Universal jurisdiction in international criminal law: the debate and the battle for hegemony
In: Routledge research in international law
Abstract
"This book explores the debate over universal jurisdiction in international criminal law, aiming to unpack a practice in which international lawyers continue to disagree over the concept of universal jurisdiction. Using Martti Koskenniemi's work as a foil, this book exposes the argumentative techniques in operation in national and international adjudication since the 1990s. Drawing on overarching patterns within the debate, [the author] argues that it is bounded by a tension between contrasting political preferences or positions, labelled as moralist ('ending impunity') and formalist ('avoiding abuse') and she reads the debate as a movement of hegemonic and counter-hegemonic positions that struggle for hegemonic control. However, she draws out how these positions (moralist/formalist) merge into one another and this produces a tendency towards a "middle" position that continues to prefer a particular preference (moralist or formalist). Aisling O'Sullivan then traces the transformation towards this tendency that reflects an internal split among international lawyers between building a utopia ("court of humanity") and recognizing its impossibility of being realized
Verfügbarkeit
Themen
Jurisdiction (International law), International criminal law, International criminal courts, International crimes, Juridiction (Droit international), Droit international pénal, Tribunaux pénaux internationaux, LAW, Internationale Gerichtsbarkeit, Internationales Strafrecht, Criminal Law
Sprachen
Englisch
Verlag
Routledge
ISBN
9781315648507, 1315648504, 9781317301219, 1317301218, 9781317301202, 131730120X
Seiten
xii, 222
Problem melden