Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Judgments of Love in Criminal Justice pp 295–312Cite as

The Gavel of Love in International Criminal Courts

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 471 Accesses

Abstract

The gavel of love for justice to be done has been the most significant tool for the respect of the dignity of man in all ages. In ancient Persian culture, tradition and custom, justice was based on three significant elements: good thoughts, good words and good deeds. This means that human beings have to orient themselves to the truth, and not just present one side of the case or merely express themselves through a one-eyed justice. We can never escape from the conclusion that appropriate legal thinking is a link in the chain of cause and effect of many factors. Therefore, it should have strong contact with its objectives. This implies the fact that legal thinking cannot be based on what is just visible, but also on what is, invisible. It can be based neither solely on tangible material nor on intangible material. Legal thinking or legal interpretation is like the heart of justice: it is a human constitutional legal mechanism, which has to work and interact with different principles, great or small, and cannot rest at any time.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Aubert (1963), p. 49.

  2. 2.

    See Osiel (2009a, b).

  3. 3.

    Id. See also Osiel (2002).

  4. 4.

    For an excellent analysis of torture and its negative effect in the process of social justice, see Rejali (2007).

  5. 5.

    Tarrant (2006), pp. 9–16.

  6. 6.

    Rawls (1971).

  7. 7.

    Nussbaum (2013).

  8. 8.

    Schwarzenberger (1950), pp. 263–296.

  9. 9.

    See Nincic (1970).

  10. 10.

    Malekian (1994).

  11. 11.

    Falk (2011a). The issue finally ended by the ratification of a treaty between the United States, Iran, and some European states (Accessed March 12, 2016).

  12. 12.

    Robert F. Kennedy, Why the Arabs don’t want us in Syria: They don’t hate ‘our freedoms.’ They hate that we’ve betrayed our ideals in their own countries—for oil in http://www.politico.eu/article/why-the-arabs-dont-want-us-in-syria-mideast-conflict-oil-intervention/ (Accessed 4 March 2016).

  13. 13.

    Malekian (1995).

  14. 14.

    Id.

  15. 15.

    For different theories of impartiality in judgment, see Ofstad (1963), pp. 135–152.

  16. 16.

    Butler (2013), p. 447.

  17. 17.

    Darcy (2011), p. 23.

  18. 18.

    Falk (2011b), available at www.transnational.org/SAJT/tff/people/r_falk.html (Accessed July 20, 2015).

  19. 19.

    Id.

  20. 20.

    Article 17 (2) (c).

  21. 21.

    The Statute also provides similar provisions relating to the principle of ne bis in idem. Article 22 (3) (b).

  22. 22.

    Consult Clapham (2003), pp. 30–67.

  23. 23.

    See Malekian (2010), pp. 41–65.

  24. 24.

    Consult also the sentiments of our judgment in Smith (2004), pp. 54–59.

  25. 25.

    The ICC has been involved in 20 situations around the world including Colombia, Georgia, Afghanistan, and Korea. They have some of the current situations under preliminary examination. Four state parties referred their own situations to the Court: Uganda, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Central African Republic, and Mali. Ivory Coast accepted the Court’s jurisdiction, and the Court independently opened investigations in Kenya. The prosecution decided not to open investigations into Iraq and Venezuela and dismissed a request by Palestine for failure to meet the preconditions for jurisdiction. Office of the Prosecutor, Report on Preliminary Examination Activities, INT’L CRIMINAL COURT (Nov. 2012), available at http://www.icc-cpi.int/NR/rdonlyres/C433C462-7C4E-4358-8A72-8D99FD00E8CD/285209/OTP2012ReportonPreliminaryExaminations22Nov2012.pdf.

  26. 26.

    Wägenbaur (2013), p. 12.

  27. 27.

    Fuller (1969).

  28. 28.

    Hacker and Raz (1977).

  29. 29.

    Article 42 (3).

  30. 30.

    Blumenthal (2002), p. 593.

  31. 31.

    Malekian (2005), pp. 673–723.

  32. 32.

    Some writers suggest that, in order for the ICC be successful, certain Islamic provisions should be adopted into the Statute of the Court. For instance, see Roach (2006), pp. 143–144.

  33. 33.

    Consult also Kennedy (2004).

  34. 34.

    See Chap. 8, Sect. 8.8.

  35. 35.

    Malekian (1993).

  36. 36.

    Id., pp. 673–723.

  37. 37.

