Profile of Invited Expert “Sadat”
- Full Name
- Leila Nadya Sadat, J.D., L.L.M, D.E.A., Ph.D. (hon.)
- James Carr Professor of International Criminal Law
- Washington University School of Law
Leila Nadya Sadat is the James Carr Professor of International Criminal Law and Director of the Whitney R. Harris World Law Institute. She currently serves as Special Adviser on Crimes Against Humanity to the International Criminal Court Prosecutor. Professor Sadat is an internationally recognized and prolific scholar writing and teaching in the fields of public international law, international criminal law, human rights and foreign affairs, and has published more than 100 books and articles in leading journals, academic presses, and media outlets throughout the world. She recently received an Honorary Doctorate from Northwestern University and the Arthur Holly Compton Distinguished Faculty award from Washington University. She held the Alexis de Tocqueville Distinguished Fulbright Chair in Paris, France in Spring 2011, and is the Director of the Crimes Against Humanity Initiative, a ground-breaking project that produced the world’s first global treaty on crimes against humanity. She is incoming President of the International Law Association (American Branch) and a member of the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations.
- Selected Citations to Published Materials
- Leila Nadya Sadat, Ed., Seeking Accountability for the Unlawful Use of Force (Cambridge U. Press, 2018).
- Leila Nadya Sadat, Ed., Forging a Convention for Crimes Against Humanity (Cambridge U. Press, 2011).
- Leila Nadya Sadat, Putting Peacetime First: Crimes Against Humanity and the Civilian Population Requirement, 31 Emory Int’l L. Rev. 197 (2017), available online.
- Leila Nadya Sadat & Jarrod M. Jolly, Seven Canons of ICC Treaty Interpretation: Making Sense of Article 25’s Rorschach Blot, 27 Leiden J. Int’l L. 755 (2014), available online.
- Leila Nadya Sadat, Crimes Against Humanity in the Modern Age, 107 Am. J. Int’l L. 334 (2013), available online.
- Member for
- 5 years 15 weeks
- jordynyian: I. Introduction Universal criminal jurisdiction allows any nation to prosecute serious international crimes. Although universal criminal jurisdiction exists under the current state of international criminal law, its decentralized nature has proven to be a weakness. This current lack of international cooperation can be resolved through the development of transgovernmental networks. However, implementation of successful transgovernmental networks is... (more)
- Alexandra Speed: Regional Organizations as Partners in Complementarity: An Exploration of the AU, ASEAN, & Arab League of States’ Roles in Implementing Complementarity I. Introduction Regional organizations like the African Union, Association of Southeast Asian Nations, and the Arab League of States have the opportunity to assist the international community by implementing the principle of complementarity. Although, there... (more)
- Regina Campbell: How TikTok Can Save the World—Regional Organizations’ Role in Joining Social Movements to Ensure Compliance With International Law In this comment, I argue that the role of regional organizations in Africa can aid in implementing the principle of complementarity by aligning themselves with social movements that create a culture of domestic prosecution and pressure States to exercise jurisdiction over mass atrocities. In Part I, I define complementarity... (more)
- Zishan Yu: Promotion of Universal Jurisdiction: With Experts One-to-One Introduction This comment discusses how to promote universal jurisdiction. By arguing for the importance of universal jurisdiction and comparing different situations faced by countries, this comment discusses problems we face when introducing universal jurisdiction to the world. In China, for example, an important principle in criminal law is “No crime without law making it so; no... (more)
- mahak jain: The comment attempts to reimagine the frameworks of the principle of complementarity under the Rome Statute in correlation with the sub-Saharan African context. The comment advances the debate over the role of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the African Court of Justice and Human Rights (ACJHR) with the incoming of the amendments to the Protocol on the Statute of the ACJHR titled as the Malabo Protocol.1 I aim to shed... (more)
- SydneyRobles: I. Introduction International law increasingly recognizes that States have a moral and legal duty to hold perpetrators of grave international crimes accountable.1 To fulfill this duty, a number of States have adopted universal jurisdiction laws empowering national courts to assert jurisdiction over select crimes based solely on their heinous nature, without any connection to the State.2 This Comment conducts a comparative analysis of German,... (more)
- hglembo: Using Development Banks to Implement Complementarity I. Introduction The principle of complementarity, specifically positive complementarity focuses on providing collaborative assistance from the International Criminal Court (ICC). While a core goal of the Rome Statute is for the ICC to work complementary to national criminal jurisdictions, this is not always successfully implemented.... (more)
- jordynyian: I. Introduction Under the principle of complementarity, the International Criminal Court (ICC or the Court) is intended to function solely as a court of last resort when courts of the national jurisdiction where crimes occurred are unable to genuinely investigate and prosecute these crimes. As part of their genuine efforts, national jurisdictions must also sufficiently address victims’ rights. However, under the current state of... (more)
- Dalia: I. Introduction The principle of universal jurisdiction provides for a state’s jurisdiction over crimes against international law even when the crime did not occur on that state’s territory, and neither the victim nor perpetrator is a national of that state (thus ruling out the exercise of jurisdiction through the principles of nationality, passive personality, and territoriality).1 This, thus, allows national courts in third countries... (more)
