Of the many expectations attending the creation of the first
permanent International Criminal Court, the greatest has been that
the principle of complementarity would catalyse national
investigations and prosecutions of conflict-related crimes and lead
to the reform of domestic justice systems. Sarah Nouwen explores
whether complementarity has had such an effect in two states
subject to ICC intervention: Uganda and Sudan. Drawing on extensive
empirical research and combining law, legal anthropology and
political economy, she unveils several effects and outlines the
catalysts for them. However, she also reveals that one widely
anticipated effect - an increase in domestic proceedings for
conflict-related crimes - has barely occurred. This finding leads
to the unravelling of paradoxes that go right to the heart of the
functioning of an idealistic Court in a world of real constraints.
General
Is the information for this product incomplete, wrong or inappropriate?
Let us know about it.
Does this product have an incorrect or missing image?
Send us a new image.
Is this product missing categories?
Add more categories.
Review This Product
No reviews yet - be the first to create one!