INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW: THE TENSION BETWEEN THE REPRESSION OF GLOBAL CRIME AND STATE SOVEREIGNTY

Abstract

This article analyzes the structural tension between the need for transnational repression of globalized criminality and the limits imposed by state sovereignty in the development of International Criminal Law. The rise of geoeconomic competition and globalization, by expanding the flow of capital, services, and people, have created new forms of transnational crimes, such as economic macro-criminality and organized crime, which cross national borders and demand supranational legal responses. However, the pursuit of international criminal justice runs into two central dilemmas: the ineffectiveness of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the risk of criminal harmonization. The ICC, despite being the most evident institutional effort, is limited by the resistance of States to relinquish their ius puniendi and by the conflict with national sovereignty, reflecting an "impotent third party." The alternative of uniformizing legislation through treaties, in turn, is driven by a punitivist logic that promotes the expansion of punitive power and the flexibilization of criminal and procedural guarantees. This homogenizing trend threatens consolidated dogmatic categories and fundamental principles of Criminal Law, resulting in a more repressive and anti-guarantist model in the name of effectiveness in combating impunity. It is concluded that the construction of a legitimate International Criminal Law requires a cooperation model that respects the diversity of national legal traditions and is committed to the values of the Rule of Law, thus preventing the reduction of Criminal Law to a mere instrument of repression.