Abstract
AbstractInternational criminal law is being pulled in different directions by various conflicting considerations – deterrence, retribution, justice for victims, reconciliation, and setting the historical record. This trend is detrimental to the survival of the system as it erodes coherence and undermines its legitimacy. One may suggest that international criminal law needs a principle objective to bring order to the system. This article argues that while this statement may be true, it is equally important to have a discussion about pragmatic policy choices underlying the system. Acknowledging that the role of international criminal law is symbolic assists with constraining over-ambition implicit in the discipline. Treating symbolism as a policy consideration places necessary checks on other goals proclaimed by international courts and UN executive bodies and also serves as a tool informing the exercise of discretion in international criminal law.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Law,Political Science and International Relations
Reference29 articles.
1. Legitimacy in International Law and International Relations;Bodansky;Interdisciplinary Perspectives on International Law and International Relations: The State of the Art,2012
2. What is the Point of International Criminal Justice?;Damaška;Chicago-Kent Law Review,2008
3. Foreword
4. Joint Criminal Enterprise: Criminal Liability by Prosecutorial Ingenuity and Judicial Creativity?
5. Ordinary Sentences for Extraordinary Crimes
Cited by
14 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献