    See the excellent article by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, ‘Washington’s Secret Agendas—Truth is Being Disguised to Suit’. Available at http://www.oneworldofnations.com/2014/09/washingtons-secret-agendas-truth-is.html (Accessed January 15, 2016).

  38. 38.

    Ron Paul, former Republican Party top politician, has admitted that the CIA killed Gaddafi. www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/…/pg1—(Accessed 20 July 2015).

  39. 39.

    Robert F. Kennedy, Why the Arabs don’t want us in Syria: They don’t hate ‘our freedoms.’ They hate that we’ve betrayed our ideals in their own countries—for oil in http://www.politico.eu/article/why-the-arabs-dont-want-us-in-syria-mideast-conflict-oil-intervention/ (Accessed 4 March 2016).

  40. 40.

    Id.

  41. 41.

    Bass (2000).

  42. 42.

    See Malekian (2014).

References

  • Aubert, V. (1963). The structure of legal thinking. In Legal essays to attribute to Frede Castberg on the occasion of his 70th birthday (pp. 41–63). Universitetsforlaget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bass, G. (2000). Stay the hand of vengeance: The politics of war crimes tribunals.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blumenthal, D. A. (2002). The politics of justice: Why Israel signed the international criminal court statute and what the signature means. Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, 30, 593.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, W. E. (2013). Russian public law (3rd ed.). London: Wildy, Simmonds & Hill Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clapham, A. (2003). Issues of complexity, complicity and complementarity: From the Nuremberg Trials to the dawn of the New International Criminal Court. In P. Sands (Ed.), From Nuremberg to The Hague: The future of international criminal justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darcy, S. (2011). Prosecuting the war crime of collective punishment: Is it time to amend the Rome statute? Journal of International Criminal Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falk, R. (2011a). Criminalizing diplomacy: Fanning the flames of the Iran War Option. Available at www.transnational.org/SAJT/tff/people/r_falk.html

  • Falk, R. (2011b). The international criminal law plays politics? The Qaddafi Arrest Warrants.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, L. L. (1969). The morality of law (2nd ed.). New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacker, P. M. S., & Raz, J. (Eds.). (1977). Law, morality and society: Essays in honour of H.L.A. Hart. Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, R. F. (2004). Crimes against nature: How George W. Bush and his Corporate Pals are plundering the country and hijacking our democracy. Harper, New title edition.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malekian, F. (1993). Condemning the use of force in the gulf crisis. Almqvist & Wiksell International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malekian, F. (1994). Condemning the use of force in the gulf crisis (2nd ed.). Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malekian, F. (1995). The monopolization of international criminal law in the United Nations, a jurisprudential approach (2nd ed.). Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malekian, F. (2005). Emasculating the philosophy of international criminal justice in the Iraqi special tribunal. Cornell International Law Journal, 38(3), 673–723.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malekian, F. (2010). The principle of good faith within the sources of international criminal law. Retfaerd, Nordisk Juridisk Tidsskrift, 131 nr.4 –årgang 33, 41–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malekian, F. (2014). Jurisprudence of international criminal court. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nincic, D. (1970). The problem of sovereignty in the Charter and in the practice of the United Nations. Martinus Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M. C. (2013). Political emotions: Why love matters for justice. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ofstad, H. (1963). Impartiality. In Legal essays to attribute to Frede Castberg on the occasion of his 70th birthday. Universitetsforlaget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osiel, M. (2002). Mass atrocity, ordinary evil, and Hannah Arendt: Criminal consciousness in Argentina’s dirty war. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osiel, M. (2009a). Making sense of mass atrocity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Osiel, M. (2009b). The end of reciprocity: Terror, torture & the law of war. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Oxford, London, New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rejali, D. (2007). Torture and democracy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roach, S. C. (2006). Politicizing the international criminal court: The convergence of politics, ethic, and the law. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarzenberger, G. (1950). The problem of an international criminal law. Current Legal Problems, 3, 263–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. (2004). Selected philosophical writings (edited and introduce by James R. Otteson). Exeter: Imprint Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarrant, H. (2006). Platonic interpretation and eclectic theory. In H. Tarrant & D. Baltzly (Eds.), Reading Plato in Antiquity. London: Duckworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wägenbaur, B. (2013). Court of the European Union. C.H.Beck. Hart. Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of International Criminal Law, Uppsala, Sweden

    Farhad Malekian

Authors
  1. Farhad Malekian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Malekian, F. (2017). The Gavel of Love in International Criminal Courts. In: Judgments of Love in Criminal Justice. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46900-3_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46900-3_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-46899-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-46900-3

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation