At the heart of this paper lies the perennial problem of the legitimacy of tribunals judging war criminals and the role of public imagery in countering Victor’s Justice challenges. The paper follows along the paths of components of the cultural transfer from Nuremberg and Tokyo international tribunals (1946– 1948) for the prosecution of war criminals post World War II through the Eichmann trial in Jerusalem (1961) to the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in The Hague (1993), focusing on two specific ‘carriers’ of this cultural transfer: “Law” and “Architecture.” By Law, I mean the copying and re-application of similar legal procedures, the active participation of certain people within two of the three instances, and even the carrying forward of physical pieces of evidence from one trial to another. By Architecture, I mean the actual construction of the trial chamber in all three places. The location of the judges’ bench, the defendants’ dock, the witnesses stand, and the interrelational architectural flow which became characteristic of each of these Lieux de Justice. In terms of public imagery, important counter measures to Victor’s- Justice claims also included the ample facilitation of journalist coverage, the provision of full translation services for the defendants (countering claims of linguistic non-misunderstanding), and the holding of the defendants in humane conditions of incarceration, in a somewhat deliberate juxtaposing countenance to their own crimes which habitually included concentration camps and harshly inhumane incarceration facilities. The paper concludes with a recalibration of Hannah Arendt’s mistaken claim vis-à-vis Eichmann, in contrast to her important understandings concerning the banality of evil.

This thesis argues that the International Criminal Court (ICC) brings a new more deontological paradigm to international interventions, founded upon the universal application of legal principle, and displacing consequentialist notions of justice linked to human rights. Based upon the Court’s Statute and mode of operations, it is argued that this is associated with assumptions concerning the ICC’s primacy, military enforcement, and theory of change. The consequences of this development in volatile contexts are demonstrated. The case study, founded upon analysis from the war-affected community, examines the impact of the International Criminal Court in the Lord’s Resistance Army war, and reveals the relationship between criminal justice enforcement, and community priorities for peace and human rights. On the basis of evidence, and contrary to narratives repeated but unsubstantiated in the literature, it demonstrates that in this case these two imperatives were in opposition to one another. The Court’s pursuit of retributive legal principle was detrimental to the community’s interests in peace and human rights. The subsequent failure of the ICC’s review process to interrogate this important issue is also established. The research establishes that statutory and operational assumptions upon which Court interventions are based do not hold in volatile contexts. For the case study community and elsewhere, this has had adverse impacts, with significant implications for the ICC. The findings indicate that if these issues are not fundamentally addressed, principled international criminal justice enforcement in volatile environments will continue to have profoundly negative human rights consequences.

This thesis argues that the International Criminal Court (ICC) brings a new more deontological paradigm to international interventions, founded upon the universal application of legal principle, and displacing consequentialist notions of justice linked to human rights. Based upon the Court’s Statute and mode of operations, it is argued that this is associated with assumptions concerning the ICC’s primacy, military enforcement, and theory of change. The consequences of this development in volatile contexts are demonstrated. The case study, founded upon analysis from the war-affected community, examines the impact of the International Criminal Court in the Lord’s Resistance Army war, and reveals the relationship between criminal justice enforcement, and community priorities for peace and human rights. On the basis of evidence, and contrary to narratives repeated but unsubstantiated in the literature, it demonstrates that in this case these two imperatives were in opposition to one another. The Court’s pursuit of retributive legal principle was detrimental to the community’s interests in peace and human rights. The subsequent failure of the ICC’s review process to interrogate this important issue is also established. The research establishes that statutory and operational assumptions upon which Court interventions are based do not hold in volatile contexts. For the case study community and elsewhere, this has had adverse impacts, with significant implications for the ICC. The findings indicate that if these issues are not fundamentally addressed, principled international criminal justice enforcement in volatile environments will continue to have profoundly negative human rights consequences.

