Search: Affective Justice: Book Symposium: A Response

...are before a legal text full of juridical inaccuracies. It is sufficient to refer to Article 1 […]. Simply, I understand that it lacks of the most elemental requirements of criminal categorisation, and this is something that we as legislators cannot ever ignore. In this sense, allow me members of the Parliament to say that we are transferring to the tribunals of justice a competence that is of the Parliament, or of the Government, but in any case of the tribunals of justice, which is to create law”. This declaration...

...sanctioning its key officials had not been contemplated. However, despite these sanctions’ shocking effect for their unlawfulness (see here) or perpetuation of racism (see here), they are only part of a consistent marginalisation of international criminal justice by powerful states. What these sanctions have come to expose is the extent to which powerful states can go to marginalise international criminal justice if it threatens their interests. Contextually, all these events arise from power and control in international criminal justice especially for states with a veto vote at the United Nations...

… I am not making an argument against I.C.C.’s existence: In places where there is no functioning government, or the government is hostage to one section of society, or where there is no viable reconciliation process, the international community has a duty to ensure that the court is the guardian of justice. But the pursuit of justice should not replace or undermine ongoing national reconciliation efforts. The foremost challenge facing the I.C.C. is to determine whether its intervention will help or hinder the cause of peace. The wheels of justice...

...the self-same test (at [88]). The Supreme Court went on to say: “The question whether there is a real risk that substantial justice will be unobtainable is generally treated as separate and distinct from the balancing of the connecting factors which lies at the heart of the issue as to proper place, but that is more because it calls for a separate and careful analysis of distinctly different evidence than because it is an inherently different question. If there is a real risk of the denial of substantial justice in...

...Distributive justice approaches are both forward and backward-looking seeking to improve political and socio-economic conditions overall, but without presuming equality or ignoring historical grievances. The reason for pursuing distributive justice approaches is simple – by addressing real (and perceived) distributive inequities, we can help to prevent future conflicts. Accordingly, distributive justice efforts cannot afford to be treated as mere afterthoughts (if conceived of at all), where the aim of transitional institutions is to address the underlying causes that led to massive human rights violations. In short, scholars and practitioners need...

[Stephen J. Rapp is a Senior Fellow at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum’s Center for Prevention of Genocide and at the Blavatnik School of Government of Oxford University. He was formerly Ambassador-at-Large heading the Office of Global Criminal Justice in the US State Department, and between 2007-2009, was the Prosecutor of the Special Court for Sierra Leone. This essay was initially prepared at the request of FIU Law Review for its micro-symposium on The Legal Legacy of the Special Court for Sierra Leone by Charles C. Jalloh (Cambridge, 2020). An edited and footnoted version is...

is credentialed to represent Myanmar at the UN General Assembly, the representative of the National Unity Government or the junta—so urgent.  Specifically, the cracks in the Tatmadaw’s impunity were certain actions taken by Myanmar’s National Unity Government and the international community seeking accountability for the Tatmadaw’s international crimes, both before and as part of the coup. Namely, the resolution, or lack thereof, of the credentials questions could bear on the ongoing processes at the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice. More generally, the implications for justice and...

...a clear signal to would-be perpetrators that justice ultimately prevails”. But can we really say that “justice prevails” when a person is sentenced to long-term imprisonment? Although there is no doubt that mass atrocities must be condemned and prevented, the idea that harsh punishment best serves the purpose of addressing these crimes is more controversial. As several academics have noted, in the last few decades criminal punishment has gradually become the decisive instrument for responding to practices of oppression and violence, as well as for promoting justice and peace. The...

...Adjunct Professor of Law, Columbia Law School David Kader, Emeritus Professor of Law, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona Daniel Kanstroom, Professor of Law, Thomas F. Carney Distinguished Scholar, Faculty Director, Rappaport Center for Law and Public Policy, Co-director, Center for Human Rights and International Justice, Boston College Law School Zachary D. Kaufman, Associate Professor of Law and Political Science, University of Houston Law Center David Kaye, Clinical Professor of Law, and Director, International Justice Clinic, University of California, Irvine School of Law Patrick Keenan, Professor of Law, University of Illinois...

...Development Goals, but it is also integral to all dimensions of inclusive and sustainable development. Therefore, Sustainable Development Goal 16 that looks to ‘‘peace, justice and strong institutions’’ requires the effective, accountable, and inclusive participation of women in all spheres of government, especially the Judiciary. As gender parity moves towards the pinnacle of the global agenda, the justice system struggles to leave behind its traditional, mostly male composition, in judicial benches across the globe. This sentiment was echoed by the Human Rights Council Advisory Committee in its report titled “Current...

...Medellin. In this regard, it is helpful to recall Justice Iredell’s opinion in Ware v. Hylton, 3 U.S. 199 (1796). In Ware, Justice Iredell distinguished between executed and executory treaty provisions. Treaty provisions are “executed” if “from the nature of them, they require no further act to be done.” Id. at 272. In contrast, executory treaty provisions require some further action by the U.S. government. Justice Iredell divided executory treaty provisions into three groups: legislative, executive, and judicial. See id. at 272-73. Whether an executory treaty provision requires legislative, executive,...

[Gabriella Citroni, Researcher in International Law and Adjunct Professor of International Human Rights Law at the University of Milano-Bicocca [gabriella.citroni@unimib.it]; she is also a member of the United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances. The opinions expressed in this post are strictly personal and do not in any way reflect the position of the United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances or any of the institutions/organisations to which the author is affiliated.] On 16 June 2021, the Supreme Court of Justice of Mexico issued a judgment...