Corporate Liability for International Crimes under Canada's Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act

摘要

Given that the Rome Statute does not provide jurisdiction to try corporations for breaches of international criminal law, it has been suggested that national jurisdictions might be used to fill this impunity gap. The author presents several arguments. First, the international criminal law system, including the Rome Statute — and particularly the principles of universal jurisdiction and complementarity — provides the theoretical grounding for states to assert jurisdiction over international crimes wider than the International Criminal Court (ICC). Second, Canada, owing to interactions between its domestic legislation implementing the ICC Statute and existing national criminal law, is now able to prosecute corporations for breaches of international criminal law. Finally, this increased jurisdiction of Canadian courts is consistent with the current status of corporations under international criminal law. What is really interesting about Canada's approach, however, is not so much that it has created a new legal principle, but rather that it is one of the first countries to establish jurisdiction over international crimes committed by corporate entities which were previously committed with impunity. By stating that I could not guarantee that the army is not using forced labour, I certainly imply that they might, (and they might) but I am saying that we do not have to monitor the army's behaviour: we have our responsibilities; they have their responsibilities; and we refuse to be pushed in to assuming more than what we can really guarantee. About forced labour used by troops assigned to provide security on our pipeline project, let us admit between Unocal and Total that we might be in a grey zone.1