@article{ZimmermannThienel2012, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas and Thienel, Tobias}, title = {Yugoslavia, cases and proceedings before the ICJ}, isbn = {978-0-19-929168-7}, year = {2012}, language = {en} } @article{ZimmermannSener2014, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas and Sener, Meltem}, title = {Chemical weapons and the international criminal court}, series = {American journal of international law}, volume = {108}, journal = {American journal of international law}, number = {3}, publisher = {American Society of International Law}, address = {Washington}, issn = {0002-9300}, doi = {10.5305/amerjintelaw.108.3.0436}, pages = {436 -- 448}, year = {2014}, language = {en} } @article{ZimmermannSchabedoth2022, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas and Schabedoth, John Alexander}, title = {Domestic and international criminal justice}, series = {KFG working paper series}, journal = {KFG working paper series}, number = {57}, publisher = {Berlin Potsdam Research Group International Law - Rise or Decline?}, address = {Berlin}, issn = {2509-3762}, doi = {10.2139/ssrn.4087189}, pages = {22}, year = {2022}, abstract = {This paper consists of two parts: In the first part, some of the challenges with which the Internationaal Criminal Court is currently confronted are being presented. First of all, the article will describe the current state of the International Criminal Court and the Rome Statue. Afterwards, the article analyses the Court's efforts to deal with cases against third-country nationals and the challenges it is facing in that regard. In addition, the Court's case law will be analyzed in order to determine an increasing 'emancipation' of the case law of the International Criminal Court from international humanitarian law. The second part of the paper will briefly discuss the role of domestic international criminal law and domestic courts in the further development and enforcement of international criminal law. As an example of the role that domestic courts may have in clarifying classic issues in international law, the judgment of the German Supreme Court of January 28, 2021 (3 StR 564/19), which deals with the status of costumary international law on functional immunity of State officials before domestic courts, shall be assessed.}, language = {en} } @book{ZimmermannOellersFrahmTomuschatetal.2012, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas and Oellers-Frahm, Karin and Tomuschat, Christian and Tams, Christian J.}, title = {The statute of the international court of justice : a commentary}, edition = {2. ed.}, publisher = {Oxford Univ. Press}, address = {Oxford}, isbn = {978-0-19-969299-6}, pages = {1745 S.}, year = {2012}, language = {en} } @article{ZimmermannJauer2021, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas and Jauer, Nora}, title = {Legal shades of grey?}, series = {Archiv des V{\"o}lkerrechts}, volume = {59}, journal = {Archiv des V{\"o}lkerrechts}, number = {3}, publisher = {Mohr Siebeck}, address = {T{\"u}bingen}, issn = {0003-892X}, doi = {10.1628/avr-2021-0016}, pages = {278 -- 299}, year = {2021}, abstract = {As part of the current process of de-formalization in international law, States increasingly chose informal, non-legally binding agreements or 'Memoranda of Understanding' ('MOUs') to organize their international affairs. The increasing conclusion of such legally non-binding instruments in addition to their flexibility, however, also leads to uncertainties in international relations. Against this background, this article deals with possible indirect legal consequences produced by MOUs. It discusses the different legal mechanisms and avenues that may give rise to such secondary legal effects of MOUs through a process of interaction with, and interpretation in line with, other (formal) sources of international law. The article further considers various strategies how to avoid such eventual possible unintended or unexpected indirect legal effects of MOUs when drafting such instruments and when dealing with them subsequent to their respective 'adoption'.}, language = {en} } @article{ZimmermannJauer2021, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas and Jauer, Nora}, title = {Possible indirect legal effects under international law of non-legally binding instruments}, series = {KFG working paper series}, volume = {48}, journal = {KFG working paper series}, publisher = {Berlin Potsdam Research Group International Law - Rise or Decline?}, address = {Berlin}, issn = {2509-3770}, pages = {24}, year = {2021}, abstract = {As part of the current overall process of de-formalization in international law States increasingly chose informal, non-legally binding agreements or 'Memoranda of Understanding' ('MOUs') to organize their international affairs. The increasing conclusion of such legally non-binding instruments in addition to their flexibility, however, also leads to uncertainties in international relations. Against this background, this article deals with possible indirect legal consequences produced by MOUs. It discusses the different legal mechanisms and avenues that may give rise to secondary legal effects of MOUs through a process of interaction with and interpretation in line with other (formal) sources of international law. The article further considers various strategies how to avoid such eventual possible unintended or unexpected indirect legal effects of MOUs when drafting such instruments and when dealing with them subsequent to their respective 'adoption'.