Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T21:09:22.231Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How Politics Shapes the Contributions of Justice: Lessons from the ICTY and the ICTR

Part of: International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda: Broadening the Debate

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Kenneth A. Rodman
Kenneth A. Rodman*
Affiliation:
Colby College
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and Rwanda (ICTR) established a number of precedents in international criminal law, as detailed by Darryl Robinson and Gillian MacNeil.1 They also set the template for the International Criminal Court (ICC) and other tribunals as to how politics can both empower and constrain international prosecution and determine its potential contribution to peace.The lesson of the ICTY is that international criminal law can assist peace processes in an ongoing way if powerful states and international institutions complement it with coercive political strategies to weaken regimes or militias led by criminal spoilers to the point where their cooperation is not needed tonegotiate and maintain a peace settlement.The lesson of the ICTR is that the impact of international criminal law on consolidating peace is dependent upon the political agenda of the state on whose territory the crimes oc-curred and whose cooperation is needed for effective prosecution.Therefore, the contribution of prosecution to peace depends on whether the law is embedded in national and international political com-mitments that go beyond compliance with formal legal obligations and over which a tribunal has limited influence.

Type
Symposium on the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda: Broadening the Debate
Information
AJIL Unbound , Volume 110 , 2016 , pp. 234 - 239
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2016

References

1 Darryl Robinson & Gillian MacNeil, The Tribunals and the Renaissance of International Criminal Law: Three Themes, 110 AJIL 191 (2016).

2 See, e.g., Luis Moreno-Ocampo, The International Criminal Court: Seeking Global Justice, 40 Case Western Reserve J.Int’l L.215, 221(2008); Kathryn Sikkink, The Justice Cascade: How Human Rights Prosecutions are Changing World Politics 232 (2011); Rebecca Hamilton, Fighting for Darfur: Public Action and the Struggle to stop Genocide 158(2011).

3 See Steven L. Burg, Coercive Diplomacy in the Balkans: The U.S. Use of Force in Bosnia and Kosovo, in The United States and Coer-Cive Diplomacy 57, 59-64 (Robert J. Art & Patrick M. Cronineds., 2003).

4 Richard J. Goldstone, Bringing War Criminals to Justice in an Ongoing War, in Hard Choices: MORAL Dilemmas in Humanitarian Intervention 195, 202 (Jonathan Mooreed., 1998).

5 Gary Jonathan Bass, Stay the Hand of Vengeance: The Politics of War Crimes Tribunals 227-231 (2000).

6 See,e.g., Paul R. Williams & Michael P.Scharf, Peace with Justice? War Crimes and Accountability in the Former Yugoslavia 120-121 (2002).

7 See Burg, supra note 3, at 94–96.

8 See,e.g., Leila N.Sadat, The International Criminal Court and the Transformation of International Law: Justice for the New Millennium 70 (2002).

9 See Trevor Findlay, The use of Force in Unpeace Operations 309 (2002).

10 See,e.g., Human Rights Watch, Selling Justice Short 43-50 (2009).

11 See International Crisis Group, Congo: Consolidating the Peace, Africa Report no.128, at 14 (July 5, 2007).

12 Alex J. Bellamy & Paul D. Williams, The UN Security Council and the Question of Humanitarian Intervention in Darfur, 5 J. Mil. Ethics 144 (2006).

13 See Bruno Stagno Ugarte, Sudan (Darfur), in The United Nations Security Council in the age of Human Rights 337, 353 (Jared Gensered., 2014).

14 Marko Milanović, The Impact of the ICTY on the Former Yugoslavia: An Anticipatory Postmortem, 110 AJIL 233, 235 (2016).

15 Victor Peskin, International Justice in Rwanda and the Balkans Virtual trials and the Struggle for State Co-operation ch. 9(2008). See also, Sara Kendall & Sarah M. H. Nouwen, Speaking of Legacy: Toward an Ethos of Modesty at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, 110 AJIL 212 (2016).

16 See, e.g., Sarah M. H. Nouwen & Wouter G. Werner, Doing justice to the political: The international criminal court in Uganda and Sudan, 21 Eur. J. Int’l L. 941, 946-954 (2010).

17 See Phil Clark, Law, Politics and Pragmatism: The ICC and Case Selection in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Uganda,in Courting Conflict 37 (Nicholas Waddell & Phil Clarkeds., 2008).

18 Human Rights Watch, Making Justice Count: Lessons from the ICC’s Work in CTE D’ivoire 41-44 (2015).

19 See Thierry Cruvellier, Court of Remorse: Inside the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda 162 (2006).

20 On surrogate enforcement, see Peskin, supra note 15; For suggestions as to why its replication to Uganda and the DRC are unlikely, see Clark, supra note 17, at 40, and ADAM Branch, Displacing Human Rights: War and Intervention in Northern Uganda 187 (2011).

21 Stephen Brown & Rosalind Raddatz,Dire consequences or empty threats? Western pressure for peace, justice and democracy in Kenya, 8 J. Eastern Afr. Stud. 43 (2014).