The individual responsibility for serious international crimes such as the crime of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crime entails the collective nature which is embodied by a mechanism of State or other political or military organization. While it has been relied on an analogy of domestic criminal theory, it is undeniable that the individual responsibility for these crimes has special nature of “system criminality”, according to which illegal conducts are made not by independent persons, but by persons incorporated in the organizational mechanism. They work like a gear of a great machine and then commit a serious crime. The present analysis clarified the characteristics of such aspect of individual responsibility and suggested the new concept of “system responsibility” as a part of traditional theory of individual responsibility

The purpose of this project is to comprehensively analyse the Kampala Amendment of the International Criminal Cpurt(ICC) Statute on the Crime of Aggression. The issues which it has examined are: the definitions of act of aggression and crime of aggression; elements of crime of aggression; conditions of exercise of jurisdiction, scope of control by the UN Security Council; character and forms of individual criminal responsibility, cooperation between the ICC and States. In addition to these analysis on articles, the project considers the role and function of the ICC in the field of international security and its interrelationship with the UN Security Council.Furthermore, this study provides important guidelines to the Japanese Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Defense, when they consider the accession of Japan to the Amendment. The project could also show issues which should be discussed at the National Diet when it approves the Japanese accession

While the international criminal judiciaries and the reparation mechanisms are closely related with each other from the political point of view, it is hard to say that they constitute an integrated legal system. On the other hand, the International Criminal Court(ICC), which includes the reparation procedure in it, does not have any inconsistency as a system. However, since the main purpose of the ICC is to prosecute and try those who are criminally responsible for international crimes, it has the problem that the reparation provided by it is limited in scope

Last three years starting from 2005, this project has held plenary meeting twice a year and several research meeting. In this process, we have analyzed various problems existing in the implementation processes of institutions and rules protecting public interests of the international community and also considered how those problems have been dealt with from the viewpoints of how the measures to solve them are justified. In the final year of 2007, we held an international workshop on the Implementation of public interests of the international community, inviting Professor Karel Wellens of Nijmegen University, Dr Kern Alexander of Cambridge University, and Director Marie-Claire Cordonier Segger of the Centre for Sustainable Development in Canada as guest speakers. Professor Wellens and the Head Investigator have edited the all the papers submitted by the members of this project and guest speakers into a book consisting of 16 chapters entitled "Implementation of Rules Protecting Public Interests of the International Community: Towards Process-based Concepts of Effectiveness in International Law and submitted it to Cambridge University Press for publication

In the research project of this year, the legal framework and the dynamics of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Process of State-Reconstruction and Peace-Building were analyzed by using two models, namely "Clearance-Function Model" and "Construction-Function Model".In particular, following points were focused: in terms of "Clearance-Function Model", (1)Applicability of domestic law before the ICC ; (2)Significance of "general principles of domestic law" as one of applicable laws before the ICC ; (3)Status of victims in the judicial process of the ICC ; and (4)Compensation for the victims. In terms of "Construction-Function Model", (1)vulnerability of the ICC as a system for reconstructing domestic legal system and realizing the rule of law; (2)Relationship with the Truth and Reconciliation Commissions in the States in question ; and (3)Effect of amnesty and other domestic measures on the procedure of the ICC.Through this examination, this investigator came to the following conclusion: It is quite likely that some measures taken by the States concerned such as the establishment of Truth and Reconciliation Commissions and amnesty will be incompatible with the criminal justice to be realized by the ICC. In this regard, we need other mechanism for State-Reconstruction and Peace-Building in addition to the ICC. On the other hand, by introducing so-called "self-deferral" in the prosecutorial strategy, the ICC, particularly the Prosecutor, has attempted to take into account the domestic situations of the States concerned. However, this analysis also shows some problems that this attempt is facingwith

