Making Complementarity a Reality

2020 ◽  
pp. 31-47
Author(s):  
Serge Brammertz
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Essential Element ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
New Techniques ◽  
New Model ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Domestic Courts

This chapter presents a prosecutorial perspective on the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia’s (ICTY) legacies. It traces the evolution of the Office of the Prosecutor from a service that is grounded in primacy of jurisdiction into a more complementarity-oriented actor, in which interaction with domestic systems is an essential element to achieving justice for serious international crimes. The author argues that the support provided to national justice sectors in the countries of the former Yugoslavia is one of the most important legacies of the ICTY. The Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) started to engage with new techniques—including establishing the Transition Team—when the ICTY Completion Strategy was put into force. The OTP referred cases to national judiciaries, which improved in their capacities to process war crimes cases. The chapter concludes that the OTP’s cooperation with national courts establishes a new model of collaboration between international and domestic courts.

scholarly journals Przedterminowe zwolnienie z kary pozbawienia wolności skazanych za ludobójstwo, zbrodnie przeciwko ludzkości i wojenne na mocy orzeczeń międzynarodowych trybunałów karnych „ad hoc” oraz ich sukcesora w postaci Mechanizmu Rezydualnego ONZ

2021 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 209-226
Author(s):  
Małgorzata Szwejkowska
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Early Release ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Domestic Law

In the last decade of the 20th century, a war in the former Yugoslavia broke out, once again making Europe a witness to an armed conflict. Almost at the same time, another local ethnic bloodshed started, but this time in distant Africa — in Rwanda. Both these events included the most horrifying international crimes against humanity: genocide and war crimes. To prosecute the most important commanding figures involved in these conflicts and hold them criminally responsible, two ad hoc United Nations tribunals were created: International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in Hague and International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda in Arusha. They finished their operation in 2017 and 2015, respectively. The tasks of conducting and completing all ongoing proceedings, including law enforcement, after the completion of their mandates have been entrusted to the UN International Residual Mechanism. One of the crucial assignments of the tribunals and later the Redisual Mechanism was to deal with the request on behalf of the convicted for granting them early release. Although none of the statutes of the aforementioned courts provided any ground for early release, soon it was accepted that both tribunals, as well as their successor, were entitled to proceed despite this issue. As soon as in 2001, the first convict was granted early release, but with no conditions. It is estimated that, to date, more than 2/3 of all convicted by the Tribunals have been released before the termination of their sentence. This should raise the question of how to rehabilitate that kind of offender, convicted of genocide, war crimes, or crimes against humanity, to ensure they do not pose a threat to society anymore. Especially since the offenders serve their punishment outside the country of their origin — meaning, different rules apply according to the domestic law regulation of the state that voluntarily agreed to enforce the sentence. This article analyzes the juridical approach of the tribunals and the Residual Mechanism on the issue of early release of the convicts involved in the armed conflicts in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda.

Responsibility for war crimes before national courts in Croatia

2006 ◽  
Vol 88 (861) ◽  
pp. 145-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivo Josipović
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Ethical Standards ◽  
The European Union ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Historical Truth

This article analyses problems with which the Republic of Croatia, as a country in transition, has to contend during war crimes proceedings. A major characteristic of the recent wars waged on the territory of the former Yugoslavia is that war crimes were committed, though on a different scale, by all parties involved, irrespective of the political and other motives that prompted them to engage in armed conflict. Political unwillingness is the principal reason why national courts, including those in the Republic of Croatia, did not prosecute war crimes in accordance with internationally acceptable standards. The international community responded by setting up the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the main objectives of which are to establish justice, render justice to victims and determine the historical truth. Implicitly, despite political and other opposition to its work, the ICTY is helping to define legal and ethical standards appropriate for a democratic society in the countries established on the territory of the former Yugoslavia. This is particularly important for the reason that all these countries aspire to membership of the European Union. The work of the ICTY, as well as proceedings before domestic courts, is therefore an important legal, political and moral catalyst on their way towards accession to the European Union. This is fully confirmed by the example of the Republic of Croatia.

Prosecutor V. Perišić (ICTY)

2013 ◽  
Vol 52 (5) ◽  
pp. 1065-1116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Jenks
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
International Crimes

What are the requisite elements to convict an individual of aiding and abetting international crimes committed by an organization? This form of liability question was the principal issue the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) addressed in its February 28, 2013 judgment overturning the 2011 conviction of General Momčilo Perišić, the former head of the Army of Yugoslavia (VJ), for aiding and abetting war crimes in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia.

Fairness in National Courts Prosecuting International Crimes: The Case of the War Crimes Chamber of Bosnia-Herzegovina

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 712-734
Author(s):  
James Meernik ◽  
Josue Barron
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Bosnian War ◽  
Critical Issues ◽  
Lower Ranking ◽  
The Impact

The Bosnian War Crimes Chamber was established to adjudicate cases of violations of international law by lower-ranking individuals in Bosnia-Herzegovina, who were not prosecuted by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY). One of the most critical issues facing this Court, however, is whether its justice is unbiased by the ethnic divisions that characterized the Bosnian War (1992–1995) and the politics of Bosnia-Herzegovina ever since. Using a new database of first instance verdicts from the War Crimes Chamber (WCC), we test for the impact of ethnic bias on verdicts and sentences. While initial analyses seem to suggest such bias may exist, our multivariate model of sentencing indicates that other factors such as the gravity of the crimes and individual circumstances play a more powerful role than ethnicity.

