Abstract
Abstract There is a hopeful story to be told with respect to the activation of the crime of aggression at the International Criminal Court (ICC). Activation will either add to deterrence, or at worst will be harmlessly symbolic. But what if the premise is wrong? What if there is a risk that activation of the crime of aggression will undermine rather than advance deterrence? It matters not that the crime is activated, but how it is activated — the narrow definitional and jurisdictional scope of the crime as it has been enacted at the ICC, may undermine the deterrence effect of the Court by further encouraging cynicism about what the Court can and cannot do. Recognizing this risk both enriches the debate and raises larger questions about strategies for building and expanding international criminal law and its institutions.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
