Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T20:39:31.710Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dissident Voices in International Criminal Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 July 2015

MIKAEL BAAZ
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Since the end of the Cold War, societies from the former Soviet Union and others throughout Eastern Europe, Africa, Asia, and Latin America have overthrown dictators and other authoritative rulers in the hope of allowing democracy, the rule of law, and human rights. In some cases, the change has been violent and drawn out, while in other cases the change has been quick and (more or less) non-violent. Regardless of whether the change has been violent or not, a crucial question during and after transition is: In what ways should post-authoritarian and/or post-conflict societies deal with their ‘evil’ past in order to ‘enable the state itself to [once again] function as a moral agent’? This question constitutes the very core of what is known as ‘transitional justice’ (TJ).

Type
REVIEW ESSAYS
Information
Leiden Journal of International Law , Volume 28 , Issue 3 , September 2015 , pp. 673 - 689
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation of the Leiden Journal of International Law 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Teitel, R. G., Transitional Justice (2003), 3Google Scholar.

2 J. Borneman, Settling Accounts. Violence, Justice and Accountability in Postsocialist Europe (1997), at 3, quoted in M. Koskenniemi, The Politics of International Law (2011), 177.

3 Schwöbel, C., ‘The Market and Marketing Culture of International Criminal Law’, in Schwöbel, C. (ed.), Critical Approaches to International Criminal Law (2014), 268Google Scholar.

4 Koskenniemi, supra note 2, 172 [emphasis added].

5 Judgment of the IMT, in the Trial of German Major War Criminals: Proceedings of the International Military Tribunal sitting at Nuremberg, Germany, Part 22, 1950, 447, quoted in Duffy, H., The ‘War on Terror’ and the Framework of International Law (2005), 74CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 See Schwöbel, supra note 3, at 276. T. Krever, ‘Unveiling (and Veiling) Politics in International Criminal Law’, in Schwöbel, supra note 3, Ch. 5.

7 G. Simpson, ‘Linear Law: The History of International Criminal Law’, in Schwöbel supra note 3, at 169–70.

8 C. Schwöbel, ‘Introduction’, in Schwöbel, supra note 3, at 3. For a good example of mainstream critic in ICL, see, e.g., Ciorciari, J. D. and Heindel, A., Hybrid Justice: The Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

9 Cox, R., ‘Social Forces, States, and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory’, in Keohane, R. O., Neorealism and Its Critics (1986), 208.Google Scholar

10 Critical Approaches to International Criminal Law Research Network, 2015, <http://www.caicl.net/>; (accessed 15 March 2015).

11 Minkkinen, P., ‘Critical Legal “Method” as Attitude’, in Watkins, D. and Burton, M., Research Methods in Law (2013), 119Google Scholar.

12 I. Tallgren, ‘Who are “We” in International Criminal Law? On Critics and Membership’, in Schwöbel, supra note 3, at 81.

13 See Cox, supra note 9, at 209.

14 See Schwöbel, supra note 8, at 2. Cox, supra note 9, at 208–9.

15 See Tallgren, supra note 12, at 81.

16 Reus-Smit, C., ‘International Law’, in Baylis, J., Smith, S., and Owens, P., The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations (2014), 286Google Scholar. See Koskenniemi, M., From Apology to Utopia: The Structure of International Legal Argument (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

17 See Reus-Smit, supra note 16, at 286.

18 Purvis, N., ‘Critical Legal Studies in Public International Law’, (1991), 32 Harvard International Law Journal, 105Google Scholar, quoted in ibid.

19 See Reus-Smit, supra note 16, at 286.

20 See Schwöbel, supra note 8, at 5.

21 See Schwöbel, supra note 8, at 5–6 [emphasis added].

22 See Schwöbel, supra note 8, at 4, 11–12.

23 S. Kendall, ‘Critical Orientations: A Critique of International Criminal Court Practice’, in Schwöbel, supra note 3, at 57.

24 See Minkkinen, supra note 11, at 119.

25 See Kendall, supra note 23, 59 [emphasis added].

26 See Schwöbel, supra note 8, at 3.

27 F. Mégret, ‘International Criminal Justice: A Critical Research Agenda’, in Schwöbel, supra note 3, at 17.

28 J. Butler, ‘What is Critique? An Essay of Foucault's Virtue’ (2004), quoted in 2004 in Mégret, supra note 27, at 21.

29 See Mégret, supra note 27, at 46 [emphasis added].

30 Ibid.

31 See Kendall, supra note 23, 57–58 [emphasis added].

32 Ibid., at 62.

33 Ibid.

34 See Tallgren, supra note 12, at 71.

35 Ibid.

36 Ibid., at 75.

37 Ibid., at 90.

38 See Schwöbel, supra note 3, at 9.

39 See Krever, supra note 6, at 118.

40 Ibid., at 132–3.

41 H. Matthews, ‘Reading the Political Jurisdiction and Legality at the Lebanon Tribunal’, in Schwöbel, supra note 3, at 139.

42 Ibid., referring to M. Koskenniemi, supra note 2.

43 See Matthews, supra note 41, at 139, 151.

44 See Simpson, supra note 7, at 159.

45 See Schwöbel, supra note 8, at 10.

46 See Simpson, supra note 7, at 173.

47 See Haslam, in Schwöbel, supra note 3, Ch. 8.

48 See Baars, in Schwöbel, supra note 3, at 197.

49 Ibid., at 212–13.

50 See Gevers, in Schwöbel, supra note 3, at 232–4.

51 See Burgis-Kasthala, in Schwöbel, supra note 3, at 246–7.

52 Ibid., at 259.

53 See Schwöbel, supra note 3, at 278.

54 Ibid., at 270.

55 Foucault, M., ‘Practising Criticism’ (1988), translated by Sheridan, A.et al., in Kritzman, L. D. (1998), Politics, Philosophy, Culture: Interviews and Other WritingsGoogle Scholar, quoted in Schwöbel, supra note 8, at 1.

56 Žižek, S., Welcome to the Desert of the Real (2002), 66–67Google Scholar.

57 See, e.g., Hoy, D. C., Critical Resistance: From Poststructuralism to Post-Critique (2004), 6–7Google Scholar.

58 Lilja, M. and Vinthagen, S., ‘Maktteorier [Theories of Power]’, in Lilja, M. and Vinthagen, S., Motstånd [Resistance](2009), 32–35Google Scholar.

59 M. Foucault quoted in Hoy, supra note 57, at 82.

60 Lilja, M. and Vinthagen, S., ‘Sovereign Power, Disciplinary Power and Biopower: Resisting What Power With What Resistance?’, (2014) 7 Journal of Political Power 107CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

61 See further, e.g., Lilja, M. and Baaz, M., ‘Resistance, Rupture and Repetition: Civil Society Strategies Against Intimate Partner Violence’, Global Public Health, DOI: 10.1080/17441692.2014.994654 (2015)Google ScholarPubMed; Lilja, M., Baaz, M., and Vinthagen, S., ‘‘Exploring “Irrational Resistance”’, (2013) 6 Journal of Political Power 201CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

62 See Koskenniemi, supra note 2, at 190.

63 Ibid.

64 Ibid., at 183.

65 Lyotard, J.-F., The Differend: Phrases in Dispute, translated by Van Den Abbeele, G. (1998), 9, see xiGoogle Scholar.

66 Ibid.

67 Widell, J., Jacques Vergès, Devil's Advocate. A Psychohistory of Vergès Judicial Strategy (2012), 102–4Google Scholar; Koskenniemi, supra note 2, at 191.

68 Ibid., at 102.