Asser Press has published a new
book on history-writing in international criminal adjudication.
ABOUT THE BOOK
This book argues for a more
moderate approach to history-writing in international criminal adjudication by
articulating the elements of a “responsible history” normative framework. The question
of whether international criminal courts and tribunals (ICTs) ought to write
historical narratives has gained renewed relevance in the context of the recent
turn to history in international criminal law, the growing attention to the
historical legacies of the ad hoc Tribunals and the minimal attention paid to
historical context in the first judgment of the International Criminal Court.
The starting point for this
discussion is that, in cases of mass atrocities, prosecutors and judges are
inevitably understood to be engaged in writing history and influencing
collective memory, whether or not they so intend. Therefore, while writing
history is an inescapable feature of ICTs, there is still today a significant
lack of consensus over the proper place of this function. Since Hannah Arendt
articulated her doctrine of strict legality, in response to the prosecutor’s
expansive didactic approach in Eichmann, the legal debate on the
subject has been largely polarised between restrictive and expansive approaches
to history-writing in mass atrocity trials. What has been noticeably missing
from this debate is the middle ground. The contribution this book seeks to make
is precisely to articulate a framework that occupies that ground. The book
asks: what are the lenses through which judges of ICTs interpret
historical events, what kind of histories do ICTs write? and what
kinds of histories should ICTs produce? Its arguments for a more
moderate approach to history-writing are based on three distinct, but
interrelated grounds: (1) Truth and Justice; (2) Right to Truth; and (3) Legal
Epistemology.
Different target audiences may
benefit from this book. Court officials and legal practitioners may find the
normative framework developed herein useful in addressing the tensions between
the competing objectives of ICTs and, in particular, in assessing the value of
the history-writing function. Lawyers, historians and other academics may also
find the analysis of the strengths, constraints and blind spots of the
historical narratives written by ICTs interesting. This issue is particularly
timely in view of current debates on the legacies of ICTs.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Aldo Zammit Borda is
Director of the Centre for Access to Justice and Inclusion at Anglia Ruskin
University, Cambridge, UK.
The table of contents can be
found here
More info here
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.