'Institutional critique' is a term that refers to a range of diverse artistic practices and discourses that emerged at the end of the 1960s and that continue in the present. In spite of their differences, they all share a concern with the institutional conditioning of artists and artworks. Various historicizations of institutional critique (Alberro and Stimson, 2009; Raunig and Ray, 2009; Welchman, 2006) concur that one could distinguish two 'phases': artists of the 1960s and 1970s allegedly investigated the possibilities of an escape towards an 'outside' of the art institution, whereas those of the 1990s analysed the ways in which the artistic subject reproduced the structures of the art institution. Since the beginning of the 2000s various artists and authors have revisited the histories and legacies of institutional critique. This growing interest was triggered by the perceived intensification of a process that began at the end of the 1960s; it refers to the recuperation and neutralization of artistic types of critique by what Boltanski and Chiapello (2005) have called the 'new spirit' of capitalism. In this context, the Austrian philosopher Gerald Raunig and the members of the European Institute for Progressive Cultural Policies have proposed the hypothesis that 'a new phase' of institutional critique was to emerge. However, this proposition was based less on empirical evidence, than on a 'political and theoretical necessity to be found in the logic of institutional critique' (Raunig, 2009, 3). This thesis is a response to this set of circumstances. By asking 'what are the conditions and possibilities of institutional critique?' it investigates the categories of institutional critique's logic. My main argument is that a 'phase change' of institutional critique could and should be understood through the apparatus of Derridean deconstruction. This implies a criticism of the idea that one needs to escape the art institution in order to respond to urgencies stemming from the social, economic, and political realms (Truth Is Concrete Platform, 2012). At the same time, I will also refute the idea that institutional critique is trapped in the art institution (Fraser, 2009a). Institutional critique works on the remainder and rest that necessarily escapes the instituting will and intention of defining and describing in an exhaustive manner the whatness of what (art) is (Boltanski, 2011). I show that between critique and the art institution there is an irreducible relation of symbiosis and cohabitation, and that the deconstructive logic of institutional critique allows it to be both partner and adversary, at the same time, of the art institution.

Certain Small Island Developing States (hereinafter the "SIDS") such as Kiribati or Tuvalu are often incorrectly called "sinking islands" because their highest points are located just a few meters above the sea level. Sea level rise may turn their territories to uninhabitable land gradually disappearing beneath the tide. Worsening of the environmental conditions causes internal displacement, migration and other problems. SIDS repeatedly brought their plight to the United Nations Security Council (the "UNSC") during its meetings in 2007, 2011, 2015, 2018 and 2019. They demanded that the UNSC should deal with their situation as a potential security issue and safeguard more equal distribution of environmental security risks and costs. During the UNSC negotiations, various states attempted to interpret and re-interpreted the UNSC mandate in order to suit their interests. The representatives of SIDS suggested that the UNSC should be a body based on the principles of distributive justice decision-making and thus safeguard fairer sharing of threats and burdens, including those of environmental character. The rapidly developing states strongly opposed; they implicitly claimed that the UNSC should be based rather on the principles of commutative justice, i.e. decide in strictly given situations of violations of...

Diploma thesis "Supervision of a probation officer over criminal irresponsible children" deals with juvenile delinquency, juvenile justice law adaptation for criminal responsible children younger 15 years of age and concerns with the ways by which society can react to the juvenile delinquency according to valid law adaptation. In its theoretical part this thesis focuses on definition of the keywords such are 'child', 'age limits of criminal responsibility', 'delinquency'. Thesis includes also description of juvenile delinquency as such where the law adaptation related to this issue is taken into consideration as well as the discipline precautions which can be ordered by court of law as a reaction to the unlawful behaviour. The goal of the practical part is to map the obstacles which discourage effective usage of discipline precautions supervision of a probation Office and suggest possible solving. The analytical part of the thesis was realised by two techniques, namely, questioning technique and document analysis.

One of the central questions in political theory deals with the nature of rights. What sorts of rights do people possess? How are these rights justified? How ought these rights be reflected and related when seen in political, economic, and social institutions? Following the publication of John Rawls' A Theory of Justice (1971) and Robert Nozick's Anarchy, State, and Utopia (1974), rights have once again returned to dominate much of contemporary political theory. However, natural law, which was the historical basis of the early Enlightenment theories of rights, is no longer the primary system appealed to when discussing rights. In fact, classical natural law has been all but discarded in most of political theory today. There has also been renewed debate over the nature of public neutrality, and what the relationship ought to be between the public and private sphere. The mainstream view of how our liberties relate to our rights, as well as what kinds of rights we have over our private affairs, has come under fire from a newly emerging political philosophy known as communitarianism. This thesis will present a robust theory of rights that provides a new understanding of the relationship between positive and negative rights through a defense of classical natural law as an ethical foundation for political theory. It will side with the communitarian critics of public neutrality, and offer a practical method of determining when the state is justified in limiting private liberties due to public interest.