Suchergebnisse

An increasing body of literature focuses on negotiations of transitional justice, but not much has been written so far regarding contestations over its practices and the refusal of states and individuals to participate. Given the remaining legalistic dominance, this is particularly true regarding the field of international criminal law. Very little, if any, work in international criminal law engages with the topic of "resistance." Departing from this gap in research, focusing on Cambodia and the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC), the objective of this article is to introduce, discuss, and analyze the "strategy of rupture"—as developed by the late French lawyer Jacques Vergès—and the ways in which this legal defense has been applied in practice at the ECCC in order to resist not only the Tribunal per se, but also the entire Cambodian transitional justice process and, by extension, the post–Cold War global liberal project.

This book examines the nature, policy aspects and interrelationship of Sudanese criminal law and law reform in the context of an uncertain transition from conflict to post-conflict society. In so doing, it situates current developments in Sudan in the broader debate of international human rights, rule of law and transitional justice. For the first time, Sudanese, national, regional and international experts and practitioners are brought together to share experiences, combining a range of legal and policy perspectives.

Reasons for the resurgence of intergovernmental interest in criminal accountability for war crimes & crimes against humanity committed by leaders of sovereign states are examined, with reference to the Yugoslavian case. The pursuit of Slobodan Milosevic & others seems guided by the morally dubious geopolitical motives of the NATO countries. NATO did not make a valid attempt to find a diplomatic solution to the Serbian assault before the bombing, & it has continued harsh economic sanctions against Serbia in lieu of bombing, apparently because of Milosevic's presence. The end of the war has prompted a new cycle of ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, but NATO has not responded to that. It appears that the interest in pursuing criminal accountability in transitional governments stems from a need to keep NATO in operation in the post-Cold War, to overcome the shame of multiple NATO failures in Bosnia, & to continue fighting a war, paradoxically for humanitarian reasons but with civilian losses. M. Pflum

The tension between law and politics places transitional justice under cross-pressures. The impetus to hold Perpetrators legally accountable for atrocities and major rights violations has emerged in part from the expectation that subjecting political behavior to the apolitical judgment of law will exert a civilizing effect. As demands for accountability have risen, politics has played a central role at every step. The past decade has seen a flourishing of research in empirical political science on the relationship between law and politics in postconflict and postauthoritarian justice. This research has tried to explain the turn to individual legal accountability and the development of norms and institutions for accountability. Research has stressed the role of politics in shaping the implementation of trials and other modes of accountability. It has also examined the consequences of these modes of accountability. We address research on each of these topics. Adapted from the source document.

Dieses neue Hintergrundpapier gibt zunächst einen Überblick über zentrale Begriffe der Debatte wie Gerechtigkeit, Versöhnung etc.. Anschließend werden drei Formen des Umgangs mit Vergangenheitsaufarbeitung vorgestellt: Vergessen & Verdrängen, strafrechtliche Aufarbeitung und Wahrheitskommissionen. Sie werden jeweils von historischen Beispielen illustriert: Ruanda, Deutschland und Südafrika. Die Frage, mit der sich das Papier befasst, lautet: Wie kann belastete Vergangenheit am besten aufgearbeitet werden? Und kann es ein "zu viel" oder "zu wenig" an Transitional Justice geben?

The tension between law and politics places transitional justice under cross-pressures. The impetus to hold perpetrators legally accountable for atrocities and major rights violations has emerged in part from the expectation that subjecting political behavior to the apolitical judgment of law will exert a civilizing effect. As demands for accountability have risen, politics has played a central role at every step. The past decade has seen a flourishing of research in empirical political science on the relationship between law and politics in postconflict and postauthoritarian justice. This research has tried to explain the turn to individual legal accountability and the development of norms and institutions for accountability. Research has stressed the role of politics in shaping the implementation of trials and other modes of accountability. It has also examined the consequences of these modes of accountability. We address research on each of these topics.