The Puzzle of Atrocity Criminalization

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Mark S. Berlin
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
Qualitative Case Studies ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
Quantitative Analyses

Why do governments take atrocity offenses, like genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity, from international law and legislate them into domestic criminal law, empowering national courts to prosecute their own, and sometimes other states’, government and military officials? The question is important, because the international community has constructed an international legal regime to prosecute the most serious human rights violations, but that regime is designed to rely primarily on domestic criminal courts to try offenders. To fulfill this role, domestic courts often require specific legislation that defines and criminalizes these offenses in national law. Yet, the adoption of national atrocity laws is puzzling, since in a number of ways, these laws appear to threaten states’ interests. This introductory chapter highlights the puzzle of atrocity criminalization and discusses its importance for the functioning of the international atrocity regime. It then situates this study in existing literatures and highlights the book’s contributions to research on atrocity justice, human rights, and international law. Next, it summarizes the book’s main arguments and details the study’s multi-method research design, which combines quantitative analyses of new, original datasets with in-depth qualitative case studies of Guatemala, Colombia, Poland, and the Maldives.

1. Introduction

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Ormerod ◽  
Karl Laird
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998

This introductory chapter examines the functions of criminal law and discusses the sources of criminal law. These include common law and statutes, EU and international law, and the Human Rights Act 1998. It also considers the principle of fair labelling in criminal law and the codification of criminal law.

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.

Extracurricular International Criminal Law

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 412-447
Author(s):  
Mark A. Drumbl
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Limited Capacity ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
Corporate Liability

This article unpacks the jurisprudential footprints of international criminal courts and tribunals in domestic civil litigation in the United States conducted under the Alien Tort Statute (ats). The ats allows victims of human rights abuses to file tort-based lawsuits for violations of the laws of nations. While diverse, citations to international cases and materials in ats adjudication cluster around three areas: (1) aiding and abetting as a mode of liability; (2) substantive legal elements of genocide and crimes against humanity; and (3) the availability of corporate liability. The limited capacity of international criminal courts and tribunals portends that domestic tort claims as avenues for redress of systematic human rights abuses will likely grow in number. The experiences of us courts of general jurisdiction as receivers of international criminal law instruct upon broader patterns of transnational legal migration and reveal an unanticipated extracurricular legacy of international criminal courts and tribunals.

scholarly journals THE EXPANDING PROTECTION OF MEMBERS OF A PARTY'S OWN ARMED FORCES UNDER INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW

2019 ◽  
Vol 68 (04) ◽  
pp. 943-976
Author(s):  
Cóman Kenny ◽  
Yvonne McDermott
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Human Rights Law

AbstractDoes international law govern how States and armed groups treat their own forces? Do serious violations of the laws of war and human rights law that would otherwise constitute war crimes or crimes against humanity fall squarely outside the scope of international criminal law when committed against fellow members of the same armed forces? Orthodoxy considered that such forces were protected only under relevant domestic criminal law and/or human rights law. However, landmark decisions issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC) suggest that crimes committed against members of the same armed forces are not automatically excluded from the scope of international criminal law. This article argues that, while there are some anomalies and gaps in the reasoning of both courts, there is a common overarching approach under which crimes by a member of an armed group against a person from the same forces can be prosecuted under international law. Starting from an assessment of the specific situation of the victim, this article conducts an in-depth analysis of the concepts of ‘hors de combat’ and ‘allegiance’ for war crimes and that of the ‘lawful target’ for crimes against humanity, providing an interpretative framework for the future prosecution of such crimes.

