THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA: AN EXERCISE IN LAW, POLITICS AND DIPLOMACY BY RACHEL KERR (OXFORD: OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, 2004) 239 PAGES. PRICE AUD$180.00 (HARDCOVER). ISBN 0 19 926305 1

2005 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 804
Author(s):  
JAMES UPCHER
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Title Page ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
Oxford University ◽  
Significant Achievement

<div class="page" title="Page 1"><div class="layoutArea"><div class="column"><p><span>T</span><span>HE </span><span>I</span><span>NTERNATIONAL </span><span>C</span><span>RIMINAL </span><span>T</span><span>RIBUNAL FOR THE </span><span>F</span><span>ORMER </span><span>Y</span><span>UGOSLAVIA</span><span>: A</span><span>N </span><span>E</span><span>XERCISE IN </span><span>L</span><span>AW</span><span>, P</span><span>OLITICS AND </span><span>D</span><span>IPLOMACY </span><span>BY </span><span>R</span><span>ACHEL </span><span>K</span><span>ERR </span><span>(O</span><span>XFORD</span><span>: O</span><span>XFORD </span><span>U</span><span>NIVERSITY </span><span>P</span><span>RESS</span><span>, 2004) 239 P</span><span>AGES</span><span>. P</span><span>RICE </span><span>AUD$180.00 (</span><span>HARDCOVER</span><span>). ISBN 0 19 926305 1 </span></p><p><span><br /></span></p><div class="page" title="Page 1"><div class="layoutArea"><div class="column"><p><span>When the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) was established in 1993, the fabric uniting the Balkans was ripping apart. How could an ad hoc Tribunal, thousands of kilometres from the conflict with no enforcement apparatus, ameliorate the anarchy and destruction sweeping the region? In its early years it languished almost unused, its courtrooms empty. In 2005, as the ICTY moves slowly towards the completion of its mandate, increased international pres- sure has led to a series of surrenders of indicted suspects.</span><span>1 </span><span>It is a significant achievement that Slobodan Milosevic, the alleged architect of so much of the car- nage in the Balkans, now sits in the dock of the ICTY, defending charges of geno- cide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. His favoured approach is to play the martyr. </span></p></div></div></div><p><span><br /></span></p></div></div></div>

scholarly journals Przedterminowe zwolnienie z kary pozbawienia wolności skazanych za ludobójstwo, zbrodnie przeciwko ludzkości i wojenne na mocy orzeczeń międzynarodowych trybunałów karnych „ad hoc” oraz ich sukcesora w postaci Mechanizmu Rezydualnego ONZ

2021 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 209-226
Author(s):  
Małgorzata Szwejkowska
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Early Release ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Domestic Law

In the last decade of the 20th century, a war in the former Yugoslavia broke out, once again making Europe a witness to an armed conflict. Almost at the same time, another local ethnic bloodshed started, but this time in distant Africa — in Rwanda. Both these events included the most horrifying international crimes against humanity: genocide and war crimes. To prosecute the most important commanding figures involved in these conflicts and hold them criminally responsible, two ad hoc United Nations tribunals were created: International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in Hague and International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda in Arusha. They finished their operation in 2017 and 2015, respectively. The tasks of conducting and completing all ongoing proceedings, including law enforcement, after the completion of their mandates have been entrusted to the UN International Residual Mechanism. One of the crucial assignments of the tribunals and later the Redisual Mechanism was to deal with the request on behalf of the convicted for granting them early release. Although none of the statutes of the aforementioned courts provided any ground for early release, soon it was accepted that both tribunals, as well as their successor, were entitled to proceed despite this issue. As soon as in 2001, the first convict was granted early release, but with no conditions. It is estimated that, to date, more than 2/3 of all convicted by the Tribunals have been released before the termination of their sentence. This should raise the question of how to rehabilitate that kind of offender, convicted of genocide, war crimes, or crimes against humanity, to ensure they do not pose a threat to society anymore. Especially since the offenders serve their punishment outside the country of their origin — meaning, different rules apply according to the domestic law regulation of the state that voluntarily agreed to enforce the sentence. This article analyzes the juridical approach of the tribunals and the Residual Mechanism on the issue of early release of the convicts involved in the armed conflicts in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda.

Briefly Noted

2019 ◽  
Vol 58 (3) ◽  
pp. 664-667
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Trial Chamber ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
Life Sentence

On March 20, 2019, the Appeals Chamber of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals set aside Radovan Karadžić's prior sentence of forty years and imposed a life sentence. Karadžić was convicted of genocide, crimes against humanity, and violations of the laws or customs of war in March 2016 by a Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and sentenced to forty years in prison. His crimes relate to war crimes he committed during the 1990s conflicts in the Balkans, in particular the 1995 Srebrenica massacre of 8,000 Bosnian Serbs and the three-year long siege of Sarajevo. The Appeals Chamber reversed part of Karadžić's convictions related to the Overarching JCE and dismissed the rest of his appeal, while also dismissing most of the Prosecution's appeal, aside from the sentence. The Appeals Chamber judges found that the Trial Chamber “committed a discernible error and abused its discretion in imposing a sentence of only 40 years of imprisonment,” and consequently imposed a life sentence.

The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia: Planners and Instigators or Foot Soldiers?

2009 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 345-357
Author(s):  
Philip Caine
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
Military Tribunal ◽  
Selection Of

The International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg prosecuted the most infamous criminals of the Nazi regime whereas the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) has brought to trial only two of the ‘big guns' of the Balkans conflicts. The aim of this study is to assess the effectiveness of the ICTY in fulfilling its mandate to prosecute those most responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law committed during the conflicts of the Former Yugoslavia. The research combines a literature-based assessment of the ICTY together with focused interviews of the main decision-makers in the Office of the Prosecutor, and seeks to assess the factors involved in the initiation of investigations and the selection of individuals for indictment. The independence and autonomy of the Prosecutor is identified as one of the most significant factors in the selection of indictees, but whilst the highest ranking individuals were always the main targets for indictment by the Office of the Prosecutor, the findings suggest that a weak mandate, inadequate resources and indifference by the international community forced the hand of the Prosecutor into indicting lower level suspects. Further ad hoc tribunals are planned by the United Nations and the lessons learned from the experience of the ICTY are essential if they are to administer international justice effectively.

Jurisdiction of the ad hoc Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda over crimes against humanity and genocide

1997 ◽  
Vol 37 (321) ◽  
pp. 651-664
Author(s):  
Marie-Claude Roberge
Keyword(s):  
Security Council ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Major Step ◽  
Clear Signal

The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) were established on 11 February 1993 and 8 November 1994 respectively by the Security Council to prosecute persons responsible for flagrant violations of international humanitarian law. The aim of the Security Council was to put an end to such violations and to contribute to the restoration and maintenance of peace, and the establishment of the ad hoc tribunals undoubtedly represents a major step in that direction. Moreover, it sends a clear signal to the perpetrators and to the victims that such conduct will not be tolerated.

Individual Criminal Responsibility before the International Criminal Court

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Goy
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Individual Criminal Responsibility

For more than 15 years the two ad hoc Tribunals, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), have interpreted the requirements of different forms of individual criminal responsibility. It is thus helpful to look at whether and to what extent the jurisprudence of the ICTY/ICTR may provide guidance to the International Criminal Court (ICC). To this end, this article compares the requirements of individual criminal responsibility at the ICTY/ICTR and the ICC. The article concludes that, applied with caution, the jurisprudence of the ICTY/ICTR – as an expression of international law – can assist in interpreting the modes of liability under the ICC Statute. ICTY/ICTR case law seems to be most helpful with regard to accessorial forms of liability, in particular their objective elements. Moreover, it may assist in interpreting the subjective requirements set out in Article 30 ICC Statute.

scholarly journals THE "HAGUE" MODIFICATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIME CONCEPT

2021 ◽  
pp. 66-74
Author(s):  
V. Popko
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Crime ◽  
International Justice ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
The Hague ◽  
International Tribunals

The article analyses the development of the concept of international crime in the "Hague" period, which covers the last decades of the last century and is closely related to the establishment of ad hoc international tribunals in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. The article reveals the legal grounds for the establishment of these tribunals, the features of their activities, jurisdiction and principles of responsibility of persons who committed crimes in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. The establishment of international justice bodies by UN Security Council decisions has provoked a number of debates about their legitimacy, but it is undeniable that the activities of ad hoc international tribunals have contributed to the initiation of a new stage in the development of international criminal justice, further development of international criminal law, in particular in the development of the Rome Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the International Criminal Court. All types of tribunal jurisdictions are disclosed, but special attention is paid to the substantive and personal jurisdictions of tribunals, which became the basis for the theoretical justification of the "Hague" modification of international crime, as well as the practical implementation of this concept in tribunal decisions. It is shown that the categories of international crimes that constitute the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (serious violations of the Geneva Conventions, violations of the laws or customs of war, genocide and crimes against humanity) and the categories of crimes defined in the Statute of the International Tribunal for Rwanda against humanity and violations of the Geneva Conventions) in the documents of the tribunals have been developed in comparison with the Nuremberg and post-Nuremberg periods. ~ 74 ~ ВІСНИК Київського національного університету імені Тараса Шевченка ISSN 1728-3817 It is shown that the substantive jurisdiction of the ICTY and the ICC does not coincide with the provisions of the Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals. The differences relate to the list of categories of crimes; parallel jurisdiction of international ad hoc tribunals and national courts; extending the competence of ad hoc tribunals to cases of crimes committed both during wars between states and during internal armed conflict, etc. The content of the categories of crimes, their composition, the subjects of responsibility have been clarified. In particular, the characteristic features of the crime of genocide and crimes against humanity are identified; the conditions, elements and subjects for the recognition of their qualifications are indicated. The author pays attention to the principles of personal jurisdiction, shows that in the decisions of international tribunals ad hoc has developed the principle of individual responsibility for international crimes that constitute substantive jurisdiction. The application of the principle of universal jurisdiction in the activity of tribunals is revealed. The author concludes that the establishment of ad hoc international criminal tribunals and their activities has contributed to the development of the concept of international crime and the separation of a special "Hague" modification. Keywords: international crime, tribunal, "Hague" modification, international justice, jurisdiction, criminal liability

Rape and Human Rights

PMLA ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 121 (5) ◽  
pp. 1662-1664 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean Franco
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Ethnic Group ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
War Criminals ◽  
The United Nations

According to the report of the United Nations commission on Human Rights, rape is the least condemned war crime (coomaraswamy, Further Promotion 64n263). Although wartime rape was listed as a crime against humanity by the Nuremberg Military Tribunals and by the Geneva Conventions, it was not until 2001 that the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia identified rapists as war criminals. In that year the tribunal sentenced three men for violations of the laws or customs of war (torture, rape) and crimes against humanity (torture, rape) committed during the war in Bosnia during the 1993 takeover of Foca, where women were systematically raped and killed, the purpose being “to destroy an ethnic group by killing it, to prevent its reproduction or to disorganize it, removing it from its home soil.”

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document