Under Scrutiny: the United Kingdom Moves towards a Significant Reform of Its Approach to Universal Jurisdiction
Over recent months, various organisations have worked to engage British parliamentarians in the reforms deemed necessary to ensure that the United Kingdom can play a more proactive role in the fight against international crimes. In particular, attention has focused on the proposal to amend the International Criminal Court Act (ICCA) 2001, introduced in the UK House of Commons by the International Development Committee. The proposed reform would allow the authorities of England, Wales and Northern Ireland to exercise universal jurisdiction over genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity, regardless of the nationality, residence status or location of the alleged perpetrator.
At present, universal jurisdiction is only provided for under the Ginebra Conventions Act 1957 and, in relation to the crime of torture, under section 134 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. When the United Kingdom incorporated the Rome Statute into its domestic legal framework through the International Criminal Court Act (ICCA) 2001, it limited jurisdiction to active extraterritorial jurisdiction based on nationality, without allowing for the exercise of universal jurisdiction. As a result, UK courts may prosecute breaches of the Geneva Conventions or acts of torture committed anywhere in the world, but they cannot do so in relation to crimes defined under the Rome Statute—namely genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes (sections 51 and 58 of the ICCA 2001)—unless British nationals or residents are involved, or the accused is subject to UK service jurisdiction.
This means that the UK judicial system currently adopts a highly restrictive approach to serious international crimes. The proposed reform therefore seeks to address the existing shortcomings in the application of the principle of universal jurisdiction and to enable the country to play an active role in international efforts to ensure justice and accountability for international crimes.
From within the third sector, this initiative is being led by the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI), in collaboration with REDRESS, Amnesty International and Legal Action Worldwide, and is expected to be advanced within the framework of the current Crime and Policing Bill. Reports submitted by these organisations highlight that the Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) has previously criticised the existing legal framework for creating “obstacles to accountability” and outline the negative consequences that may arise should the law remain unreformed. In line with this, on 16 October, the Director of IBAHRI, Baroness Helena Kennedy LT KC, addressed the issue in the House of Lords during the second reading of the Bill.
In the words of the IBAHRI Director, the Bill “represents a unique opportunity to remedy long-standing accountability gaps within the United Kingdom’s universal jurisdiction laws and will ensure […] that perpetrators of the world’s most serious crimes can be brought to justice on British soil. At a time when the incidence of grave crimes is increasing globally, this reform is indispensable.”
Ultimately, the proposed reform seeks not only to update the UK legal framework, but also to reaffirm the United Kingdom’s commitment to international justice in a global context marked by the rise of atrocity crimes and persistent impunity. It would help ensure that the UK does not become a safe haven for individuals accused of international crimes. Expanding the scope of universal jurisdiction would allow the country to align itself with the highest human rights standards and to contribute effectively and responsibly to international efforts to ensure that no perpetrator of serious crimes finds refuge. This reform therefore represents a historic opportunity to place the United Kingdom firmly on the side of justice, memory and accountability.
Federica Carnevale, Junior Project Manager at FIBGAR
