scholarly journals Defining the National, Ethnic, Racial and Religious Groups of Genocide in the Practice of International Criminal Courts

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 38-45
Author(s):  
Dmytro Koval
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Genocide Convention ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Contextual Element ◽  
The Stability ◽  
Definition Of

The article analyzes the approaches of international courts (the UN International Court of Justice, International Criminal Court, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and hybrid Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia) to the criteria for defining genocide groups. The article emphasizes that the definition of belonging to a group is a contextual circumstance (contextual element) of the crime of genocide. In particular, the paper studies how the international courts applied positive/negative and objective/subjective identification strategies to conclude that certain groups constitute those protected by the Genocide Convention or the statutes of the international criminal courts. In addition, the article deals with the problem of the stability and mobility of the groups and the ways these characteristics help the international courts to apply the Convention.The article focuses on a search for algorithms that allow international courts to identify genocide groups. It stresses that the international criminal courts have not demonstrated consistency in their assessment of the definition of the groups. Neither have they showed the synchronized understanding of the approaches (objective/subjective, positive/negative, stable/mobile) to be used for the identification of these groups. Therefore, it is further argued that, due to the variability of approaches and strategies used by international courts to identify genocide groups, belonging to the group is a window of opportunity for a contextual reading of international criminal law.

scholarly journals Practice theory and change in international law: theorizing the development of legal meaning through the interpretive practices of international criminal courts

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nora Stappert
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Interpretive Practices ◽  
Legal Meaning

AbstractThe question of change has emerged as one of the main conceptual and empirical challenges for International Relations' practice turn. In the context of international law, such a challenge is brought into particularly stark relief due to the significant development of legal meaning through more informal, interpretive avenues, including through the judgments of international courts. This paper develops a framework for theorizing how interpretive legal practices generate normative content change in international law. Specifically, it uses the example of the development of international criminal law through the decisions of international criminal courts to analyze how legal interpretation can lead to normative change in practice. Drawing on interviews conducted with judges and legal officers at the International Criminal Court (ICC), the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), and the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL), I analyze how a community of legal practice centered around these courts was able to construct and alter legal meaning in international criminal law, and how such a potential for change was curbed by understandings of the interpretive process and the role of international courts dominant among international lawyers.

International Criminal Tribunals

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ron Levi ◽  
John Hagan ◽  
Sara Dezalay
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Political Environments ◽  
Professional Field

This chapter focuses on international criminal tribunals. These have emerged as part of a professional field of international criminal law, reshaping how atrocities are handled at the international level. They include the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), and the International Criminal Court (ICC). In many international courts, authority turns on judicial decisions. Yet in the context of international criminal courts, prosecutorial strategy is often at the core of the building or waning of authority. This is partly because of the power of prosecutors to make headlines and cause political controversy with indictments, and of the highly contentious and atypical political environments in which these courts operate. In building their authority, prosecutors are acutely aware of the constraints on the authority they enjoy and thus seek to speak to the constituencies they need—while avoiding others—through their prosecutorial practices.

scholarly journals Economic Genocide Under International Law

2018 ◽  
Vol 82 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-34
Author(s):  
P Sean Morris
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Spillover Effect ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Genocide Convention ◽  
Narrow Scope ◽  
The Status ◽  
Definition Of

The status of genocide in international law is well developed and forms part of customary international law and also treaty law. International tribunals such as the International Criminal Court and specialised chambers such as the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda have addressed and made a number of convictions regarding genocide. This relative success in the international criminal justice system regarding genocide has given the appearance that perpetrators responsible for genocide will be brought to justice. Yet, there is a fundamental crack in international criminal law with regard to genocide as a crime and how to bring perpetrators to justice. That crack, is essentially, the narrow scope and definition of genocide, and also how to demonstrate that perpetrators had the intention of committing genocide. I contend in this article that the scope of genocide should be extended to include economic genocide and argue that spillover intent of aiders and abettors of genocide requires more clear and coherent rules to include economic genocide as part of how the crime of genocide is assessed in international law. The article first presents and discusses the notion of genocide, taking into consideration the Genocide Convention (1948) and then discusses the status of Article 2(c) of the Convention to define economic genocide. The article then posits the calculated economic measures that affect the conditions of life of peoples involve intent and that intention has a spillover effect.

International Criminal Law

2019 ◽  
pp. 466-490
Author(s):  
Hirad Abtahi ◽  
Philippe Kirsch
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Genocide Convention ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
Common System ◽  
Substantive Law ◽  
Judicial Assistance

By virtue of its longevity, territorial scope, mandate, and resources, the UN has been pivotal in the development of international criminal justice. While its contribution has been mostly institutional, in terms of genesis, establishment, and functioning of international and hybrid criminal courts, the UN has also shaped their procedural and substantive law. Starting with the first to be established—the ad hoc tribunals—the UN Security Council, acting under Chapter VII, adopted the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) statutes and fully managed them. To a lesser extent, the same could be said of Timor Leste’s Special Panel for Serious Crimes. Regarding the creation of hybrid criminal courts, that is, the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC), Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL), and Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL), the UN served as a bilateral treaty-making forum for the negotiation and conclusion of UN-member states’ agreements. Through the ICTY completion strategy and rule 11bis, the UN also internationalized domestic courts (War Crimes Chambers) to enhance national judicial capacity building to prosecute international crimes. Finally, the UN served as the ultimate multilateral treaty-making body in the ICC’s half-century-long creation; starting with the Genocide Convention, and continuing with the ILC and subsequent negotiations leading to the adoption of the ICC Statute, which created a complex institutional and jurisdictional relationship with the UN. Institutionally, this has included cooperation and judicial assistance, dispute settlement functions, UN treaty functions, and adherence to the UN common system. Jurisdictionally, this has involved Chapter VII referrals and deferrals and jurisdiction over a range of crimes close to other UN created tribunals.

