Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

15 results

  • 21 - Concluding Remarks

  • from Part III - Consequences for the Practice of the International Criminal Court
  • Edited by Florian Jeßberger, Universität Hamburg, Julia Geneuss, Universität Hamburg
  • Book:
    Why Punish Perpetrators of Mass Atrocities?
    Published online:
    07 February 2020
    Print publication:
    20 February 2020, pp 380-386

  • Summary

    Since Nuremberg, international punishment for mass atrocities is pervasive, as an idea and as a practice. In fact, many observers regard the institutionalization of international punishment – i.e., the incarceration of perpetrators of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes – as a progress and as a promise: The international community, by and large, seems to have, at least rhetorically, agreed that criminal punishment rather than impunity or, e.g., summary executions, is the adequate reaction to mass atrocities.

  • 1 - Introduction: The Need for a Robust and Consistent Theory of International Punishment

  • Edited by Florian Jeßberger, Universität Hamburg, Julia Geneuss, Universität Hamburg
  • Book:
    Why Punish Perpetrators of Mass Atrocities?
    Published online:
    07 February 2020
    Print publication:
    20 February 2020, pp 1-11

  • Summary

    Ever since the trial against the major war criminals of World War II before the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, the institution of punishment has beenan integral part of the international legal system. Nowadays, a large number of perpetrators and accomplices of crimes under international law – i.e. genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes – are being sent to jail by international judges. But why and to what aim do we punish individuals for their involvement in mass atrocities? How can we justify punishment by international criminal courts and tribunals vis-à-vis the affected individual? More generally: What are the (realistic) objectives of international criminal law?

Why Punish Perpetrators of Mass Atrocities?
  • Purposes of Punishment in International Criminal Law
  • Edited by Florian Jeßberger, Julia Geneuss
  • Published online:
    07 February 2020
    Print publication:
    20 February 2020
  • This edited volume provides, for the first time, a comprehensive account of theoretical approaches to international punishment. Its main objective is to contribute to the development of a consistent and robust theory of international criminal punishment. For this purpose, the authors - renowned scholars in the fields of criminal law, international criminal law, and philosophy of law, as well as practitioners working at different international criminal courts and tribunals - address the question of meaning and purpose of punishment in international law from various perspectives. The volume fleshes out the predominant dimensions of a theory of international punishment and highlights the differences between 'ordinary' (domestic) crime and international crimes and their respective enforcement. At the same time, throughout the volume a major focus is on the practical consequences of the different theoretical approaches, in particular for the activities of the International Criminal Court.

  • The Protection of Human Dignity in Interrogations: May Interrogative Torture Ever Be Tolerated? Reflections in Light of Recent German and Israeli Experiences

  • Miriam Gur-Arye, Florian Jessberger
  • Journal:
    Israel Law Review / Volume 44 / Issue 1-2 / 2011
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    30 January 2013, pp. 229-262
    Print publication:
    2011

  • The issue of whether interrogative torture may ever be tolerated has been discussed explicitly by both the Israeli High Court of Justice and the Frankfurt Regional Court in Germany. The Israeli court ruling related to the use of interrogative torture in the war on terror; the case brought before the German court was one of routine police work. This paper analyzes the two rulings in depth and offers a comparative reading of the rulings. The comparative analysis reveals that, despite some fundamental differences, the Israeli and German rulings should both be seen as an attempt to uphold the ban on torture, on the one hand, and yet to grant fair treatment to an individual interrogator who used, or threatened to use, force in order to save innocent lives, on the other. While determining the lessons to be learned from the German and Israeli experiences, this paper raises doubts as to whether it is possible to keep the ban on torture intact while either excusing the individual interrogator (Israel) or significantly mitigating his punishment (Germany). The paper further suggests that, in order to provide a real barrier against the practice of interrogative torture, the evidence resulting from such interrogations should be inadmissible in any criminal proceedings.