The International Criminal Court’s (ICC) policy and practice of self-referrals has attracted some degree of academic criticism. This has been due partly because the procedure itself was, according to some opinions, never quite envisaged in the original Rome Statute, and partly because the concept of a State self-referral appears to contradict the Rome Statute objective of the ICC as a Court of complementarity. Following Gabon’s self-referral in 2016, and in view of the recent termination of the ICC Prosecutor’s Preliminary Examinations in Gabon, this paper argues that African States’ self-referral practice continues to represent a step backwards for African local justice and accountability. The fact that in this particular situation the necessary threshold was not met is actually not relevant for the argument put forward in this paper, namely that this practice should now be put under scrutiny rather than accepting, at face value, a self-referral whenever an (African) State proposes it. The strengthening of local accountability and the transformation of the local justice landscape should be considered as the ICC long-term objectives, and more dialogue (as well as political pressure) should be contemplated in order to gently coerce States to take on investigations and prosecutions of international crimes.

中文翻译：

---

《罗马规约》在非洲的催化作用：积极互补和自我推荐

国际刑事法院（ICC）的自我推荐政策和做法引起了一定程度的学术批评。部分原因是，根据某些意见，最初的《罗马规约》从未完全设想过程序本身，部分原因是国家自我提交的概念似乎与国际刑事法院作为国际刑事法院的罗马规约目标相矛盾。互补性。继加蓬于 2016 年自我推荐之后，鉴于最近在加蓬终止了国际刑事法院检察官的初步审查，本文认为非洲国家的自我推荐做法继续代表非洲地方正义和问责制的倒退。在这种特殊情况下没有达到必要阈值的事实实际上与本文提出的论点无关，即现在应该对这种做法进行审查，而不是从表面上接受（非洲）国家提出的自我推荐。应将加强地方问责制和转变地方司法格局视为国际刑事法院的长期目标，并应考虑进行更多对话（以及施加政治压力），以温和地胁迫各国对这些案件进行调查和起诉。国际罪行。