Crime of Aggression in International Criminal Law / Agresija u međunarodnom krivičnom pravu

Abstract

Ever since the term “aggression” appeared as a legal term, for several decades there has been an academic fight where scientists, attempting to decipher its real meaning and purpose, have been exchanging different views and arguments. On the other hand, problems in defining aggression arise from the fact that there has been a number of different approaches to this term, taken by various states, so that, in defining aggression, some states have seen a sign of salvation against anyone’s interference with their internal problems, whereas other states have seen it as a limiting factor for realising their pretensions. Yet, even in these circumstances, progress has been inevitable. Taking a path being difficult and hard but successful, the term „aggression“ has evolved from an ordinary clause prohibiting aggression through the international crime up to the clear system of individual guilt before the International Criminal Tribunal.
In this regard, the important steps have been made, including the Treaty of Versailles, the Kellogg–Briand Pact, the Nuremberg and Tokyo Trials, the Charter of the United Nations, United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3314, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and, finally, the Kampala Review Conference. Is the step taken in Kampala the last one? Though the solution reached in Kampala may have hitherto been the greatest victory in defining aggression, it also has a flaw: its applicability is of a conditional nature.