‘Lessons in Humanity’

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 229-257
Author(s):  
Renana Keydar
Keyword(s):  
Popular Culture ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Law And Society ◽  
Cultural Narratives ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Collective Response ◽  
International Military Tribunal ◽  
Military Tribunal ◽  
State Practice ◽  
The Impact

Abstract A narrative of progressive evolution of law and society has been dominating international legal discourse for some time now. This is evident in both practice and scholarship. This progress narrative provocatively mocked as ‘lessons in humanity’ in Quentin Tarantino’s Inglourious Basterds, has been created through a rejection of revenge as a possible individual as well as collective response to mass atrocities and human rights violations. However, through an analysis of counter terrorism measures and cultural narratives of the post 9/11 era, this article argues that international criminal law’s anti-revenge narrative proves increasingly incommensurable with contemporary zeitgeist and undermines international law’s relevance to today’s reality. The article traces the origins of the anti-revenge narrative to the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal and analyses the impact of its idea of progressive retribution on contemporary international criminal tribunals. It examines the growing divide between the progress narrative of the law and the reemergence of state revenge in response to threats of terror in the post 9/11 era, in contemporary military practices and popular culture. The article shows that while international legal narrative treats the rejection of revenge as a settled question, state practice and cultural outputs suggest a ‘return of the repressed’ and that in fact the question is far from resolved.

Criminal Tribunals

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron Fichtelberg
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Politics ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Post Cold War ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Military Tribunal ◽  
International Tribunals ◽  
Heads Of State ◽  
The Impact

One the most dramatic development in international law in the 20th century was the formation of international criminal tribunals. Unlike conventional international tribunals, such as the International Court of Justice and the Permanent Court of Arbitration, international criminal tribunals—such as the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg—are a controversial element of international law and international politics. Precisely because they are aimed at individuals who act under color of law, such as military officials or heads of state, they invoke a number of political challenges. Their combination of international law, human rights, criminal justice, and hotly disputed facts of great moral gravity makes them a subject of intense debate among academics, government officials, and the public at large. Much of the scholarship on international tribunals can be summed up by three periods: pre-Nuremberg, Nuremberg, and post-Cold War developments. Each period reveals shifts in the way that international criminal tribunals were studied and conceptualized in the academic world. In the future, much of the scholarship on international tribunals is expected to be influenced by the impact that the actual tribunals themselves have on international politics.

The Birth of Atrocity Speech Law Part 1

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory S. Gordon
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Genocide Convention ◽  
International Military Tribunal ◽  
Military Tribunal ◽  
Comparable Control

Chapter 3 considers the initial choices made by the newly formed body of international criminal law vis-à-vis atrocity speech. The framers of the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal (IMT) recognized that Nazi barbarities were rooted in propaganda. Article 6(c) of the IMT Charter”(and a comparable Control Council Law No. 10 provision) permitted prosecutors to charge “crimes against humanity” against Nazi defendants, including Julius Streicher and Hans Fritzsche (before the IMT) and Otto Dietrich (before an American tribunal). This novel offense criminalized certain heinous acts committed against civilians that were outside the ambit of war crimes, including hate speech as persecution. The chapter then considers the origins of the Genocide Convention and its pioneering formulation of the incitement crime. Finally, it examines the ad hoc tribunal statutes and the Rome Statue of the International Criminal Court, each of which criminalizes incitement to genocide, persecution as a crime against humanity, instigation, and ordering.

scholarly journals State Practice as Element of Customary International Law: A White Knight in International Criminal Law?

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (5) ◽  
pp. 784-804
Author(s):  
Harmen van der Wilt
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Case Law ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
State Practice

Inter-state practice is relatively scarce in the area of human rights and international criminal law. This article ventures to inquire how this has affected the process of identification of customary international law by international criminal tribunals and courts. The main conclusion is that the two components of customary international law – opinio juris and state practice – have become blurred. In search of customary international law, international tribunals have resorted to national legislation and case law of domestic courts. These legal artefacts can be qualified as both evidence of state practice and opinio juris. The author attempts to explain the reasons for this development and holds that, if properly applied, the methodology, while seemingly messy, comports with the nature of international criminal law.

scholarly journals Defining Hate Speech

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-57
Author(s):  
Audrey Fino
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
International Crime ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Causal Connection ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Military Tribunal ◽  
Violent Acts

Abstract This article looks at the international criminal law on hate speech that falls short of direct and public incitement to commit genocide. Using the most egregious form of hate speech that has been prosecuted as an international crime — that of direct and public incitement to genocide — as a baseline, the author analyses the legal parameters of hate speech as persecution (a crime against humanity) and hate speech as instigation (a mode of liability). In so doing, the author critically reviews the International Residual Mechanism for the International Criminal Tribunals’ (IRMCT) appeal judgment in the Šešelj case (Šešelj Appeal Judgment) in the light of prior case law of the International Military Tribunal of Nuremberg (IMT) and the International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia (ICTR and ICTY respectively). The author submits that a plain reading of the Šešelj Appeal Judgment supports the view that it is only the more extreme form of incitement to violence, incitement to commit crimes, followed by actual violent acts, that may constitute hate speech amounting to the crime of persecution: incitement to discrimination or incitement to hatred as such do not qualify. Whether ‘incitement to violence’ absent the commission of crimes could qualify as persecution (a crime against humanity) remains an unsettled point. With regard to hate speech as instigation, the Šešelj Appeal Judgment’s restatement and application of the law causes less controversy: the substantial causal connection required for instigation was found to be direct in the circumstances of that case — even though directness is not a legal requirement for instigation. The author concludes that both these interpretations of hate speech are consistent with the earlier ad hoc tribunals’ jurisprudence and, more generally, with international human rights law which, with some controversial exceptions, allows criminalization only of the most extreme forms of incitement to violence.