Prosecutor v. Perišić

2013 ◽  
Vol 107 (3) ◽  
pp. 622-627 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Jenks
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Essential Element ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Effective Control ◽  
Specific Direction ◽  
Actus Reus

On February 28, 2013, the appeals chamber (Chamber) of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) overturned the 2011 conviction of General Momčilo Perišsicć, the former head of the Yugoslav Army (VJ), for aiding and abetting war crimes in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia. By a 4-1 vote, the Chamber held that “specific direction” is an essential element of liability for the actus reus of aiding and abetting the crimes of murder, extermination, inhumane acts, attacks on civilians, and persecution as crimes against humanity and/or violations of the laws or customs of war. It also held that Perišsicć lacked the necessary “effective control” over his subordinates to subject him to command responsibility for their violations of the laws and customs of war.

Interviewing Perpetrators against the Backdrop of Ethical Concerns and Reflexivity

2019 ◽  
pp. 72-88 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mina Rauschenbach
Keyword(s):  
Power Relations ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Ethical Concerns ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Research Outcomes ◽  
Interview Situation ◽  
Political Dimensions ◽  
Sampling Procedures

This chapter takes stock of experiences gained through a research project on the perspective of individuals accused by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY). Using interviews, it analyses the discourse of eighteen individuals accused of having indirectly (i.e. ordered, planned, not prevented) or directly (i.e. personally committing a crime) participated in international crimes. It shows how identity positions and power relations must also be accounted for in terms of their specific implications for ethical concerns and reflexivity when carrying out such research. It discusses how the interviewees’ particular status, in its legal and political dimensions, affected the sampling procedures, the organization of the interview situation, process, its outcomes, and outputs, as well as the researchers’ roles in shaping the interview process and research outcomes. It concludes by reflecting upon the significance of the ‘figure of the perpetrator’ in academia and beyond.

Briefly Noted

2019 ◽  
Vol 58 (3) ◽  
pp. 664-667
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Trial Chamber ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
Life Sentence

On March 20, 2019, the Appeals Chamber of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals set aside Radovan Karadžić's prior sentence of forty years and imposed a life sentence. Karadžić was convicted of genocide, crimes against humanity, and violations of the laws or customs of war in March 2016 by a Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and sentenced to forty years in prison. His crimes relate to war crimes he committed during the 1990s conflicts in the Balkans, in particular the 1995 Srebrenica massacre of 8,000 Bosnian Serbs and the three-year long siege of Sarajevo. The Appeals Chamber reversed part of Karadžić's convictions related to the Overarching JCE and dismissed the rest of his appeal, while also dismissing most of the Prosecution's appeal, aside from the sentence. The Appeals Chamber judges found that the Trial Chamber “committed a discernible error and abused its discretion in imposing a sentence of only 40 years of imprisonment,” and consequently imposed a life sentence.

Close to Home

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 219-242
Author(s):  
Kim Thuy Seelinger
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Violence ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Local Justice ◽  
Forced Prostitution ◽  
Historical Antecedents

Abstract For decades, the ad hoc tribunals and the International Criminal Court have taken the presumptive spotlight in prosecuting international crimes cases, including those involving conflict-related sexual violence. However, recent progress in prosecuting conflict-related sexual violence in national courts has started to both fulfil and complicate the notion of ‘complementarity’ between these two arenas of international criminal justice. This article presents the historical antecedents and current diversity of national courts addressing conflict-related sexual violence. It first casts back to the 1940s, to the little-known efforts of the United War Crimes Commission that guided national authorities in their prosecution of wartime atrocities including rape and forced prostitution. It then focuses on three kinds of national courts addressing conflict-related sexual violence today: military tribunals, hybrid tribunals and ‘purely domestic’ specialized chambers, highlighting key case studies and different ways these courts have engaged international actors. In conclusion, the article confirms the growing importance and diversity of national courts in the prosecution of conflict-related sexual violence, identifying ways the international community can better support survivors’ access to this more local justice.

scholarly journals The Norm of Justice and the Negotiation of the Rambouillet/Paris Peace Accords

2000 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 207-217
Author(s):  
Paul R. Williams
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Government Officials ◽  
Peace And Justice ◽  
High Government ◽  
Made In

With the creation of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the imminent creation of a permanent International Criminal Court, as well as the proliferation of public statements by high government officials endorsing the norm of justice, many commentators are hypothesizing that the long running tension between peace and justice may be undergoing a period of reconciliation. A brief review of the efforts to incorporate the norm of justice in the Rambouillet/Paris Accords and UNSC 1244 indicates that only minimal progress has been made in the reconciliation between the quest for a negotiated peace and the norm of justice. As the most powerful nation committed to the rule of law, we have a responsibility to confront these assaults on humankind. One response mechanism is accountability, namely to help bring the perpetrators of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes to justice. If we allow them to act with impunity, then we will only be inviting a perpetuation of these crimes far into the next millennium. Our legacy must demonstrate an unyielding commitment to the pursuit of justice.David SchefferUS Ambassador for War Crimes The search for a juster peace than was obtainable at the negotiating table has inflicted hardship and havoc on innocent civilians within the former Yugoslavia and exacted a heavy price from the already weak economies of the neighboring states.David OwenCo-Chair of the International Conference for the former Yugoslavia

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document