Throughout the past three decades the world has witnessed an increased transition of states from autocratic systems to liberal democracies. During such transitions the reconciliation of societies fractured by previous human atrocities is an integral part for success. This article explores the impacts of principles of truth and justice on reconciliation of fractured societies during the process of transitional justice. Throughout the process it will provide an insight on different aspects and levels of the terminology of reconciliation. To illustrate the difference between a judicial approach and the process of amnesty giving, it will contrast the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa. Furthermore, it will provide an analytical account on the impact of internal actors versus external actors on reconciliation of fractured societies. This analysis will provide an understanding of the factors at work during reconciliation as a process and an outcome.

The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) has been both contentious and successful. By examining the ICTY from a Levinasian ethical standpoint, we might be able to understand how the court uses language to enforce ethical and moral standards upon post-war societies. Using linguistic methods of analysis combined with traditional data about the ICTY, I empirically examine the court using ordinary least squares (OLS) in order to show the impact that language has upon the court's decision making process. I hypothesize that the court is an ethical entity, and therefore we should not see any evidence of bias against Serbs and that language will provide a robust view of the court as an ethical mechanism.

<p>This paper is about the reparations regime of the International Criminal Court and reparations possibilities for victims of sexual violence. It will contain a legal analysis of the reparations system of&nbsp / the Court, including the Trust Fund for Victims of the International Criminal Court. In a second step, the needs of women who experienced conflict related violence will be examined. The central&nbsp / &nbsp / question, which this paper will try to answer, is whether the ICC reparations regime has the ability to provide gender-sensitive reparations and thus make a contribution to the improvement of&nbsp / women&rsquo / s lives in post-conflict societies.</p>

<p>This paper is about the reparations regime of the International Criminal Court and reparations possibilities for victims of sexual violence. It will contain a legal analysis of the reparations system of&nbsp / the Court, including the Trust Fund for Victims of the International Criminal Court. In a second step, the needs of women who experienced conflict related violence will be examined. The central&nbsp / &nbsp / question, which this paper will try to answer, is whether the ICC reparations regime has the ability to provide gender-sensitive reparations and thus make a contribution to the improvement of&nbsp / women&rsquo / s lives in post-conflict societies.</p>

The concept of genocide is probably the most debated subject in Holocaust and genocide studies. The political implications to its usage, or resistance to do so, have also been lengthily discussed. Yet, when it came to the legal sphere of the concept it has been mostly descriptive, without much theorizing on the politicization of the convictions of genocide. This study investigates the relation between the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda application of the crime of genocide and how these judgements were informed. Through the court’s transcripts of a number of selected cases, the research will analyze the application qualitatively, identifying the key factors that determined its usage. The analyses rest on the legal and political aspects that influenced the chambers, evaluating which one explains best. The results indicate that there is no single explanation and that both legal and political reasonings merge in the international legal arena. The courts’ decisions have many inconsistencies that cannot be accounted by a solo description. Thus, matters of law interpretation, conflict’s ending, postcolonialism, and legitimacy all take a tool when convicting or acquitting someone for the crime of genocide.

Magister Legum - LLM / This paper is about the reparations regime of the International Criminal Court and reparations possibilities for victims of sexual violence. It will contain a legal analysis of the reparations system of the Court, including the Trust Fund for Victims of the International Criminal Court. In a second step, the needs of women who experienced conflict related violence will be examined. The central question, which this paper will try to answer, is whether the ICC reparations regime has the ability to provide gender-sensitive reparations and thus make a contribution to the improvement of women’s lives in post-conflict societies. / South Africa

