The Merits of Unifying Terms: "Atrocity Crimes" and "Atrocity Law"

Scheffer, David J.

doi:10.1353/gsp.2011.0041

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Mass atrocity, itself not a legal term, encompasses elements of three legally defined international crimes: genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes (and more recently also the crime of aggression). The term “atrocity crimes” has gained popularity in recent years as a practical unifying term to refer to these international crimes (Karstedt ; Schabas ; Scheffer , , ). David Scheffer, first United States Ambassador‐at‐Large for War Crimes Issues, suggested the following practical term: “high‐impact crimes of severe gravity that are of an orchestrated character, that shock the conscience of humankind, that result in a significant number of victims… meriting an international response holding the lead perpetrators accountable before a competent court of law” (Scheffer : 239).…”

Section: Connecting the Dots Between Mass Atrocity And Mass Testimonymentioning

confidence: 99%

Mass Atrocity, Mass Testimony, and the Quantitative Turn in International Law

Keydar¹

2019

Law Soc Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article identifies and analyses the development it labels the “quantitative turn” in international criminal law. Addressing the cumulative effect of the large numbers of witnesses in international processes, the article considers quantity as an integral, and substantively beneficial, component of the law's response to atrocity crimes. The article develops a theorized understanding of the relationship between mass atrocity and mass testimony and provides a taxonomy of the functions that the quantity of testimonies fulfills in international trials: the evidentiary, didactic, epistemic, and restorative functions. Focusing on a recent case before the International Criminal Court in the matter of The Prosecutor v. Bemba, the article demonstrates how the different players in the international justice system—Prosecution, Defense, Victims, and the Court—employ the functions of quantity, while negotiating concerns over manageability and scale. The goal of this article is to prompt a debate and a more careful consideration of the potential benefits of a meaningful participation of witnesses and victims in post‐atrocity proceedings. This is particularly important given the dominance of the efficiency paradigm in international criminal law (ICL) discourse, which directly impacts the quantitative turn. The article forges new ways for ICL institutions to maintain a plurality of voices and their commitment to victims while safeguarding the rights of the accused.

show abstract

Section: Connecting the Dots Between Mass Atrocity And Mass Testimonymentioning

confidence: 99%

Mass Atrocity, Mass Testimony, and the Quantitative Turn in International Law

Keydar¹

2019

Law Soc Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…She notes that the trial chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in the Kupresik case recognized that widespread destruction of homes and property can constitute the crime against humanity of persecution when committed with systematic intent. The non-judicial concept of atrocity crimes goes further by setting aside even the criterion of intent, at least in encouraging investigation of collateral costs to civilians and helping to preempt or charge crimes against humanity and genocide (Scheffer, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Atrocity victimization and the costs of economic conflict crimes in the battle for Baghdad and Iraq

Hagan

Kaiser

Rothenberg

et al. 2012

European Journal of Criminology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Economic conflict crimes are defined in this paper as violations of international human rights and humanitarian law, as well as domestic law, associated with military and political conflict and producing significant monetary as well as other forms of suffering for civilians. Criminologists are well positioned by disciplinary emphasis to document and explain military and political violence resulting in economic conflict crimes. Criminal victimization associated with the US-led invasion of Iraq imposed an enormous toll on civilians. Yet there is little attention by criminologists or others to the profound economic costs to Iraqis, whether through lost property, life, or opportunities. We cautiously estimate that the economic losses for households in the city of Baghdad alone were almost US$100 billion, and more than three times this amount for the entire country, with Sunni groups experiencing significantly greater losses than others. So far as we know, our article presents the first estimates of civilian losses from economic conflict crimes that followed the US-led invasion of Iraq. These losses were widespread and systematic, the hallmarks of crimes against humanity.

show abstract

Atrocity Crimes Framing the Responsibility to Protect

Scheffer¹

2009

Responsibility to Protect

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Merits of Unifying Terms: "Atrocity Crimes" and "Atrocity Law"

Cited by 6 publications

References 12 publications

Mass Atrocity, Mass Testimony, and the Quantitative Turn in International Law

Mass Atrocity, Mass Testimony, and the Quantitative Turn in International Law

Atrocity victimization and the costs of economic conflict crimes in the battle for Baghdad and Iraq

Atrocity Crimes Framing the Responsibility to Protect

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About