This comprehensive Companion examines the achievements and challenges of the International Criminal Court (ICC), the world's first permanent international criminal tribunal. It provides an overview of the first two decades of the ICC's existence, investigating the dominant narratives and counter-narratives that have emerged about the institution and its work. In this timely work, an international team of scholars and experts evaluate the ICC's actual and potential role in the world by exploring some of the central issues related to its creation, mandate, and operations. Chapters address topics ranging from the negotiation dynamics surrounding the drafting of the Rome Statute, to the roles of the Office of the Prosecutor, judges, defence and victims, as well as key controversies around peace and justice, selectivity of cases and situations, and gender-sensitivity. This Companion is critical reading for scholars, students and practitioners of international criminal law. Its mixture of theoretical perspectives and case study analysis will also be of interest to those studying and working in global justice and international law more broadly, including in transitional justice, human rights law, public international law and international relations.

The most commonly cited justification for international criminal law is that it addresses crimes of such gravity that they "shock the conscience of humanity." From decisions about how to define crimes and when to exercise jurisdiction, to limitations on defences and sentencing determinations, gravity rhetoric permeates the discourse of international criminal law. Yet the concept of gravity has thus far remained highly undertheorized. This book uncovers the consequences for the regime's legitimacy of its heavy reliance on the poorly understood idea of gravity. Margaret M. deGuzman argues that gravity's ambiguity may at times enable a thin consensus to emerge around decisions, such as the creation of an institution or the definition of a crime, but that, increasingly, it undermines efforts to build a strong and resilient global justice community. The book suggests ways to reconceptualize gravity in line with global values and goals to better support the long-term legitimacy of international criminal law.

The most commonly cited justification for international criminal law is that it addresses crimes of such gravity that they "shock the conscience of humanity." From decisions about how to define crimes and when to exercise jurisdiction, to limitations on defences and sentencing determinations, gravity rhetoric permeates the discourse of international criminal law. Yet the concept of gravity has thus far remained highly undertheorized. This book uncovers the consequences for the regime's legitimacy of its heavy reliance on the poorly understood idea of gravity. Margaret M. deGuzman argues that gravity's ambiguity may at times enable a thin consensus to emerge around decisions, such as the creation of an institution or the definition of a crime, but that, increasingly, it undermines efforts to build a strong and resilient global justice community. The book suggests ways to reconceptualize gravity in line with global values and goals to better support the long-term legitimacy of international criminal law.