}, language = {en} } @incollection{ZimmermannGeiss2017, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas and Geiß, Robin}, title = {The International Committee of the Red Cross: A Unique Actor in the Field of International Humanitarian Law Creation and Progressive Development}, series = {Humanizing the Laws of War}, booktitle = {Humanizing the Laws of War}, publisher = {Cambridge University Press}, address = {Cambridge}, isbn = {978-1-107-17135-0}, doi = {10.1017/9781316759967.009}, pages = {215 -- 255}, year = {2017}, language = {en} } @incollection{ZimmermannGeiss2016, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas and Geiß, Robin}, title = {Article 8, VI, Article 8 para. 2 (f): scope of application of article 8 para. 2 (e)}, series = {The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court}, booktitle = {The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court}, publisher = {Beck}, address = {M{\"u}nchen}, isbn = {978-3-406-64854-0}, year = {2016}, language = {en} } @incollection{ZimmermannGeiss2022, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas and Geiß, Robin}, title = {Article 8 Paras. 2(c)-(f) and 3: War crimes committed in an armed conflict not of an international character}, series = {Rome statute of the International Criminal Court}, booktitle = {Rome statute of the International Criminal Court}, editor = {Ambos, Kai}, edition = {4}, publisher = {C.H. Beck}, address = {M{\"u}nchen}, isbn = {978-3-406-74384-9}, pages = {837 -- 1048}, year = {2022}, language = {en} } @incollection{ZimmermannGeiss2022, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas and Geiß, Robin}, title = {Article 8 Para. 2(b)(xvi): Pillage}, series = {Rome statute of the International Criminal Court}, booktitle = {Rome statute of the International Criminal Court}, editor = {Ambos, Kai}, edition = {Fourth edition}, publisher = {C.H. Beck}, address = {M{\"u}nchen}, isbn = {978-3-406-74384-9}, pages = {539 -- 554}, year = {2022}, language = {en} } @incollection{ZimmermannGeiss2022, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas and Geiß, Robin}, title = {Article 8 Para. 2(b)(x): Prohibition of physical mutilation}, series = {Rome statute of the International Criminal Court}, booktitle = {Rome statute of the International Criminal Court}, editor = {Ambos, Kai}, edition = {4}, publisher = {Beck}, address = {M{\"u}nchen}, isbn = {978-3-406-74384-9}, pages = {419 -- 436}, year = {2022}, language = {en} } @incollection{ZimmermannGeiss2022, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas and Geiß, Robin}, title = {Article 8 Para. 2(b)(xiii): Prohibited destruction}, series = {Rome statute of the International Criminal Court}, booktitle = {Rome statute of the International Criminal Court}, editor = {Ambos, Kai}, edition = {4}, publisher = {Beck}, address = {M{\"u}nchen}, isbn = {978-3-406-74384-9}, pages = {474 -- 503}, year = {2022}, language = {en} } @incollection{ZimmermannFreiburgBraun2022, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas and Freiburg-Braun, Elisa}, title = {Article 15ter Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (Security Council referral)}, series = {Rome statute of the International Criminal Court}, booktitle = {Rome statute of the International Criminal Court}, editor = {Ambos, Kai}, edition = {Fourth}, publisher = {Beck}, address = {M{\"u}nchen}, isbn = {978-3-406-77926-8}, doi = {10.17104/9783406779268-927}, pages = {927 -- 932}, year = {2022}, language = {en} } @incollection{ZimmermannFreiburgBraun2022, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas and Freiburg-Braun, Elisa}, title = {Article 8bis Crime of aggression}, series = {Rome statute of the International Criminal Court}, booktitle = {Rome statute of the International Criminal Court}, editor = {Ambos, Kai}, edition = {Fourth}, publisher = {Beck}, address = {M{\"u}nchen}, isbn = {978-3-406-77926-8}, doi = {10.17104/9783406779268-686}, pages = {686 -- 726}, year = {2022}, language = {en} } @incollection{ZimmermannFreiburg2016, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas and Freiburg, Elisa}, title = {Article 15bis: Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (State referal, proprio motu)}, series = {The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court ; a commentary}, booktitle = {The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court ; a commentary}, editor = {Triffterer, Otto and Ambos, Kai}, edition = {3. Aufl}, publisher = {Beck}, address = {M{\"u}nchen}, isbn = {978-3-406-64854-0}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {741 -- 764}, year = {2016}, language = {en} } @incollection{ZimmermannFreiburg2016, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas and Freiburg, Elisa}, title = {Article 8bis: Crime of aggression}, series = {The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court ; a commentary}, booktitle = {The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court ; a commentary}, editor = {Triffterer, Otto and Ambos, Kai}, edition = {3. Aufl.