
part of oxford law faculty – a major centre for the study of international law for over 400 years

Dapo Akande is also Yamani Fellow at St. Peter's College and Co-Director of the Oxford Institute for Ethics, Law and Armed Conflict (ELAC). He is the current Convenor of the Oxford Law Faculty's Public International Law Group. In 2008/09 he was Visiting Associate Professor and Robinna Foundation International Fellow at Yale Law School. In 2002 and 2009, he was Visiting Professor at the University of Miami School of Law. From 1998 to 2000, he was Lecturer in Law at the University of Nottingham School of Law and from 2000 to 2004 he was a Lecturer in Law at the University of Durham. From 1994 to 1998, he has taught (part-time), first at the London School of Economics and then at Christ's College and Wolfson College, Cambridge.
He has varied research interests within the field of general international law and has published articles on aspects of the law of international organizations, international dispute settlement , international criminal law and the law of armed conflict. His articles have been published in leading international law journals such as the American Journal of International Law, the British Yearbook of International Law and the European Journal of International Law . His article in the Journal of International Criminal Justice on the "Jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court over Nationals of Non-Parties: Legal Basis and Limits" was awarded the 2003 Giorgio La Pira Prize.
Dapo has advised States and international organizations on matters of international law. He has advised and assisted counsel or provided expert opinions in cases before the International Court of Justice, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, international arbitral tribunals, WTO and NAFTA Dispute Settlement Panels as well as cases in England and the United States of America. He has acted as Consultant for the African Union on the international criminal court and on the law relating to terrorism. He has also provided training on international law to diplomats, military officers and other government officials.
In addition to being editor of EJIL:Talk! (the blog of the European Journal of International Law), he is a member of the boards of a number of journals, academic and professional organizations, including:
the Scientific Advisory Board of the European Journal of International Law;
the Editorial Board of the African Journal of International and Comparative Law;
the Advisory Council of the British Institute of International and Comparative Law;
the Executive Council of the British Branch of the International Law Association; the Advisory Board of the International Centre for Transitional Justice and
the Advisory Committee of International Lawyers for Africa.
Showing five recent publications sorted by author, then title [change this]
Showing 5 of the most recent publications
Change to sort them by year | title | type OR
Show All 40 | Selected publications
D Akande, 'Act of State Doctrine' in P. Cane (ed), The New Oxford Companion to Law (OUP 2008)
D Akande, Max du Plessis and Charles Jalloh, 'An African Expert Study on the African Union's Concerns About Article 16 of the Rome Statute of the ICC' (2010) Institute for Security Studies [...]
This African expert study on the African Union’s (AU) concerns about article 16 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) seeks to articulate a clearer picture of the law and politics of article 16 deferrals within the context of the AU’s repeated calls to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to invoke article 16 to suspend the processes initiated by the ICC against President Omar al-Bashir of Sudan. The lack of a formal reply by the UNSC to the AU request has resulted in AU member states deciding to withhold cooperation from the ICC in respect of the arrest and surrender of Bashir. In light of the AU’s continued concerns, questions have arisen about the UNSC’s exercise of the controversial deferral power contained in article 16. This culminated in the AU proposing that article 16 be amended to empower the UN General Assembly to act should the UNSC fail to decide on a deferral request after six months. Although states parties to the Rome Statute have shown little support for the AU’s proposed amendment to article 16, the merits of the AU proposal must be considered. A failure to engage with African government concerns about the deferral provision could further damage the ICC’s credibility in Africa. Constructive suggestions about the ‘article 16 problem’ must be developed in order to contribute towards resolving the negative stance that some African countries have taken towards the ICC. The challenge is to devise both legally sound and politically palatable options. For many Africans, the ICC’s involvement in Sudan has come to reflect the skewed nature of power distribution within the UNSC and global politics. The result is that the uneven political landscape of the post-World War II collective security regime has become a central problem of the ICC. It is also important to pay attention to the AU’s concerns and its request for an article 16 deferral of the Bashir indictment because the matters underlying the tension – how ICC prosecutions may be reconciled with peacemaking initiatives and the role and power of the UNSC in ICC business – are likely to arise in the future with respect to other situations. Solutions must be found to problems that may arise in working out the relationship between the UNSC and the ICC. The study therefore makes practical suggestions about how to resolve the concerns raised within certain African government circles and other developing nations about the relationship between the UNSC and the ICC, and the relationship between the ICC and peacemaking initiatives of governments and regional organisations. The spirit underlying the study is that a strong, independent and successful ICC is ultimately in Africa’s best interest as the continent works to tackle impunity. By the same token, it is equally in the ICC’s long-term interest to show greater sensitivity towards the specific interests and views of African states. It is for this reason that the position paper includes proposals for possible amendment of article 16, despite agreement among the experts of the project’s working group that such an amendment is unlikely considering the amount of support that would be required from states parties to enable the passing of an amendment. . . . The expert study began with the writing of a draft position paper on the article 16 issue. The draft was then circulated to a group of African and international experts from civil society and government, who provided written comments and participated in a two-day meeting in Addis Ababa in June 2010 to discuss the draft paper. The experts participated in their personal capacities and their views do not reflect the views of their organisations. Although the final position paper reflects the outcomes of the inputs and discussions among the expert group members, the contents of this paper must be attributed to the three authors rather than to members of the expert group.
ISBN: 978-1-920422-24-0
D Akande, 'Are there Limits to the Powers of the Security Council? in Old Questions and New Challenges for the UN Security System' (2007) V Journal of International Law and Policy
D Akande, 'Arrest Warrant Case”; “Pius Nwaoga v. The State' in Cassese, Akande, et al (eds), Oxford Companion to International Criminal Justice (OUP 2009)
D Akande, C. Jalloh and M. du Plessis, 'Assessing the African Union Concerns about Article 16 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court' (2011) 4 African Journal of Legal Studies 5 [...]
This article assesses the African Union’s (AU) concerns about Article 16 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC). It seeks to articulate a clearer picture of the law and politics of deferrals within the context of the AU’s repeated calls to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC, or the Council) to invoke Article 16 to suspend the processes initiated by the ICC against President Omar Al Bashir of Sudan. The UNSC’s failure to accede to the AU request led African States to formally withhold cooperation from the ICC in respect to the arrest and surrender of the Sudanese leader. Given the AU’s continued concerns, and the current impasse, fundamental questions have arisen about the Council’s authority to exercise, or not exercise, its deferral power. This culminated into a November 2009 African proposal for an amendment to the Rome Statute to empower the UN General Assembly to act should the UNSC fail to act on a deferral request after six months. Although ICC States Parties have so far shown limited public support for the AU’s proposed amendment to the deferral provision, this article examines its merits because a failure to engage the “Article 16 problem” could impact international accountability efforts in the Sudan, and further damage the ICC’s credibility in Africa. This unresolved issue also has wider significance given that the matters underlying the tension – how ICC prosecutions may be reconciled with peacemaking initiatives and the role and power of the Council in ICC business – will likely arise in future situations from around the world.
ISBN: 2210-9730
Public International Law @ Oxford
Contact details:
other affiliation(s):
St Peter's College
New Inn Hall,
Oxford OX1 2DL