff. "Morality, Law, and the Relation Between Jus ad Bellum and Jus in Bello." American Society of International Law Proceedings 100 (2006).
12.     Mitchell, Ryan. "Sovereignty and Normative Conflict: International Legal Realism as a Theory of Uncertainty." Harvard International Law Journal 58, no.2 (2017).
13.     Mousazadeh, Reza, and Sara Hosseinzadeh. “Evaluation of the United Nations Security Council’s Performance in Utilizing the Responsibility to Protect Doctrine.” The Public Law Studies Quarterly 50, no. 2 (2020): 431–451. (In Persian)
14.     Reisman, W. Michael. "The Cult of Custom in the Late 20th Century." California Western International Law Journal 17 (1987).
15.     Schmitt, Michael N. "Military Necessity and Humanity in International Humanitarian Law: Preserving the Delicate Balance." Virginia Journal of International Law 50, no. 3 (2010).
16.     Sefriani. "The Dichotomy of Jus Ad Bellum and Jus Ad Bello in the 21st Century: Its Relevance and Reconstruction." Padjadjaran Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 9, no. 2 (2022).
17.     Van den Herik, Larissa J. "An Inquiry into the Role of Commissions of Inquiry in International Law: Navigating the Tensions Between Fact-Finding and Application of International Law." Chinese Journal of International Law 13, no.1 (2014).
18.     Yazdaniyan, Alireza, and Omid Mahmoudi Qehsareh. “Comparative Study of the Role of Civil Liability in Effective Compensation for Human Rights Violations with Emphasis on the Resolution on Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to Remedy and Reparation.” Journal of Comparative Law 8, no. 2 (2021): 7–30. (In Persian)
 
- Instrument
1.       Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, U.N.Doc. A/CONF.183/9 (July17,1998). https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/ 260261? ln=en&v=pdf
 
- Documents
1.         Definition of Aggression, G.A.Res.3314 (XXIX), annex, U.N.Doc. A/RES/3314(XXIX) (Dec.14,1974). https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/ 190983?ln=en&v=pdf
2.         Draft Code of Crimes Against the Peace and Security of Mankind, Rep. of the Int’l Law Commission to the Gen. Assembly, U.N.Doc.A/51/10. https://legal.un.org/ilc/documentation/english/reports/a_51_10.pdf
3.         UN. Secretary-General, “Report of the Secretary-General’s Panel of Inquiry on the 31 May 2010 Flotilla Incident”, para.3 (Sept.2,2011). https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/720841?ln=en&v=pdf
 
- Cases
1.          Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996.
2.         ICTY, Prosecutor v. Gotovina, Trial Judgment, Case No. IT-09-90-T (Apr.15,2011).
 

  • Receive Date 14 August 2025
  • Revise Date 13 September 2025
  • Accept Date 27 September 2025