A Classification of the Crimes in the Malabo Protocol

Today, when it comes to penal matters, legal scholars and practitioners of international law tend to draw a distinction between \u27international crimes\u27 and \u27transnational crimes\u27. But it would be misleading to suggest that there is consensus on the precise meaning of these terms. Authors have assigned them a wide variety of definitions in the literature. For our purposes, the phrase \u27international crimes\u27 should be taken to mean \u27breaches of international rules entailing the personal criminal liability of the individuals concerned\u27.\u27 This conception is similar to, but broader than, that preferred by a group of scholars who have described \u27international crimes\u27 as \u27those offences over which international courts or tribunals have been given jurisdiction under general international law\u27. In contrast, the notion of \u27transnational crimes\u27, apparently conceived by a United Nations body, is said to describe \u27certain criminal phenomena transcending international borders, transgressing the laws of several states or having an impact on another country\u27. Or, put more succinctly, \u27transnational crimes\u27 is a reference to \u27crimes with actual or potential trans-border effects\u27 . That is to say, those offenses \u27which are the subject of international suppression conventions but for which there is as yet no international criminal jurisdiction\u27.https://ecollections.law.fiu.edu/faculty_books/1268/thumbnail.jp