scholarly journals Reassembling International Justice: The Making of 'the Social' in International Criminal Law and Transitional Justice

2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Campbell
2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 509-534
Author(s):  
Maria Ereza Rocha de Assis Moura ◽  
Fabíola Girão Monteconrado ◽  
Marcos Zilli

AbstractIn the Brazilian legal system there is no tradition in recognising the applicability of international criminal law over domestic law. In two cases judged by the STF, the Haximu Massacre and Siegfried Ellwanger, only tangential questions were addressed. In the first, the arguments concentrated on examining the legal definition of the crime of genocide and its distinction from homicide. In the second, the questions revolved around the social, historical, and political interpretation of the word "race" in the judgment of a defendant who had published anti-Semitic and "revisionist" books and articles about the Holocaust. Brazil has also demonstrated itself to be somewhat refractory in incorporating the principles of international criminal law when examining the Justice of Transition. In a recent decision, the STF affirmed the constitutionality of Law No. 6,683/79, which granted amnesty to the perpetrators of political crimes and the public agents responsible for torture and the forced disappearance of people during the military dictatorship. In summary, the Justices recognised as valid the political agreement that led to the promulgation of the Amnesty Law in such a way that any alteration of its terms could only be made by the National Congress.


Author(s):  
Gur-Arye Miriam ◽  
Harel Alon

This chapter focuses on why international criminal law (ICL) matters, by generating a distinctive philosophical vision for the project of international criminal justice. Specifically, this chapter rejects the notion that ICL is simply a gap-filler for ineffective penal institutions at the domestic level. So much of the literature is characterized by an assumption, buttressed by the International Criminal Court’s complementarity principle, that international tribunals simply spring into action to resolve the lacunae in domestic legal processes when armed conflict or other disruptions dismantle traditional institutions for criminal enforcement. In contrast, the chapter argues that the goods of ICL and the values it promotes can only be provided by international entities. In that respect, international justice is not a second-best alternative to domestic justice but is, rather, necessarily international because international institutions are specifically designed to redress wrongs that harm the interests of the international community as a whole.


2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (5) ◽  
pp. 879-908
Author(s):  
Auriane Botte-Kerrison

This article examines the viability of integrating the duty to rescue concept in international criminal justice to deal with the responsibility of bystanders. Despite the fact that they often contribute to create the social context in which mass crimes occur, bystanders are almost absent from the scope of international criminal justice, focusing mainly on the perpetrators and the victims. This article explores a possible avenue to fill this gap so that the attribution of responsibility for mass crimes can be more coherent with their collective dimension. It assesses whether the duty to rescue concept, commonly found in the legislation of civil law countries, could provide a ‘ready-made’ solution to deal with bystander responsibility. Following a comparative analysis of the different approaches to the duty to rescue in civil law and common law countries, it examines how the duty to rescue would fit with similar concepts in international criminal law.


2013 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 163-216
Author(s):  
Martin Wählisch

In October and November of 2012, the Appeals Chamber of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) issued two key decisions affirming the legality of the court and the use of trials in absentia of the accused. Highly disputed within Lebanon and throughout the international legal community, both decisions are crucial milestones in the developing history of the STL, and mark critical developments in the evolution of the international justice system and international criminal law.


2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (4-5) ◽  
pp. 738-767 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giorgio Bongiovanni ◽  
Giovanni Sartor ◽  
Chiara Valentini

The legal philosophy of the 20th century has contributed to the development of international criminal law by rethinking fundamental legal concepts and theories concerning the nature of international law, its relation with national laws, the connection between the law and the State, and the very idea of responsibility. This was achieved, in the first place, through the reflection of Hans Kelsen, who put forward the idea of a system of enforceable criminal norms at the international level, directed at individuals and having a positive legal foundation. In the years immediately following the Second World War, a number of legal theorists and, in particular, Gustav Radbruch, argued in favour of a necessary connection between law and morality, on whose basis it could be claimed that the worst atrocities were punishable even when allowed by state norms, and even in the absence of positive international norms. In the last decade, the practice of international criminal law, through ad hoc tribunals and the International Criminal Court, has stimulated theoretical reflections on a variety of further fundamental issues, like impartiality, judicial truth, justification of punishment, side-effects of prosecution and transitional justice.


2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 177-201
Author(s):  
Luisa Giannini Figueira ◽  
Roberto Vilchez Yamato ◽  
Claudia Alvarenga Marconi

This article investigates sovereign (in)equality as a phenomenon that is manifested in thedifferent levels of international institutions. The analysis is developed from the process againstOmar Al Bashir, Sudan’s President-in-Office, at the International Criminal Court. Consideringthat norms and rules have a social role in the multiple relations existing between agents andstructures, that is, they transform relations in the international system, the article investigates the dispositions and principles present within the scope of the International Criminal Courtthat authorize a discrimination between States. This distinction implies the imposition ofinternational rules for some actors and the maintenance of certain sovereign prerogativesfor others. More specifically, international criminal justice is characterized by selectivityin judgments, as some countries are given certain authority over the regime. In this sense,it is argued that the sovereign (in)equality that is present in international criminal law issimultaneously a manifestation and condition of possibility for the hierarchy in the social,and therefore institutional normative, and political architecture of the international system.It is argued that the presence of this sovereign (in)equality can be identified at the differentlevels of the institutions of international society, insofar as they influence one another.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document