International Tribunals and the Criminalization of International Violence

Abstract

What difference does international criminal law make to global security, and what contributions has the United Nations made to international criminal law? The establishment through the UN of international criminal tribunals for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and Rwanda (ICTR), its role in initiating tribunals in East Timor, Sierra Leone, and Cambodia, and the rapid coming into force of the International Criminal Court represent revolutionary developments in how the world attempts to deal with war and crimes against humanity. While the Nuremberg and Tokyo military tribunals after World War II provided a major shift in the paradigm of legal responsibility for conduct in war from states to individuals, the more recent tribunals symbolize a decisive move away from the perception of “victors’ justice” towards a more universal mechanism for ensuring accountability for atrocities committed during wartime and even peacetime. In doing so, these courts have overcome a number of obstacles that skeptics over the years have argued would prevent the effective operation or even existence of such international courts. Observers of international law and war had long maintained that the diverse legal systems and cultures around the world present an insuperable obstacle to the creation of a permanent international criminal court.

The authors thank David Malone, Michael Barnett, and the other authors of this volume for their comments on earlier versions of this chapter.