Kimi L King and James D Meernik
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- September 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780199573417
- eISBN:
- 9780191728822
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199573417.003.0002
- Subject:
- Law, Public International Law, Criminal Law and Criminology
This chapter conceptualizes the ICTY as a judicial institution whose justice affects international and local (former Yugoslavia) sets of stakeholders. If an evaluation is to be conducted on the ...
More
This chapter conceptualizes the ICTY as a judicial institution whose justice affects international and local (former Yugoslavia) sets of stakeholders. If an evaluation is to be conducted on the impact of the ICTY, the competing tensions and difficulties the Tribunal faces in advancing its mission given the diverse interests of these constituencies must be understood. The chapter argues that because of institutional, political, and practical necessities inherent in its very nature and limits of its powers, the ICTY is not able to respond primarily to affect the interests of its constituents in the former Yugoslavia. Rather, the UN mandate, its statute, and Rules of Procedure and Evidence were instead designed according to the extant status and limitations of international law rather than the demands of local communities. It also argues and finds, through an analysis of issues pertaining to sentencing, that when there are conflicts of interest between the international and the local, the former more often tends to see its interests upheld by the ICTY.Less
This chapter conceptualizes the ICTY as a judicial institution whose justice affects international and local (former Yugoslavia) sets of stakeholders. If an evaluation is to be conducted on the impact of the ICTY, the competing tensions and difficulties the Tribunal faces in advancing its mission given the diverse interests of these constituencies must be understood. The chapter argues that because of institutional, political, and practical necessities inherent in its very nature and limits of its powers, the ICTY is not able to respond primarily to affect the interests of its constituents in the former Yugoslavia. Rather, the UN mandate, its statute, and Rules of Procedure and Evidence were instead designed according to the extant status and limitations of international law rather than the demands of local communities. It also argues and finds, through an analysis of issues pertaining to sentencing, that when there are conflicts of interest between the international and the local, the former more often tends to see its interests upheld by the ICTY.
