Law versus Justice in International Atrocity Prosecutions

Authors

Mark A. Drumbl, Washington and Lee University School of LawFollow

Document Type

Book Review

Publication Title

Law & Social Inquiry

Publication Date

2024

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1017/lsi.2024.13

Abstract

Attribution of individual criminal responsibility in the context of extraordinary international crimes that, pace Hannah Arendt (1963), explode the limits of law and bust the global trust, indeed, remains fraught and taut. Hence, attention to legally cognizable linkages between the free will of the accused person and the connived malignant context matters greatly. These linkages adopt various monikers, including nexus and modes of liability. Insofar as international criminal trials self-identify as imposing international criminal law—as opposed to show trials that heave theatrics upon a stage—some respect toward due process is required in order to maintain credibility. While international criminal law generally aims to convict and not to acquit (with acquittals often seen as failures), the fact remains that to declare something as law means adhering to the minima of fairness and some principled punctiliousness to ensure that the attribution of responsibility does not unduly compromise the rights of the accused.

Recommended Citation

Mark A. Drumbl, Law versus Justice in International Atrocity Prosecutions, 49 Law & Soc. Inquiry 1931 (2024) (reviewing Liana Georgieva Minkova, Responsibility on Trial: Liability Standards in International Criminal Law (2023)).