The State of the International Criminal Court,of Special Tribunals and of International Criminal Law: A Concise Review

International criminal law has changed rather dramatically in the last three decades. Whereas in the early 1990s the field was an almost exotic specialization of penal law, it has now developed into a thriving part of the law. Nowadays, most law schools have specialists in international criminal law which has usually developed into an important field of research. An important factor in this development has been the performance of three Special Criminal Tribunals established by the United Nations Security Council. In this article their institutional record as well as their importance for the development of international criminal law will be reviewed. In both senses, on the basis of a necessarily concise review, it is submitted that the performance of the tribunals must be considered a success. The International Criminal Court (ICC) is already twenty years in existence. Its performance cannot be judged equally successfully, however. In particular as an institution it cannot point to records comparable to those of the Special Criminal Tribunals. Still, although it is undoubtedly fragile, the ICC has become a relevant feature of modern international law and in international relations (as a brief examination of its potential role regarding the Special Military Operation in Ukraine shows). Notwithstanding its institutional weaknesses, the importance of the ICC manifests itself in its Statute which can be seen as a codification of international criminal law. The strong increase in the domestic administration of international crimes as a consequence of the principle of the complementarity of the Statute is taken into consideration.

     

International criminal justice: reflections on the past and the future

While Nuremberg constitutes a watershed in the evolution of international law with its establishment of the fundamental principle of individual criminal responsibility under international law it has not left much else by way of precedent for the subsequent international criminal tribunals. The adoption of UN Security Council Resolution 827 establishing the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, and Resolution 955 (1994) establishing the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, set the groundwork for a new model of hybrid tribunals, with the establishment of the Special Court for Sierra Leone in 2002, the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia in 2006, and the Special Tribunal for Lebanon in 2007. Perhaps one of the greatest legacies of these ad hoc and hybrid courts and tribunals has been paving the way for the establishment of a permanent international criminal court. However, they have also brought about the development of international criminal law through judicial interpretation, elaborating, inter alia, the elements of the crime of genocide as detailed in the 1948 Genocide Convention, the judicial recognition of the concept of joint criminal enterprise and the principle that national arrangements for amnesties in respect of international crimes are no bar to prosecution for such crimes at an international tribunal. In view of the completion strategies of the ad hoc Tribunals, as well as of the SCSL, this article delves into some of their legacies and outlines some of the difficulties and challenges they have faced, while identifying areas of best practice in order for the newly‐operational International Criminal Court to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past or even reinventing new wheels.     

Prosecuting Violence, Performing Sovereignty: The Trial of Dusko Tadic

This article is a critical reading of the contemporary international legal regulation of warfare and an analysis of war crimes trials as ``sovereignty-producing practices'. Whereas proponents of international law optimistically presume that the advent of war crimes tribunals signifies a humanitarian-inspired erosion of sovereignty in the international system, this article shows that legislating violence in war exemplifies an international commitment to structures which normalize war and violence while individualizing, dehistoricizing and depoliticizing criminal acts. This analysis focuses on the first trial of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia which convicted Dusko Tadic of war crimes and crimes against humanity.     

当代国际刊法的新发展

大量证据显示国际刑事审判的展开促进了国际刑法的发展,而在国际刑法发展的进程中,出现了一系列新的观念和原则并逐渐得到国际社会的广泛认可,诸如灭绝种族罪、危害人类罪和战争罪的定义,以及合法性原则、补充性管辖原则、个人刑事责任原则和国际合作与司法协助原则等。国际刑事法院的建立在国际刑法制度发展中具有里程碑式的意义,联合国、联合国宪章以及联合国大会的一系列决议为国际刑法的发展发挥了至关重要的作用。     