14. International Criminal Law

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Dixon ◽  
Robert McCorquodale ◽  
Sarah Williams
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
Political Will ◽  
National Courts ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals

This chapter addresses the prosecution of crimes in international criminal courts according to international—not national—criminal law. International law has long recognised that certain conduct, for example piracy and slavery, are crimes against international law which may be tried by international bodies or by any State. This principle has been expanded to cover more substantive crimes. International mechanisms for criminal accountability may be established where national courts have failed or are unable to try offenders due to a lack of political will, insufficient resources, deficiencies in national law, and/or ongoing conflict. The establishment and jurisdiction of the existing international criminal tribunals, including the International Criminal Court, are considered.

scholarly journals The Close Relationship Between Serious Human Rights Violations and Crimes Against Humanity: International Criminalization of Serious Abuses

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (17) ◽  
pp. 145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan Pablo Pérez-León Acevedo
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
Legal Concept ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
Close Relationship ◽  
The Relationship

This article aims to evidence both the existence of a close relationship between the notions of serious human rights violations and crimes against humanity, and how this works in international law. To do so, international legal sources such as the United Nations practice, case-law of international and hybrid criminal courts and tribunals, and case-law of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and other human rights bodies are taken into account. Thus, this article analyses how these and other international sources have examined the above-mentioned relationship, i.e., inter alia the similarities and differences between serious human rights abuses and the legal objective and subjective elements of crimes against humanity. Accordingly, it is found that, although some differences exist, the notion of serious human rights violations underlies the legal concept of crimes against humanity. In turn, this is linked to the relationship between those two categories of international law.

scholarly journals Mapping the Shift: Human Rights and Criminal Law

2018 ◽  
Vol 112 ◽  
pp. 84-85
Author(s):  
Karen Engle
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Think Tank ◽  
Policy Studies ◽  
Formerly Incarcerated ◽  
International Award ◽  
Convicted Felons

In 2015, the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS)—a progressive think tank on U.S. domestic and foreign policy—awarded its annual human rights awards to two criminal lawyers. The domestic award went to Daryl Atkinson, who advocates for the rights of convicted felons. Its international award went to Almudena Bernabeu, for what the IPS called her “successful prosecution of several of the worst Latin American perpetrators of crimes against humanity.” I do not think that the IPS was trying to be balanced by picking a lawyer working on behalf of the rights of the formerly incarcerated, on one hand, and a prosecutor, on the other. Rather, the organization sought to honor those it sees as promoting human rights. In the context of U.S. law, that means fighting for the rights of defendants and the convicted. For international law, it means the opposite.

1. Introduction

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
David Ormerod ◽  
Karl Laird
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998

This introductory chapter examines the functions of criminal law and discusses the sources of criminal law. These include common law and statutes, international law, and the Human Rights Act 1998. It also considers the principle of fair labelling in criminal law and the codification of criminal law.

Comparative Views on the Right to Vote in International Law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shai Dothan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
National Courts ◽  
European Court ◽  
Right To Vote ◽  
The Right ◽  
Democratic Elections ◽  
The Way

There is a consensus about the existence of an international right to vote in democratic elections. Yet states disagree about the limits of this right when it comes to the case of prisoners’ disenfranchisement. Some states allow all prisoners to vote, some disenfranchise all prisoners, and others allow only some prisoners to vote. This chapter argues that national courts view the international right to vote in three fundamentally different ways: some view it as an inalienable right that cannot be taken away, some view it merely as a privilege that doesn’t belong to the citizens, and others view it as a revocable right that can be taken away under certain conditions. The differences in the way states conceive the right to vote imply that attempts by the European Court of Human Rights to follow the policies of the majority of European states by using the Emerging Consensus doctrine are problematic.

Ius Humanitatis and the Right to Reparation for International Crimes in Foreign Domestic Courts

2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 358-376
Author(s):  
Marcel Brus
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Domestic Court ◽  
Core Element ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
State Immunity ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
Humanitarian Ethics ◽  
The Right

This article focuses on the possibilities for victims of international crimes to obtain reparation in a foreign domestic court. The chances of success for such claims are small under traditional international law. The article questions whether the development of human rights and humanitarian ethics as a core element of international law (referred to as ius humanitatis) is having an impact on traditional obstacles to making such claims. Two elements are considered: the relevance of changing societal attitudes to the ‘rights’ of victims of such crimes and their possible effect on the interpretation and application of existing law, and whether in present-day international law humanitarian concerns have led to limiting obstacles that are still based on sovereignty, notably regarding the universality principle, prescription, and state immunity. The general conclusion is that on all these points much remains to be done.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document