Abstract:
This paper examines the crime of aggression as agreed upon by State parties at the
Kampala Review Conference in 2010. It highlights the uncertainties and deficiencies
within the crime’s definition. These include the failure of Article 8bis to address terrorist
attacks by non-state actors and cyber-attacks. Further, it is argued that Article 8bis does
not comply with the principle of legality. The Kampala definition is inherently ambiguous
in respect of self-defence and humanitarian intervention. This paper focuses particularly
on the relationship between the crime of aggression and humanitarian intervention, and
concludes that there ought to be expression exclusion for unilateral humanitarian
intervention in Article 8bis.