- aalmaguer: How Regional Organizations Can Support Complementarity: The Asian Development Bank and Judicial Reform Introduction The principle of complementarity requires institutional capacity at the national level to prosecute the crimes set forth by Article 5 of the Rome Statute (Article 5 Crimes). The International Criminal Court (ICC) was designed to be a court of last resort, not the only court. Of... (more)
- Dalia: I. Introduction The principle of complementarity aims at granting jurisdiction to a subsidiary body when the main body fails to exercise its primacy jurisdiction.1 In the case of the International Criminal Court (ICC), this would mean interfering only when the national jurisdiction was unwilling or unable to prosecute pursuant to Article 17 of the Rome Statute.2 One of the major issues that the... (more)
- arvind2024: Universal Jurisdiction and Horizontal Complementarity I. The Problem with Universal Jurisdiction As the prompt for this question notes, states are becoming increasingly comfortable trying cases under universal jurisdiction. Yet, universal jurisdiction remains a frequently debated issue because its exercise involves infringing traditional state sovereignty.1 When a state invokes universal jurisdiction, it may exercise jurisdiction... (more)
- Regina Campbell: Victim Over Verdict—How Exercising Universal Jurisdiction Means Promoting the Interests of Victims of International Atrocities In this comment, I argue that in order to exercising universal jurisdiction, the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) should prioritize the interests and desires of the victims of international atrocities. In Part I, I explain why the OTP should... (more)
- SydneyRobles: I. Introduction The principle of complementarity is a cornerstone of the Rome Statute and the International Criminal Court (ICC). Under this design, the ICC will only intervene in “exceptional” circumstances where states fail to investigate and prosecute international crimes.1 Since its inception, the ICC has opened investigations in nine African States.2 A number of... (more)
- DevinYaeger: How Can the International Criminal Court Help National Courts Implement Universal Jurisdiction: Potential Applications and Pitfalls Arising from the Article 93 Cooperation I. Introduction In recent years, there has been renewed interest in countries exercising universal jurisdiction, i.e., the prosecution of foreign nationals for serious crimes unrelated to the prosecuting nation other than their offensiveness or threat to... (more)
- james2024: Regional Complementarity: Mutually Beneficial Collaboration between Regional Courts and the ICC I. Introduction The International Criminal Court (ICC) is a unique forum for international justice, as the only international court charged with prosecuting individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression.1 Despite its unique place in international justice, the Court has long faced... (more)
- Zishan Yu: A Win-Win Situation: Cooperation Between the International Criminal Court and Regional Organizations I. Introduction This comment addresses the challenges that the International Criminal Court (ICC) faces in today’s rapidly changing world. Some people are disappointed that only a few perpetrators have been tried by the ICC, and that the vast majority have so far escaped consequences for their crimes. Some countries... (more)
- mahak jain: The success of the International Criminal Court (ICC) revolves around its jurisdictional structure and the complementarity component of its legal system and it may very well be quantifiable by how few situations the Court will have to prosecute.1 This is not because of the quixotic belief that the ICC can serve as a better court of law and custodian of world peace and justice, but because of its default... (more)
- hglembo: ICC as a Partner for States Trying Universal Jurisdiction Cases I. Introduction As a greater number of states try universal jurisdiction-based cases, it is apparent that the International Criminal Court (ICC) should make itself a better partner for these states. Universal jurisdiction allows states to try crimes, similar to those outlined in the Rome Statute,1 no matter where the crime occurred or... (more)
- Alexandra Speed: Universal Jurisdiction’s Universal Issues: Solutions for the States by the ICC I. Introduction Universal jurisdiction is an element of international law that is frequently exercised by many countries across the world. It is most generally exercised by states that have an interest in seeing perpetrators of international crimes brought to justice. It has recently been exercised by Germany prosecuting Syrian officials and... (more)
- aalmaguer: Helping States Pursue Investigations Under Universal Jurisdiction: Proposed Role for the International Criminal Court and Interpol Introduction At a fundamental level, a state needs three things to pursue a criminal investigation through universal jurisdiction: existing national laws or legislation authorizing the exercise of universal jurisdiction over the specific crime, political will to apply those laws and pursue... (more)
- arvind2024: Doing Away with the ICC’s Unitary Structure The principle of complementarity is a “cornerstone” of the Rome Statute.1 It is more than a jurisdictional rule on concurrent claims by domestic courts and the International Criminal Court (ICC) as articulated in Article 17: it “has begun to shape the normative structure of peace-making.”2 In its 2006 Report on Strategy, the Office... (more)
- james2024: Expanding the Landscape of International Justice: Obstacles to Universal Jurisdiction and the Potential Role of the ICC I. Introduction Since its inception in 1998, the International Criminal Court (ICC) has aimed to bring justice to the gravest international crimes in the world. The Court is the first and only permanent international criminal court with the jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute individuals for genocide... (more)