Not many states have effective national laws on prosecution of international crimes. Presently, of the 124 states parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Rome Statute), less than half have specific national legislation incorporating international crimes. Some faith has been placed in the ordinary-crimes approach; the assumption being that states without effective laws on international crimes can prosecute on the basis of ordinary crimes. This article assesses the practicality of this approach with regard to the crime of rape in Uganda. Based on this assessment, the author draws a number of conclusions. First, that there are glaring gaps in the Ugandan definition of rape, making it impossible for it to be relied on. Secondly, although national courts have the option to interpret national laws with a view to aligning them with international law, the gaps salient in the definition of ordinary rape are too glaring; they cannot be remedied by way of interpretation without undermining the principle of legality. Thirdly, prosecuting the international crime of rape as an ordinary crime suggests that approaches applicable to the prosecution of ordinary rape will be invoked. Because these approaches were never intended to capture the reality of the international crime of rape, the ordinary-crimes approach remains illusory.

在起诉国际罪行方面，没有多少州具有有效的国家法律。目前，在《国际刑事法院罗马规约》（《罗马规约》）的124个缔约国中，只有不到一半的国家制定了纳入国际罪行的具体国家立法。人们对普通犯罪的做法抱有某种信念；这种假设是，没有有效的国际罪行法律的国家可以在普通罪行的基础上起诉。本文评估了这种方法在乌干达的强奸罪方面的实用性。基于此评估，作者得出了许多结论。首先，乌干达对强奸的定义存在明显差距，因此不可能依靠强奸。其次，尽管国家法院可以选择解释国内法，以使其与国际法保持一致，但普通强奸定义中的显着差距太明显了；在不损害合法性原则的情况下，不能通过解释来补救它们。第三，将国际强奸罪行作为普通罪行起诉，表明将援引适用于起诉普通强奸的方法。由于这些方法从未打算抓住国际强奸罪的现实，因此普通犯罪方法仍然是虚幻的。将国际强奸罪行作为普通罪行起诉，表明将援引适用于起诉普通强奸的方法。由于这些方法从未打算抓住国际强奸罪的现实，因此普通犯罪方法仍然是虚幻的。将国际强奸罪行作为普通罪行起诉，表明将援引适用于起诉普通强奸的方法。由于这些方法从未打算抓住国际强奸罪的现实，因此普通犯罪方法仍然是虚幻的。