Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Military, War, and Peace Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 5 of 5

Full-Text Articles in Military, War, and Peace

From Discretion To Law: Rights-Based Concerns And The Evolution Of International Sanctions, Christopher Roberts Dec 2018

From Discretion To Law: Rights-Based Concerns And The Evolution Of International Sanctions, Christopher Roberts

Brooklyn Journal of International Law

This Article considers the manner in which rights-based concerns have increasingly impacted upon the nature of international sanctions regimes. First, this Article considers two better-known instances of this impact—the manner in which general sanctions became more targeted, and the manner in which due process concerns came to receive greater respect in the context of targeting decisions. Following these investigations, this Article turns to explore a third, under-recognized development—the gradual evolution of a sense that sanctions may be required in certain instances. It explores this development by highlighting the growing scope of understandings of responsibility within various bodies of public international …


Judicializing History: Mass Crimes Trials And The Historian As Expert Witness In West Germany, Cambodia, And Bangladesh, Rebecca Gidley, Mathew Turner Dec 2018

Judicializing History: Mass Crimes Trials And The Historian As Expert Witness In West Germany, Cambodia, And Bangladesh, Rebecca Gidley, Mathew Turner

Genocide Studies and Prevention: An International Journal

Henry Rousso warned that the engagement of historians as expert witnesses in trials, particularly highly politicized proceedings of mass crimes, risks a judicialization of history. This article tests Rousso’s argument through analysis of three quite different case studies: the Frankfurt Auschwitz trial; the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia; and the International Crimes Tribunal in Bangladesh. It argues that Rousso’s objections misrepresent the Frankfurt Auschwitz trial, while failing to account for the engagement of historical expertise in mass atrocity trials beyond Europe. Paradoxically, Rousso’s criticisms are less suited to the European context that represents his purview, and apply more …


Pull And Push'- Implementing The Complementarity Principle Of The Rome Statute Of The Icc Within The Au: Opportunities And Challenges, Sascha Dominik Dov Bachmann, Eda Luke Nwibo Jun 2018

Pull And Push'- Implementing The Complementarity Principle Of The Rome Statute Of The Icc Within The Au: Opportunities And Challenges, Sascha Dominik Dov Bachmann, Eda Luke Nwibo

Brooklyn Journal of International Law

The complementarity principle of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) is an international legal principle that governs the relationship between two; sometimes; contrasting international principles of law; namely sovereign equality of States and the international community’s duty to end impunity for international core crimes. Article 17 of the Rome Statute envisages that States maintain primary jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute international crimes; while the ICC’s jurisdiction to prosecute when States are unwilling or genuinely unable to carry out such investigations or prosecutions constitutes the exception. This article provides an analysis of this principle in the context of …


The Failure Of International Law In Palestine, Svetlana Sumina, Steven Gilmore May 2018

The Failure Of International Law In Palestine, Svetlana Sumina, Steven Gilmore

The Scholar: St. Mary's Law Review on Race and Social Justice

Abstract forthcoming


Litigating Genocide: A Consideration Of The Criminal Court In Light Of The German Jew's Legal Response To Nazi Persecution, 1933-1941, Jody M. Prescott Feb 2018

Litigating Genocide: A Consideration Of The Criminal Court In Light Of The German Jew's Legal Response To Nazi Persecution, 1933-1941, Jody M. Prescott

Maine Law Review

After years of negotiation, a majority of the nations of the world have agreed to create an International Criminal Court. It will be given jurisdiction over three core types of offenses: genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. With regard to war crimes, however, nations that join the court may take advantage of an “opt-out” procedure, whereby the court's jurisdiction over these offenses may be rejected for seven years after the court comes into existence. For various reasons, a small number of nations, including the United States, have refused to sign the treaty creating the court. While heralded as a …