Our study group, with almost the same members, has begun this project since 2002. While we received this fund, especially in 2006, our project was not necessarily working better than we thought, mainly because core members had to be hospitalized due to their illness and partly because the discrepancy of each member's idea became more apparent in the phase of publishing the common achievement. We continued our discussion in the meetings and e-mails so that we have reached more plausible ideas for other academia and intellectuals.We had three intensive meetings this year. In one of the meetings above, we invited Prof. ENDO Seiji, Professor of Seikei University, to have a presentation on E. H. Carr. Prof. ENDO is one of the leading researchers on his thought. Our project is stimulated by E. H. Carr's thought which criticize utopianism with proper Utopian elements in the age of two World Wars. Most of our members are international lawyers and this session putting more emphasis on political and economic side provides useful perspectives to our project.Each member's paper based on our common concern was published as showed on the reverse side of this report. In addition, our study group are ready to publish "Law and Power in International Society" (tentative title), the most important fruit of this project. Our work concerns on fundamental issues such as the concept of "power", "law", "society", those of which are important but not investigated enough in international law study. We tacked with these problems with interdisciplinary perspectives.We have not been granted by this fund this year, but we are ready to publish the work based on this fund in the very near feature

In the research project of this year, implementing legislations in terms of the International Criminal Court(ICC) were examined from a comparative point of view. In particular, following points were focused : (1)role of domestic procedures and organs in executing an arrest warrant issued by the ICC ; (2)role of domestic courts in transferring accused to the ICC ; (3)domestic measures to seize the property of a person who was convicted by the ICC ; (4)applicability of domestic penal rules to the execution of sentences declared by the ICC.Through this examination, this investigator came to the following conclusion : In the state which has an ICC implementing legislation besides existing criminal laws, the implementing function of that legislation is generally so effective to succeed to link ICC Statute with domestic legal system. On the contrary, in the state which bases the implementation of ICC Statute on existing criminal laws and procedure, its purpose is not necessarily attained. In some states, relation between their national courts and the ICC is not considered as "vertical" one as in the case of the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda (ICTY and ICTR). Those states constitute domestic implementing system for the ICC just as quasi inter-state penal cooperation (an intermediate between "vertical" and "horizontal" systems). In this respect, effective implementation of the ICC system cannot be fully expected because it is dependent on the discretionary power of judiciary of the state concerned.As to the civil procedure concerning seizure of property for compensation to victims, the way of implementation varies from state to state. Remarkably, some states do not respond at all to the compensation for victims that is clearly incorporated in the ICC system

This three-year research project has been carried out, organizing intensive semi-annual seminars among members and occasional public symposiums, through the examination of works of so-called "realist" in international legal scholarship such as Julius Stone, Hans Morgenthau, Georg Schwarzenberger, Charles de Visscher, and Prosper Weil.During the first two-year period (2002 to 2003), we have examined possibilities of realism in international legal scholarship, reading all the major works of Stone, Schwarzenberger, and Weil. An important finding is the existence of an internal relationship between realism and legal positivism, elucidated through an investigation of their prima facie contradictory combination, as is the case with Schwarzenberger.In the last year (2004), we set to the completion and publication of the results of the project, with an emphasis on the theoretical implication of the relationship between law and power in international society. The main results are to be published in the forthcoming year as a book temporarily titled, Law and Power in International Society

This research analyzed the implementing process of international norms by examining in detail the drafting process of various international criminal tribunals like ICTY, ICTR and ICC and the decisions and judgment thereof.In 2001, close examinations into the establishing process of the ICTY, ICTR and ICC have revealed that a new direct way of implementation of international norms is emerging and it has a completely different character from the traditional one which has been basically relied on the domestic legal systems of States. The research has also demonstrated that the above-mentioned special character of implementing process introduces two roles of implementing legislation of a State: Firstly a role to give effect to international norms in its domestic legal system, and secondly a role to accommodate its domestic law with international norms in order not to be in conflict with each other.In 2002, by examining the Special Court of Sierra Leone, Special Court of East Timor and ICTY/ICTR, leading principles for determining the distribution of cases between international courts and national courts were clarified. In spite of their international nature in common, each court has its own historical, political and social background. The research has demonstrated that according to the expected roles of each court vis-a-vis the States concerned, it adopts different principles for determining whether a case should be dealt with by itself or by a national court. The research also has clarified that the determination of distribution has actually been made at several levels of the whole process from investigation to trial, to which researches so far made have failed to pay attention

