| Most scholars agree that the international community must respond with a uniform approach against genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. This consensus which is the pillar behind the establishment of an international criminal jurisdiction has always been bedeviled by the quest of states to exercise primacy over their criminal jurisdiction. Complementarity as the basis of the ICC's jurisdiction is a response to this tension. Complementarity implies that states continue to maintain their primacy over their criminal jurisdiction, while the ICC maintains a secondary jurisdiction which will be activated by the failure of states to exercise their primary jurisdiction. Complementarity was a key in garnering state support for the establishment of an ICC, and remains a major factor in the success or failure of the court. The regime of complementarity adopted in Rome gives the ICC the power to determine its jurisdiction in all cases and rules out compulsory deferral to a state where the case arose from a Security Council referral. This would align the statute with the U.N. Charter, promote the objective of international criminal justice and strengthen the court. |
