This thesis employs a social constructionist perspective to analyze constructions of the International Criminal Court (ICC), specifically (1) the notion of impunity; (2) the presence of a critical analysis; and (3) the connection between state support/opposition and favourable/negative portrayals of the Court. The theory chapter focuses on the propaganda model’s main premise that “media serve the interests of that state … framing their reporting and analysis in a manner supportive of established privilege and limiting debate accordingly” (Herman & Chomsky, 1998, p.32). A thematic qualitative content analysis and several tools of grounded theory deconstructed 1,982 articles collected from The Globe and Mail, The Toronto Star, The New York Times, and The Washington Post. Overall, the newspapers contained a high level of support for the propaganda model’s main assertions. Some of these conversations were quite limited and/or biased; specifically, American newspapers manipulated debates to justify American opposition to the Court.

No description available.

This thesis critically examines the origins and development of international criminal lave to identify the defining features of this emerging legal tradition. It critically evaluates the experimental approach taken in Article 21 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which attempts to codify an untested normative super-structure to guide this legal tradition. / International criminal law is a hybrid tradition which seeks legitimacy and answers to difficult questions by drawing on other established legal traditions. Its development at the confluence of public international law, international humanitarian law, international human rights law and national criminal laws has resulted in gaps in difficult cases with no clear answers. These lacunae have been filled by recourse to judicial discretion, exercised consistent with Patrick Glenn's theory of transnational common laws, and by privileging one of the competing aims of international criminal law: enhancing humanitarian protection versus maximizing fairness to the accused.

The International Criminal Court (hereinafter ICC) is a new permanent international judicial tribunal which plays an important role in combating international crimes and dispensing justice. It was established in 1998 by the international community after much effort and compromise. It is designed to be an independent international body, with the autonomy to determine its budget and control its funding. This study discusses how the ICC acts as a mechanism to create a nexus between international criminal and humanitarian law by prosecuting crimes like genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and the crime of aggression, that fall within its jurisdiction. The study seeks to show that the international jurisdiction of the ICC is a potential safeguard against arbitrary national criminal procedures in respect of those who are accused of committing serious international crimes. The ICC's jurisdiction is complementary to that of national courts that are unable or unwilling to investigate and prosecute these crimes. National judicial systems are still required to play a primary role in combating international crimes and it is important that states, organisations and individuals assist the ICC if it is to become an effective deterrent to perpetrators of international crimes. The rationale behind the ICC's establishment is that the international community is under a legal obligation to prosecute violations of international law in either national or international courts. The study also analyses the role of the ICC in balancing the rights of the victims and the rights of the accused by applying the guarantees and safeguards for conducting fair trials set out in the Rome Treaty. In this way, it seeks to show that prosecuting and punishing perpetrators of international crimes is an important contributing factor in the creation of a human rights' culture, while also serving as a deterrent to prospective violators of international human rights and humanitarian law. / Thesis (LL.M)-University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, 2005.

For nearly half a decade discussion of the responsibility to protect (R2P) and international criminal justice proceeded along separate lines. However, in recent years an emerging perception that international criminal law may contribute to putting an end to a continuing atrocity crimes has lead to its use as an R2P reactive tool. This paper examines the relationship between R2P and the activity of International Criminal Court (the ICC), and the implications of their recent rapprochement. Firstly, the paper aims to bring a much-needed focus on the implications of their current interaction in ongoing conflict situations. Secondly it examines whether the convergence of R2P and the ICC represents a paradigmatic shift toward humanity’s law and a possible utopian tyranny or reinforces the traditional statist system as the fundamental framework for conflict mediation opening the door to a possible “cynic tyranny”. Thirdly, it considers how ICC and R2P activities should be coordinated.

For nearly half a decade discussion of the responsibility to protect (R2P) and international criminal justice proceeded along separate lines. However, in recent years an emerging perception that international criminal law may contribute to putting an end to a continuing atrocity crimes has lead to its use as an R2P reactive tool. This paper examines the relationship between R2P and the activity of International Criminal Court (the ICC), and the implications of their recent rapprochement. Firstly, the paper aims to bring a much-needed focus on the implications of their current interaction in ongoing conflict situations. Secondly it examines whether the convergence of R2P and the ICC represents a paradigmatic shift toward humanity’s law and a possible utopian tyranny or reinforces the traditional statist system as the fundamental framework for conflict mediation opening the door to a possible “cynic tyranny”. Thirdly, it considers how ICC and R2P activities should be coordinated.

This thesis employs a social constructionist perspective to analyze constructions of the International Criminal Court (ICC), specifically (1) the notion of impunity; (2) the presence of a critical analysis; and (3) the connection between state support/opposition and favourable/negative portrayals of the Court. The theory chapter focuses on the propaganda model’s main premise that “media serve the interests of that state … framing their reporting and analysis in a manner supportive of established privilege and limiting debate accordingly” (Herman & Chomsky, 1998, p.32). A thematic qualitative content analysis and several tools of grounded theory deconstructed 1,982 articles collected from The Globe and Mail, The Toronto Star, The New York Times, and The Washington Post. Overall, the newspapers contained a high level of support for the propaganda model’s main assertions. Some of these conversations were quite limited and/or biased; specifically, American newspapers manipulated debates to justify American opposition to the Court.

Thesis (LL. M.)--University of Toronto, 2005.

Thesis (doctoral)--Universität, St. Gallen, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references (p. [289]-312) and index.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--RAND Graduate School, 2007. / Includes bibliographical references.