IJ №2(30) 2019
International justice as a contested domain: a crisis of international criminal courts?

The full text of the article is available only in Russian.

Abstract

Modern history of international law would not be complete without the story of international criminal tribunals, set up for the first time in Nuremberg and Tokyo by the Allied Powers in the aftermath of WWII, and then, after the end of the Cold War, by the Security Council for crimes committed in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda (ad hoc tribunals). In the 1990s, establishment of the tribunals was regarded by both politicians and academics as an important and necessary step to end impunity for the most serious international crimes. Since the mid-2000s, however, we witness waning of interest towards international criminal justice institutions (and even overt resistance to their activities on the part of the states), despite the fact that the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) entered into force in 2002. In this article we would like to contemplate on the problem of “backlash” in relation to international criminal courts and tribunals, as well as to suggest a possible way out of the current “legitimacy crisis”. Optimistic assessments of international criminal justice prospects are long gone, being replaced by gloomy scenarios of crisis in this domain of international law and recurring appeals to reform the existing institutions. Recent withdrawal of some African states from the Rome Statute only exacerbates the already bleak situation when states increasingly fail to comply with the decisions of international organizations, resorting to harsh criticism of their activities instead. The article starts by looking at existing definitions of this current “backlash” against international courts in the context of “legitimacy crisis”, and proceeds with the examination of states’ relations with international criminal tribunals and the ICC with a view of identifying major points of contention and possible solutions to the crisis as seen from the perspective of both liberal and critical theoretical camps. In the final part of the article we seek to demonstrate that the adoption of a model code of international criminal procedure (or at least, codification of certain rules regulating major problem areas like the rights of the accused and protection of victims and witnesses) might serve to re-create trust in international criminal institutions.

About the authors:
Galina Nelaeva – Candidate of Sciences (Ph.D.) in Political Science, Professor, Institute of Social Sciences and Humanities, University of Tyumen, Tyumen, Russia
Natalia Sidorova– Candidate of Sciences (Ph.D.) in Law, Associate Professor, Institute of State and Law, University of Tyumen, Tyumen, Russia
Elena Khabarova – Candidate of Sciences (Ph.D.) in Law, Associate Professor, Institute of State and Law, University of Tyumen, Tyumen, Russia

Citation: Nelaeva G., Sidorova N., Khabarova E. (2019) Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie kak predmet osparivaniya: krizis mezhdunarodnykh ugolovnykh sudov? [International justice as a contested domain: a crisis of international criminal courts?]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie, vol.9, no.2, pp.93–106. (In Russian).

References:

Belyy I.Yu. (2017) Mezhdunarodnoe ugolovnoe pravosudie i problemy pravovogo suvereniteta Rossii [International criminal justice and problems of Russia’s legal sovereignty]. Vestnik voennogo prava, no.3, pp.63–67. (In Russian).

Boas G., Schabas W.A. (eds.) (2003) International Criminal Law Developments in the Case Law of the ICTY, Leiden; Boston, MA: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

Buzogány A. (2007) Illiberal Democracy in Hungary: Authoritarian Diffusion or Domestic Causation? Democratization, vol.24, no.7, pp.1307–1325.

De Brouwer A.-M.L.M. (2005) Supranational Criminal Prosecution of Sexual Violence: The ICC and the Practice of the ICTY and the ICTR, Antwerpen: Intersentia.

Del Ponte C., Sudetic C. (2008) La caccia – io e i criminali di guerra, Milano: Feltrinelli.

Donnely J. (1995) State Sovereignty and International Intervention: The Case of Human Rights. In: Lions G.M., Mastanduno M. (eds.) Beyond Westphalia? State Sovereignty and International Intervention, Baltimore, MD; London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, pp.115–147.

Dutton Y.M. (2017) Bridging the Legitimacy Divide: The International Criminal Court’s Domestic Perception Challenge. Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, vol.56, no.1, pp.71–122.

Einarsdottir K.O. (2010) Comparing the Rules of Evidence Applicable before the ICTY, ICTR, and the ICC: Master Thesis, University of Iceland. Available at: https://skemman.is/bitstream/1946/4226/1/1_fixed.pdf (accessed: 01.12.2018).

Finnemore M., Sikkink K. (1998) International Norm Dynamics and Political Change. International Organization, vol.52, no.4, pp.887–917.

Franck S.D. (2005) The Legitimacy Crisis in Investment Treaty Arbitration: Privatizing Public International Law Through Inconsistent Decisions. Fordham Law Review, vol.73, no.4, pp.1521–1625.

Fukuyama F. (1989) The End of History? The National Interest, no.16, pp.3–18.

Glotova S.V. (2011) Osobennosti mezhdunarodnogo ugolovnogo sudoproizvodstva na primere Mezhdunarodnogo ugolovnogo suda [Peculiarities of international criminal justice: International Criminal Court as a case-study]. Rossiyskiy yuridicheskiy zhurnal, no.3, pp.99–110. (In Russian).

Goldstone R. (2000) For Humanity: Reflections of a War Crimes Investigator, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Habermas J. (1975) Legitimation Crisis, Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Hall-Martinez K., Bedont B. (1999) Ending Impunity for Gender Crimes Under the International Criminal Court. Brown Journal of World Affairs, vol.6, no.1, pp.65–85.

Hola B., Smeulers A., Bijleveld C. (2009) Is ICTY Sentencing Predictable? An Empirical Analysis of ICTY Sentencing. Leiden Journal of International Law, vol.22, no.1, pp.79–97.

Huntington S.P. (1993) The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century, Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.

