Do War Crime Tribunals Deliver Justice?

1823 Words8 Pages
Do war crime tribunals deliver justice? Student ID: 2328581 Introduction The Bosnian war in the early 1990s engendered ethnic cleansing, genocide, and other crimes against humanity. Under such context of international climate, nearly fifty years after the Nuremburg and Tokyo trials, the United Nations created the ad hoc international criminal tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda (ICTs) to prosecute individuals suspected of committing war crimes regardless of their official positions. As the grounding and binding agreements, the Security Council Resolution 827 established the ICTY in 1993. It defines the main purpose of the tribunal as ‘prosecuting individuals responsible for serious violations of international…show more content…
This report sets out to test and measure the effectiveness and failure of the ICTs as its main purpose, briefly discuss the historical background of the ICTs and the potential tension and linkage between the pursuing peace and delivering justice in the ICTs as starting point, and further conclude contemporary role of the ICTs and the primary justification for the creation of a permanent international criminal court, the ICC. Historical background of the ICTs Despite the fact there were a lot of twists and turns for the U.S’s position for creating the International Criminal Court (hard legalization) since the U.S. does not want to have the ICC out of control and to avoid the potential risks that this legal tribunal would accuse the U.S. citizens, the U.S. did spend some efforts to call for international community to support the post-Second World prosecutions in 1940s. More importantly, “when international justice revived, as the fall of the Berlin Wall brought the short twentieth century to a close, the United States did not hesitate to take a front seat. It provided enthusiastic support to the ad hoc tribunals established by the UN Security Council for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda and a range of similar efforts at national and international justice in Sierra Leone, Cambodia, Kosovo, East Timor, and Lebanon” (Schabas, 2011). Notably, it is deserved to mention that the Clinton administration especially had done a
Open Document