Part 1
General Provisions

4. Austrian jurisdiction
1. The competence of the International Criminal Court does not preclude the competence of Austrian courts.
2. There is no Austrian jurisdiction however in respect of crimes for which a person has been sentenced or found not guilty by the International Criminal Court in an enforceable judgement.

Part 2
Specific provisions
Section 4
Custody pending surrender, surrender and transit

26. Custody pending surrender and orders for surrender
2. Should there be significant doubts as to the identity of the person arrested, the investigating judge shall order appropriate investigations or ask the International Criminal Court to submit additional information. In any event, the investigating judge shall inform the accused person of the grounds of the warrant of arrest issued against him or her by the International Criminal Court and about his or her rights to challenge the surrender on account of a violation of the principle of “ne bis in idem” in article 20 of the Statute or of a lack of jurisdiction on the part of the International Criminal Court pursuant to articles 17 to 19 of the Statute. In addition, the person shall be informed of his or her right, pending a surrender order, to apply for interim release. The accused person shall be provided with copies (photocopies) of the arrest warrant or of the relevant allegations and provisions of the Statute together with the translations of them provided by the International Criminal Court.
3. Should the accused person wish to challenge the surrender on account of a violation of article 20 of the Statute or a lack of jurisdiction on the part of the International Criminal Court, the International Criminal Court shall be informed thereof and be provided with the requisite documents. Concurrently, the Court shall be notified of whether the challenge has a suspensive effect.
4. The decision on surrender shall be deferred only in the event of a challenge of admissibility pursuant to paragraph 5(2) above until a decision by the International Criminal Court has been taken. In the event of a challenge to the jurisdiction of the Court pursuant to articles 17 to 19 of the Statute by a third country, the procedure in paragraph 28 below shall apply.

Article 17
Issues of admissibility
1. Having regard to paragraph 10 of the Preamble and article 1, the Court shall determine that a case is inadmissible where:
(a) The case is being investigated or prosecuted by a State which has jurisdiction over it, unless the State is unwilling or unable genuinely to carry out the investigation or prosecution;
(b) The case has been investigated by a State which has jurisdiction over it and the State has decided not to prosecute the person concerned, unless the decision resulted from the unwillingness or inability of the State genuinely to prosecute;
(c) The person concerned has already been tried for conduct which is the subject of the complaint, and a trial by the Court is not permitted under article 20, paragraph 3;
(d) The case is not of sufficient gravity to justify further action by the Court.
2. In order to determine unwillingness in a particular case, the Court shall consider, having regard to the principles of due process recognized by international law, whether one or more of the following exist, as applicable:
(a) The proceedings were or are being undertaken or the national decision was made for the purpose of shielding the person concerned from criminal responsibility for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court referred to in article 5;
(b) There has been an unjustified delay in the proceedings which in the circumstances is inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice;
(c) The proceedings were not or are not being conducted independently or impartially, and they were or are being conducted in a manner which, in the circumstances, is inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice.
3. In order to determine inability in a particular case, the Court shall consider whether, due to a total or substantial collapse or unavailability of its national judicial system, the State is unable to obtain the accused or the necessary evidence and testimony or otherwise unable to carry out its proceedings.