Ðóñ Eng Cn Translate this page:
Please select your language to translate the article


You can just close the window to don't translate
Library
Your profile

Back to contents

International Law and International Organizations
Reference:

Nelaeva G.A., Khabarova E.A. Assessment of the work of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia: views of Russian and foreign experts

Abstract: The subject of this research is the views of the Russian and foreign community upon the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). The authors analyze the problematic aspects of its activity of legal and political character. The article examines the contribution of the Tribunal into the development of international criminal law and procedure, participation of the Tribunal in post-conflict reconciliation in the Balkans, involvement of ICTY in the integration process of the countries of Western Balkans into the European Union, as well as such issues as complication of processes and remoteness of the Tribunal from the Western Balkan countries. The main method of this research lies in comparison of the Russian and foreign communities during the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. The ICTY experience allows determining the key problems in the area on international criminal justice and the ways for their solution. The analysis of the views of Russian and foreign experts demonstrates that the negative sides of the international criminal processes must be considered by international community in establishment of similar institutions in future.


Keywords:

international humanitarian law, United Nations, experts opinion, tribunals, international criminal justice, ICTY, International Criminal Law, international community, post-conflict resolution, Western Balkans


This article can be downloaded freely in PDF format for reading. Download article

This article written in Russian. You can find original text of the article here .
References
1. Meron T. The Humanization of Humanitarian Law // American Journal of International Law, 2000. Vol. 4. Ps. 239-278.
2. Cassese, A. International Criminal Law. Second Edition. Oxford University Press. 2008.
3. Ajevski M. International Criminal Tribunals as Law-Makers-Challenging the Basic Assumptions of International Law (2011). Central European University SJD Thesis.
4. Droege C. The Interplay between International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law in Situations of Armed Conflict // Israel Law Review. 2007. Vol. 40, No. 2. Ps. 310-355.
5. Gardam J. G., Jarvis, M.J. Women, Armed Conflict and International Law. The Hague/London/Boston: Klewer Law International, 2001.
6. Mikhaylov N.G. Mezhdunarodnyy ugolovnyy tribunal po byvshey Yugoslavii kak institut mezhdunarodnoy ugolovnoy yustitsii: Avtoreferat diss.. … dokt. yurid. nauk. M., 2006. 55 s.
7. Volevodz A.G., Volevodz V.A. Sovremennaya sistema mezhdunarodnoy ugolovnoy yustitsii: ponyatie i mnozhestvennost' institutsional'nykh modeley // Mezhdunarodnoe ugolovnoe pravo i mezhdunarodnaya yustitsiya. 2008. ¹ 3. S. 3 – 14.
8. Egorov S.A. Mezhdunarodnyy ugolovnyy tribunal po byvshey Yugoslavii // Mezhdunarodnoe pravo i mezhdunarodnye organizatsii. 2014. ¹ 4. S. 581 – 597.
9. Mezyaev A.B. Prava obvinyaemogo v sovremennom mezhdunarodnom ugolovnom protsesse (voprosy teorii i praktiki): Avtoreferat diss.. … dokt. yurid. nauk. M., 2013. 68 s.
10. Lyamin N.M. Primenenie Mezhdunarodnym ugolovnym sudom norm mezhdunarodnogo gumanitarnogo prava i mezhdunarodnogo prava prav cheloveka // Sovremennoe pravo. 2015. ¹ 6. S.144 – 148.
11. Belyy I.Yu. Mezhdunarodnoe ugolovnoe pravosudie i sovremennyy miroporyadok // Mezhdunarodnoe pravo i mezhdunarodnye organizatsii. 2016. ¹ 2. S. 238 – 256.
12. Rimskiy statut Mezhdunarodnogo ugolovnogo suda ot 17.07.1998 // Mezhdunarodnoe ugolovnoe pravo v dokumentakh: Ucheb. posobie: V 2 t. / Sost. R.M. Valeev, I.A. Tarkhanov, A.R. Kayumova. 2-e izd., pererab. i dop. M.: Statut, 2010. T. 2. S. 256 – 352.
13. Klimova E.A. Protsessual'nye aspekty deyatel'nosti Mezhdunarodnogo ugolovnogo suda // Mezhdunarodnoe ugolovnoe pravo i mezhdunarodnaya yustitsiya. 2009. ¹ 4. S. 16 – 19.
14. Nelaeva G.A. Politika Evropeyskogo Soyuza v otnoshenii institutov mezhdunarodnoy ugolovnoy yustitsii v kontekste stanovleniya «global'nogo pravovogo prostranstva» // Vestnik Novosibirskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Istoriya, filologiya. 2016. Tom 15, vypusk 1: Istoriya. S. 54 – 61.
15. Shinkaretskaya G.G. Pravomernost' sozdaniya i deyatel'nosti mezhdunarodnykh ugolovnykh sudov // Mezhdunarodnoe pravo i mezhdunarodnye organizatsii. 2014. ¹ 4. S. 564 – 570.
16. Grigor'ev V.N., Antonov A.N. Reshenie tribunala po byvshey Yugoslavii po delu Gotovina/Markach kak (ocherednoy) proval mezhdunarodnogo pravosudiya // Mezhdunarodnoe ugolovnoe pravo i mezhdunarodnaya yustitsiya. 2013. ¹ 3. S. 9 – 15.
17. Gus'kova E.Yu. Deyatel'nost' MTBYu: soderzhanie, rezul'taty, effektivnost' // Novaya i noveyshaya istoriya. 2009. ¹ 5. S. 252–253
18. Rudolph C. Constructing an Atrocities Regime: The Politics of War Crimes Tribunals // International Organization. 2001. V. 55. ¹ 3. Ps. 655–691.
19. Snyder J., Vinjamuri L. Trials and Errors. Principle and Pragmatism in Strategies of International Justice // International Security. 2003. Vol. 28. ¹ 3. Ps. 5–44.
20. Orentlicher, D. That Someone Guilty Be Punished. The Impact of the ICTY in Bosnia. OSI Justice Initiative. 2010.
21. Nelaeva G.A. Uchastie epistemicheskogo soobshchestva v reshenii problemy iznasilovaniy v vooruzhennykh konfliktakh: deyatel'nost' meditsinskikh nepravitel'stvennykh organizatsiy // Politika i Obshchestvo. - 2016. - 2. - C. 232 - 244. DOI: 10.7256/1812-8696.2016.2.13109.
22. Sazonova K.L. K voprosu o sootnoshenii mezhdunarodnykh prestupleniy
23. gosudarstva, norm jus cogens i obyazatel'stv erga omnes
24. v sovremennom mezhdunarodnom prave // Pravo i politika. - 2013. - 9. - C. 1175 - 1181. DOI: 10.7256/1811-9018.2013.9.9410.
25. Vorob'ev V.A. Nekotorye voprosy otsenochnykh ponyatiy v mezhdunarodnom gumanitarnom prave. // Pravo i politika. - 2014. - 6. - C. 825 - 834. DOI: 10.7256/1811-9018.2014.6.12255.