Advertisement

Managing Expectations of the Tribunal and Chambers

  • Ray Nickson
  • Alice Neikirk
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Compromise after Conflict book series (PSCAC)

Abstract

In the view of many respondents, the attachment of a raft of expectations to criminal trials did not reflect the reality of what they can provide, or of their function. Expectations were frequently framed by transitional justice practitioners as ‘too high’, ‘unrealistic’, and ‘inappropriate’. According to interviewees, the solution to the expectation gap was “expectation management.” This chapter focuses further on how participants viewed expectations, the key factors influencing expectations of trials (and transitional justice) along with distinctions and similarities between the Tribunal and Chambers. In both of these contexts, the role of the local media is significant in shaping expectations of justice. Interviewee conceptions of expectation management are presented. Expectation management was predominantly understood as top-down and unidirectional, which is problematic from the perspective of serving broader transitional goals.

References

  1. Akhavan, P 1998, ‘Justice in The Hague, peace in the former Yugoslavia? A commentary on the United Nations war crimes tribunal’, Human Rights Quarterly, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 737–816.Google Scholar
  2. Clark, JN 2009, ‘International war crimes tribunals and the challenge of outreach’, International Criminal Law Review, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 99–116.Google Scholar
  3. Dzihana, A and Hodzic, S 2011, ‘The Karadzic case: The analysis of media reporting about Radovan Karadzic’s arrest and trial’ in Dzihana, A and Volcic, Z (eds), Media and national ideologies: Analysis of reporting on war crime trials in the former Yugoslavia, Media Centar Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina.Google Scholar
  4. Erjavec, K 2011, ‘The case of Dobrovoljacka: An analysis of the Serbian and Bosnian-Herzegovinian daily press’ in Dzihana, A and Volcic, Z (eds), Media and national ideologies: Analysis of reporting on war crime trials in the former Yugoslavia, Media Centar Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina.Google Scholar
  5. Erjavec, K and Volcic, Z 2009a, ‘Journalistic (re)production of history: Televized coverage of Radovan Karadzic’s arrest in Serbia’, Solsko Polje, vol. 20, no. 5/6, pp. 75–99.Google Scholar
  6. Erjavec, K and Volcic, Z 2009b, ‘Rehabilitating Milosevic: Posthumous coverage of the Milosevic regime in Serbian newspapers’, Social Semiotics, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 125–147.Google Scholar
  7. Hodzic, R 2010, ‘Living the legacy of mass atrocities: Victims’ perspectives on war crimes trials’, Journal of International Criminal Justice, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 113–136.Google Scholar
  8. Hussain, V 2005, ‘Sustaining judicial rescues: The role of outreach and capacity-building efforts in war crimes tribunals’, Virginia Journal of International Law, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 547–561.Google Scholar
  9. Klarin, M 2009, ‘The impact of the ICTY trials on public opinion in the former Yugoslavia’, Journal of International Criminal Justice, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 89–96.Google Scholar
  10. Korac, M 1993, ‘Serbian nationalism: Nationalism of my own people’, Feminist Review, vol. 45 (Autumn), pp. 108–112.Google Scholar
  11. Markovic, P and Subasic, K 2011, ‘The case of Vukovar: A comparative analysis of reports on trials for war crimes committed in Vukovar in 1991 in The Hague and Belgrade’ in Dzhiana, A and Volcic, Z (eds), Media and national ideologies: Analysis of reporting on war crime trials in the former Yugoslavia, Media Centar Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina.Google Scholar
  12. Nettlefield, LJ 2010, ‘From the battlefield to the barracks: The ICTY and the armed forces of Bosnia and Herzegovina’, International Journal of Transitional Justice, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 87–109.Google Scholar
  13. Nickson, R 2017, ‘Unmet expectations and the legitimacy of transitional justice institutions’ in Karstedt, S and Brants, C (eds), Engagement, contestation and legitimacy, Hart Publishing, Portland, Oregon.Google Scholar
  14. Pham, P, Vinck, P, Balthazard, M, Hean, S and Stover, E 2009, So we will never forget: A population based survey on attitudes about social reconstruction and The Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, Human Rights Center, University of California, Berkeley, California.Google Scholar
  15. Pham, PN, Vinck, P, Balthazard, M, Strasser, J and Om, C 2011. ‘Victim participation and the trial of Duch at the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia’, Journal of Human Rights Practice, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 264–287.Google Scholar
  16. Sebastian, S 2010, ‘Statebuilding in divided societies: The reform of dayton in Bosnia and Herzegovina’, Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 324–344.Google Scholar
  17. Stanley, E 2002, ‘What next? The aftermath of organised truth telling’, Race and Class, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 1–15.Google Scholar
  18. Verfuss, T 2004, ‘Trying poor countries crimes in a rich city: The problems of the press from the former Yugoslavia’, Journal of International Criminal Justice, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 509–515.Google Scholar
  19. Zdravkovic-Zonta, H 2011, ‘The case of scorpions: Media, nationalism and war crimes’, in Dzhiana, A and Volcic, Z (eds), Media and national ideologies: Analysis of reporting on war crime trials in the former Yugoslavia, Media Centar Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina.Google Scholar
  20. Zikic, B 2011, ‘The Biljana Plavsic case: Nationalist and gender narratives in the service of media (non)reporting on the Plavsic case in Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina (The Republika Srspka)’, in Dzhiana, A and Volcic, Z (eds), Media and national ideologies: Analysis of reporting on war crime trials in the former Yugoslavia, Media Centar Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Fresno Pacific UniversityFresnoUSA
  2. 2.Australian National UniversityCanberraAustralia

Personalised recommendations