The lack of available capacity of the domestic legal systems, under the principle of complementarity
When pass the test of complementarity, the notions of lack of willingness and of capacity are erecting as decisive for the admissibility of a situation and a case of which is derived, before the International Criminal Court. Of course, determining the reach of such expressions is largely normative and, for its realization, the Rome’ Statute of the International Criminal Court provides a range edges whose meaning, by the hand of the doctrine and jurisprudence, seeks to elucidate.
The Principle of Complementarity in the Cases of the Sudanese Nationals Ahmad Harun and Ali Kushayb before the International Criminal Court
In April 2007, the Pre-Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued its first arrest warrants with regard to the situation in Darfur. Addressees of these measures are the Minister for Humanitarian Affairs and former Minister for the Interior Ahmad Harun and the alleged Janjaweed leader Ali Kushayb , who both at the time of writing have not yet been surrendered to the ICC. On the contrary: Sudan consistently invokes its national sovereignty and its ability to prosecute its nationals itself. However, with regard to Harun and Kushayb , there is reason to hold strong doubts as to Sudan's ability and willingness to seriously prosecute them. Therefore, this article assesses the admissibility of these two cases before the ICC, focusing on the principle of complementarity. For this the article starts with an overview of those aspects of the principle of complementarity which are relevant for the situation in Darfur. A thorough analysis of the status of the Sudanese judicial system both before and after the adoption of the Interim National Constitution of Sudan in 2005 follows, before, finally, the application of the principle of complementarity to the two cases is assessed against the results found.
The Area of Freedom, Security and Justice ten years on: Successes and future challenges under the Stockholm Programme. CEPS Paperbacks. June 2010
This book celebrates the tenth anniversary of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ) by bringing together the views of key practitioners and policy-makers who have played an outstanding role in thinking about and shaping EU policies on freedom, security and justice. 
 
Ten years ago, the member states transferred competences to the EU for law and policy-making in the fields of immigration, asylum and border controls, and began the transfer process for criminal justice and policing. This decade of European cooperation on AFSJ policies has experienced very dynamic convergence, the enactment of a large body of European law and the setting-up of numerous EU agencies working in these domains. Such dynamism in policy-making has not been without challenges and vulnerabilities, however. As this collective volume shows, the main dilemmas that lie ahead relate to an effective (while more plural) institutional framework under the Treaty of Lisbon, stronger judicial scrutiny through a greater role for national courts and the Court of Justice in Luxembourg, better mechanisms for evaluating and monitoring the implementation of EU AFSJ law and a more solid fundamental rights strategy. The contributions in this volume address the progress achieved so far in these policy areas, identify the challenges for future European cooperation in the AFSJ and put forward possible paths for making more progress in the next generation of the EU’s AFSJ.