This introduction explores interdisciplinarity by first considering law as a discipline to account for how international criminal law has emerged as a field of practice and scholarship within the broader epistemic context of law. It then considers the nature of international criminal law scholarship before turning to questions of interdisciplinarity.
Burgis-Kasthala (2016)supra note 29 p. 924; P. Dixon and C. Tenove ‘International Criminal Justice as a Transnational Field: Rules Authority and Victims’ 7(3) International Journal of Transitional Justice (2013) 393–413; M. Koskenniemi ‘The Fate of Public International Law: Between Technique and Politics’ 70 Modern Law Review (2007) 1–30 p. 30. Christensen also suggests we understand icl as a ‘sub-discipline’ as well as field Christensen supra note 14. Also see Dezalay (supra note 15) in this issue on the topic on the idea of icl as a ‘weak field’ as well as her study of the conflict field as a ‘weak field’: S. Dezalay ‘Lawyering War or Talking Peace? On Militant Usages of the Law in the Resolution of Internal Armed Conflicts: A Case Study of International Alert’ in Y. Dezalay and B.G. Garth (eds.) Lawyers and the Construction of Transnational Justice (Routledge Abingdon 2012) 60–83; also see Tallgren (2014) ibid.
Anderson (2009)supra note 2 p. 357. Structural implications of icl can also be explored through a political economy perspective. For examplesee T. Krever ‘Ending impunity? Eliding political economy in international criminal law’ in U. Mattei and J.D. Haskell (eds.) Research Handbook on Political Economy and Law (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar 2015) 298–314.