In association with the International Commission of Jurists

Search: Affective Justice: Book Symposium: A Response

19 Nov

Court of Justice also has declared that “the obligations stemming from an international agreement cannot violate fundamental rights.” In other words, the Italian Court justifies its attitude in saying that the kind of values it is protecting characterizes democratic legal civilizations and the EU. All things considered, the theory of counter-limits was conceived to shield the Constitution against EU laws, but was never used; here it is backed by the European Court of Justice’s decisions. What used to menace, specifically the EU, has now become a powerful source of legitimization....
19.11.14 | |

25 May

...it comes to punishment, claiming it is not a human rights court. One might expect similar flexibility in cases on the other side of the spectrum. Finally, Article 53(1)(c) of the Rome Statute allows some room for a manoeuvre granting the prosecution the power not to commence an investigation even where the situation is formally admissible if it serves the ‘interests of justice’. The ‘interests of justice’ is a broad category open to various interpretations, but ultimately it leaves the door open for a political compromise. The fragility of the...
25.05.15 | |

09 Feb

and other related areas. TJF’s bloggers are an impressive group including, among others, Mark Drumbl, Christopher Le Mon, William Schabas, and Ruti Teitel. Recent posts have spanned topics including the problems of the Iraqi special tribunal, conflict resolution in Uganda, why East Timor doesn’t want a tribunal, and Morocco’s truth commission. They also have links to full-text versions of transitional justice articles. For anyone interested staying informed on democratization, post-conflict reconstruction, or transitional justice, TJF is a site you will want to check out regularly. (Belated) Welcome to the blogosphere!...
09.02.06 | |

28 Jan

...international criminal justice—creating a historical record of mass atrocities—can make the trials slower and less efficient in terms of reaching outcomes for specific defendants. Professor Ford also finds that the ICTY performed more efficiently than the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL), thus challenging a perceived advantage of such hybrid tribunals over ad hoc tribunals like the ICTY. His conclusion suggests the need for future research on comparisons among tribunals within the international criminal justice field, which might have implications from an institutional design perspective. Professor Ford does not address...
28.01.14 | |

23 Apr

of whether Gaza is occupied. We will post the contributions on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday. We will then post responses by the contributors on Thursday. The line-up is as follows: Prof. Aeyal Gross, Tel Aviv University Sari Bashi, Executive Director, Gisha: Legal Center for Freedom of Movement Valentina Azarov, Al Quds University Adv. Pnina Sharvit Baruch Dr. Matthew Saul, Durham University Readers will notice that the contributors come from all over the political spectrum. Indeed, what makes this symposium so interesting is that it is not possible to infer a...
23.04.12 | |

03 Jun

of the Court, including the functioning of different stages of proceedings. The Court’s decisions have significant repercussions: on domestic law, criminal theory, and the law of other international courts and tribunals. In this context, the book assesses the extent to which specific approaches and assumptions, both positive and negative, regarding the potential impact of the Court are in need of re-thinking. This book will be essential reading for practitioners, scholars, and students of international criminal law. The book includes my essay on Regulation 55 and an essay on co-perpetration by...
03.06.15 | |

29 Jun

The Supreme Court today issued its decision in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld and ruled that the military commissions were invalid. The decision is available here. Justice Stevens wrote the 5-3 opinion and was joined by Justices Breyer, Ginsburg, Souter, and in part Justice Kennedy. Justices Kennedy and Breyer wrote separate opinions. Justices Alito, Thomas, and Scalia dissented and wrote separate dissenting opinions. Chief Justice Roberts took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. Here is a key excerpt of the case holding that the Geneva Conventions apply to...
29.06.06 | |

26 Jul

Many international lawyers, particularly those involved in human rights, maintain that for certain serious international crimes, amnesty, exile, plea bargains and other forms of negotiated justice are impermissible. This is so even when the alternative to amnesty be the perpetuation of a murderous regime, or end a bloody civil war. In this view – I think the dominant one – justice cannot be traded for peace. Violations of certain norms bring with them the obligation to punish; and this obligation is not waivable, even for very significant return benefits. The...
26.07.07 | |

19 Jul

rules for world trade, efforts to enlist domestic courts to enforce orders of the International Court of Justice, domestic judicial enforcement of the Geneva Convention, the domain of international commercial agreements, and the question of odious debt incurred by sovereigns. This book explains how international law, like contract, depends largely on the willingness of responsible parties to make commitments. Click here to download an order form for the book, which will be available from Cambridge University Press starting in August. This book is going to be a big contribution from...
19.07.06 | |

02 Feb

book also offers fresh thinking on related issues, ranging from juvenile justice, to humanitarian interventions, to the universality of human rights, to the role of law in responding to mass atrocity. The book is available both in hardback and paperback. I had the pleasure of reading a couple of chapters while Mark was writing the book, and they were superb. I predict the book — which will no doubt be controversial — will have a profound impact on the way courts, scholars, and activists think about child soldiers. Read Drumbl!...
02.02.12 | |

12 Jun

...the defense is unavailable in cases involving the killing of civilians. The common law rule has also been adopted at the ICTY (Erdemovic). So the viability of this third strategy (necessity) requires adopting the civil law approach to necessity (no carve-out for murder and loss-of-life cases). John C. Dehn Jens, was the reference to Dudley & Stephens coupled with the use "no carve-out" intentional? James G. Stewart I wanted to add something brief in response to Dov Jacobs’ and Jens Ohlin’s thoughtful comments. In response to Dov, I agree that...
12.06.13 | |

11 Oct

Thanks to Kevin Heller for his thoughts on the professors’ amicus brief in Doe v. Nestle USA, Inc., and to Opinio Juris for affording me this opportunity to respond. I should say at the outset that I’m making this response only in my personal capacity, not on behalf of any litigant or amicus. While I appreciate the passion Kevin brings to his analysis, I think he lets it carry him a bit beyond the context in which these arguments are being made. To begin, it’s important to appreciate (as I’m...
11.10.11 | |