论国际犯罪与国内犯罪的关系

国际犯罪是指由国际法创设或者推动因而被国际社会普遍确定为犯罪、严重危害国际社会共同利益的行为,跨国性、涉外性、违反公约性都不是国际犯罪的基本特征。国际犯罪不是从国内犯罪发展而来的,它们是两个互不隶属的并列范畴,是"犯罪"这一共同上位概念之下的子概念,从渊源上讲,两者基本上分属国内法与国际法两大法律体系。国际犯罪与国内犯罪之间有明确的界限,主要体现在犯罪危害的性质、针对的法律关系和法律制定者不同三方面。     

Constructing Achievement in the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY): A Corpus-Based Critical Discourse Analysis

The International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia (ICTY) was established by the UN Security Council in 1993 to prosecute persons responsible for war crimes committed in the former Yugoslavia during the Balkan wars. As the first international war crimes tribunal since the Nuremburg and Tokyo tribunals set up after WWII, the ICTY has attracted immense interest among legal scholars since its inception, but has failed to garner the same level of attention from researchers in other disciplines, notably linguistics. This represents a significant research gap, as the Tribunal’s public discourse (notably its case law and Annual Reports) can open up interesting avenues of analysis to researchers of law, language, and legal discourse alike. On its official website, the Tribunal claims that it has “irreversibly changed the landscape of international humanitarian law” and lists six specific achievements: “Holding leaders accountable; bringing justice to victims; giving victims a voice; establishing the facts; developing international law and strengthening the rule of the law”. While a number of legal scholars have studied and critiqued the level of ‘achievement’ actually attained by the Tribunal against these metrics and others, of interest to linguists is the ways in which this work might be conveyed discursively. In this paper, we demonstrate how methods from the linguistic field of corpus-based critical discourse analysis can be utilised to explore the discursive construction of such achievements in the language of the ICTY.     

我国刑法规定国际犯罪的立法模式探讨

国际犯罪分为"国际核心罪行"与"一般国际犯罪",它们源于习惯国际法或者条约国际法,但都被国际公约明确规定.我国缔结、加入了大量规定有国际犯罪的国际公约,而这些公约都要求缔约国通过国内立法对国际犯罪加以规定.因此,在我国全面或者大部分地规定国际犯罪,既是作为条约缔约国的义务,也是防止、有效惩治国际犯罪所必需的措施.鉴于我国的刑事立法特点,我们宜在刑法典中统一规定国际犯罪.即在修改刑法第9条、增加其对国际公约适用灵活性的同时,我们可以将一般国际犯罪根据其侵犯的客体规定于现有各章中,并新增一章"危害人类和平与安全罪"来规定战争罪、种族灭绝和危害人类罪这些国际核心罪行.     

国际人道主义法的危机——驻伊美军虐待俘虏事件的若干法律问题分析

战争的残酷性使得人们更为关注生命尊严的价值,国际人道主义法亦随之得以发展。然而,近期曝光的驻伊美军虐待战俘事件,侵犯了战俘的生命健康权、人格权、中诉及公平审判权,严重违反国际人道主义法,而现行国际法与国内法机制均无法有效地惩罚这种违法行为。因此,为了真正保护国际人权,惩治战争犯罪,应增强国际刑事法院等组织的地位。     

Dealing with the holocaust and collaboration: The Dutch experience of criminal justice and accountability after World War II

This paper addresses the problem of ``settling accounts' after periods of armed conflict in a given society (be they civil war, insurrection or occupation by foreign forces), when those who took the losing side have come to be defined as collaborators, a process now known as transitional justice. More specifically, it looks at the way in which Dutch citizens who collaborated with the Nazi occupation forces in deporting and murdering about 80% of the Jewish population of the country, were dealt with after the Second World War. There are generally assumed to be three ways of coming to terms with such traumatic events: prosecution and criminal trial, truth and reconciliation commissions or a combination of both. Under present international law, states have a duty to use the criminal law and to prosecute and punish perpetrators of crimes againt humanity and war crimes, specifically because it is felt that prosecution will bring some measure of recognition and healing to victims. After the Second World War in the Netherlands, the emphasis was indeed on criminal law and the manifest aim was swift and just retribution. The author shows how this was frustrated by political considerations; but – and perhaps this is a more important lesson for the future – also by the fact that criminal law, by its very nature, is unable to deal with the problems of collective guilt or to recognise the suffering of collective victimhood.     

战争罪的国内立法研究

战争罪是在战争或者武装冲突中发生的违反战争法规、严重侵犯人权的罪行。战争罪主要是国际法上的罪行,但国内法院也承担着追究战争罪罪犯刑事责任的重要任务。将我国缔结的国际公约里规定的战争罪转化为国内刑法上的犯罪,是我国作为缔约国应当履行的条约义务。但我国《刑法》只有第446条和第448条规定的两个犯罪才基本符合国际法对于战争罪的定义。我国《刑法》应当专章设立“危害人类和平与安全罪”,使其包括战争罪等核心罪行,这样可以更好地维护我国的刑事管辖权,有效地避免我国公民受到国际刑事法庭的审判,以便享受《国际刑事法院规约》补充管辖原则提供的益处。     

伊拉克战争涉及的国际法和国际刑法问题

战争行为是人类历史上最为残暴的行为之一,在国际犯罪种类中也属于最为严重的罪行之一。近代第一次和第二次世界大战的爆发,不仅没有达到战争发动者所欲追求的结果,反而进一步暴露了战争的残酷性,也发展了涉及战争行为的国际法律文件。1949年的四个《日内瓦公约》及两个《附加议定书》确立了战争行为采用的规章和规则,并进一步确认了战争罪行违反国际人道主义法和习惯国际法的基本模式。因此战争,尤其是国际性的伊拉克战争不可避免地涉及国际法和国际刑法的问题。     

Seeking Justice for the Holocaust: Herbert C. Pell Versus the US State Department

Herbert C. Pell served his nation as an Ambassador and member of the US House of Representatives, as well as US Representative on the United Nations War Crimes Commission (UNWCC). This article presents his struggle with the US State department and the bureaucratic and legalistic dispute that developed over the UNWCC particularly with respect to policy considerations surrounding whether or not to prosecute crimes against humanity committed by the Nazis in Germany and satellite territories. The article traces Pell’s initial difficulty engaging with the work of the UNWCC due to the State Department’s delaying techniques and the absence of clear instructions from either the State Department or the President. Moreover, it is shown how Pell struggled to convince the State Department and his fellow UNWCC members to include the above-mentioned crimes. This debate and Pell’s role has remained largely unknown to a public that considers the post-war Nuremberg war crimes trials an achievement in the advancement of international law and justice. To whatever extent those trials were such, particularly in advancing international human rights law by adjudicating Axis war criminals for crimes against humanity, it is singularly noteworthy that Axis war criminals might not have been prosecuted at all for these crimes were it not for the efforts of Herbert Pell.     

普遍管辖国内立法近期发展态势

作为传统国际法所赋予国家的域外刑事管辖权，普遍管辖在当代国际法中对于结束核心国际犯罪（种族灭绝罪、危害人类罪和战争罪）有罪不罚的局面仍然具有重要意义。冷战结束后，普遍管辖国内立法呈现出单行立法、所依据的国际法基础以及司法可操作性均有所增加的发展态势。这是国际人道法复兴以及国际刑法和国际人权法蓬勃发展共同作用的结果，也是国际政治气氛改变、国家不对称发展、经济全球化和科技迅猛发展的必然结果。我国刑法应当顺应这种发展态势。     

The International Crimes Tribunal in Bangladesh and International Law

The International Crimes Tribunal in Bangladesh was re-established in 2010 in order to hold the perpetrators of the 1971 War accountable for international crimes; namely, war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. The Trial has already begum to operate and has been dealing with various challenges. The basis of the trial proceedings is the International Crimes (Tribunal) Act 1973. The Parliament of Bangladesh enacted the Act in accordance with international law shortly after the War. This paper assesses the key legal issues that arise from the context of the 1973 Act, and will provide a reflection on trial proceedings in light of international law. It concludes that any initiatives to address the impunity of perpetrators and offer redress to the victims of gross human rights violations should be applauded, while any trial proceedings that do not follow appropriate standards for a fair trial and offer the right of due process should be deprecated.     

The Commission on the Responsibility of the Authors of the War and on Enforcement of Penalties and its Contribution to International Criminal Justice After World War II

This article traces the evolution of discussions within the Commission on the Responsibility of the Authors of the War and on Enforcement of Penalties and the United Nations War Crimes Commission regarding the establishment of an international criminal court. The Commission on the Responsibility of the Authors of the War and on Enforcement of Penalties was the first war crimes commission that seriously debated establishing an international criminal court for the prosecution of war criminals. Following the discussions held in the UNWCC, the International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg was created. All three institutions played a major part in the development of international criminal law.     

La evolución del crimen de lesa humanidad en el derecho penal internacional*

Due to its “ex novo” character and the lack of a definition provided by a treaty, crimes against humanity have been evolutionarily defined by different international norms and by the jurisdictional activity of the International criminal tribunals that have been established throughout recent history up until the creation of the International Criminal Court. Thus, both positive and customary International criminal law have represented a competent judicial cooperative way to face these acts, first and foremost, by developing its gradual conceptualization and final codification and, secondly, through enabling the prosecution and the punishment of those responsible for these crimes. Accordingly, the evolution of the crimes against humanity’s definition is an outstanding legal element, which has contributed to the further consolidation of international criminal law.     

科索沃国际维持和平行动与国际法上的集体安全制度

科索沃战争是一场以美国为首的北约国家对南斯拉夫联盟共和国的侵略战争。北约组织领导人与部队的行为都严重违反了战争法,构成战争罪。科索沃战争与科索沃国际维护和平行动均不是集体安全制度的具体实施,相反,这些行动侵蚀了《联合国宪章》下的集体安全制度,对国际法上的集体安全制度产生了深远的消极影响。     

国际犯罪的类型研究:回顾、反思与探寻

在理论研究的层面,国际犯罪的范围包括战争罪、侵略罪、危害人类罪等31种犯罪。在对这些国际犯罪进行类分时,根本立足点是国际犯罪,即以国际犯罪的自身特性为视角。由于国际犯罪是一定的主体所实施的严重危害国际社会共同利益,依据国际刑法应当承担刑事责任的行为,因此,在划分国际犯罪的基本类型时,可以采取如下几项标准:一是国际刑法的"两重性";二是国际犯罪的主体;三是国际犯罪的行为特征;四是国际犯罪侵害的法益。     

The International Committee of the Red Cross and International Human Rights Law

Throughout a considerable part of its history, the InternationalCommittee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has customarily refrainedfrom invoking international human rights law, for reason ofthis law's alleged politicisation. However, the changing characterof armed conflicts and other situations of violence where theICRC is currently operating have prompted it to set a frameworkfor making some limited use of selected and applicable humanrights, for the purpose of reinforcing the protection and assistanceit provides. This article examines how the ICRC may use humanrights in this way during armed conflicts, through the prismof international humanitarian law, as well as the conditionsfor their invocation in accordance with relevant ICRC doctrines.     

Emerging combatants, war crimes and the future of international humanitarian law

The purpose of this paper is to examine the traditional paradigm of international law that regulates warfare and defines criminal behavior,and examine how the emergence of new actors has changed the environmentof armed conflict. The existing paradigm takes into account state actorsand insurgents who have recognizable political goals. All such combatantshave some stake in the existing international political system and somemeans are available (military intervention, war crimes trials) to compeltheir compliance with the law. However, new categories of combatants areemerging. They are not connected to states, may have no political goalsand are difficult to reach or persuade with time-tested methods.Compelling or persuading them to better compliance with the law is essential to protect vulnerable populations from their depredations.The paper concludes by identifying some contributions that criminologistscan make toward understanding these groups and devising strategies to meetthe challenge of war crimes. Those contributions by criminologists wouldbe equally valuable in dealing with the problem of war crimes and ``traditional' combatants.