49 Vand. J. Transnat'l L. 443 (2016)
The ICC, Pre-Existing Jurisdictional Treaty Regimes, and the limits of the Nemo Dat Quod Non Habet Doctrine - A Reply to Michael Newton

handle is hein.journals/vantl49 and id is 459 raw text is: 




Response: The ICC, Pre-Existing

Jurisdictional              Treaty         Regimes,

and the Limits of the Nemo Dat

Quod         Non        Habet Doctrine-A

Reply to Michael Newton


                       Carsten Stahn*


                    TABLE OF CONTENTS

   I.   INTRODU CTION ..............................................................  443
        A.   Universalist v. Delegation-Based
             Foundations of ICC Jurisdiction ........................  446
        B.   Limits of the Nemo Dat Quo Non
             H abet  D octrine  ....................................................  448
             1.    Limits of the Symmetry
                   Requirem ent ...........................................  448
             2.    The Distinction Between
                   Prescriptive Jurisdiction and
                   Enforcement Jurisdiction  ......................  450
        C.   Situational Differences .......................................  452


                      I. INTRODUCTION

    It is a pleasure and a privilege to provide a few reflections on
Michael Newton's thought-provoking essay on How       the ICC
Threatens Treaty Norms. His article marks an important piece of
scholarship. It reflects significant concerns about the reach and
function of the International Criminal Court (ICC) that merit further
attention and explanation in ICC  practice. Newton makes a
provocative argument. He argues that the ICC might undermine
sovereign law enforcement efforts and exceed its powers if it exercises
jurisdiction over American forces in Afghanistan or Israeli offenses in
the West Bank or the Gaza Strip. This argument is not entirely new.
It is part of a broader strand of critique that has been voiced against


   * Professor of International Criminal Law and Global Justice, Leiden University. I
wish to thank Dr. Rod Rastan and Joseph Powderly for their valuable insights and
comments on this essay.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing nearly 2,700 academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline with pricing starting as low as $29.95

Access to this content requires a subscription. Please visit the following page to request a quote or trial:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?