"In response to President Kabah's request of June 2000, the United Nations Security Council called on the Secretary-General to negotiate an agreement with the government of Sierra Leone for the creation of a special court for Sierra Leone (hereafter SCSL), to investigate the atrocities committed within the country, by Resolution 1315 of 14 August 2000. Under the agreement concluded in February 2001, the SCSL has jurisdiction over crimes against humanity, war crimes and other serious violations of international humanitarian law committed since November 1996. The author assesses in detail the efficacy of the SCSL in dispensing justice up to date. The author concludes that, although the SCSL has accomplished much, it has shortcomings and faces changes that hamper the attainment of its objectives. ... This study is divided into five chapters. Chapter one provides the context in which the study is set, the focus and objectives of the study, its significance and other preliminary issues, including a statement of the problem and the literature review. Analysis of the conflict in Sierra Leone are necessary to grasp the graveness and the nature of the human rights violations and to understand the nature and extent of justice already meted out. Chapter two focuses particularly on the historical background of the conflict and the reasons that necessitate the establishment of the SCSL. The SCSL was established specifically to respond to human rights abuses committed during the civil war in Sierra Leone. Chapter three examines the major achievements of the Court in dispensing justice, and chapter four identifies the shortcomings and the challenges that confront the Court in its aim to fulfil its mandate." -- Chapter one. / Thesis (LLM (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa)) -- University of Pretoria, 2006. / Prepared under the supervision of Professor Lovell Fernandez, Faculty of Law, University of the Western Cape / http://www.chr.up.ac.za/academic_pro/llm1/dissertations.html / Centre for Human Rights / LLM

The thesis deals with the question, in which situation the International Criminal court would probably open an Investigation of such crimes by an international body is a delicate question mainly with regard to a great extend of intervention into a state sovereignty, which manifests itself also as jurisdictional sovereignty. The thesis focuses on the case of Kenyan post-election violence in years of 2007 and 2008 and the aim to suppress Libyan revolution of 2011. Besides, the work is based upon the theory of (liberal) institutionalism, which could hopefully be applied to the international-law case of investigation of the crimes committed outside an armed conflict. Within the framework of the thesis I try to reveal criteria determining whether the International Criminal court opens or not an investigation to a situation of human rights abuse. For the purpose I take into consideration world and local country status, character of the perpetrators, extend of the attacks, country's relation to the great powers, as well as readiness of the country to prosecute the perpetrators within the national jurisdiction. As conclusion I try t compare the findings from the part applying liberal institutionalism and from the case studies.

This thesis provides a rhetorical analysis of the Western representation of the Kosovo conflict and its resolution in the year 1999. By reviewing political, scholarly and media rhetoric, the thesis examines how the dominant narrative of "genocide in Kosovo" was created in Western discourse, arguing that it gained its persuasive force from the legacy of the collective memory of the Holocaust. Using the framework of Kenneth Burke's theory of Dramatism and Walter Fisher's theory of the narrative paradigm, this thesis aims to understand how language, analogy and collective memory function in rhetoric to shape audience perceptions and guide political and military action. The study illustrates the mechanics of the operating rhetoric by analyzing two primary sources, the rhetoric of U.S. President Bill Clinton and British Prime Minister Tony Blair. / by Tajana Bjellos. / Thesis (M.A.)--Florida Atlantic University, 2010. / Includes bibliography. / Electronic reproduction. Boca Raton, Fla., 2010. Mode of access: World Wide Web.

During the 1990s Yugoslavia and Rwanda were swept by wars accompanied by serious violations of international humanitarian law. Grave and severe crimes wiped away lives and destroyed properties. The United Nations Security Council determined that the violations committed constituted threats to international peace and security, declaring itself empowered to take action. It established international ad hoc criminal tribunals for Yugoslavia and Rwanda with the mandate of prosecuting individuals responsible for those crimes as an enforcement measure under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter. Investigating the tribunals’ effectiveness enables one to assess whether they achieved the anticipated outcomes based on the tribunals’ mission, goals, and objectives without creating other problems. The research relies on naturalism and positivism to put the tribunals in a moral and ethical perspective. By examining how the tribunals were established, their objectives, the investigation and prosecution processes, the reliance on guilty plea and judicial notice and the imputation of criminal responsibility by applying joint criminal enterprise and command responsibility doctrines; the study argues that prosecution has not been an effective tool as contemplated by the Security Council. An analytical and comparative review of various domestic and international legal resources helped to provide an insightful approach for an effective prosecution of international crimes. Credible, legitimate and legal judicial institutions in which professional judges and prosecutors discharge their function independently, impartially and are accountable may achieve justice for the victims of international crimes. Ad hoc tribunals failed to thoroughly investigate and assume the dual role of prosecution. They conveniently used legal procedural tools that fit petty domestic crimes; unfortunately demeaning the magnitude of international crimes of concern. Criminal responsibility was mostly imputed without properly scrutinising the legality, extent, actual participation and guilty mind of the alleged perpetrators. Effectiveness should be a value assessment. Imposed and overburdened ad hoc tribunals are inappropriate and should be abandoned. / Public, Constitutional, & International / LLD