Doctor Legum - LLD / It is rare in law and in other disciplines for a word or a phrase to appear to mean what it does not. This is, however, true when it comes to life imprisonment or life sentence. I Unlike sentences like the death penalty, there have been instances where even those who are expected to know the meaning of the sentence of life imprisonment have misunderstood it.2 This misunderstanding is compounded by the fact that even dictionaries that have always helped us to understand the meaning of the words are of little help when it comes to the definition of life imprisonment. The Oxford Advanced Leamer's Dictionary, for example, defines life sentence to mean 'the punishment by which [some body] spends the rest of their life in prison." It goes ahead to define a 'lifer' as 'a person who has been sent to The ambiguity of life imprisonment could partly explain why the campaign prison for their whole life. The ambiguity of life imprisonment could partly explain why the campaign to abolish the death penalty and substitute it with life imprisonment has option to choose between the death penalty and life-imprisonment, many been successful in many parts of the world. When people are given the option to choose between the death penalty and life-imprisonment, many would oppose the former and favour the latter for various reasons. This is because, inter alia, many people think that an offender sentenced to life imprisonment will be detained for the rest of his natural life. This is of course not true in some cases, and, as Lord Mustil held, The two tribunals that were established after the World War III, the Nuremberg Tribunal and the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, the Tokyo Tribunal, were empowered to impose the death penalty and indeed, as will be discussed later in detail, some offenders were sentenced to death." Although these tribunals were not expressly empowered to 2 sentence offenders to life imprisonment, they did sentence some of the offenders to life imprisonment. However, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) and the International Criminal Court (ICC) all have jurisdiction to sentence offenders to life imprisonment. At the time of writing, the ICC had not completed any case and therefore had no jurisprudence on life imprisonment." The ICTR has sentenced more offenders to life imprisonment and imprisonment for the remainder of their lives than the ICTY. This thesis reviews cases on life imprisonment in international criminal tribunals in order to examine the theories of punishment that these tribunals considered in sentencing offenders to life imprisonment. There are cases where the ICTR has sentenced offenders to imprisonment for the rest of their natural lives. From a human rights perspective the thesis argues that imprisonment for the remainder of the offender's natural life is inhuman punishment. The statutes of the ICTY, ICTR and ICC provide for circumstances where an offender sentenced by any of those tribunals could be released before the completion of his or her sentence. It is on that basis that it is argued that even offenders sentenced to 3 imprisonment for the remainder of their lives by the ICTR could be released.

