Justice and the Libyan crisis: the ICC’s role under Security Council Resolution 1970

This briefing paper examines the role of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in Libya following UN Security Council Resolution 1970, analyzing the legal implications of the referral, the challenges of enforcement within the African context, and the tension between international justice and military intervention under Resolution 1973.

• UN Security Council Resolution 1970, passed unanimously on 26 February 2011, referred the situation in Libya to the ICC. This marked only the second time the Security Council used its discretion under the Rome Statute to refer a matter to the court, the first being the situation in Sudan's Darfur region under Resolution 1593 (2005).
• Resolution 1970 contains a specific provision, included at the insistence of the United States, that excludes nationals and officials of states other than Libya from ICC jurisdiction regarding operations authorized by the Security Council, unless their home states waive that jurisdiction. However, this does not extend to mercenaries, as they do not act with Security Council authority.
• On 16 May 2011, ICC prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo identified Muammar Gaddafi, his son Saif al-Islam, and intelligence chief Abdullah al-Sanussi as bearing the greatest responsibility for 'widespread and systematic attacks' on civilians, including crimes against humanity and war crimes.
• The African Union (AU) has maintained a divisive relationship with the ICC, characterized by orders of non-cooperation regarding suspects like Omar al-Bashir. While three African Security Council members (Gabon, Nigeria, and South Africa) supported Resolution 1970, the AU generally opposes the court's perceived preoccupation with Africa.
• The African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights took independent action on 25 March 2011, issuing a unanimous Order for Provisional Measures demanding that Libya refrain from actions resulting in loss of life or violations of physical integrity.
• There is a significant risk that the ICC's justice mandate is being conflated with the controversial military intervention authorized by Resolution 1973. While Resolution 1970 focused on justice, Resolution 1973 authorized a no-fly zone and 'all means necessary' to protect civilians, leading to AU criticism of 'foreign military intervention'.

APA

du Plessis, M., & Louw, A. (2011). Justice and the Libyan crisis: the ICC’s role under Security Council Resolution 1970. Institute for Security Studies. https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/LibyaICCBrief.pdf

Chicago

du Plessis, Max, and Antoinette Louw. Justice and the Libyan crisis: the ICC’s role under Security Council Resolution 1970. Institute for Security Studies, 2011. https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/LibyaICCBrief.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=du Plessis |first1=Max |last2=Louw |first2=Antoinette |title=Justice and the Libyan crisis: the ICC’s role under Security Council Resolution 1970 |publisher=Institute for Security Studies |date=31 May 2011 |url=https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/LibyaICCBrief.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{duplessis2011justice, author = {du Plessis, Max and Louw, Antoinette}, title = {{Justice and the Libyan crisis: the ICC’s role under Security Council Resolution 1970}}, institution = {Institute for Security Studies}, year = {2011}, month = may, url = {https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/LibyaICCBrief.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }