Collective Reparations and the Limitations of International Criminal Justice to Respond to Mass Atrocity

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadia Tapia Navarro
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Trust Fund ◽  
Legal Fiction ◽  
Mass Atrocity ◽  
Collective Dimension

Crimes under international criminal law (icl) are complex and are necessarily committed by complex nets of perpetrators with different degrees of responsibility. Claims have been raised against icl as a mechanism overly focused on the legal fiction of an individual perpetrator, obscuring the true collective dimension of the crimes. Despite these criticisms, icl has incorporated a mechanism to address this collective dimension, at least on the side of the victims: collective reparations. However, the emerging use of collective reparations faces important challenges in an avenue based on an individual-perpetrator logic. Here, I identify current difficulties in the early practice of collective reparations in international criminal justice. These difficulties relate mainly with procedural issues and the role of the ‘adjunct mechanisms’ such as the Trust Fund for Victims (tfv). I submit that these difficulties reflect the inherent tensions present in the asymmetrical treatment of the collective dimension of the crimes

Responsibility for Bystanders in Mass Crimes: Towards a Duty to Rescue in International Criminal Justice

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (5) ◽  
pp. 879-908
Author(s):  
Auriane Botte-Kerrison
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Attribution Of Responsibility ◽  
The Social ◽  
Collective Dimension

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.

s.III Rationales, Ch.9 Taking Internationalism Seriously: Why International Criminal Law Matters

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gur-Arye Miriam ◽  
Harel Alon
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Institutions ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Justice ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Penal Institutions ◽  
Traditional Institutions ◽  
Domestic Level

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.

International Criminal Law as Expressivist Justice

2020 ◽  
pp. 391-416
Author(s):  
Carsten Stahn
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Different Dimensions

This chapter connects expressivism to justice discourse and different dimensions of justice. It claims that expressivism has a more complex role in international criminal justice than publicly admitted. It is a means to reaffirm the purposes and ambitions of the field and to encourage commitment to it, and to enact and perform law. It also provides a more realistic understanding of justice. It views justice not as something ‘objective’ or ‘definitive’ that can be delivered through criminal proceedings, but rather as an intersubjective process that is triggered through messages and communicative relationships: justice is a message.

Beyond the Juristic Orientation of International Criminal Justice: The Relevance of Criminological Insight to International Criminal Law and its Control A Commentary

2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 97-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dawn Rothe ◽  
Christopher Mullins
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Deterrent Effect ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Crime Commission ◽  
Empirical Fact

AbstractThis article draws attention to the relevance of criminological insight on issues of international criminal law and criminal justice. In particular, the ideology and theory of deterrence, legitimacy, and international criminal law are drawn from. After all, the deterrent effect has been touted as a solid empirical fact with the progression and development of 'international criminal justice', the international tribunals since the mid 1990s, and the International Criminal Court. Yet, the current rather blind belief in the deterrent impact of international criminal justice remains, regretfully, a bit premature. Additionally, beyond the concepts of deterrence and legitimacy, criminologists have much to contribute to international criminal justice. As noted, there are social, political, cultural, and geographical issues that play a role in not only crime commission, but in the hindrance of and/or facilitation of deterrence. Criminologists are well positioned to show how these connections may facilitate or hinder the broader goals of the legal community.

Personal Remarks on Antonio Cassese and His Vision of International Law and International Criminal Justice along the Road He Walked

2012 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 503-510
Author(s):  
SALVATORE ZAPPALA
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Prolific Author ◽  
The Road

AbstractThis article is a journey through the life of Antonio Cassese, a giant of international law, no doubt one of the most prominent international lawyers of the twentieth century, and the ‘architect of international criminal justice’. From his first steps in the academic community in Pisa in the early 1960s to his well-known contributions as first president of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, he became a prolific author and editor of seminal books and commentaries on international law and international criminal law, as well as founder of groundbreaking law journals.

s.V Modalities, Ch.21 From Machinery to Motivation: The Lost Legacy of Criminal Organizations Liability

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohamed Saira
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Organizations ◽  
Military Tribunal ◽  
Mass Atrocity ◽  
Atrocity Crimes ◽  
Missed Opportunity

This chapter considers the lost legacy of the concept of criminal organizations in international criminal law. When the notion of declaring the criminality of organizations, in addition to determining the guilt of individuals, was first proposed in anticipation of the trial before the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, organizational criminality was viewed as an opportunity both to recognize the role of organizations in nurturing mass criminality and to facilitate the prosecution of masses of individuals. But by the time the Tribunal was in operation, the first of these goals had faded away, and organizational criminality represented nothing more than a tool to accomplish individual criminality. This chapter argues that treating criminal organizations as a means to secure individual criminal liability represents a loss, a missed opportunity, in international criminal law. The condemnation of organizations that can attend organizational liability could have created within international criminal law an opportunity to expose the role of organizations in the perpetration of mass atrocity, to call attention to and analyze the institutionalized nature of mass atrocity crimes, which makes these crimes not only unthinkably destructive, but also inherently and importantly distinct from criminal wrongdoing in which a person’s conduct diverges from the standards of most of society. The missed opportunity of abandoning criminal organizations liability is particularly acute, this chapter contends, in light of the research in the decades since Nuremberg establishing how organizations affect individual behaviour. With greater understanding about the mechanisms for individuals’ desire to conform with peers, to obey authorities, and to rationalize their own actions, we can now see that organizations contribute to individuals’ decisions to commit crimes by providing forums and creating environments in which individuals come to believe that criminal behaviour is necessary or normal or even good, or in which individuals fail to recognize their own part in a criminal system. The organizations thus provide not only the machinery for atrocity, but also the motivation. By abandoning the substantive core of criminal organizations, international criminal law fails to identify the foundational role of organizations in creating mass atrocity crimes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document