Spans in 'Sierra Leone - Constitution' tagged with 'Ne bis in idem'

'Ne bis in idem' in document 'Sierra Leone - Constitution'

Jump to:

More information about the keyword 'Ne bis in idem'
More information about the document 'Sierra Leone - Constitution'
The relevant provisions of implementing legislation: [1]
The Relevant Provisions of the Rome Statute

RELEVANT SECTIONS OF THE IMPLEMENTING LEGISLATION

CHAPTER III – THE RECOGNITION AND PROTECTION OF FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS AND
FREEDOMS OF THE INDIVIDUAL

23. (9) No person who shows that he has been tried by any competent court for a criminal offence and either convicted or acquitted shall again be tried for that offence or for any other offence of which he could have been convicted at the trial for that offence save upon the order of a superior court made in the course of appeal proceedings relating to the conviction or acquittal; and no person shall be tried for a criminal offence if he shows that he has been pardoned for that offence :

Provided that nothing in any law shall be held to be inconsistent with or in contravention of this subsection by reason only that it authorises any court to try a member of a defence force for a criminal offence notwithstanding any trial and conviction or acquittal of that member under service law ; but any court so trying such a member and convicting him shall in sentencing him to any punishment take into account any punishment awarded him under service law.

RELEVANT ROME STATUTE PROVISIONS

Article 20
Ne bis in idem
1. Except as provided in this Statute, no person shall be tried before the Court with respect to conduct which formed the basis of crimes for which the person has been convicted or acquitted by the Court.
2. No person shall be tried by another court for a crime referred to in article 5 for which that person has already been convicted or acquitted by the Court.
3. No person who has been tried by another court for conduct also proscribed under article 6, 7 or 8 shall be tried by the Court with respect to the same conduct unless the proceedings in the other court:
(a) Were for the purpose of shielding the person concerned from criminal responsibility for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court; or
(b) Otherwise were not conducted independently or impartially in accordance with the norms of due process recognized by international law and were conducted in a manner which, in the circumstances, was inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice.