Browsing by Author "King, Andrew"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2

Restricted
Davies v Police and Criminal Reparations - Conceptualising the Accident Compensation Scheem
(Te Herenga Waka—Victoria University of Wellington, 2010) King, Andrew
The Supreme Court majority in Davies v Police relied upon an unrealistic conception of the accident compensation system in denying the availability of criminal reparations to supplement the compensation provided through it. The primary aim of this paper is the exposition of an alternative theoretical structure of the accident compensation scheme, allowing engagement with and development of accident compensation law in a manner far more in accordance with reality than the conceptualisation employed by the Davies majority. In accordance with the historical development of the scheme, ‘no-fault can be seen as simply a default mechanism of providing compensation in accordance with the principles of the Report of the Royal Commission of Inquiry. Competing imperatives promote the creation of exceptions to no-fault compensation, clear examples of which can be identified. This conception allows reconsideration of the appropriateness of allowing supplementary criminal reparations, taking into account the imperative underlying imperative of any prospective exception and its relationship with currently existing exceptions.
Restricted
The Security Council 'Situation': Challenging the Independence of the International Criminal Court
(Te Herenga Waka—Victoria University of Wellington, 2011) King, Andrew
The International Criminal Court, being a tribunal for adjudicating upon the "most serious crimes of concern to the international community" is intended to operate independently, the concept of a 'situation' in art 13 of the Rome Statute allowing the Prosecutor of the Court to determine where to investigate and prosecute free of political pressures. However, the United Nations Security Council, having a definite interest in the administration of international criminal justice and a role in triggering the operation of the ICC, may attempt to define the bounds of a situation through a referral resolution. The effectiveness of this purported limitation on the Court's capacity is difficult to ascertain given that the nature of the ICC's jurisdiction and the corresponding degree of independence that it is to assert when operating pursuant to the Security Council triggering mechanism are ambiguous and contestable. The author seeks to consider how the term 'situation' may be interpreted under the various understandings of the Court which exist. Further, some suggestion is made as to how the ICC may be conceptualised as an institution so as to ensure that it maintains a degree of independence and institutional legitimacy, despite undertaking prosecutions pursuant to a politicised Security Council referral.