Abstract
Contemporary international law contains quite adequate substantive rules aimed at the prevention and suppression of State acts of aggression but the efficiency of those provisions is weakened by procedural shortcomings inherent, in particular, in the operation of the UN Security Council. Until a comprehensive reform of the United Nations eliminates those procedural deficiencies, the General Assembly and the International Court of Justice should be more active in maintaining international peace and security, and in reacting to threats to the peace, breaches of peace and acts of aggression. An important role in the maintenance of international peace and security is played by regional security organisations, as well as by international organs and institutions monitoring compliance, in particular, with international human rights law, international humanitarian law, the law of the sea, and environmental law. By contrast, despite the formal activation of the International Criminal Court’s jurisdiction with respect to the crime of aggression as of 17 July 2018, the Court is unlikely to prosecute individuals for the crime of aggression, and domestic prosecutions or, potentially, prosecutions by the African Court of Justice and Human and Peoples’ Rights are more likely.