Rights of the Criminally Accused Under International Law

Abstract : With the sudden collapse of the former Soviet Union, yesterday's bi- polar world of military superpowers is quickly fading into history. Today's new world order is moving towards a multi-polar world of economic superpowers with increased cooperation and interdependence in a myriad of areas. This progress towards global cooperation together with a growing international emphasis on individual rights indicate a need for the international community to set baselines for fundamental human rights in many areas. One of these areas in criminal law. When an individual travels to a foreign country and runs afoul of the law, should he be entitled to a certain manner of treatment in accord with his status as a human being? Which country can exercise jurisdiction over the individual? If the individual is tried in a foreign court, what can be done to ensure he receives a fair trial? This paper will address these issues and suggest there is a lack of guidance in the international criminal law arena regarding the basic rights of the criminally accused. This gap needs to be addressed on the international level in order to provide basic rights to the accused regardless of what country he might find himself in. As a background for this discussion, this article begins with a brief explanation of basic international law principles of jurisdiction over criminal offenses. It will then move to a discussion of the NATO Status of Forces Agreement, including its provisions as well as its shortfalls, and the status of United States nationals subject to traditional international law. The paper concludes by briefly discussing the feasibility of an international codification of basic individual rights, using the Status of Forces Agreements as a model