Abstract
After the issuance of the two arrest warrants against the sitting president of Sudan, Al Bashir, for alleged war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide, issues arise of the obligation upon states parties to cooperate with the ICC. The ICC rendered several decisions on the non-compliance issues. In recent, the ICC delivered a decision on South Africa’s refusal to arrest and surrender him to The Hague. The Chamber heavily relied on Resolution 1593 to reach its conclusion that Sudan is in a status of a state party to the Rome Statute in the Darfur situation. The same composed Chamber shared the same viewpoint in a subsequent decision on Jordan’s refusal to cooperate. This note critically discusses the effect of Resolution 1593(2005) in three respects: firstly, it briefly summaries different approaches adopted in the ICC about non-compliance issues; secondly, it evaluates the effect of Resolution 1593; thirdly, it argues that Resolution 1593 cannot make Sudan (who has not signed up to the Rome Statute) participated in the ICC as if it were a party to the Statute.