Crimes of States/Crimes of Hate: Lessons from Rwanda

This Article critiques international lawyers' assumptions about how best to pursue criminal accountability for perpetrators of atrocities such as those committed in Rwanda during 1994. It contrasts an internationalist paradigm for dealing with such atrocities, characterized by international law...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:  
Bibliographische Detailangaben
1. VerfasserIn: Alvarez, Jose E. (VerfasserIn)
Medienart: Elektronisch Buch
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: 1999
In:Jahr: 1999
Online-Zugang: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Verfügbarkeit prüfen: HBZ Gateway

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a22000002c 4500
001 186612305X
003 DE-627
005 20250126054905.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 231018s1999 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
035 |a (DE-627)186612305X 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP186612305X 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Alvarez, Jose E.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Crimes of States/Crimes of Hate: Lessons from Rwanda 
264 1 |c 1999 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a This Article critiques international lawyers' assumptions about how best to pursue criminal accountability for perpetrators of atrocities such as those committed in Rwanda during 1994. It contrasts an internationalist paradigm for dealing with such atrocities, characterized by international law's state-centric orientation, with the more grass-roots perspective seen in many journalistic accounts which characterizes the underlying offenses as prototypical crimes premised on hatred of the other. The author uses the dichotomy between these two perspectives to illustrate the fallacies perpetrated by the international community's principal response to the Rwandan genocide: namely, the establishment of an international war crimes tribunal for Rwanda based in a foreign country, with foreign judges on its bench, and charged solely with the application of international norms. The author argues that the International Tribunal for Rwanda is fundamentally misconceived and may undermine the rationales for its creation to the extent that it relies on jurisdictional primacy over domestic courts, ethnic neutrality, and an emphasis on prosecuting primarily high-level perpetrators.T he author also draws larger lessons from the Rwandan example, contending that it is important to be more attentive to the characteristics of particular instances of mass atrocities and that it is wrong to adopt a one size fits all approach to international criminal adjudication. The author contends that international forms of accountability, including the proposed international criminal court, need to truly complement, and resonate with, local efforts for accountability where these are likely or can be made available 
856 4 0 |u https://core.ac.uk/download/72839139.pdf  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mkri 
951 |a BO 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 439180381X 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 186612305X 
LOK |0 005 20231018043633 
LOK |0 008 231018||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-2619)CORE37561209 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-2619  |c DE-627  |d DE-2619 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-2619 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a core 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw