Peace And Justice At The International Criminal Court

This book focuses on how the International Criminal Court seeks accountability for the most serious crimes. Errol P. Mendes dives deep into the facts and rulings of the Court that involved some of the most serious conflicts in recent times to demonstrate that justice is critical for sustainable peace. What results is a detailed but honest critique of where the Court succeeds and where it needs to improve. The author goes on to provide a prediction of the greatest challenges facing the Court in the foreseeable future. This book is a valuable resource for academics and students in international criminal law and practice, public international relations, political science, military and, war studies etc.

Errol Mendes spent nearly a year as a Visiting Professional with the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court. This has given him a unique perspective and some special insight into the big situations confronting the Court, including Darfur, Palestine and Uganda. William A. Schabas, National University of Ireland, Galway This authoritative book addresses the greatest challenge facing the International Criminal Court since its historic establishment in 1998: reconciling the demand for justice for the most serious crimes known to humanity with the promotion of sustainable peace in conflict areas around the world. In describing and analyzing this challenge, Errol Mendes demonstrates that the Court is a product of centuries of global efforts to integrate peace with justice. Focusing on two important prosecutions involving indictments of the president and other senior officials of Sudan and a savage rebel group in Northern Uganda, the author argues that the choice between peace and justice is not a zero sum game. Based on knowledge and experience obtained during his time as a visiting professional at the Court, the author combines insights from Court leaders with his own analysis in his call for greater international cooperation with the Court in fulfilling its mandate and overcoming other obstacles that threaten its work into the future. Scholars and students of criminal justice, international studies, political science and human rights, as well as civil society groups, government officials and those working with international justice organizations, will find in this book a unique and sophisticated perspective on this complex dilemma.

What happens when the international community simultaneously pursues peace and justice in response to ongoing conflicts? What are the effects of interventions by the International Criminal Court (ICC) on the wars in which the institution intervenes? Is holding perpetrators of mass atrocities accountable a help or hindrance to conflict resolution? This book offers an in-depth examination of the effects of interventions by the ICC on peace, justice and conflict processes. The 'peace versus justice' debate, wherein it is argued that the ICC has either positive or negative effects on 'peace', has spawned in response to the Court's propensity to intervene in conflicts as they still rage. This book is a response to, and a critical engagement with, this debate. Building on theoretical and analytical insights from the fields of conflict and peace studies, conflict resolution, and negotiation theory, the book develops a novel analytical framework to study the Court's effects on peace, justice, and conflict processes. This framework is applied to two cases: Libya and northern Uganda. Drawing on extensive fieldwork, the core of the book examines the empirical effects of the ICC on each case. The book also examines why the ICC has the effects that it does, delineating the relationship between the interests of states that refer situations to the Court and the ICC's institutional interests, arguing that the negotiation of these interests determines which side of a conflict the ICC targets and thus its effects on peace, justice, and conflict processes. While the effects of the ICC's interventions are ultimately and inevitably mixed, the book makes a unique contribution to the empirical record on ICC interventions and presents a novel and sophisticated means of studying, analyzing, and understanding the effects of the Court's interventions in Libya, northern Uganda - and beyond.

Peace and Justice at the International Criminal Court focuses on the evolution and the present-day work of the International Criminal Court, a historic global institution. Errol P. Mendes provides a compelling argument that there can never be a sustainable peace in conflicts unless the cause of justice is also addressed.The author dives deep into the facts and rulings of the Court that involved some of the most serious international conflicts in recent times. The author also discusses the challenges facing the Court from failed prosecutions to failures of the UN Security Council and other member states. What results is a detailed but honest critique of where the Court succeeds and where it needs to improve. Mendes goes on to provide a prediction of the greatest challenges facing the Court in the foreseeable future. This book is a valuable resource for academics and students in international criminal law and practice, public international relations, political science, military and war studies.

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.

An in-depth and interdisciplinary analysis of the politics and practice of the International Criminal Court. This title is also available as Open Access.

What happens when the international community simultaneously pursues peace and justice in response to ongoing conflicts? What are the effects of interventions by the International Criminal Court (ICC) on the wars in which the institution intervenes? Is holding perpetrators of mass atrocitiesaccountable a help or hindrance to conflict resolution? This book offers an in-depth examination of the effects of interventions by the ICC on peace, justice and conflict processes. The "peace versus justice" debate, wherein it is argued that the ICC has either positive or negative effects on'peace', has spawned in response to the Court's propensity to intervene in conflicts as they still rage. This book is a response to, and a critical engagement with, this debate.Building on theoretical and analytical insights from the fields of conflict and peace studies, conflict resolution, and negotiation theory, the book develops a novel analytical framework to study the Court's effects on peace, justice, and conflict processes. This framework is applied to two cases:Libya and northern Uganda. Drawing on extensive fieldwork, the core of the book examines the empirical effects of the ICC on each case. The book also examines why the ICC has the effects that it does, delineating the relationship between the interests of states that refer situations to the Court andthe ICC's institutional interests, arguing that the negotiation of these interests determines which side of a conflict the ICC targets and thus its effects on peace, justice, and conflict processes.While the effects of the ICC's interventions are ultimately and inevitably mixed, the book makes a unique contribution to the empirical record on ICC interventions and presents a novel and sophisticated means of studying, analyzing, and understanding the effects of the Court's interventions inLibya, northern Uganda - and beyond.

Striking a balance between peace and justice has long been debated by scholars and practitioners. There has been definite progress in a world in which blanket amnesties were at times granted with little hesitation. There is a growing understanding that accountability has both pragmatic and principled arguments in its favor. Practical arguments as much as shifts in norms have created a situation in which the choice is increasingly seen as "which forms of accountability" rather than a stark one between peace and justice. The Colombian Justice and Peace Law 975 and its implementation offer an interesting and unique approach to dealing with the international crimes committed in Colombia’s decades-long armed conflict. Yet, will this approach suffice with regard to Colombia’s obligations under international law to investigate and prosecute international crimes? Does it meet the standards of the ICC, which has been monitoring the Colombian situation for some time now? In particular, does it pass the complementarity test laid out in the ICC statute or will the ICC have to intervene in Colombia to enforce international criminal law?