Over the past two decades, war crimes tribunals have become an increasingly mainstream response to atrocities. Yet, in order to see the world of war crimes tribunals as international jurists see, one has to pay attention to the legal tools that have been forged for investigating and prosecuting war crimes internationally. This is especially so because these tribunals must attend to two strikingly different sets of legal and normative principles: the field of international criminal law is marked by what some call a "split personality", in which the coercive approach of the criminal law sits uneasily with an internationalist emphasis on the voluntary cooperation of sovereign states. This paper studies the inner legal workings of a war crimes tribunal to learn how it copes with this challenge. Focusing on the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, we investigate how two powerful legal tools - subpoenas and arrests - were the objects of legal controversy, and were adapted to accommodate both the criminal and the international dimensions of this chiastic field of law. We find that by embedding these competing principles into the design of its legal tools, this war crimes tribunal mediates a logic of criminal enforcement with an internationalist model of state sovereignty.
|Translated title of the contribution||Mediating international criminal law|
|Journal||Actes de la Recherche en Sciences Sociales|
|State||Published - Sep 1 2008|
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Social Sciences(all)