The effectiveness of the amnesty issued in accordance with national law in light of the complementary relationship with international criminal justice

International positions regarding including amnesty in the Statute of the International Criminal Court varied between supporters and opponents, which favored those opposed to including it. Therefore, the Statute was devoid of any text on amnesty or its acceptability, so the International Criminal Court cannot of its own free will look into cases that had previously been examined by the national judiciary. If it includes an amnesty or any decision, Unless a case that may be covered by the amnesty laws is referred to it by the Security Council, the Public Prosecution, or any other state party, but the consideration of any case does not take place except after two factors are achieved, namely (the state’s inability or unwillingness), which may give an explanation close to the amnesty Sometimes. Whereas if the state’s desire is available or the purpose of that pardon is the necessity of bringing peace to the country, then the pardon that is taken after the trial procedures is considered an acceptable pardon. Likewise, if the case undergoes a proper trial and legal investigation, the court will not consider the case based on the text of Article 17 of the law. Conversely, if the amnesty precedes an investigation into the case or is intended to protect the accused, the court considers this case. Therefore, the national amnesty decision in itself is not considered a violation of the basic statute of the court, nor does it prevent the court from exercising its jurisdiction,