The legitimacy of international courts: Victims’ evaluations of the ICTY and local courts in Bosnia and Herzegovina

2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 200-220 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanja Kutnjak Ivković ◽  
John Hagan
Keyword(s):  
Bosnia And Herzegovina ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Political Independence ◽  
Distributive Fairness ◽  
Specific Support ◽  
Local Courts

This paper presents the results of a 2007 survey of victims of war crimes and crimes against humanity from Bosnia and Herzegovina. We study the level of diffuse and specific support for the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) among its constituency by exploring the respondents’ views about the ICTY and the local courts in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, and Serbia. Our results show that, whereas the ICTY was the preferred decision-maker for war crimes and crimes against humanity for the majority of the respondents, ethnicity plays a strong role in the perceptions of the ICTY’s legitimacy. Compared with Croat and Serb respondents, who typically expressed little confidence in the ICTY, the Bosniak/Muslim respondents seemed to show the greatest degree of support for the ICTY. Although the majority of the respondents evaluated the ICTY as fair, the level of support for the ICTY was sharply divided across ethnic lines as well and was related to evaluations of the ICTY’s distributive fairness and procedural fairness, and to perceptions about the judges’ (lack of) political independence. The majority of the respondents evaluated only one domestic court – the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina – as fair.

scholarly journals Relativising Atrocity Crimes: The Message of Unconditional Early Release of Perpetrators Convicted by the ICTY (1998 – 2018)

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-96
Author(s):  
Priyamvada Yarnell
Keyword(s):  
Bosnia And Herzegovina ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Early Release ◽  
Key Stakeholders ◽  
Moral Condemnation ◽  
Atrocity Crimes

Abstract Despite being found guilty of egregious acts, crimes against humanity and war crimes, 54 of the 90 perpetrators sentenced by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (icty) were granted unconditional early release (uer). This article argues that uer did a disservice to two principal expressive purposes of punishment - moral condemnation of the crimes and the overall norm projected by the icty, the ‘universal repugnance of group-based killing’. Fundamentally, punishment of perpetrators signifies the inherent worth of victims. Interviews with key stakeholders in Bosnia and Herzegovina revealed that the interviewees largely concurred with authors who posit that punitive justice conveys valuable messages to audiences. This article complements expressivist theories by demonstrating the extent to which expressivism was negated as perpetrators were granted uer. Finally, it proposes how early release in future tribunals and courts might be tailored to counter the negation of international criminal justice’s expressive value.

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.

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.

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

Fitness to Stand Trial under International Criminal Law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Freckelton ◽  
Magda Karagiannakis
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Legal Standards ◽  
Fitness To Stand Trial ◽  
Physical Disorders

This chapter analyses the international criminal law jurisprudence on fitness to stand trial. It examines the mental and physical disorders that have been asserted in international criminal proceedings for defendants accused of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. It exposes the processes by which fitness is determined and distils the legal standards that international courts have utilised and the consequences of unfitness by international courts. The chapter canvasses the introduction of more nuanced and psychiatrically informed criteria for fitness determinations. It also proposes the introduction of adequately resourced secure facilities for the confinement of persons found unfit to stand trial in order to reduce the incentives for the assertion of questionable unfitness claims, and encourages consideration of the introduction of special hearings for those found unfit in order to advance the overall aims of international criminal justice.

Individual Criminal Responsibility for the Financing of Entities Involved in Core Crimes: Aiding and Abetting

2021 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Ausserladscheider Jonas ◽  
Dire Tladi
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Individual Criminal Responsibility

War crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide and the crime of aggression could not be perpetrated without those who finance them. This article examines the basis for criminal liability in international criminal law (ICL) for persons who finance entities that perpetrate core crimes. Despite the need for clear rules, neither international courts nor scholars agree upon (i) whether liability exists for individuals who finance entities that perpetrate core crimes; and (ii) if so, the circumstances under which such liability exists. This article argues that an individual who finances an entity that perpetrates a core crime should be held criminally liable under customary international criminal law as an aider and abettor. The objective of this article is to clarify the rules that would enable international courts and tribunals to identify the extent to which individual criminal liability attaches to the financing of core crimes, as well as the legal basis for such liability. By clarifying the criminal accountability of individuals who finance entities that perpetrate core crimes, this article also seeks to clarify the mental elements of the mode of liability of aiding and abetting.

The Good Deeds of International Criminal Defendants

2012 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 799-813 ◽  
Author(s):  
JEAN GALBRAITH
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
The Other ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Good Deeds

AbstractInternational criminal tribunals try defendants for horrific acts: genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. At sentencing, however, evidence often arises of what I will call defendants’ ‘good deeds’ – humanitarian behaviour by the defendants towards those on the other side of the conflict that is conscientious relative to the culture in which the defendants are operating. This article examines the treatment of good deeds in the sentencing practices of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. I show that the tribunals’ approaches are both undertheorized and internally inconsistent. I argue that the tribunals should draw upon the goals that underlie international criminal law in developing a coherent approach to considering good deeds for sentencing purposes.

Shakespeare's Fools

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 29-41
Author(s):  
Maja Milatovic-Ovadia
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Life Imprisonment ◽  
Close Analysis ◽  
Complex Process ◽  
Applied Theatre ◽  
Work Functions

In November 2017, Ratko Mladic, a war-time leader and a commander of the Bosnian Serb Army, was sentenced by the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal to life imprisonment for the genocide and crimes against humanity committed during the 1992–1995 war in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In the region the verdict was received with conflicting reactions, emphasising yet again how extensive the ethnic division is within the society. Through close analysis of the theatre project Shakespeare’s Comedies performed by ethnically segregated youth in Bosnia-Herzegovina, this article aims to understand how Shakespeare’s work functions as a vehicle to address the consequences of war and to support the complex process of reconciliation under circumstances in which the issues of war crimes cannot be tackled in a straightforward and direct manner. The study takes a cross-disciplinary approach to research, drawing from theory of reconciliation, applied theatre practice and comedy studies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document