Les violations aux droits humains causent des milliers de victimes chaque année, des mécanismes de justice sont élaborés afin de répondre à ces crimes, mais les victimes demeurent peu consultées. Par le biais d’entretiens semi-directifs, cette étude présente le point de vue et les attentes des victimes de crimes contre l’humanité du Cambodge et du Rwanda sur la justice. La justice sociale constitue le cadre théorique de cette étude. Les résultats montrent que la justice pénale est centrale à la définition de la justice. La réparation et la vérité en constituent aussi les éléments essentiels. Toutefois, la capacité des tribunaux à rendre compte de la vérité est critiquée par les répondants créant un écart entre ce qu’elles veulent et ce qu’elles obtiennent. La qualité de la prise de décision et du traitement interpersonnel favorise aussi la perception de justice du point de vue des victimes. Les différentes composantes de la justice perçues, comme la punition, la réparation et la procédure, varient toutefois en fonction du contexte social et historique de la victimisation. / Human rights violations cause thousands of victims every year. Justice mechanisms, such as the International Criminal Court, have been developed to respond to these crimes, but victims remain under consulted. In this study, semi-structured interviews were conducted with Rwandan and Cambodian victims of crimes against humanity. Using social justice theories as a theoretical framework, this study examines victims’ perceptions of justice. The results show that while criminal justice is central in victims’ definition of justice, reparation and truth also are essential components. However, the criminal court’s ability to achieve truth is criticized by respondents creating a gap between the truth that they seek and the truth that they obtain. The quality of decision-making as well as how victims are treated also contribute to victims’ perception of justice. However, victims’ justice objectives vary according to the social and historic context.

Thèse numérisée par la Division de la gestion de documents et des archives de l'Université de Montréal.

in English The theme of this dissertation is the subject matter jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Offences such as aggression, genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, sometimes called the "core crimes", are the most serious crimes ever indentified under international law. These crimes do not violate only some particular rights, but they threaten the whole international community, peace, security and well-being of the world. Therefore it is essential to have a precise legal definition of these grave crimes and to establish an effective judicial mechanism for prosecution of the most dangerous criminals. However, it is not easy to find general consent on these matters among the international community. There is not much space for internationalisation in the field of criminal law, which was traditionally considered an important part of national sovereignty. Thus the path towards establishment of the ICC, which is the first permanent international criminal judicial body ever, was extremely difficult, as was definition of the four core crimes falling within its jurisdiction. This thesis scrutinises the concrete provisions of the ICC Statute, the "Rome Statute", which constitute substantive law by defining the crime of genocide (art. 6), crimes against humanity (art. 7), war...

A rebours de la croyance populaire qui veut que le temps efface les blessures, le constat s'impose de l'omniprésence de la mémoire comme matrice des orientations décidées par nos gouvernants. Soixante-dix ans après la fin de la Seconde Guerre mondiale, elle occupe l'espace public dans toutes ses composantes et pousse à l'adoption de lois de reconnaissance des victimes et de sanction des discours de négation. Parallèlement, le législateur doit répondre à ses engagements conventionnels et satisfaire aux exigences de la justice pénale internationale. Mais ici encore, les contingences politiques sont fortes, qui sclérosent la réflexion juridique et conduisent à l'élaboration de dispositions controversées. Ce phénomène, ostensible en France, l'est moins chez notre voisin allemand, pourtant tributaire d'un lourd héritage mémoriel. Cette observation peut surprendre celui qui ne tient pas compte des évolutions conjointes mais divergentes des deux Etats depuis 1945, quant à la « gestion » des crimes internationaux par nature et de leurs suites ; d'où l'utilité d'une approche transversale, historique et comparative de ces questions. / Contrary to the popular belief that the time clears injuries, the finding must be made of the omnipresence of the memory as a matrix of guidelines decided by our leaders. Seventy years after the World War II ended, it occupies public space in all its components and drives the adoption of laws recognizing victims and punishing speech of negation. Meanwhile, the legislature must meet its conventional obligations and the requirements of international criminal justice. But again, the political contingencies are strong, which block legal thinking and lead to the creation of controversial provisions. This phenomenon, striking in France, is less at our german neighbor, yet reliant on a heavy legacy memorial. This observation may surprise those who do not consider the joint but divergent evolutions of the two states since 1945, on the « treatment » of international crimes by nature and their consequences ; hence the usefulness of a transverse, historical and comparative approach to these issues.

