The proposal for an International Court against terrorism: legal and political challenges

Abstract

Abstract: The proposal put forward by Spain and Romania for the creation of an International Court Against Terrorism is a traditional legal response to one of the most serious threats of our time. From the beginning of the 20th century, several projects have considered the possibility of including the crime of terrorism in an international jurisdiction with general scope, either as an exclusive competence or as a part of a wider list of crimes. However, certain legal and political obstacles have blocked the developments in this field. This article analyses the main elements and problems of this new proposal in order to determine its viability to evolve from lege ferenda to lege data. The debate revolves around the definition and nature of the crime of terrorism, as well as the relationship with other tribunals, the legal foundation and the well-known political impasse about state terrorism and national liberation movements. The study of these elements shows the aim to reach a consensus at the expense of effectiveness. Nevertheless, this goal is hindered by certain aspects, both internal and external to this proposal, raising serious doubts over the success of this project. Regardless of the outcome, this initiative is a response based on the rule of law against a threat that is disrupting certain basic principles for the pacific coexistence of the international community and, as such, it deserves thorough consideration.

Keywords

• terrorismo
• derecho internacional penal
• legitimidad
• eficacia
• intereses políticos
• terrorism
• international criminal law
• legitimacy
• effectiveness
• political interests