Explaining public opinion on international criminal justice

2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 567-591 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Meernik
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Empirical Inquiry ◽  
The Past ◽  
Levels Of Support

Despite the fact that international courts have proven popular in the last 20 years, systematic and empirical inquiry to determine whether they are beginning to realize their objectives is a fairly recent phenomenon. Support among the publics in the affected countries is critical to their success for, as deGuzman writes, ‘… the globalization of communications increasingly means that an institution’s legitimacy depends on the opinions of ordinary citizens around the world’. I develop a theory of public opinion regarding international criminal justice and test it on support for the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), among peoples of the former Yugoslavia. I contend that support for the ICTY is filtered through individuals’ perceptions of the past, present, and future. As one’s beliefs about whether conditions are good or improving grow more positive, such positive perceptions are generalized to extend to international institutions that play a major role in shaping those conditions. In addition, I argue that support for the ICTY is strongly influenced by an individual’s views of the legitimacy and morality of the law. Ethnicity is also important in differentiating levels of support across the peoples of the former Yugoslavia.

The ICTY is Dead! Long Live the ICTY!

2020 ◽  
pp. 71-82
Author(s):  
Carsten Stahn
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Institutional Culture ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Many

The chapter sets the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) legacies into a broader context of international criminal justice. It presents different approaches towards the many legacies of the ICTY. The chapter engages with the several phases that the Tribunal has passed, discussing their positive and negative points. It then examines the normative legacy of the ICTY, arguing that, although some gaps exist, the overall record of the ICTY is marked with several normative innovations. The chapter then visits the procedural legacy of the ICTY, in the sense of how the Tribunal made justice heard and seen. Lastly, the chapter discusses the institutional culture of the ICTY and its legacy to other international criminal tribunals. With this analysis, the chapter claims that the ICTY legacies are living beings, which will continue to be transformed throughout the history of international criminal justice.

Appeal may reject UN tribunal's Yugoslav acquittal

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Political Instability ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Prison Sentence ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
The Hague

Significance The verdict runs counter to 20 years of jurisprudence and history at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). It undermines the idea of using international criminal justice to assist in post-conflict reconstruction and reconciliation. It has caused disbelief, disappointment and anger in Croatia and Bosnia, especially among victims, and generated political instability in Serbia. Impacts The controversial judgment will further discredit the ICTY and the very idea of international criminal justice in the eyes of critics. It followed Karadzic's 40-year prison sentence, which has dismayed victims and observers expecting a harsher sentence. Despite working towards closure in 2017, the ICTY is very likely to grant an appeal. However, Seselj himself is unlikely to reappear in The Hague voluntarily.

“I Would Do the Same Again”

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 317-332 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olivera Simić
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
International Tribunal ◽  
Return Home

After more than 20 years in operation, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) has closed down at the end of 2017. Biljana Plavšić made history by becoming the only woman, of 161 individuals, indicted by the ICTY. She was also the highest ranking official and the first Serb leader to plead guilty to charges raised against her before the ICTY. After entering into a plea agreement and serving two thirds of her 11-year sentence in Sweden, she returned to Belgrade in 2009 where she has been living ever since. In this article, I draw on interviews I undertook with Plavšić in the course of 2017. In the first part of the article, I briefly introduce Plavšić and situate the study within the field of international criminal justice and transitional justice. I then proceed to discuss four themes that Plavšić most frequently returned to during our conversations. These themes offer an original perspective into Plavšić’s experience of being tried and sentenced by the international tribunal and her subsequent release and return home. This article aims to fill a gap in the literature by analyzing the reflections on the ICTY from its only woman defendant.

Individuals Accused of International Crimes as Delegitimized Agents of Truth

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 291-316 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mina Rauschenbach
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Trials ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
The Past ◽  
Concept Of Truth ◽  
International Criminal Trials

The workings of international criminal trials situate themselves in an era where the concept of truth is heralded as a key aspect in the production of understandings of the past within transitional justice (TJ) settings. Yet, in such contexts where representations of the past are multilayered, trials tend to put to the fore certain narratives as legitimate readings, while excluding many others. This article explores the discourses of 18 individuals accused by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY). It focuses on their role as generally delegitimized agents of truth and analyzes how they reconstruct their justice experience, focusing particularly on how they make sense of the judicial truths stemming from their case. It reveals how they reconstruct the ICTY as a hegemonic arena which produces judicial truths, which cannot be considered as legitimate and complete accounts of the past and which are at odds with their authoritative perspective of the “truth.” These findings are analyzed against the backdrop of increasing scholarly debates about the legitimacy, which can be attributed to perpetrators’ perspectives given the tendency, within TJ discourses and practices, to position international criminal justice as a universal and authoritative arbitrator of morality in conflict.

Justice pénale internationale pour la paix et la réconciliation

2007 ◽  
Vol 7 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 391-424 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammed Ayat
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
International Community ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
The Past ◽  
International Tribunals ◽  
Judicial Recognition

AbstractInternational criminal justice has made a tremendous leap forward since the mid-1990s. Gradually, it tends to reacting more and more to situations of armed conflict with declared objectives aiming at restoring peace and bringing about reconciliation among people. To what extent have these objectives been achieved?This article is revolves around this important question. The analysis is particularly focused on the case of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, where the author has been working for the past ten years. Ad hoc international tribunals have helped formalizing the judicial recognition by the international community of crimes that go against the conscience of the entire mankind. They consecrate their disapproval of the commission of such offences. In so doing, they contribute towards fighting impunity, which has for long been associated with those offences. They function in an environment where conventional national jurisdictions would have found it difficult to operate with efficiency. The author is neither overestimating nor underestimating their contribution. It is presented as one of the components in a reply that is inescapably of a multiple nature, to some complex situations where a remedy is as difficult as the illness to be cured. It is in this perspective that such contribution is indeed appreciated.

scholarly journals Leaving Legacies Open-Ended: An Invitation for an Inclusive Debate on International Criminal Justice

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 110 ◽  
pp. 205-208
Author(s):  
Eyal Benvenisti ◽  
Sarah M.H. Nouwen
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
International Law ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
The Creation

As a response to the Symposium on the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda published by the American Journal of International Law on the occasion of the tribunals’ closure, this AJIL Unbound Symposium intends to broaden the debate on the “legacies” of those courts. The AJIL Symposium contains articles on the creation of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR); the ad hoc tribunals’ jurisprudential contributions; and their extra-legal impacts and legacies. The concept of “legacy” is itself contested and the appropriateness of the courts’ own efforts to consolidate it may be questioned, especially as they have barely ended (or are about to end) their work. Nevertheless, their over two decades of existence does provide an occasion to assess all they have done and not done, and have affected, intentionally and unintentionally. Against that background, we have invited a group of scholars to respond to the AJIL Symposium and to reflect upon the work of the tribunals with a view to enriching the debate with more voices, from different regions, from different interest groups, and from different disciplines.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document