Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law

International criminal law has developed to differing extents in the various countries of the world on account of national-historical and political events. In this process, there is a close, actio-reactio connection between these events, the influence of individuals in a particular country, and the evolution of that country’s international criminal law. This is especially apparent in the example of Romania – documented throughout history on the one hand by the works of the international law expert Vespasian V. Pella and by the trials of Marshall Antonescu and of Elena and Nicolae Ceauşescu on the other. Against this backdrop, the topic of this project is the issue of how international criminal law and the problem of national prosecution of international crimes, in particular, was handled in Romania in the past and how it is being handled today. The issue is studied from a legal-historical, comparative, and international criminal legal perspective.

The primary goal of this project is a legal-historical study of whether and when Romania contributed to the evolution of international criminal law. In addition, the question is addressed as to the extent to which Romania has complied with its international obligations by using its national penal powers effectively to cover international crimes or whether deficits exist.

Starting with a historical analysis as a research method, this study uses the method of functional comparative criminal law to compare existing Romanian legislation with the Rome Statute. In this process, those norms and systems designed for the prosecution of international crimes are compared with each other.

The study shows that Romania played a significant role in the emergence and evolution of international criminal law. This is especially clear from the ideas and works of the Romanian international law expert Vespasian V. Pella who, as early as 1928, presented the Community of Nations a draft of a statute for the establishment of a permanent international criminal senate, within the then-existing Permanent International Court of Justice, for prosecuting international crimes. During the communist era, the Romanian criminal code already contained crimes against peace and humanity in the form of provisions criminalizing war propaganda, genocide, inhumane treatment, destruction of certain property and acquisition of certain goods, as well as the destruction, plundering, and acquisition of cultural goods. This international criminal law-friendly line of the criminal code was misused, however, by the communist rulers for their own purposes and, consequently, was not applied in conformity with international criminal law. This is apparent in the trial of Elena and Nicolae Ceauşescu, both of whom were charged with genocide, where no legal discussion whatsoever took place regarding the international crime of genocide. The results of this study show, however, that the application of existing Romanian criminal law is a viable method today for guaranteeing prosecution of international crimes. Indeed, some provisions of the criminal code – such as the provision criminalizing "war propaganda" – provide even more protection than the Rome Statute. Deficits, however, were found in the area of the core crimes, and major deficits were found in the provision criminalizing "war crimes."

This project was a doctoral dissertation supervised by Prof. Dr. Jörg Arnold, Humboldt-University, Berlin.