Prosecution strategy at the International Criminal Court in search of a theory

Alex Whiting thoroughly analyzes the submissions by the ICC Office of the Prosecutor and statements made by the Prosecution. He explains the different approaches of the first and the second Prosecutor: The first embraced a theory of ‘disruption and specific deterrence’, seeking to intervene in real...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Whiting, Alex (Author)
Format: Print Article
Language:English
Published: 2021
In: Why punish perpetrators of mass atrocities?
Year: 2021, Pages: 285-304
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Keywords:

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a2200000 c 4500
001 1945152869
003 DE-627
005 20251209140636.0
007 tu
008 251209s2021 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c
020 |a 9781108475143 
035 |a (DE-627)1945152869 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1945152869 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Whiting, Alex  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Prosecution strategy at the International Criminal Court in search of a theory  |c Alex Whiting 
264 1 |c 2021 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen  |b n  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Band  |b nc  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Alex Whiting thoroughly analyzes the submissions by the ICC Office of the Prosecutor and statements made by the Prosecution. He explains the different approaches of the first and the second Prosecutor: The first embraced a theory of ‘disruption and specific deterrence’, seeking to intervene in real time to stop ongoing crimes with the Court being a force for diplomacy and peace. The second Prosecutor, on the other hand, focuses on the judicial tasks of the Court, chooses fewer cases, acts slowly and carefully. This way, the Court moved towards an expressive theory of punishment, investigations and cases are a way of expressing, shaping and enforcing norms. In the end, Whiting concludes that at the ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor theory does not dictate practice - it is the other way round: The Office’s strategy is reactive to and constrained by the dependency on state cooperation and the limits of the ICC’s authority. Only within those constraints, can theories of punishment play a role: ‘robust theories of punishment are a luxory of actors with power’. 
650 4 |a ICC 
650 4 |a prosecutorial policy 
650 4 |a statements on theories of punishment 
650 4 |a selection of cases and situations 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Why punish perpetrators of mass atrocities?  |b First paperback edition  |d Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2021  |g (2021), Seite 285-304  |h xviii, 392 Seiten  |w (DE-627)1805530976  |z 9781108465892  |z 9781108475143  |7 nnam 
773 1 8 |g year:2021  |g pages:285-304 
776 1 |o 10.1017/9781108566360.020 
951 |a AR 
ELC |b 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4824806828 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1945152869 
LOK |0 005 20251209140636 
LOK |0 008 251209||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
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 |0 939   |a 09-12-25  |b l01 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw