International Criminal Law A Counter Hegemonic Project

This book enquires into the counter-hegemonic capacity of international criminal justice. It highlights perspectives and themes that have thus far often been neglected in the scholarship on (critical approaches to) international criminal justice. Can international criminal justice be viewed as a ‘counter-hegemonic’ project? And if so, under what conditions? In response to these questions, scholars and practitioners from the Global South and North reflect inter alia on the engagement with international criminal justice in the context of Ukraine, Palestine, and minorities in South-Asia while also highlighting the hegemonic tendencies built into the institutional structure of the International Criminal Court on the axes of gender and language. Florian Jeßberger is Professor of Criminal Law and Director of the Franz von Liszt Institute for International Criminal Justice, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Germany. Leonie Steinl is a Senior Lecturer in Criminal Law at Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Germany. Kalika Mehta is an Associate Researcher at the Franz von Liszt Institute for International Criminal Justice, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Germany.

This book enquires into the counter-hegemonic capacity of international criminal justice. It highlights perspectives and themes that have thus far often been neglected in the scholarship on (critical approaches to) international criminal justice. Can international criminal justice be viewed as a 'counter-hegemonic' project? And if so, under what conditions? In response to these questions, scholars and practitioners from the Global South and North reflect inter alia on the engagement with international criminal justice in the context of Ukraine, Palestine, and minorities in South-Asia while also highlighting the hegemonic tendencies built into the institutional structure of the International Criminal Court on the axes of gender and language. Florian Jeßberger is Professor of Criminal Law and Director of the Franz von Liszt Institute for International Criminal Justice, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Germany. Leonie Steinl is a Senior Lecturer in Criminal Law at Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Germany. Kalika Mehta is an Associate Researcher at the Franz von Liszt Institute for International Criminal Justice, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Germany.

With the sensational arrest of former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet in 1998, the rise to prominence of universal jurisdiction over crimes against international law seemed to be assured. The arrest of Pinochet and the ensuing proceedings before the UK courts brought universal jurisdiction into the foreground of the "fight against impunity" and the principle was read as an important complementary mechanism for international justice –one that could offer justice to victims denied an avenue by the limited jurisdiction of international criminal tribunals. Yet by the time of the International Court of Justice’s Arrest Warrant judgment four years later, the picture looked much bleaker and the principle was being read as a potential tool for politically motivated trials. This book explores the debate over universal jurisdiction in international criminal law, aiming to unpack a practice in which international lawyers continue to disagree over the concept of universal jurisdiction. Using Martti Koskenniemi’s work as a foil, this book exposes the argumentative techniques in operation in national and international adjudication since the 1990s. Drawing on overarching patterns within the debate, Aisling O’Sullivan argues that it is bounded by a tension between contrasting political preferences or positions, labelled as moralist ("ending impunity") and formalist ("avoiding abuse") and she reads the debate as a movement of hegemonic and counter-hegemonic positions that struggle for hegemonic control. However, she draws out how these positions (moralist/formalist) merge into one another and this produces a tendency towards a "middle" position that continues to prefer a particular preference (moralist or formalist). Aisling O’Sullivan then traces the transformation towards this tendency that reflects an internal split among international lawyers between building a utopia ("court of humanity") and recognizing its impossibility of being realized.

Peace without Justice is a highly topical and insightful examination of the attitudes, policies and constitutional issues behind U.S. rejection of the Rome Treaty and the International Criminal Court.

This book explores the intended and unintended impact of international criminal justice on the legitimacy of quasi-state entities (QSEs). In order to do so, the concept of ‘quasi-state entity’ is introduced to distinguish actors in statehood conflicts that aspire to statehood, and fulfil statehood functions to a greater or lesser degree, including the capacity and willingness to deploy armed force, but lack the status of sovereign statehood. This work explores the ability of QSEs to create and maintain legitimacy for their actions, institutions and statehood projects in various constituencies simultaneously. It looks at how legitimacy is a prerequisite for success of QSEs and, using critical legitimacy theory, assesses the legitimating narratives of QSEs and their statehood adversaries. The book links international criminal justice to statehood projects of QSEs and their success and legitimacy. It looks at the effects of international criminal justice on the ability to create and maintain legitimacy of QSEs, an approach that leads to new insights regarding international courts and tribunals as entities competing with states over statehood functions that increasingly have to take the legal implications of their actions into consideration. Most important, a close assessment of the legitimising narratives of QSEs, counter narratives, and the messages sent by international criminal justice with which QSEs have to deal, and their ability to overcome legitimacy crises, provides insight on QSEs and the complex processes of legitimation. This book will be of much interest to students of international criminal justice, political violence, security studies and IR.

Evelyne Schmid demonstrates how violations of economic, social and cultural rights can overlap with international crimes.

A practical guide to what motivates international crimes and how these are structured and investigated in theory and practice.

"The Politics of International Criminal Law is an interdisciplinary collection of original research that examines the often noted but understudied political dimensions of International Criminal Law (ICL). As a nascent legal regime that seeks to regulate the longstanding power of states to manage war and crime, ICL faces challenges to its legitimacy, including disagreement over its aims and effectiveness; inequality in the work of its institutions; and opposition from dominant countries. The editors bring together eleven senior and emerging scholars and practitioners from Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia and North America to analyse these challenges from an illuminating range of theoretical and empirical perspectives. Taken together, the collection ultimately helps advance our understanding of the particularly charged relationship between law and politics in ICL"--