Kalandarishvili Kh.A. (2018) Standartizatsiya dokazyvaniya s pomoshch’yu ugolovno-protsessual’nykh prezumptsiy v resheniyakh Evropeyskogo suda po pravam cheloveka [Standardizing the evidentiary process by criminal procedure presumptions in case law of the European Court of Human Rights]. Rossiyskiy sud‘ya, no.5, pp.44–48. (In Russian).

Kote L. (2006) Mezhdunarodnaya ugolovnaya yustitsiya: pravila igry stanovyatsya strozhe [International criminal justice: the rules of the game are becoming tougher]. Mezhdunarodnyy zhurnal Krasnogo Kresta, vol.88, no.861, pp.163–177. (In Russian).

Krastev I. (2007) The Strange Death of the Liberal Consensus: Is Central Europe Backsliding? Journal of Democracy, vol.18, no.4, pp.56–63.

Lenz T., Viola L.A. (2017) Legitimacy and institutional Change in International Organisations: A Cognitive Approach. Review of International Studies, vol.43, no.5, pp.939–961.

Linton S. (2016) Women Accused of International Crimes: A Trans-disciplinary Inquiry and Methodology. Criminal Law Forum, vol.27, pp.159–226.

Lovat H. (Forthcoming) International Criminal Tribunal Backlash. In: Heller K.J. et al. (eds.) Oxford Handbook of International Criminal Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3253050 (accessed: 22.12.2018).

Madsen M.R., Cebulak P., Wiebusch M. (2018) Backlash against International Courts: Explaining the Forms and Patterns of Resistance to International Courts. International Journal of Law in Context, vol.14, no.2, pp.197–220.

Mälksoo L. (2015) Russian Approaches to International Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Mälksoo L., Benedek W. (eds.) (2017) Russia and the European Court of Human Rights: The Strasbourg Effect, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mezyaev A.B. (2013) Prava obvinyaemogo v sovremennom mezhdunarodnom ugolovnom protsesse (voprosy teorii i praktiki): Avtoref. dis. … d-ra yurid. nauk [Defendant’s rights in contemporary international criminal trial (theory and practice): Dr. in law sci. diss.], Moscow. (In Russian).

Nelaeva G.A., Khabarova E.A. (2016) Otsenki deyatel’nosti Mezhdunarodnogo tribunala po byvshey Yugoslavii: vzglyady rossiyskikh i zarubezhnykh ekspertov [Assessing the activities of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia: Russian and Foreign views]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo i mezhdunarodnye organizatsii, no.4, pp.457–464. (In Russian).

Pilch F.T. (2003) Sexual Violence: NGOs and the Evolution of International Humanitarian Law. In: Carey H.F., Richmond O.P. (eds.) Mitigating Conflict: The Role of NGOs, London; Portland, OR: Frank Cass, pp.90–100.

Powderly J. (2019) International Criminal Justice in an Age of Perpetual Crisis. Leiden Journal of International Law, vol.32, no.1, pp.1–11.

Rabtsevich O.I. (2011) Mezhdunarodnoe ugolovno-protsessual’noe pravo: k voprosu o samostoyatel’nosti normativnogo kompleksa [International criminal procedure law: on the question of independence of the normative complex]. Rossiyskiy yuridicheskiy zhurnal, no.3, pp.90–98. (In Russian).

Reus-Smit C. (2007) International Crises of Legitimacy. International Politics, vol.44, no.2–3, pp.157–174.

Risse T. (2002) Transnational Actors and World Politics. In: Carlsnaes W., Risse T., Simmons B. (eds.) Handbook of International Relations, London: SAGE, pp.255–274.

Risse T., Sikkink K. (1999) The Socialization of International Human Rights Norms into Domestic Practices: Introduction. In: Risse T., Ropp S.C., Sikkink K. (eds.) The Power of Human Rights: International Norms and Domestic Change, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.1–38.

Rogers D. (2018) Law, Politics and the Limits of Prosecuting Mass Atrocity, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Romano C.P.R., Nollkaemper A., Kleffner J.K. (eds.) (2004) Internationalized Criminal Courts and Tribunals: Sierra Leone, East Timor, Kosovo, and Cambodia, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Roshchin E. (2017) The Hague Conferences and “International Community”: A Politics of Conceptual Innovation. Review of International Studies, vol.43, no.1, pp.177–198.

Sands P. (ed.) (2003) From Nuremberg to The Hague: The Future of International Criminal Justice, Cambridge University Press.

Schwöbel C. (ed.) (2014) Critical Approaches to International Criminal Law: An Introduction, Abington; New York: Routledge.

Simpson G. (2007) Law, War and Crime: War Crimes Trials and the Reinvention of International Law, Cambridge: Polity.

Sivakumaran S. (2007) Sexual Violence Against Men in Armed Conflict. European Journal of International Law, vol.18, no.2, pp.253–276.

Sjoberg L., Gentry C.E. (2007) Mothers, Monsters, Whores: Women’s Violence in Global Politics, London; New York: Zed Books.

Smeulers A.L. (2015) Female Perpetrators: Ordinary and Extra-ordinary Women. International Criminal Law Review, vol.15, no.2, pp.207–253.

Soley X., Steininger S. (2018) Parting Ways or Lashing Back? Withdrawals, Backlash and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. International Journal of Law in Context, vol.14, no.2, pp.237–257.

Vasiliev S. (Forthcoming) The Crises and Critiques of International Criminal Justice. In: Heller K.J. et al. (eds.) Oxford Handbook of International Criminal Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3358240 (accessed: 11.04.2019).

Issue articles