Shifting Accounts of Justice: The Legalisation and Politicisation of International Criminal Justice

Henry Redwood,Hannah Goozee

doi:10.1177/09646639211058832

Abstract

In December 2015, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda delivered its final verdict in Butare, bringing the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda to a close after 21-years. Despite the important role that the tribunal played in confirming international criminal justice as a key transitional justice mechanism, and tool of international peace and security, there has been little retrospective analysis of the court’s history. This article draws on a Bourdieusian field analysis to address the absence and makes two contributions. First, it demonstrates that over the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda’s history the tribunal’s conception of justice shifted from a weak form of restorative justice to a more traditional form of retributive justice. Second, it reveals that this shift was the result of a ‘settling’ on the law and, more importantly, UN Security Council interventions. This legalisation and politicisation of trial practice saw a shift in the field from prioritising moral authority to legal and delegated authority.

Highlights

In December 2015, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda’s (ICTR) appeals chamber delivered the final verdict in Prosecutor versus Nyamirashoko et al, which brought the ICTR’s 21-year existence to a close.1 The tribunal, along with the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), significantly contributed towards the solidification and institutionalisation of international criminal justice (ICJ) (Drumbl, 2005; Hagan et al, 2006; Mégret, 2016), introducing ICJ as a main stay of the international system and a key transitional justice mechanism (ICTR, 1994)
For an in depth understanding of trial practice, we focus our analysis on three ICTR trials: Jean Paul Akayesu, Bourgmestre of the Taba Commune (1998); Cyangugu, consisting of Emmanuel Bagambiki – Prefet of Cyangugu Prefecture; Samuel Imanishimwe – Commander of the Cyangugu military camp; and Andre Ntagerura – Minister for Transport and Communication (2003); and Jean-Baptiste Gatete, director within the civil service and former Bourgmestre of the Murambi commune (2011)
Whilst not representative of all ICTR trials, the selection offers a way to systematically analyse how ICJ was practiced at the ICTR and how this changed over time

Summary

Introduction

In December 2015, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda’s (ICTR) appeals chamber delivered the final verdict in Prosecutor versus Nyamirashoko et al, which brought the ICTR’s 21-year existence to a close. The tribunal, along with the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), significantly contributed towards the solidification and institutionalisation of international criminal justice (ICJ) (Drumbl, 2005; Hagan et al, 2006; Mégret, 2016), introducing ICJ as a main stay of the international system and a key transitional justice mechanism (ICTR, 1994). There has been little retrospective analysis as to what the ICTR’s history can tell us about how the field of ICJ changed during this important moment in its development, why it took the course it did and what this reveals about the function and purpose of ICJ within the international community.2 To address these questions, this article joins a number of scholars who have drawn on Bourdieu’s concept of a ‘field’ to explain the functioning of ICJ (Dezalay, 1986; Dixon and Tenove, 2013; Hagan and Levi, 2005; Madsen, 2018; Mégret, 2016). The fourth and fifth sections detail why this happened, turning first to the ‘legalisation’, and second the ‘politicisation’, of the trial process

Methods

Conclusion