Measuring the impact of punishment and forgiveness: a framework for evaluating transitional justice

2006 ◽  
Vol 88 (861) ◽  
pp. 19-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pierre Hazan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Community ◽  
Truth Commissions ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Post Cold War ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
The Impact

Truth commissions, international criminal tribunals, reparations, public apologies and other mechanisms of transitional justice are the new mantras of the post-cold-war era. Their purpose is to foster reconciliation in societies that have experienced widespread human-rights violations and to promote reform and democracy, the ultimate aim being to defuse tension. But to what degree are these mechanisms, which are financially and politically supported by the international community and NGOs, truly effective? Very little, in fact, is known about their impact. By examining the underlying hypotheses and workings of transitional justice and proposing a series of indicators to evaluate its results, this article helps to fill the gap.

scholarly journals ‘Justice seen is Justice done?’ - Assessing the Impact of Outreach Activities by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR)

2015 ◽  
Vol 21 (74) ◽  
pp. 63-93
Author(s):  
Philipp Schulz
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
National Level ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Field Research ◽  
Theoretical Argument ◽  
Group Discussions ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
And Control ◽  
The Impact

Abstract By referring to the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) as a case study, this paper seeks to explore the impact of outreach activities by international criminal tribunals. Building upon primary field research findings, including twenty-seven in-depth interviews and focus group discussions with 108 respondents, this paper applies a theory-driven investigation of the impact of outreach activities by the ICTR. Contrary to the theoretical argument, on a national level throughout society over time, outreach activities by the ICTR did neither increase awareness and understanding, nor shape positive perceptions towards the Tribunal and its expected contribution to reconciliation. Furthermore, a comparison of groups of outreach participants and control groups shows that outreach did increase the level of knowledge among beneficiaries of such activities. An increased understanding, however, cannot be correlated with more positive perceptions towards the Tribunal or its role in promoting reconciliation.

The Law and Practice of the International Criminal Court

2015 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Impact

The International Criminal Court is a controversial and important body within international law and is significantly growing in importance, particularly as other international criminal tribunals close down. After a decade of Court practice, this book takes stock of the activities of the International Criminal Court, identifying the key issues in need of potential reform. It provides a systematic and in-depth thematic account of the law and practice of the Court, including its changing context, the challenges it faces, and its overall contribution to international criminal law. The book is written by over forty leading practitioners and scholars from both inside and outside the Court. They provide an unparalleled insight into the Court as an institution, its jurisprudence, the impact of its activities, and its future development. The book is organised along six key themes: (i) the context of International Criminal Court investigations and prosecutions; (ii) the relationship of the Court to domestic jurisdictions; (iii) prosecutorial policy and practice; (iv) the applicable law; (v) fairness and expeditiousness of proceedings; and (vi) its impact and lessons learned.

Part 6 The Trial: Le Procès, Art.74 Requirements for the decision/Conditions requises pour la décision

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schabas William A
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Trial Chamber ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Military Tribunal ◽  
Military Tribunal

This chapter comments on Article 74 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 74 deals with several aspects of the trial itself. It requires members of the Trial Chamber to be present at all stages of the trial, but also allows for alternates to be designated. It indicates that the decision be adopted by a majority, and that the deliberations remain secret. The decision must contain a full and reasoned statement. This is far more specificity than any other international criminal tribunal has required. The Charter of the International Military Tribunal said that the judges must ‘give the reasons on which it is based’. Nowhere did it specify whether the deliberations should be in secret, or whether the decision should be by majority or unanimity, or whether there should be dissenting opinions, yet the judges did essentially what is provided for in article 74 of the Rome Statute.

New histories and new laws: Crimes against humanity at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda

2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 801-818
Author(s):  
Amanda Alexander
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
International Military Tribunal ◽  
Military Tribunal ◽  
History Of

AbstractThis article looks at the development of the concept of crimes against humanity at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR). It contends that the ICTR’s interpretation of crimes against humanity is generally seen by international lawyers as a commendable, but unsurprising, step in the historical development of this category. In much the same way, the ICTR’s historical account is considered to be a standard attempt by a war crimes court to relate a liberal history of crimes against humanity in a way that upholds civilized values. Yet, although the historical and legal work of the ICTR appear unexceptional, this article will argue that they do demonstrate a particular conceptual approach towards warfare, history, humanity, and the nature of international law. Moreover, this is a conceptual approach that is quite different to that taken by the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg. The article suggests that these differences, and the invisibility of the change, are due to the ICTR’s reliance on familiar narrative tropes. These narratives were established through poststructuralist theory but could be expressed in a variety of more or (often) less theoretical forms. By exploring the influence of these narratives on the Tribunal, it is possible to examine some of the ways in which conceptual change is facilitated and knowledge is created in international law. In particular, it shows how theories that are often considered marginal to international law have had a significant impact on some of the central provisions of international humanitarian law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document