Nuremberg’s Legacy Within Transitional Justice: Prosecutions Are Here to Stay

A lasting legacy of the Nuremberg and Tokyo military tribunals is the assertion that individuals are subjects of international law and should be held criminally responsible for perpetrating war crimes and crimes against humanity. Building upon the Nuremberg legacy, the emergence and proliferation of modern international(ized) tribunals has ushered in a new era in international criminal justice, whereby states seek to end impunity for international crimes through criminal trials. This Article addresses the legacy of Nuremberg in transitional justice approaches. It examines the criticisms within the transitional justice field that criminal justice processes are generally ill-suited to address the social forces that characterize collective violence and the push away from criminal prosecutions towards other non-retributive processes. It argues that while post-conflict peacebuilding requires a more holistic transitional justice approach, recourse to at least some criminal prosecutions remains an enduring legacy of Nuremberg, supported by both international actors as well as victim communities

Access to Medicines in Times of Conflict:Overlapping Compliance and Accountability Frameworks for Syria

Syria is currently experiencing the world’s largest humanitarian crisis since World War II, and access to medicines for emergency care, pain control, and palliative care remains shockingly restricted in the country. Addressing the dire need for improved access to medicines in Syria from an international law compliance and accountability perspective, this article highlights four complementary legal frameworks: international human rights law, international drug control law, international humanitarian law, and international criminal law. It arrives at two central conclusions. First, all four bodies of law hold clear potential in terms of regulatory—hence compliance—and accountability mechanisms for improving access to medicines in times of conflict, but they are too weak on their own account. Second, the potential for on-the-ground change lies in the mutual reinforcement of these four legal frameworks. This reinforcement, however, remains rhetorical and far from practical. Finally, within this complex picture of complementary international legal frameworks, the article proposes concrete recommendations for a more integrated and mutually reinforcing interpretation and implementation of these areas of law to foster better access to medicines in Syria and elsewhere

The journey of international human rights law: a path leading to an international criminal court and the United States' role in its progression

Boston University. University Professors Program Senior theses.PLEASE NOTE: Boston University Libraries did not receive an Authorization To Manage form for this thesis. It is therefore not openly accessible, though it may be available by request. If you are the author or principal advisor of this work and would like to request open access for it, please contact us at [email protected]. Thank you.2031-01-0

A Practitioner’s Perspective on the Kenya I and Kenya II Cases Before the ICC

On 10 September 2013 the International Criminal Court (ICC) began hearing a case against William Ruto, Deputy President of the Republic of Kenya, and Joshua Sang. The related case against the President of Kenya, Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta, was scheduled to begin in November 2013 but has since been postponed until October 2014. Both cases are noteworthy since they are the first against sitting politicians. Unsurprisingly, they have not been without controversy. These trials are challenging for the Court, not least because the Kenyan government recently passed a resolution withdrawing from the ICC and repealing its domestic legislation criminalizing international crimes, arguing that Kenya needed to restore it sovereignty and resist neo-colonialism. Although this withdrawal does not affect the current cases before the Court, it certainly makes cooperation with Kenya for the purpose of further investigations more difficult. Karim A.A. Khan, QC, formerly the defense counsel of Muthaura and currently the lead defense counsel of Ruto, raised these issues in an interview taking place one week before his opening statements in the Kenya I case. These same issues and concerns were also raised with Adesola Adeboyejo a lead prosecutor in the Kenya II case in December 2013