This major new study examines the developing practice of universal jurisdiction, as well as the broader phenomenon of "globalizing" justice, and its ramifications. With a detailed overview of the contemporary practice of universal jurisdiction, it discerns three trends at work: pure universal jurisdiction, universal jurisdiction "plus", and non-use. It also argues that these disparities in practice should raise serious concerns as to the legitimacy and perceived legitimacy of such globalized justice. It then turns to a further consideration, that of globalized justice, precisely because it takes place far from the locus of the crime, and is therefore "externalized" and may fail to achieve many of its putative goals. In addition, this is a key assessment of civil accountability, through the use of the Alien Tort Claims Act in the United States. It details how the use of civil penalties may offer new avenues for redress, particularly with relation to group accountability, whether that of armed groups or of corporations. However, it balances this approach to accountability with recognition of certain flaws within externalized criminal accountability. This study also focuses on mixed tribunals, or other methods of internationalized justice as viable alternatives, which may avoid some of the problems with external justice, but are themselves far from perfect. Mixed or hybrid tribunals in East Timor and Sierra Leone represent different models of hybrid justice and provide the reader with excellent examples of these new forms of justice in action. This book will be of great interest to all students and scholars of human rights international law and political science.

"Pursuing Justice for Mass Atrocities: A Handbook for Victim Groups" is an educational resource for victim groups that want to influence or participate in the justice process for mass atrocities. It presents a range of tools that victim groups can use, from building a victim-centered coalition and developing a strategic communications plan to engaging with policy makers and decision makers and using the law to obtain justice.

The twentieth century has been labelled the ‘century of genocide’, and according to estimates, more than 250 million civilians were victims of genocide and mass atrocities during this period. This book provides one of the first regional perspectives on mass atrocities in Asia, by exploring the issue through two central themes. Bringing together experts in genocide studies and area specialists, the book looks at the legacy of past genocides and mass atrocities, with case studies on East Timor, Cambodia and Indonesia. It explores the enduring legacies of trauma and societal divisions, the complex and continuing impacts of past mass violence, and the role of transitional justice in the aftermath of mass atrocities in Asia. Understanding these complex legacies is crucial for the region to build a future that acknowledges the past. The book goes on to consider the prospects and challenges for preventing future mass atrocities in Asia, and globally. It discusses both regional and global factors that may impact on preventing future mass atrocities in Asia, and highlights the value of a regional perspective in mass atrocity prevention. Providing a detailed examination of genocide and mass atrocities through the themes of legacies and prevention, the book is an important contribution to Asian Studies and Security Studies.

What can be done to combat genocide, ethnic cleansing, and other crimes against humanity? Why aren't current measures more effective? Is there hope for the future? These and other pressing questions surrounding human security are addressed head-on in this provocative and all-too-timely book. Millions of people, particularly in Africa, face daily the prospect of death at the hands of state or state-linked forces. Although officially both the United Nations and the African Union have adopted "Responsibility to Protect" (R2P) principles, atrocities continue. The tenets of R2P, recently cited in a UN Outcomes Document, make it clear that states have a primary responsibility to protect their citizens from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. When states cannot—or will not—protect their citizens, however, the international community must step into the breach. Why have efforts to stop horrific state-sanctioned crimes seen only limited success, despite widespread support of R2P? As this enlightening volume explains and illustrates, converting a norm into effective preventive measures remains difficult. The contributors examine the legal framework to inhibit war crimes, use of the emerging R2P norm, the role of the International Criminal Court, and new technologically sophisticated methods to gather early warnings of likely atrocity outbreaks. Together they show how mass atrocities may be anticipated, how they may be prevented, and when necessary, how they may be prosecuted. Contributors include Claire Applegarth (Harvard Kennedy School), Andrew Block (Harvard Kennedy School), Frank Chalk (Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies, Concordia University), David M. Crane (Syracuse University College of Law), Richard J. Goldstone (Constitutional Court of South Africa; UN International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda), Don Hubert (University of Ottawa; Global Center for the Responsibility to Protect, City University of New York), Sarah Kreps (Cornell University), Dan Kuwali (Malawi Defence Force), Jennifer Leaning (Harvard Francois Xavier Bagnoud Center for Health and Human Rights), Edward C. Luck (Columbia University; International Peace Institute), Sarah Sewall (Harvard Kennedy School)

