In November 2004, Unc imposed targeted sanctions on individuals and entities in Côte d`Ivoire for the first time. Acting in accordance with chapter vii of the United Nations Charter and, in accordance with Article 28 of its provisional internal regulation162, the UN body established a sanctions committee in Resolution 1572.163. The sanctions regime for Côte d`Ivoire was aimed at responding to renewed fighting in violation of a ceasefire agreement negotiated after the disputed 2000 Ivorian presidential election, of which Laurent Gbagbo was the winner and that Alessane Ouattara was excluded from the protests among other opposition candidates. With regard to the sanctions requested, Resolution 1572 contains an arms embargo,164 a travel ban,165 and asset freeze measures.166 Thirteen months later, After Unc found that the situation in Côte d`Ivoire remained “a threat to international peace and security in the region” (167), Unc decided to extend by one year the sanctions imposed by Resolution 1572.168 After the disputed presidential elections of 2010, further measures were taken, the result of which was rejected by Mr. Ouattara. calling on all Ivorian parties and interested parties to respect the popular will and the outcome of the elections in Resolution 1962,169, in view of Mr. Gbagbo`s persistent refusal, 171 Unc repeated and amended the measures several times172 before lifting the sanctions regime for Côte d`Ivoire in resolution 2283 of 28 April 2016. As Sir Franklin Berman said, “I think the Court`s relationship will be the relationship that will develop with the Security Council.” (Berman, F., `The Relationship between the International Criminal Court and the Security Council`Google Scholar, in Von Hebel et al., op. cit. 6, p. 173.) In practice, the UN body has called for asset freeze measures to be implemented in a number of situations in which the ICC has also addressed. However, as this article has shown, there is little evidence that the two institutions are acting together.
It is this lack of “coordinated” action that leads the current author to conclude that it is not realistic to expect close and formalised cooperation between Unsc and Istdar in this area of their respective (albeit related) actions, as provided for by the reciprocal commitment of cooperation to which the two institutions are linked. (5) Article 2 of the ICC statute states that “[d]er Court of Justice … [d]er … By an agreement that must be approved by the Assembly of States Parties to this Statute and which will then be concluded by the President of the Court on his behalf, will be put in contact with the United Nations. For the draft agreement on relations between the Court and the United Nations, see report of the Preparatory Commission of the International Criminal Court (more). Preparatory Commission of the International Criminal Court, PCNICC/2001/1/Add.1, 8 January 2002, 6. There may also be a relationship between the International Court of Justice and the ICC, see Higgins, R., “The Relationship between the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice,” in Reflections on the International Criminal Court: Essays in Honour of Adriaan Bos, von Hebel, H.A.M., Lammers, J.G., AND Schukking, J., eds.