<p>Савремени концепти међународног кривичног права одавно су напустили правне оквире, начела и традицију очувања светског мира, јер се међународно право више не примењује, оно се тумачи и то на онај начин који одговара политичким струјама у међународним односима.<br />На који начин је дошло до вулгаризације међународног кривичног права и у којој мери је оно изражено најприближније говоре случајеви покренути пред међународним кривичним судовима. Анализом рада међународних кривичних судова у смислу: конституисања суда, дефинисања материјалних и процесних норми, извођењу доказа, изменом и допуном Правилника о поступку и доказима, истицању одређених кривичних дела, различитим стандардима и начину вредновања наступелих последица, националниј припадности субјеката у поступку... могу се препознати многи проблеми који су дискредитовали постојање начелних питања истине, објективности и правичности. У овим начелима налазе се потенцијална решења ефикасности међународних кривичних судова, али стиче се утисак да би решењем ових проблема правда била достижна и за оне који су проузроковали низ озбиљних сукоба у свету. Сходно томе, потребно је запитати се да ли међународна заједница уопште жели да постоји институција као што је Међународни кривични суд?<br />Међународни кривични судови, до сада су више личили на институције које су биле подређене медијским кампањама усмереним против унапред етикетираних држава и носиоца њихове суверене власти, што се у великом броју случајева показало као идеалан параван за покретање агресивних ратова. Ако је Међународни кривични суд надлежан, између осталог, и за дела агресије, због чега целокупна међународна заједница ћути и ништа не предузима по питању окупације аутономне покрајне Косова и Метохије и&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; не супротстави се рушилачким идеологијама припајања суседним државама. Зар то не представља рушилачки фактор безбедности и мира у региону? Већина држава у свету, а посебно у Европи, има сличних проблема који су мање или више транспарентни, али уколико се настави садашњим путем слична судбина могла би и њих да задеси.<br />Да би међународни кривични судови били у могућности да обављају функцију због које су основани њихова надлежност треба да искqучи сваки вид економске и политичке зависности. Своју надлежност судови треба да заснивају на правилима бона фидес којима би као Судови региона своју правну снагу црпили из кодификованог међународног кривичног права и постулата обичајних правних правила. Такве судове је могуће успоставити, под условом да се постојећи политизовани бирократски систем судија и тужилаца у међународним кривичним судовима замени новим регионалним решењима и концепцијама независних механизама контроле.</p> / <p>Savremeni koncepti međunarodnog krivičnog prava odavno su napustili pravne okvire, načela i tradiciju očuvanja svetskog mira, jer se međunarodno pravo više ne primenjuje, ono se tumači i to na onaj način koji odgovara političkim strujama u međunarodnim odnosima.<br />Na koji način je došlo do vulgarizacije međunarodnog krivičnog prava i u kojoj meri je ono izraženo najpribližnije govore slučajevi pokrenuti pred međunarodnim krivičnim sudovima. Analizom rada međunarodnih krivičnih sudova u smislu: konstituisanja suda, definisanja materijalnih i procesnih normi, izvođenju dokaza, izmenom i dopunom Pravilnika o postupku i dokazima, isticanju određenih krivičnih dela, različitim standardima i načinu vrednovanja nastupelih posledica, nacionalnij pripadnosti subjekata u postupku... mogu se prepoznati mnogi problemi koji su diskreditovali postojanje načelnih pitanja istine, objektivnosti i pravičnosti. U ovim načelima nalaze se potencijalna rešenja efikasnosti međunarodnih krivičnih sudova, ali stiče se utisak da bi rešenjem ovih problema pravda bila dostižna i za one koji su prouzrokovali niz ozbiljnih sukoba u svetu. Shodno tome, potrebno je zapitati se da li međunarodna zajednica uopšte želi da postoji institucija kao što je Međunarodni krivični sud?<br />Međunarodni krivični sudovi, do sada su više ličili na institucije koje su bile podređene medijskim kampanjama usmerenim protiv unapred etiketiranih država i nosioca njihove suverene vlasti, što se u velikom broju slučajeva pokazalo kao idealan paravan za pokretanje agresivnih ratova. Ako je Međunarodni krivični sud nadležan, između ostalog, i za dela agresije, zbog čega celokupna međunarodna zajednica ćuti i ništa ne preduzima po pitanju okupacije autonomne pokrajne Kosova i Metohije i&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; ne suprotstavi se rušilačkim ideologijama pripajanja susednim državama. Zar to ne predstavlja rušilački faktor bezbednosti i mira u regionu? Većina država u svetu, a posebno u Evropi, ima sličnih problema koji su manje ili više transparentni, ali ukoliko se nastavi sadašnjim putem slična sudbina mogla bi i njih da zadesi.<br />Da bi međunarodni krivični sudovi bili u mogućnosti da obavljaju funkciju zbog koje su osnovani njihova nadležnost treba da iskquči svaki vid ekonomske i političke zavisnosti. Svoju nadležnost sudovi treba da zasnivaju na pravilima bona fides kojima bi kao Sudovi regiona svoju pravnu snagu crpili iz kodifikovanog međunarodnog krivičnog prava i postulata običajnih pravnih pravila. Takve sudove je moguće uspostaviti, pod uslovom da se postojeći politizovani birokratski sistem sudija i tužilaca u međunarodnim krivičnim sudovima zameni novim regionalnim rešenjima i koncepcijama nezavisnih mehanizama kontrole.</p> / <p>Modern concepts of international criminal law have long since left the legal frameworks, principles and tradition of preserving world peace, because international law is no longer applicable, it is interpreted in a way that is consistent with political currents in international relations.<br />How has the vulgarisation of international criminal law come about and to what extent is it most closely illustrated by cases brought before international criminal courts. By analyzing the work of international criminal courts in terms of: constituting a court, defining substantive and procedural norms, presenting evidence, amending the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, highlighting certain criminal offenses, different standards and the way of evaluating the consequences, the national affiliation of the subjects in the proceedings ... many problems can be identified that have discredited the existence of fundamental questions of truth, objectivity and fairness. These principles provide potential solutions to the effectiveness of international criminal courts, but the impression is that by resolving these problems, justice would be attainable for those who have caused a number of serious conflicts in the world. Accordingly, one has to wonder if the international community wants an institution such as the International Criminal Court at all?<br />International criminal courts have so far been more like institutions subordinate to media campaigns against pre-labeled states and holders of their sovereign power, which in many cases proved to be an ideal front for launching aggressive wars. If the International Criminal Court has jurisdiction over, among other things, acts of aggression, for which reason the entire international community is silent and does nothing about the occupation of the autonomous provincial Kosovo and Metohija and does not oppose the destructive ideologies of annexation to neighboring countries. Doesn&#39;t that represent the destructive factor of security and peace in the region? Most countries in the world, and especially in Europe, have similar problems that are more or less transparent, but if they continue along the same path, a similar fate could befall them.<br />In order for international criminal courts to be able to perform the function for which they were founded, their jurisdiction should exclude any form of economic and political dependence. Courts should base their jurisdiction on bona fides rules which, as the Courts of the Region, derive their legal power from codified international criminal law and the common law rules. Such courts can be established, provided that the existing politicized bureaucratic system of judges and prosecutors in international criminal courts is replaced by new regional solutions and concepts of independent control mechanisms.</p>

