Legitimacy of International Criminal Law

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Reasons for legitimacy
Drawbacks
Conclusion
References

Introduction

The legitimacy of international criminal law has always been under a vehement discussion in the world. The initial goal of the international criminal law is to prosecute and determine the punishment of the crimes on the international level (Cryer, 2005). Additionally, the structure of the criminal law is rather complex as it involves domestic criminal law, international human rights law, and transitional justice (Danner & Martinez, 2005).

In this instance, it could be assumed that the international criminal law has positive intentions while promoting peace, internationalization, and attempting to create a common court system. However, it experiences some difficulties while implementing these principles, and this approach questions its legitimacy. The primary goal of this paper is to discover and examine the legitimacy of international criminal law. Moreover, it is essential to discover the primary reasons for the existing opinion. In this case, the history of the development of the crime theories of liability and relevant courts are discovered. In the end, the conclusions are drawn.

Reasons for legitimacy

Definition of the legal personality

Firstly, international criminal law or any law, in general, create the perceptions of the “legal personality”, which allow particular persons to maintain their rights (Shaw, 2003, p. 195). Nonetheless, the international law is more complicated, as it implies regulating interactions between legal personalities and other entities on the international level. It is evident that the law clearly states the definitions and descriptions of different types of legal entities. However, some historical facts state that despite being defined in the documents some of the countries such as Albania were accepted as states without having distinct boundaries (Shaw, 2003). Nonetheless, the development of the legal system contributed to the sufficient understanding of these principles and the lack of confusing situations, as nowadays the international criminal law combines several principles while making decisions on the international level.

Regulation of conflicts

Secondly, one of the benefits is the ability of the international criminal law to regulate the conflicting situations between the entities due to its global acceptability (Shaw, 2003). In this instance, the international criminal law is a tool, which is used to combine the principles of the domestic law of all countries by creating the international law system (Danner & Martinez, 2005).

It could be said that this approach contributes to the sufficient regulation of the conflicting situation between countries, as it creates the grounds for the sufficient solutions to the law cases. It remains evident that the debates still tend to exist, as Welsh, German, and English laws differ in the finding legally acceptable solutions while implementing the domestic law doctrines (Bohlander, 2011). In this instance, the international criminal law plays the role of the regulator of the conflicting situations between these countries.

Internationalizations and recognition of the human rights

Furthermore, the international criminal law creates the grounds for internationalization and recognition of the human rights in the world (Danner & Martinez, 2005). In turn, it also establishes the individual responsible for the particular actions including the Holocaust due to the essentiality to promote peaceful coexistence and cooperation between nations (Danner & Martinez, 2005). One of the historical examples, for the application of the individual responsibility, is IG Farben for the company’s active participation in Nazi crimes (Jessberger, 2010). It was the first attempt to implement the principles of individual responsibility and avoid future development of genocide.

Another case is a special court of Sierra Leone, which was held against the Liberian president, who committed a significant number of crimes against humanity (Jalloh, 2014). The primary goal of the individual responsibility was to prohibit the development of the violation of human rights in the country. In this instance, it remains evident that the promotion of the individual responsibility establishes the sufficient understanding of the ability of to take a blame for the particular actions, as the nation cannot be punished for the actions of one person, who is in charge of the international and domestic political relations.

Drawbacks

Lack of common legal structure

Nonetheless, the international law has some issues during the implementation due to the lack of sufficient legal structure and legislature of the courts, which comply with each other on the international level, as no single entity for the law establishment tends to exist (Shaw, 2003). It could be said that this aspect tends to create confusion while making decisions, which will be relevant on the international level. Additionally, some controversies about the inclusion of the particular elements as the determinants of the legal structure tend to exist, and one of them is the essentiality of taking customs into account while discovering the legitimacy (Shaw, 2003).

In this case, the conflicting situations will tend to exist, as the established approaches have some benefits and drawbacks. Nonetheless, the international criminal law attempts the unity and internationalization of the law principles. However, the lack of a well-established global legal system creates complications while making particular decisions. In the end, this issue can be solved over time due to the regularity of the similar cases in the international arena.

Compliance with domestic, transitional, and international human rights

Finally, the compliance of the international criminal law with the transitional and domestic law is the primary challenge, as the application of the legal principles cannot be predicted by the international tribunals due to the absence of previous cases (Danner & Martinez, 2005). One of the examples of the international tribunal’s decision-making is the case when Guinea was claiming against the Democratic Republic of Congo for the humiliation of the business assets of the Diallo Ahmadou Sadio, who is the Congo’s resident for the 32 years with Guinean origin (Barker & Okowa, 2008). In this instance, it remains evident that no cases regarding this matter were previously present since each case has its peculiarities and specifications. Consequently, the actions of the Tribunal were individual and based on the common principles of international law.

Conclusion

In the end, the paper contributes to the understanding whether international criminal law is legitimate or not. It could be said that the cultivation of international law has positive intentions. However, misunderstandings and misinterpretations of the particular concepts tend to exist due to the lack of the unity of decision-making and the absence of the well-established legal structure of the courts. Moreover, some criminal cases underline, that there is no specific decision to the particular actions, which will be accepted by the legal principles of all countries. Nonetheless, international criminal law creates the principles of the unity of the international legal by creating the grounds for the development of human rights. Finally, it remains evident that some improvements have to be introduced to establish sufficient international legal principles to avoid misunderstandings and misconceptions between the legal entities.

References

Barker, C., & Okowa, P. (2008). Decisions of international tribunals: International court of justice. The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 57(1), 219.

Bohlander, M. (2011). Radbruch redux: the need for revisiting the conversation between common and civil law at root level at the example of international criminal justice. Leiden Journal of International Law, 24(2), 393-410.

Cryer, R. (2005). Prosecuting international crimes: Selectivity and the international criminal law regime. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Danner, A., & Martinez, J. (2005). Guilty associations: Joint criminal enterprise, command responsibility, and the development of international criminal law. California Law Review, 93(1), 75-170.

Jalloh, C. (2014). International criminal law – Special court for Sierra Leone – Individual criminal responsibility – Modes of liability – Aiding and abetting – Planning. American Journal of International Law, 108(1), 58.

Jessberger, F. (2010). On the origins of individual criminal responsibility under international law for business activity: IG Farben on trial. Journal of International Criminal Justice, 8(3), 783-802.

Shaw, M. (2003). International law. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Click Here To Order Now!