}, publisher = {Beck}, address = {M{\"u}nchen}, isbn = {978-3-406-64854-0}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {580 -- 618}, year = {2016}, language = {en} } @article{ZimmermannDorschner2011, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas and Dorschner, Jonas}, title = {Article 22}, isbn = {978-0-19-954251-2}, year = {2011}, language = {en} } @article{ZimmermannBaeumler2013, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas and B{\"a}umler, Jelena}, title = {Navigating through narrow jurisdictional straits : the Philippines - PRC South China Sea Dispute and UNCLOS}, year = {2013}, language = {en} } @article{ZimmermannBoos2018, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas and Boos, Felix}, title = {Bringing States to Justice for Crimes against Humanity}, series = {Journal of international criminal justice}, volume = {16}, journal = {Journal of international criminal justice}, number = {4}, publisher = {Oxford Univ. Press}, address = {Oxford}, issn = {1478-1387}, doi = {10.1093/jicj/mqy053}, pages = {835 -- 855}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Draft Article 15 of the International Law Commission's project on crimes against humanity — dealing with the settlement of disputes arising from a proposed convention — attempts to strike a balance between state autonomy and robust judicial supervision. It largely follows Article 22 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, which renders the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) conditional upon prior negotiations. Hence, the substance of the clause can be interpreted in light of the recent case law of the ICJ, especially in the case Georgia v. Russia. In addition, this contribution discusses several issues regarding the scope ratione temporis of the compromissory clause. It advances several proposals to improve the current draft, addressing its relationship with state responsibility — an explicit reference to which is currently missing — as well as the relationship between the ICJ and a possible treaty body. It also proposes to recalibrate the interplay of the requirement of prior negotiations with, respectively, the possibility of seizing a future treaty body and the indication of provisional measures by the ICJ.}, language = {en} } @article{Zimmermann2017, author = {Zimmermann, Andreas}, title = {Humanitarian Assistance and the Security Council}, series = {Israel Law Review}, volume = {50}, journal = {Israel Law Review}, number = {1}, publisher = {Cambridge University Press}, address = {Cambridge}, isbn = {0021-2237}, doi = {doi.org/10.1017/S0021223716000315}, pages = {3 -- 23}, year = {2017}, abstract = {Over the years, the Security Council has on several occasions dealt with humanitarian assistance issues. However, it is Security Council Resolution 2165(2014), related to the situation in Syria, that has brought the role of the Security Council to the forefront of the debate. It is against this background that the article discusses the legal issues arising from Security Council action facilitating humanitarian assistance to be delivered in situations of non-international armed conflict. Following a brief survey of relevant practice of the Security Council related to humanitarian assistance, the article considers the relevance, if any, of Article 2(7) of the Charter of the United Nations (UN) to humanitarian assistance to be delivered in such situations. It then moves on to analyse whether a rejection by the territorial state of humanitarian aid to be delivered by third parties may amount to a situation under Article 39 of the UN Charter. It then considers in detail whether (at least implicitly) Resolution 2165 has been adopted under Chapter VII and, if this is not the case, whether it can be still considered to be legally binding. The article finally considers what impact the adoption of Security Council Resolution 2165 might have on the interpretation of otherwise applicable rules of international humanitarian law and, in particular, the right of third parties to provide humanitarian assistance in a situation of a non-international armed conflict in spite of the absence of consent by the territorial state, and the obligations that members of the Security Council, permanent and non-permanent, have under Common Article 1 of the Geneva Conventions when faced with a draft resolution providing for the delivery of humanitarian assistance, notwithstanding the absence of consent by the territorial state.}, language = {en} }