Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gq7q9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T19:33:26.429Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Gender Justice Beyond the Tribunals: From Criminal Accountability to Transformative Justice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Kirsten Campbell*
University of London
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]


Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

What are the legacies for gender justice of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR)? Darryl Robinson and Gillian MacNeil in this symposium describe the modernization of the law on sexual violence as a key legacy of the ad hoc international criminal tribunals. However, this characterization does not capture the wider challenges that gender based crimes have raised for the Tribunals, including other legacies of gendered hierarchiesand inequalities.How, then, is it possible to move past these issues to build international criminal justice so that it transforms, rather than reproduces, gendered injustices?

Symposium on the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda: Broadening the Debate
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2016


1 Darryl Robinson & Gillian MacNeil, The Tribunals and the Renaissance of International Criminal Law: Three Themes, 110 AJIL 191 (2016).

2 See Jelke Boesten & Polly Wilding, Transformative Gender Justice: Setting An Agenda, 51 Women’s Stud. Int’l Forum, 75 (2015).

3 Prosecutor v. Stakic, Case No. IT-97-24(Int’l Crim. Trib. for the Former Yugoslavia), Prosecutor v. Karemera et al., Case No. ICTR-98-44.

4 For discussion, see Serge Brammertz & Michelle Jarvis, Prosecuting Conflict-Related Sexual Violence at the ICTY (2016); Hilmi Zawati, Fair Labelling and the Dilemma of Prosecuting Gender-Based Crimes at the International Tribunals (2014); and Office of the Prosecutor, Best Practice Manual for the Prosecution of Sexual Violence, ICTR (2014).

5 Victims and Witness Section & The Castleberry Peace Institute, Echoes of Testimony (2016). Comparable witness statistics are not available for the ICTR.

6 See Prosecutor v. Milutinovic et al., Case No. IT-05-87-T, Trial Judgment, V.1, para. 201(Int’l Crim. Trib.for the Former Yugoslavia, Feb. 26, 2009); and Prosecutor v. Kajelijeli, Case No. ICTR-98-44A-T.

7 Brammertz & Jarvis, supra note 4; and Office of the Prosecutor, supra note 4.

8 Brammertz & Jarvis, supra note 4.

9 See Id. at 216-219 and 320-332.

10 For example, Prosecutor v.Krstić, Case No.IT–98–33, Appeals Judgment (Int’l Crim. Trib. for the Former Yugoslavia, Apr. 19, 2004);andProsecutor v.Akayesu, ICTR-96-4respectively.

11 SeeJ udith Gardam & Michelle Jarvis, Womenarmed Conflictand International LAW (2001).

12 Sara Kendall & Sarah M. H. Nouwen, Speaking of Legacy: Toward an Ethos of Modesty at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, 110 AJIL 212 (2016); Marko Milanović, The Impact of the ICTY on the Former Yugoslavia: An Anticipatory Postmortem, 110 AJIL 233, 235 (2016).

13 See Patricia Sellers, Sexual Violence and Peremptory Norms: The Legal Value of Rape, 34 Case W. Res. J. Int’l L. 287 (2002).

14 See Kirsten Campbell, The Gender of Transitional Justice, 1 Int’l J. Transitional J. 411 (2007).

15 See Brammertz & Jarvis, supra note 5,at 7.

16 This point was identified in dialogue with Nela Porobic Isakovic, Michelle Jarvis,Gorana Mlinarevic, Patricia Sellers, and Du-bravka Zarkov.

17 See Patricia Sellers, Sexual Violence in Conflict: A War Crime, House of Lordspaper NO.23, ouse of Lords Select Committee on Sexual Violence in Conflict, (Apr. 12, 2016); and Brammertz & Jarvis, supra note 5, at 16.

18 See Rashida Manjoo & Calleigh McRaith, Gender-Based Violence and Justice in Conflict and Post-Conflict Areas, 44 Cornell Int’l L. J. 11(2011).