Assembly/AU/ 14 (XI) Page 19 87. In the event of abuse of the concept of universal jurisdiction, certain avenues for redress may be explored by an aggrieved State. Primarily, legal redress could be sought before the International Court of Justice challenging violation of sovereignty. This was the option that was adopted by the Democratic Republic of Congo against Belgium and the Court decided the case in favour of Congo. Although, the decision of the Court in the Arrest Warrant case was not based on universal jurisdiction for reasons earlier adduced in the Report, some of the Judges (Guillaume, Higgins, Kooijmans, and Buergenthal) in their reasoning and separate opinions state that there is no clear instance of universal jurisdiction in the absence of other existing jurisdictional grounds. It was also the option taken by Djibouti against France and the Court decided, on preliminary matters, in favour of Djibouti in relation to the admissibility of the case and the breach by France of its obligations towards Djibouti with regard to mutual legal assistance in the Case Concerning Certain Questions of Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (Djibouti v France). 88. However, the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice is not automatic and is based on the consent of the parties to the suit. cxix Furthermore, the parties to the suit can request the Court for an indication of provisional measures under Article 41 of the Statute of the Court so as to preserve the rights of the parties. The Democratic Republic of Congo made a request under Article 41 in the Arrest Warrant case on the same day that it filed an application instituting proceedings against Belgium. 89. States can also seek political or diplomatic redress through the use of its good offices. The United States through a policy of negotiation and threats succeeded in not only having cases against its officials discontinued in the Belgian courts but also in the amendment of the Belgian Law on universal jurisdiction. Likewise, African States can lodge diplomatic protests objecting to the abuse of universal jurisdiction by some States, especially where a right of diplomatic protection may be the more appropriate way to proceed in cases concerning nationals of the States concerned. 90. It is also recommended that the African Union makes use of the advisory jurisdiction of the African Court of Justice and Human Rights when this Court becomes operational. Such jurisdiction is provided for in the Statute of the Court and could be exercised along the same lines as the advisory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice. cxx While not a redress for abuse of universal jurisdiction, the advisory opinion of the proposed Court will no doubt contribute significantly to the discourse on universal jurisdiction and will also advise and guide members of the African Union on emerging trends concerning the scope and applicability of the concept. 91. It is important to mention the role of the International Criminal Court (ICC). The ICC as supranational court established under a multilateral agreement is well placed to address the concern of States over their sovereignty. Unlike the ICJ, the ICC has criminal jurisdiction over certain international crimes including genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and acts of aggression. cxxi It is recommended that States of the African Union can refer cases to the International Criminal Court, under Article 14 of the Rome Statute of the Court 1998. Referring cases to the ICC would check the excesses and whims of individual States as well as address some of the concerns of potential for abuse highlighted earlier in the Report. The Central African Republic has relied on the jurisdiction of the Court by referring cases for investigation and the Court recently arrested Jean-Pierre Bemba, the head of the Mouvement de Libération du Congo (MLC), an armed group in the Central African Republic. cxxii It is to be noted that the jurisdiction of the Court is prospective and does not relate to crimes committed before the entry into force of the Rome Statute of the Court. cxxiii