After a controversial war in which he was ousted and captured by United States forces, Saddam Hussein was arraigned before a war crimes tribunal. Slobodan Milosevic died midway through his contentious trial by an international war crimes tribunal at The Hague. Calls for intervention and war crimes trials for the massacres and rapes in Sudan's Darfur region have been loud and clear, and the United States remains fiercely opposed to the permanent International Criminal Court. Are war crimes trials impartial, apolitical forums? Has international justice for war crimes become an entrenched aspect of globalization? In Global Justice, Moghalu examines the phenomenon of war crimes trials from an unusual, political perspective—that of an anarchical international society. After a controversial war in which he was ousted and captured by United States forces, Saddam Hussein was arraigned before a war crimes tribunal. Slobodan Milosevic died midway through his contentious trial by an international war crimes tribunal at The Hague. Calls for intervention and war crimes trials for the massacres and rapes in Sudan's Darfur region have been loud and clear, and the United States remains fiercely opposed to the permanent International Criminal Court. Are war crimes trials impartial, apolitical forums? Has international justice for war crimes become an entrenched aspect of globalization? In Global Justice, Moghalu examines the phenomenon of war crimes trials from an unusual, political perspective—that of an anarchical international society. He argues that, contrary to conventional wisdom, war crimes trials are neither motivated nor influenced solely by abstract notions of justice. Instead, war crimes trials are the product of the interplay of political forces that have led to an inevitable clash between globalization and sovereignty on the sensitive question of who should judge war criminals. From Germany's Kaiser Wilhelm to the Japanese Emperor Hirohito, from the trials of Milosevic, Saddam Hussein, and Charles Taylor to Belgium's attempts to enforce the contested doctrine of universal jurisdiction, Moghalu renders a compelling tour de force of one of the most controversial subjects in world politics. He argues that, necessary though it was, international justice has run into a crisis of legitimacy. While international trials will remain a policy option, local or regional responses to mass atrocities will prove more durable.

A free ebook version of this title is available through Luminos, University of California Press’s new open access publishing program for monographs. Visit www.luminosoa.org to learn more. How do interventions by the UN Security Council and the International Criminal Court influence representations of mass violence? What images arise instead from the humanitarianism and diplomacy fields? How are these competing perspectives communicated to the public via mass media? Zooming in on the case of Darfur, Joachim J. Savelsberg analyzes more than three thousand news reports and opinion pieces and interviews leading newspaper correspondents, NGO experts, and foreign ministry officials from eight countries to show the dramatic differences in the framing of mass violence around the world and across social fields. Representing Mass Violence contributes to our understanding of how the world acknowledges and responds to violence in the Global South.

Abusive leaders are now held accountable for their crimes in a way that was unimaginable just a few decades ago. What are the consequences of this recent push for international justice? In The Justice Dilemma, Daniel Krcmaric explains why the "golden parachute" of exile is no longer an attractive retirement option for oppressive rulers. He argues that this is both a blessing and a curse: leaders culpable for atrocity crimes fight longer civil wars because they lack good exit options, but the threat of international prosecution deters some leaders from committing atrocities in the first place. The Justice Dilemma therefore diagnoses an inherent tension between conflict resolution and atrocity prevention, two of the signature goals of the international community. Krcmaric also sheds light on several important puzzles in world politics. Why do some rulers choose to fight until they are killed or captured? Why not simply save oneself by going into exile? Why do some civil conflicts last so much longer than others? Why has state-sponsored violence against civilians fallen in recent years? While exploring these questions, Krcmaric marshals statistical evidence on patterns of exile, civil war duration, and mass atrocity onset. He also reconstructs the decision-making processes of embattled leaders—including Muammar Gaddafi of Libya, Charles Taylor of Liberia, and Blaise Compaoré of Burkina Faso—to show how contemporary international justice both deters atrocities and prolongs conflicts.