International Criminal Courts as an Architect of Sustainable Peace in Post-Conflict Societies

Abstract

The theory behind international law courts and tribunals has existed for some time however a vast cavity existed in their practical implementation. Their genesis arrived in the aftermath of World War II through the Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals. Since these post WWII trials newly created international institutions include the International Criminal Court (ICC, 2002), ad hoc tribunals for Rwanda (International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda ICTR, 1994) and the former Yugoslavia (International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia ICTY, 1993) the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL, 2000) and a variety of hybrid panels or chambers.There is a sense that conducting more criminal trials in more provinces afflicted by atrocity will lead to more justice and peace, so long as those trials conform to due process standards. Criminal trials can serve to articulate and emphasize legal norms – typically human rights that were violated in contexts of civil war or oppression. In articulating and emphasizing such norms, criminal trials can serve as important steps toward the ending of a culture of impunity and the transition to a society based on the rule of law. They also derive legitimacy because, in the wake of atrocity, national institutions may be annihilated, corrupt, politicised, biased, or too insecure. Therefore there is an argument that international criminal courts can nurture the progression to sustainable peace in vulnerable post-conflict societies.