There is no doubt that the global environmental protection is the most important agenda in international society. Since 1972 Stockholm Human Environment Conference, it is recognized the lack of law on international environmental protection and has rapidly made treaties for the purpose of environmental protection. As a result, there are a lot of treaties of environmental protection. But these environmental treaties, general principle and so on are not quite implemented adequately. For example, some treaties do not work after all and become sleeping treaties. Since 1992 Earth Summit, it has rapidly address implementation of international environmental law, that is compliance of international environmental law. Then, the purpose of our project for three years is examination of multilateral environmental agreements whether is properly implemented in the international level and domestic level through the analysis(study) of main agreements. And also we try to theoretically and practically consider about state responsibility, international compensation, civil liability and free trade. Ultimately we seek to analyze the substance of compliance on international environmental law.On first year our project addressed compliance for setting the framework of conceptual analysis. First, we tried to identify the nature of obligation to comply with international environmental law from the point of view of hard law and soft law. Then, we deliberated policy instruments and economic instruments enhancing compliance on each dimensions and also compliance on the domestic level. On second year we especially addressed Asia-Pacific region because there are some arguments which level is effective in working on compliance with environmental law on the international (global), regional(EU, north America, south America and Asia-Pacific) and national level.As a result, we found that it is better to attempt the settlement of certain environmental problem on regional level firstly, not on global level. On last year we addressed Environment and Trade because after the study of 1999 and 2000 it emerged the need to resolve the interference with environmental protection and free trade enhancing effective compliance with environmental law. As a result, it is pointed out some problem that free trade institutions, for example WTO, are not necessarily positive with environmental protection

From the analysis on the relation between the International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Court on one hand, and national jurisdiction on the other, the following points become clear.1. The Tribunal, which is given primacy over national jurisdiction under its Statute, has elaborated its supremacy through subsequent judgments and decisions. The Tribunal, for example, found in Blaskic case that its order had a direct effect on individuals in the territory of states without national implementing jurisdiction, and it can take forcible measures (such as on-site investigation) in the territory, when the national legislation impedes its effective conduct of investigation and trial.2. On the contrary, each state made an implementing legislation in the framework of international legal cooperation in a traditional sense. Many states inserted into their legislations the same principles as in extradition procedure. For example, there are many stipulations in the legislations that allow a judicial organ of a state to determines whether the Tribunal really has jurisdiction on the accused whom thc state is requested to surrender, or whether there is probable cause to believe that the accused really committed the alleged crimes. In this respect, Tribunal's primacy is reduced implicitly by the national legislations.3. The International Criminal Court adopts the principle of complementarity, which may imply the primacy of national jurisdiction over the Court. Nevertheless, the examination of its legislative history makes it clear that under the Rome Statute, the Court is given a power to determine whether prosecution or trial by national authorities is really effective, and due to this power, it serves as an extra appellate judicial body to review the performance of national prosecutors and judges.On the basis of the researches above, I will next attempt to analyze practical function of the Court by examining in detail implementing legislations which will be made in the near future in order to ratify the Rome Statute of the Court

　本研究は、イラク・クウェート「国連補償委員会」（United Nations Compensation Commission, 1991年）、ボスニア・ヘルツェゴビナ「避難民および難民の不動産請求権に関する委員会」（Commission for Real Property Claims of Displaced Persons and Refugees, 1996年）、コソボ「家屋および財産に関する請求権委員会」（Housing and Property Claims Commission, 1999年）、「エリトリア・エチオピア請求権委員会」（Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission, 2000年）、「イラク財産請求権委員会」（Iraq Property Claims Commission, 2004年）、「スーダン・ダルフール補償委員会」（Compensation Commission, 2005年）など、冷戦後に設置された補償委員会・請求権委員会に関して、一時期に大量の個人請求が提起される可能性に対応して、どのように迅速かつ実効的な処理を行うメカニズムを備えているのかという観点から、比較研究を行った。　具体的には、（１）個人請求の関係国家による取りまとめ（consolidated claims）の制度的な問題、（２）関係国家による取りまとめを望まない個人による請求の処理制度、（３）国家に対して支払われた賠償金の個人への迅速かつ公正な配分のあり方について、個々の委員会の手続が持つ特徴と問題を分析した。そのうえで、本研究の成果として、“Model Statute of Ad Hoc International Compensation Commission”の草案を作成するとともに、、これに対して詳細なコメンタリーを付ける作業を行った。　なお、このModel Statuteとコメンタリーは、2008年８月にブラジル・リオデジャネイロで開催される2008年International Law Association大会において報告される予定である。

