CONSELHO DE SEGURANÇA E O TRIBUNAL PENAL INTERNACIONAL À LUZ DO CASO OMAR AL-BASHIR: COOPERAÇÃO OU CONFLITO?

Abstract

The UN's Security Council (UNSC) and the International Criminal Court (ICC) are both institutions that at first glance seem to act in multiple fields: politics and law. Adopting as basis the case of Omar Al-Bashir, Sudan’s ex-president, that took root on the first remittance of a situation by means of the UNSC to the ICC, it will be analyzed the relationships between the mentioned institutions in order to point out the inevitable interlacing between them both. The case stemmed intense repercussions inside the international community, since it was the first instance of an acting Head of State to have an arrest warrant issued by the ICC, even though Sudan was not a State Party to the Rome Statute. By virtue of this, it has been made a case study of the Rome Statute in pursuit of identifying the intersections between the two parts in the normative instruments and as natural procedure, issues related to the case were faced, such as the immunity of Heads of State and Government, and the duty of aid of the States to the Court, as well as observations about the supposed selectiveness done by the International Criminal Court towards to the african continent. It is thus established that the case’s circumstances surpassed the boundaries of legality, itself becoming a narrative struggle and the rulings attributed to the UNSC by the Rome Statute have been displaying themselves in a detrimental way to their own functioning and the ICC’s legitimacy.