scholarly journals The Indirect Intent in The International Criminal Case-Law

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 192-196
Author(s):  
Viorel Pașca ◽  
Bianca-Codruța Băra
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Significant Step ◽  
New Form ◽  
Definition Of

Abstract This study focuses on the analyse of the indirect intent in the international criminal caselaw. Traditionally, the Romanian Criminal Code defines the indirect intent through the pshychological position of the offender towards the result of the crime, which can lead, in some circumstances, to unfair result. Finding an appropriate definition has been a constant problem for the international courts of justice, especially taking into consideration the effort to reconcile this attempt with the national regulations and principles. The International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia developed a new form of criminal participation in which it described the mens rea using the notion of `risk`. The Tadić case represents a significant step for the definition of indirect intent, in the way it is considered in our legal system.The international criminal court emphasizes the importance of the person`s position towards the risk that criminal acts could lead to relevant results and it outlines the standards of foreseeability of such risk.

The Judiciary of International Criminal Law

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 537-555
Author(s):  
Mikkel Jarle Christensen
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
The Core ◽  
Original Dataset ◽  
Political Expertise ◽  
Structure Access

Abstract The article investigates the judiciary of international criminal law and its development over time. Inspired by the sociological tools of Pierre Bourdieu and building on an original dataset, the article analyses the judiciary of three international criminal courts, namely the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, the International Criminal Court and the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia. The focus of the analysis is on how the composition of expertise in the judiciary of these courts reflects the wider power structure in the field of international criminal law as well as temporal developments in this structure. Reflecting and responding to these transformations, the judiciary of international criminal law has been affected by a double decline of positions and prestige and a turn towards practice as the core expertise of the field. However, despite this turn to practice, the accumulation of political expertise continues to structure access to elite positions in the international criminal law judiciary.

scholarly journals A New Influence of Legal Scholars? The Use of Academic Writings at International Criminal Courts and Tribunals

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 963-980 ◽  
Author(s):  
NORA STAPPERT
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Qualitative Interviews ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Mixed Methods Approach ◽  
Citation Practices

AbstractWhat role have international legal scholars played in the development of international criminal law? Building on recent studies of the citation practices of international courts, the article provides an empirical assessment of the use and functions of citations to scholarly writings in the judgments of international criminal courts and tribunals. Using a mixed-methods approach, the article combines: a) a quantitative analysis of judgments interpreting the law of war crimes across four international and hybrid courts; with b) qualitative interviews with judges and legal officers at the International Criminal Court (ICC), the ad hoc Tribunals, and the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL). The article argues that scholarly writings have been strikingly visible in the judgments of international criminal courts and tribunals, and especially at the ICC, which entails significant implications for the functions of academic writings and the role of international legal scholars.

Protracted Armed Violence as a Criterion for the Existence of Non-international Armed Conflict: International Humanitarian Law, International Criminal Law and Beyond

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miloš Hrnjaz ◽  
Janja Simentić Popović
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Armed Violence ◽  
Definition Of

Abstract The present article provides legal analysis of the concept of ‘protracted armed violence’ which is part of the commonly accepted definition of non-international armed conflict (NIAC). The International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia interpreted this notion as the intensity requirement. However, the practice of other international legal institutions that use this concept (such as International Criminal Court and some other judicial institutions) is not always coherent with this finding. This fact raised several theoretical and practical issues in the process of interpretation and implementation of international legal norms. Therefore, the aim of the article is to critically reassess the ‘protracted armed violence’ concept in various branches of international law and to contribute to the better understanding of the NIAC phenomenon.

Judicial Lawmaking, Discourse Theory, and the ICTY on Belligerent Reprisals

2011 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 1261-1278 ◽  
Author(s):  
Milan Kuhli ◽  
Klaus Günther
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Individual Case ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Discourse Theory ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
Normative Expectations ◽  
Judicial Lawmaking ◽  
The Individual

Without presenting a full definition, it can be said that the notion of judicial lawmaking implies the idea that courts create normative expectations beyond the individual case. That is, our question is whether courts' normative declarations have an effect which is abstract and general. Our purpose here is to ask about judicial lawmaking in this sense with respect to international criminal courts and tribunals. In particular, we will focus on the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY). No other international criminal court or tribunal has issued so many judgments as the ICTY, so it seems a particularly useful focus for examining the creation of normative expectations.

scholarly journals The Legacy of the ICTY and ICTR in China

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 110 ◽  
pp. 245-250
Author(s):  
Bing Bing Jia
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Tribunal

Legacy is a matter that may become topical when its creator finally stops producing. Normally, the silent years would be many before the thought of legacy enters into open, formal discourse among lawyers and decision-makers. This comment treats the meaning of the word as relative to the circumstances in which it is invoked. The more closely it is used in relation to the present, the more distant it drifts from its literal meaning, to the extent that it denotes what the word “impact” signifies. This essay questions whether the word “legacy” is apt in describing the footprint of the work of the two ad hoctribunals in China, where its influence has, as a matter of fact, been waning ever since the adoption of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court in 1998 (“Rome Statute” ). The Chinese example suggests that the work of the tribunals is (at least so far) no more significant to international criminal law than the illustrious Nuremberg and Tokyo Trials of the 1940s. The most major impact (a more apposite term than legacy) of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) for China may be that China’s policy with regard to the tribunals, manifested mostly in the United Nations, has determined its approach to the International Criminal Court (“ICC” ). For that, the work of the tribunals could be considered as having left China something in the nature of an indirect legacy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document