Le génocide des Tutsi du Rwanda est singulier au regard des génocides du XXème siècle. Il l’est par le nombre de ses victimes, par sa rapidité, ses modes d’exécution et surtout par le nombre de ses auteurs. Ce sont plus d’un million de Rwandais (Hutu) qui ont pris part directement aux massacres. La sanction de ces crimes de masse dans une société en quête de reconstruction soulevait d’innombrables difficultés notamment dans l’appréhension d’une criminalité collective en termes de responsabilité individuelle. L’ampleur et le paroxysme atteint dans ce drame a nécessité un traitement spécifique. Trois instances de justice ont été activées de manière concomitante : les juridictions classiques rwandaises (relayées par des juridictions coutumières dites Gacaca), le Tribunal international créé par le Conseil de Sécurité des Nations Unies et enfin les juridictions nationales étrangères en application du principe de la compétence universelle. L’intérêt scientifique de notre démarche réside justement dans l’étude de ce traitement juridictionnel multiniveaux. Deux questions se posent : quelle est la pertinence de ce modèle de justice 20 ans après le drame rwandais ?Quel bilan provisoire peut-on tirer de tous les jugements rendus par ces différentes juridictions ? / The Tutsi genocide in Rwanda is singular in consider genocides of the XXth century. It is true by the number of victims, the speed and methods of implementation and, above all the number of the authors. These are more than one million Rwandan (Hutu) who participated directly in the massacres. Punishment of the massive crimes in a society in search of reconstruction, run into problems of group crime and individual responsibility. The scale and the speak of human tragedy needed specific treatment. Rwandan ordinary courts (replace by customary Courts called Gacaca), International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (created by United Nations Security Council) and lastly, national foreign jurisdictions are also begin simultaneously in application of the principle of universal jurisdiction. The interest of our scientific approach lies in the study of multilevel constitutionalism. This raises two obvious questions: What is the relevance of this justice model twenty years after the Rwandan tragedy? What has been the interim review of all the judgments handed down by the different jurisdictions?

The development of joint criminal enterprise at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) has been controversial since the doctrine was first created in 1997. For the judgments rendered by the ICTY to be perceived as legitimate, the doctrines used to bring charges against defendants must also be perceived as legitimate. The purpose of my thesis is to study the application of joint criminal enterprise at the ICTY and examine how the doctrine has influenced the length of sentences given. I find that joint criminal enterprise may be influencing longer sentences and the three categories of joint criminal enterprise are being used differently on defendants of different power levels. By empirically analyzing the patterns developing at the ICTY, I can see how joint criminal enterprise is influencing sentencing and the fairness of trials.