From The Hague to the Balkans: A Victim-oriented Reparations Approach to Improved International Criminal Justice

in International Criminal Law Review
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

The international crimes committed in the territory of the former Yugoslavia during the 1990s have been the subject of both State responsibility claims and prosecutions establishing individual criminal responsibility. On 26 February 2007 the International Court of Justice handed down its judgment in the Genocide case while it is expected that in 2014 the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia will conclude all appeals from prosecutions. While these initiatives contribute to the acknowledgement of the commission of international crimes they have not provided the victims with any financial reparations. Instead victims have had to make compensation claims under domestic law. The article examines how, in addition to the international initiatives at The Hague, a regionally focused victim oriented reparations approach can assist in attaining improved international criminal justice for international crimes committed during the Yugoslav wars. A victim oriented reparations approach would enhance victims’ rights through the provision of financial reparations, reflect improved international criminal justice and assist in the attainment long-term stability in the war-torn States of the former Yugoslavia.

From The Hague to the Balkans: A Victim-oriented Reparations Approach to Improved International Criminal Justice

in International Criminal Law Review

Sections

References

10

State responsibility articlessupra note 8 Article 34.

14

CATsupra note 11 Article 14

20

Cherif Bassiounisupra note 5 203.

21

Basic Principles and Guidelinessupra note 19 Article 8.

42

Robertssupra note 34 319.

43

Buxbaumsupra note 35 37.

56

Palassissupra note 45 97–99 104–5.

58

ICTY Statutesupra note 4 Article 1.

60

Jonathan Charney‘International Criminal Law and the Role of Domestic Courts’American Journal of International Law (2001) 95 1.

61

Diane Marie Amann‘Assessing International Criminal Adjudication of Human Rights Atrocities’Third World Legal Studies [2000–03] 169 175.

63

Amannsupra note 61 174.

64

Zacklinsupra note 59 542.

102

Mačkićsupra note 100.

105

Maja Milavic‘Torture Victims’ Quest for Justice’Balkan Investigative Reporting Network26 September 2006 http://www.bim.ba/en/29/10/1015/.

106

Mačkićsupra note 100.

107

BiH Progress Report 200819.

120

Sarkinsupra note 112 88.

125

Lahirisupra note 122 332.

132

Cherif Bassiounisupra note 5 p. 204.

135

Cherif Bassiounisupra note 5 231.

139

Background Papersupra note 6 2.

140

Adama Dieng‘International Criminal Justice: from Paper to Practice- A Contribution from the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda to the Establishment of the International Criminal Court’25 Fordham Int’l Law Journal (2001–2) 688 688.

141

Graycar and Wangmannsupra note 138.

146

Popovićsupra note 109 31.

148

Laifersupra note 133 163–164.

149

Fischersupra note 134 197.

150

Background Papersupra note 6 3.

Information

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 27 27 3
Full Text Views 87 87 59
PDF Downloads 3 3 1
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0