I. General Provisions

Article 5
Challenge of admissibility of proceedings before the International Criminal Court; deferral of proceedings to the International Criminal Court or an International Tribunal

(1) Should the International Criminal Court assert its jurisdiction in respect of a case, the Ministry of Justice may claim Liechtenstein jurisdiction within the meaning of Article 18 of the Rome Statute or challenge the admissibility of proceedings or the jurisdiction of the Court under Article 19 of the Rome Statute.

(2) Admissibility shall be challenged where:
(a) the person has been sentenced for or found not guilty of an act by a Liechtenstein court in an enforceable judgement in respect of the act;

(b) criminal proceedings are underway before the Liechtenstein public prosecutor or a Liechtenstein court either on account of an act committed in Liechtenstein or by a Liechtenstein national or of a request from the International Criminal Court for arrest and surrender or for the provision of judicial assistance, except where priority should be given to the pursuit of criminal proceedings by the International Criminal Court in consideration of particular circumstances, especially in order to establish the truth or the relation to other crimes giving rise to proceedings before the Court; or

(c) proceedings were already underway before the public prosecutor or a court in Liechtenstein on account of the act and were suspended on other than strictly procedural grounds.

(3) In order to enable challenges of jurisdiction, the public prosecutor shall notify the Ministry of Justice of any ongoing cases involving crimes within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.

(4) A decision by the International Criminal Court on the admissibility of a case may be challenged within five days by the Ministry of Justice by application lodged with the Court.

(5) Where the admissibility of a case before the International Criminal Court or the Court’s jurisdiction over it goes unchallenged, if the International Criminal Court definitively confirms that it has jurisdiction, or if an International Tribunal has made a formal request for the deferral of criminal proceedings for crimes within its jurisdiction, the princely court shall take all measures required to secure the person and evidence and shall temporarily suspend proceedings and provide the Ministry of Justice with a full photocopy of the case file for its transmission to the International Criminal Court or International Tribunal. When evidence is enclosed and there is no need to return it, this should be indicated.

(6) The Liechtenstein criminal proceedings shall be closed following a definitive decision by the International Criminal Court or International Tribunal. The case may be reopened however subsequent to an application by the public prosecutor following a court ruling, if:

(a) the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court or International Tribunal decides not to proceed with an indictment or drops the charges;

(b) upon review, the International Criminal Court or International Tribunal rejects the indictment;

(c) the International Criminal Court determines it does not have jurisdiction or that the case is inadmissible, or the International Tribunal determines it does not have jurisdiction.

II. Specific provisions

D. Custody pending surrender, surrender and transit

Article 26
Simplified surrender to the International Criminal Court

(1) Should a person being held in provisional custody pending surrender on the basis of a request from the International Criminal Court pursuant to Article 25(1) above agree to surrender to the International Criminal Court before the end of the time period in Article 25(3), the princely court shall order the person’s surrender, without prejudice to a challenge of admissibility pursuant to Article 5(2) above. In such a case the person shall be surrendered to the International Criminal Court as soon as possible.

Article 19
Challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court or the admissibility of a case
1. The Court shall satisfy itself that it has jurisdiction in any case brought before it. The Court may, on its own motion, determine the admissibility of a case in accordance with article 17.
2. Challenges to the admissibility of a case on the grounds referred to in article 17 or challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court may be made by:
(a) An accused or a person for whom a warrant of arrest or a summons to appear has been issued under article 58;
(b) A State which has jurisdiction over a case, on the ground that it is investigating or prosecuting the case or has investigated or prosecuted; or
(c) A State from which acceptance of jurisdiction is required under article 12.
3. The Prosecutor may seek a ruling from the Court regarding a question of jurisdiction or admissibility. In proceedings with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility, those who have referred the situation under article 13, as well as victims, may also submit observations to the Court.
4. The admissibility of a case or the jurisdiction of the Court may be challenged only once by any person or State referred to in paragraph 2. The challenge shall take place prior to or at the commencement of the trial. In exceptional circumstances, the Court may grant leave for a challenge to be brought more than once or at a time later than the commencement of the trial. Challenges to the admissibility of a case, at the commencement of a trial, or subsequently with the leave of the Court, may be based only on article 17, paragraph 1 (c).
5. A State referred to in paragraph 2 (b) and (c) shall make a challenge at the earliest opportunity.
6. Prior to the confirmation of the charges, challenges to the admissibility of a case or challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court shall be referred to the Pre-Trial Chamber. After confirmation of the charges, they shall be referred to the Trial Chamber. Decisions with respect to jurisdiction or admissibility may be appealed to the Appeals Chamber in accordance with article 82.
7. If a challenge is made by a State referred to in paragraph 2 (b) or (c), the Prosecutor shall suspend the investigation until such time as the Court makes a determination in accordance with article 17.
8. Pending a ruling by the Court, the Prosecutor may seek authority from the Court:
(a) To pursue necessary investigative steps of the kind referred to in article 18, paragraph 6;
(b) To take a statement or testimony from a witness or complete the collection and examination of evidence which had begun prior to the making of the challenge; and
(c) In cooperation with the relevant States, to prevent the absconding of persons in respect of whom the Prosecutor has already requested a warrant of arrest under article 58.
9. The making of a challenge shall not affect the validity of any act performed by the Prosecutor or any order or warrant issued by the Court prior to the making of the challenge.
10. If the Court has decided that a case is inadmissible under article 17, the Prosecutor may submit a request for a review of the decision when he or she is fully satisfied that new facts have arisen which negate the basis on which the case had previously been found inadmissible under article 17.
11. If the Prosecutor, having regard to the matters referred to in article 17, defers an investigation, the Prosecutor may request that the relevant State make available to the Prosecutor information on the proceedings. That information shall, at the request of the State concerned, be confidential. If the Prosecutor thereafter decides to proceed with an investigation, he or she shall notify the State to which deferral of the proceedings has taken place.