”Can I Be Brought Before the ICC?”: Deterrence of mass atrocities between Jus in Bello and Jus ad Bellum
Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Book chapter › Research › peer-review
Standard
”Can I Be Brought Before the ICC?” : Deterrence of mass atrocities between Jus in Bello and Jus ad Bellum. / Holtermann, Jakob v. H.
Why Punish Perpetrators of Mass Atrocities?: Theoretical and Practical Perspectives on Punishment in International Criminal Law. ed. / Florian Jeßberger; Julia Geneuss. Cambridge University Press, 2020. p. 137-160.Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Book chapter › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - CHAP
T1 - ”Can I Be Brought Before the ICC?”
T2 - Deterrence of mass atrocities between Jus in Bello and Jus ad Bellum
AU - Holtermann, Jakob v. H.
PY - 2020
Y1 - 2020
N2 - This article returns to the discussion about the possible deterrent effect of the International Criminal Court. It argues that previous discussions are incomplete as they fail to take into account the significance specifically for deterrence of differences between prosecuting in bello and ad bellum atrocity crimes. To this end, the paper focuses on the recent activation of the Court’s jurisdiction over the crime of aggression and sees this fact in combination with reports about the behavior of the prime ministers of both the United Kingdom and Denmark leading up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Thus, before taking their countries to war, both Tony Blair and Anders Fogh Rasmussen asked their respective legal advisors whether in joining the US-led war they would run the risk, as individuals, of being brought before the ICC. When seen in light of the recent activation of the crime of aggression, the fact that both heads of state felt compelled to ask this particular question at that particular point in time is highly interesting because it both lends support to, points to important lacunae in, and adds nuance to the deterrence-based argument in favor of the ICC.
AB - This article returns to the discussion about the possible deterrent effect of the International Criminal Court. It argues that previous discussions are incomplete as they fail to take into account the significance specifically for deterrence of differences between prosecuting in bello and ad bellum atrocity crimes. To this end, the paper focuses on the recent activation of the Court’s jurisdiction over the crime of aggression and sees this fact in combination with reports about the behavior of the prime ministers of both the United Kingdom and Denmark leading up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Thus, before taking their countries to war, both Tony Blair and Anders Fogh Rasmussen asked their respective legal advisors whether in joining the US-led war they would run the risk, as individuals, of being brought before the ICC. When seen in light of the recent activation of the crime of aggression, the fact that both heads of state felt compelled to ask this particular question at that particular point in time is highly interesting because it both lends support to, points to important lacunae in, and adds nuance to the deterrence-based argument in favor of the ICC.
UR - https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/why-punish-perpetrators-of-mass-atrocities/A9B94C2EAB248B89E5187D5235856DA0
U2 - 10.1017/9781108566360
DO - 10.1017/9781108566360
M3 - Book chapter
SN - 9781108475143
SP - 137
EP - 160
BT - Why Punish Perpetrators of Mass Atrocities?
A2 - Jeßberger, Florian
A2 - Geneuss, Julia
PB - Cambridge University Press
ER -
ID: 188644858