Send In the Lawyers: The Political Architecture of Justice
The society of states, whether through the United Nations (UN) or alternative arrangements, did not send troops to halt the slaughter in Rwanda. But within the Security Council, a clear dynamic evolved toward international judicial intervention—the establishment of an international war crimes tribunal to hold individuals accountable for the genocide and other violations of international humanitarian law. The road to the international tribunal began in April 1994—the first month of the mass killings. Although, as we have seen, the United States and Britain were reluctant to put the label “genocide” on the killings in Rwanda at that time, the statement issued by the president of the Security Council on April 30, 1994 condemned all breaches of international humanitarian law in Rwanda and noted that the persons who instigated or participated in such acts where individually responsible. The statement referred to the killing of members of an ethnic group with the intention of destroying the group, wholly or partially, as a crime according to international law.
KeywordsExplosive Arena Tral Ghost Argentina
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
2 Send In the Lawyers: The Political Architecture of Justice
- 13.David Scheffer, “International Judicial Intervention,” Foreign Policy spring 1996, 39.Google Scholar
- 14.Jackson Nyamuya Maogoto, War Crimes and Realpolitik: International Justice from World War I to the 21st Century ( Boulder and London: Lynne Rienner, 2004 ), 187.Google Scholar
- 30.Jose Alvarez, “Crimes of States/Crimes of Hate: Lessons from Rwanda,” Yale Journal of International Law, summer 1999, 5.Google Scholar
- 38.Madeline H. Morris, “The Trials of Concurrent Jurisdiction: The Case of Rwanda,” 7 Duke Journal of Comparative and International Law 349, spring 1997.Google Scholar
- 64.Samantha Power, “A Problem from Hell”: America and the Age of Genocide (Flamingo, 2003), 484.Google Scholar
- 69.Betty Pisck, “Long-Lost Rwandan Black Box at UN,” Washington Times, March 12, 2004.Google Scholar