Abstract
Criminal law has the specificity of being more repressive than other branches of law, such as administrative law and civil law. Doctrinally, the purposes of any criminal judgment are to restore the social justice for the committed offense, to correct (educate) the convicted person, and to prevent the convicted person from committing a new crime in the future. However, the analysis of practices of international criminal law has shown that the aim of the judgment of persons convicted for committing international crimes differs from the doctrinal criminal law approaches. Thus, the purposes of the judgment for persons convicted of committing international crimes comprise the restoration of social justice and the prevention of further crimes but not to assist in correcting the convicted person. This scientific work consists of the analysis of practices of international bodies, in particular practices of the International Criminal Court and the other International Criminal Tribunals, to respond to the question of why the correction of the convicted person is not engaged in International Criminal Law.
Reference28 articles.
1. Adu YN. International criminal law and Victor’s justice: The case of cote d’Ivoire. ASRJET. 2016;20(1):128-136
2. Quirico O. International “Criminal” Responsibility: Antinomies. Taylor and Francis; 2019. p. 296
3. Heller KJ. The Nuremberg Military Tribunals and the Origins of International Criminal Law. Oxford University press; 2011
4. Nuremberg Trial Proceedings Vol. 1. Charter of the International Military Tribunal (art. 6). Available from: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/imtconst.asp
5. Nuremberg trials: History.com editors updated: Jun 7, 2019, Original: Jan 29, 2010: Available from: https://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/nuremberg-trials