The Power of the Beaten Path

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
William A. Schabas
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Head Of State ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Paris Peace Conference

The introductory chapter explains contemporary interest in legal developments a century ago. Discussions and decisions at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919 were the beginning of debates that continue to this day. The chapter looks in some detail at the criminality of starting a war, today known as the crime of aggression, the immunity that can be invoked by a Head of State like the Kaiser, and problems of attributing criminal responsibility to those who are not physically involved in the crime. It also addresses the creation of international criminal tribunals, which began with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.

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.

Individual Criminal Responsibility before the International Criminal Court

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Goy
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Individual Criminal Responsibility

For more than 15 years the two ad hoc Tribunals, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), have interpreted the requirements of different forms of individual criminal responsibility. It is thus helpful to look at whether and to what extent the jurisprudence of the ICTY/ICTR may provide guidance to the International Criminal Court (ICC). To this end, this article compares the requirements of individual criminal responsibility at the ICTY/ICTR and the ICC. The article concludes that, applied with caution, the jurisprudence of the ICTY/ICTR – as an expression of international law – can assist in interpreting the modes of liability under the ICC Statute. ICTY/ICTR case law seems to be most helpful with regard to accessorial forms of liability, in particular their objective elements. Moreover, it may assist in interpreting the subjective requirements set out in Article 30 ICC Statute.

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.

The Right of the Accused to Self-Representation Before International Criminal Tribunals: Further Developments

2005 ◽  
Vol 99 (3) ◽  
pp. 663-668
Author(s):  
Nina H. B. Jørgensen
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
Rapid Development ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Trial Chamber ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
The Law ◽  
Developing Area ◽  
The Right

In its decision on assigned counsel's motion for withdrawal in the Milosevic case, the trial chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) observed “that assignment of counsel against the wishes of the accused is a developing area of the law both in national and international jurisdictions.” This area of law witnessed rapid development by international criminal tribunals in the latter half of 2004.

New Mechanisms for the Enforcement of International Humanitarian Law

2001 ◽  
Vol 95 (4) ◽  
pp. 934-952 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daryl A. Mundis
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
International Community ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Domestic Courts

The international criminal court (ICC) will serve as a permanent institution dedicated to the enforcement of international humanitarian law sixty days after the sixtieth state has deposited its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval, or accession to the Treaty of Rome with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.1 Pursuant to Article 11 of the ICC Statute, however, the ICC will have jurisdiction only with respect to crimes committed after the treaty comes into force.2 Consequently, when faced with allegations of violations of international humanitarian law in the period prior to the establishment of the ICC, the international community has five options if criminal prosecutions are desired.3 First, additional ad hoc international tribunals, similar to those established for the former Yugoslavia (International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, ICTY) and Rwanda (International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, ICTR) could be established.4 Second, "mixed" international criminal tribunals, which would share certain attributes with the ad hoc Tribunals, could be created.5 Third, the international community could leave the prosecution of alleged offenders to national authorities, provided that the domestic courts are functioning and able to conduct such trials. Fourth, in those instances where the national infrastructure has collapsed, international resources could be made available to assist with the prosecution of the alleged offenders in domestic courts. Finally, the international community could simply do nothing in the face of alleged violations of international humanitarian law.

International Criminal Tribunals and Cooperation with States

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geoffrey Nice ◽  
Nevenka Tromp
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Recent Experience ◽  
Political Elites ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
Commander In Chief ◽  
Conflict Narratives

This chapter examines the cooperation between Serbia and the International Criminal tribunal for Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) though reconstruction of how the OTP obtained records of the Supreme Defence Council (SDC), a collective Commander-in-Chief of the Yugoslav Army (VJ: Vojska Jugoslavije) from 1992 to 2003. Recent experience in the former Yugoslavia, in particular with Serbia, shows that the leading political elites will rarely be open and will do everything possible to control and limit post-conflict narratives. This proposition will be illustrated by analysing the way the de facto and de jure powers of Slobodan Milošević as president of Serbia (1990-1998) and of the FRY (1998-2000) would have been revealed through the SDC collection of documents generated by the highest state bodies in charge of commanding the armed forces during the Croatian, BiH, and Kosovo indictment periods that were incompletely and grudgingly produced by Serbia to the ICTY for its use.

Plausible Deniability

2019 ◽  
pp. 256-272
Author(s):  
Iva Vukušić
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Military Leaders ◽  
High Ranking

Outsourcing illegal violence and plausible deniability feature among the main reasons for states to establish, finance, equip, and direct actions of paramilitary units. Political and military leaders have an interest in distancing themselves from crimes, which are committed to further their political goals. This chapter discusses some of the reasons that make prosecuting paramilitary violence more difficult by analysing examples from the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). After reviewing relevant trials and their outcomes, the main conclusion is that plausible deniability works and results in shielding high-ranking officials from criminal responsibility. Overall, it is the lower-level perpetrators that receive punishment, and not those who have sent them on their missions, especially when those missions are across state borders. If courts do not find ways to hold accountable those that establish, fund, and direct paramilitaries as they persecute civilians, future perpetrators will not be deterred.

Victims and the International Criminal Court: Three major issues

2003 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 345-367 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sam Garkawe
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Protective Measure ◽  
Legal Representation ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals

AbstractThe Statute of the permanent International Criminal Court (the "ICC") agreed to in Rome in 1998 contains many provisions that deal with the specific concerns and rights of victims and survivors of the international crimes that the ICC will have jurisdiction over. It consolidates the work of the two ad hoc international criminal Tribunals (the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda) in this area, but also further enhances the role and rights of victims in a number of innovative ways. These three international criminal Tribunals thus collectively represent an important step forward in the recognition of the suffering and the position of victims and survivors of international crimes. This article will examine three main issues in relation to victims and the ICC. First, after identifying the protective measures for victims allowed at the discretion of the international criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, it will focus on the most controversial measure (which the ICC can also order) - the non-disclosure to the defence of the identity of witnesses. Does this protective measure violate a defendant's right to a fair trial? The Statute of the ICC also allows, for the first time in international criminal justice, for the right of victims to obtain their own legal representation, subject to the discretion of the ICC. The second issue is how is this going to work in practice in light of the fact that international crimes normally involve hundreds, if not thousands or even tens of thousands, of victims? And finally, while the ICC Statute provides for the possibility of reparations to victims, where will the money come from, and thus what are the chances of victims actually being able to receive compensation?

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document