Este trabalho tem por objetivo debater a contribuição e o papel que a jurisprudência do Tribunal Penal Internacional para a ex-Iugoslávia desempenhou no processo de produção e desenvolvimento do direito internacional penal costumeiro sobre crimes contra a humanidade e sua influência na formação do conteúdo normativo atual do art. 7o(1),(2)(a), do Estatuto de Roma, que trata do crime contra a humanidade. Para isso, analisa-se como a Corte determinou o costume válido sobre as elementares do crime contra a humanidade nos casos Duko Tadie Draen Erdemovi, julgados antes da conferência de Roma. Em seguida, examina-se a teoria das fontes, mais especificamente, o costume internacional, seu fundamento, seus dois elementos (combinação de prática e opinio iuris), bem como seus sujeitos criadores e veículos de exteriorização, em especial a jurisprudência internacional. Nesse percurso, apontam-se as práticas destoantes do costume e a dificuldade de sua determinação, para então indicar o binômio valor e poder como elementos que influenciam sua manifestação. Depois, procura-se verificar o contexto político e jurídico de criação do Tribunal Penal Internacional para a ex-Iugoslávia, associando-o à proteção do valor paz mundial e às alterações das estruturas de poder da ordem internacional. Então, faz-se uma avaliação da contribuição dos julgados analisados como veículos para exteriorização do costume ou de seus elementos. Por fim, com a análise da coincidência de resultados no que tange à estrutura de algumas das elementares decididas pelo Tribunal Penal Internacional para a ex-Iugoslávia e o conteúdo normativo atual do art. 7o(1),(2)(a) do Estatuto de Roma, pode-se concluir que a jurisprudência estudada veiculou parte da opinio iuris do direito costumeiro sobre crimes contra a humanidade, contribuindo, assim, com o desenvolvimento do direito internacional penal sobre o tema. / This work aims to discuss the contribution and the role that the jurisprudence of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia played in the production and development of international criminal customary law on crimes against humanity and its influence in shaping the article 7o(1),(2)(a), of the Rome Statute, about crime against humanity. In order to accomplish this task, it analyses how the Court defined valid custom on the chapeau elements of crime against humanity in the Duko Tadi and Draen Erdemovi cases. Next, it considers the theory of sources, more specifically, international custom, its basis, its two elements (combination of state practice and opinion juris), as well as its subjects and forms of externalization, including international decisions. About this, it points out the dissonant ways custom emerges and the difficulty of its determination, then indicating values and power as elements that influence its manifestation. After, it analyses the political and juridical contexts in which the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia was established, relating it with the protection of world peace, as a value, and the changes in the power structures of international order. Then, it unpacks the contribution of the above decisions (Duko Tadi and Draen Erdemovi cases) as vehicles of externalization of custom or, at least, one of its elements. Finally, with the analyse of the coincidence between the chapeau elements of crimes against humanity as decided by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the current normative content of article 7o(1),(2)(a),of the Rome Statute, it can be concluded that the jurisprudence studied ran part of the opinion jurisabout crimes against humanity as an element of custom, thus, contributing to the development of international criminal law on that issue.

During the 1990s Yugoslavia and Rwanda were swept by wars accompanied by serious violations of international humanitarian law. Grave and severe crimes wiped away lives and destroyed properties. The United Nations Security Council determined that the violations committed constituted threats to international peace and security, declaring itself empowered to take action. It established international ad hoc criminal tribunals for Yugoslavia and Rwanda with the mandate of prosecuting individuals responsible for those crimes as an enforcement measure under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter. Investigating the tribunals’ effectiveness enables one to assess whether they achieved the anticipated outcomes based on the tribunals’ mission, goals, and objectives without creating other problems. The research relies on naturalism and positivism to put the tribunals in a moral and ethical perspective. By examining how the tribunals were established, their objectives, the investigation and prosecution processes, the reliance on guilty plea and judicial notice and the imputation of criminal responsibility by applying joint criminal enterprise and command responsibility doctrines; the study argues that prosecution has not been an effective tool as contemplated by the Security Council. An analytical and comparative review of various domestic and international legal resources helped to provide an insightful approach for an effective prosecution of international crimes. Credible, legitimate and legal judicial institutions in which professional judges and prosecutors discharge their function independently, impartially and are accountable may achieve justice for the victims of international crimes. Ad hoc tribunals failed to thoroughly investigate and assume the dual role of prosecution. They conveniently used legal procedural tools that fit petty domestic crimes; unfortunately demeaning the magnitude of international crimes of concern. Criminal responsibility was mostly imputed without properly scrutinising the legality, extent, actual participation and guilty mind of the alleged perpetrators. Effectiveness should be a value assessment. Imposed and overburdened ad hoc tribunals are inappropriate and should be abandoned. / Public, Constitutional, and International / LL. D.