　本研究は、イラク・クウェート「国連補償委員会」（United Nations Compensation Commission, 1991年）、ボスニア・ヘルツェゴビナ「避難民および難民の不動産請求権に関する委員会」（Commission for Real Property Claims of Displaced Persons and Refugees, 1996年）、コソボ「家屋および財産に関する請求権委員会」（Housing and Property Claims Commission, 1999年）、「エリトリア・エチオピア請求権委員会」（Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission, 2000年）、「イラク財産請求権委員会」（Iraq Property Claims Commission, 2004年）、「スーダン・ダルフール補償委員会」（Compensation Commission, 2005年）など、冷戦後に設置された補償委員会・請求権委員会に関する比較分析を行い、各々の手続的特徴と問題点を検討した。　具体的には、１）請求の法的基盤にある個人請求権の位置づけ、２）個人による直接的な請求提起と関係国家による一括提起のあり方、３）大量請求に対応するための処理システムのあり方、４）補償金の配分方法といった点に関して、各委員会の規程（設立文書）や手続規則の分析を行うとともに、それに至った審議過程について検討した。その際に、国連による国家再建・平和構築活動（PKO活動など）や国内法整備支援活動などとの関連性を念頭に、地域・社会における国際的なプレゼンスの特徴と補償のための国際手続の構造・動態との関係についても考察した。　研究成果の一部は、国際法協会（ILA）2006年世界大会（カナダ・トロント）における「戦争犠牲者の補償に関する委員会」において報告され、その研究内容の独創性と実務的な重要性が多くの出席者より評価された。

研究課題に関して、①国際刑事裁判所（ICC）に対応した犯罪人引渡・捜査共助に関する各国の国内実施立法の内容、②混合刑事裁判所における国内法の機能、の二点について研究を行った。　①に関しては、イギリス、オランダ、ドイツなど新たにICC協力法を制定して対応している国と、カナダのように既存の犯罪人引渡法、刑事共助法を改正して対応している国がある。しかし、いずれにおいても、具体的なICCからの容疑者引渡請求や証拠等の提出請求に対しては、個々の国家の伝統的な国内手続を準用する傾向が見られる。このため、ICCからの協力要請に対し、これを拒絶する規定を持つ場合がある（たとえば、カナダ法では双罰性の原則などが維持されている）。また、検察官による関係国家領域内での直接的な捜査行動（ICC規程99条４項）など、国家間の司法共助では見られない手続に関しては、これを担保する国内法規を持たない国が多い。こうした点を踏まえて、今後は日本における国内法の対応に関して検討を行う予定である。　②に関しては、シエラレオネ特別裁判所、コソボ・パネル、東ティモール・パネル、カンボジア特別裁判部の検討を行った。とりわけ、シエラレオネとカンボジアにおいては国内法が裁判実施に重要な役割を果たしているが、前者が裁判所を設置した国連・シエラレオネ間の協定の技術的な国内実施立法としての性格を持つのに対して、後者においてはカンボジア国内法が裁判部設置の直接的根拠となっており、その運営に関しても国内法が主導的な役割を果たすことを解明した。混合刑事裁判においては、協定と国内法との関係が、その「国際的」ないし「国内的」性格のバリエーションを判断する上での重要な基準となることが明らかになった。継続して今後は、こうした角度から、種々の混合刑事裁判の類型化を試みる予定である。