CHAPTER III AMENDMENTS TO THE ACT OF 17 APRIL 1878 CONTAINING THE PRELIMINARY TITLE OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Article 16
The following amendments shall be made to article 10 of the same preliminary Title, which was amended by the Acts of 12 and 19 July 1932, 2 April 1948, 12 July 1984 and 13 March 2002:
(2) a new point (1) bis shall be inserted between (1) and (2) and shall read as follows:
“(1) bis.
If the federal prosecutor has been seized of a complaint in application of the preceding paragraphs, he or she shall request the investigating judge to institute an investigation of the complaint, unless:
(4) it emerges from the specific circumstances of the case that, in the interests of the proper administration of justice and in the light of Belgium’s international obligations, the matter should be heard by the international courts, or by the courts of the place where the crimes were committed, or the courts of the State of which the accused is a national or the place where he or she may be found, provided the court in question meets the requirements of independence, impartiality and fairness, as can be established in particular from the relevant international instruments binding Belgium and the State in question.

CHAPTER III AMENDMENTS TO THE ACT OF 17 APRIL 1878 CONTAINING THE PRELIMINARY TITLE OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Article 18
The following amendments shall be made to article 12 bis of the same preliminary Title, inserted by the Act of 17 April 1986 and replaced by the Act of 18 July 2001:
(4) The following paragraphs shall be added to the article:
“A prosecution, including the criminal investigation, may only be instituted on the application of the federal prosecutor who assesses any complaints. There shall be no legal remedy against such a decision.
If the federal prosecutor has been seized of a complaint in application of the preceding paragraphs, he or she shall request the investigating judge to institute an investigation of the complaint, except if:
(4) it emerges from the specific circumstances of the case that, in the interests of the proper administration of justice and in the light of Belgium’s international obligations, the matter should be heard by the international courts, or by the courts of the place where the crimes were committed, or the courts of the State of which the accused is a national or the place where he or she may be found, provided the court in question meets the requirements of independence, impartiality and fairness, as can be established in particular from the relevant international instruments binding Belgium and the State in question.

CHAPTER VI MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
Article 28
Without prejudice to the application of the Act of 22 March 1996 on the recognition of the International Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the International Tribunal for Rwanda, and cooperation with those tribunals, the Minister of Justice may acquaint the International Criminal Court with the facts relative to offences specified in Book II, Title I bis of the Criminal Code which have been referred to the judicial authorities, following a decision discussed by the Cabinet.
Once the Prosecutor has given the notification provided for in article 18, paragraph 1 of the Statute in respect to the facts brought to the attention of the Court by the Minister of Justice, the Court of Cassation, on application by the Principal Crown Prosecutor, shall pronounce the deferral of the Belgian court seized of the same facts.
Where the Court, at the request of the Minister of Justice, after the deferral of the Belgian court, states that the Prosecutor of the Court has decided not to produce an indictment or that the Court has not confirmed an indictment, or has deemed it does not have jurisdiction or that the case is inadmissible, the Belgian courts shall once again have jurisdiction.

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.