Traditional international law considered the sovereignty of state as the core principle and
state cannot be interfered by other states or international community even though it is failed to
protect its people. The modern international law developed when the Peace of Westphalia was
signed in 1648. With this development, the principle of sovereignty of state has been gradually
replaced with the principle of international community as every state more or less is dependent,
particularly in terms of economics and politics, in order to survive in the world community. In
this regard, each state came into agreement on trade, diplomacy and so on with the others. So
each is bound by international law either treaty, customary international law, or other sources of
international law. Regarding the international crimes under international criminal law such as
genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes, most of the states more or less are bound by
them, significantly under the 1948-Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime
of Genocide, 1968-Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes
and Crimes against Humanity, and the 2002-Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
(ICC).
Throughout the history, a number of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes
happened, but only were four ad hoc tribunals right away created to prosecute the criminals
before the ICC came into being in 2002. Those are the 1945-Nuremberg Tribunal, the 1946-
Tokyo Tribunal, the 1993-International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, and the
1994-International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. However, such a thing was not undertaken in
Cambodia after the Khmer Rouge regime collapse in 1979. The Khmer Rouge Tribunal is
selected to study because it is the only tribunal established very late after the carelessness of the
international community and the prolonged and often acrimonious cooperation and negotiation
between the Cambodian government and the UN, unlike the others. [...]
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. The Definitions of International Crimes
3. The International Cooperation in Dealing with International Crimes: The Creation of the Permanent International Criminal Court in the 21st Century
4. Other Hybrid Courts Established under the Cooperation between the UN and the Home Governments in the 21st Century
5. Cooperative Peace Building as Politics: The Analysis of the Khmer Rouge Tribunal
6. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Themes
This research paper examines the complexities of international cooperation in the establishment of tribunals for international crimes, with a specific focus on the Khmer Rouge Tribunal in Cambodia. It investigates how political influences and the compromise of interests between the United Nations and national governments can impact the effectiveness and legitimacy of transitional justice processes, questioning whether true justice for victims can be achieved under such politically negotiated frameworks.
- Legal definitions of international crimes (genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes) under the Rome Statute.
- The historical evolution and challenges in establishing the International Criminal Court (ICC).
- The unique nature of hybrid courts as a mechanism for international-national judicial cooperation.
- Political manipulation and jurisdictional limitations within the Statute of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC).
- The relationship between justice, reconciliation, and peace-building in post-conflict societies.
Excerpt from the Book
Cooperative Peace Building as Politics: The Analysis of the Khmer Rouge Tribunal
The hybrid Khmer Rouge tribunal or Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC)10 was ultimately established in June 2006, and put into action in 2007 in the wake of an extended process of negotiation, and the implementation of the agreement reached in March 2003 (The March Agreement) between the Cambodian government and the United Nations (UN). Thirty years after the demise of the Democratic Kampuchea, internationally known as the Khmer Rouge regime, in 1979, justice for the Cambodian victims has not been served even though the Khmer Rouge Tribunal has been in the process of prosecuting the leaders and those most responsible for the brutal crimes of genocide, and crimes against humanity, caused the grisly deaths of up to two million people, in the late 1970s Cambodia. Seeking justice for Cambodian people is quite important for the peace-building process in present-day Cambodia. Nevertheless, the time for justice is running out as the protracted mechanism of establishing the Khmer Rouge Tribunal is taking too long.
Justice has been revealing as a fundamental role in healing the victim’s trauma, bringing reconciliation, and building peace in Cambodia. Kiernan (1993) argued that peace rather than justice has been prioritized by the Cambodian people due to the weakness of political and legal systems in Cambodia. This might be somewhat true when Cambodia has just emerged from genocidal regime since physiological needs and safety needs are most prioritized respectively as defined by Abraham Maslow about the hierarchy of needs (Maslow, 1943), but peace cannot be achieved without justice, particularly in terms of positive one in order to reach long-term reconciliation (Ramsbotham, Woodhouse & Miall, 2005)11. In terms of reconciliation dealing with past massacre, it prevails only when the legal justice is served (Lambourne, 2001) through juridical/punishment approach12, with which the Khmer Rouge Tribunal has been merely implementing based on the agreed upon source of international law, the Statute of the ECCC.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: This chapter outlines the shift from state sovereignty to international accountability and introduces the Khmer Rouge Tribunal as a late-stage, complex case of international judicial cooperation.
2. The Definitions of International Crimes: This section provides a legal overview of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes as codified in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
3. The International Cooperation in Dealing with International Crimes: The Creation of the Permanent International Criminal Court in the 21st Century: The chapter explores the historical trajectory of international criminal justice, from the Nuremberg and Tokyo Tribunals to the eventual establishment of the permanent ICC.
4. Other Hybrid Courts Established under the Cooperation between the UN and the Home Governments in the 21st Century: This chapter discusses the emergence of special hybrid courts as a unique response to localized mass atrocities that require international-national collaboration.
5. Cooperative Peace Building as Politics: The Analysis of the Khmer Rouge Tribunal: The chapter critically analyzes the ECCC, arguing that political influence and limited jurisdictional scope have compromised the pursuit of genuine justice for Cambodian victims.
6. Conclusion: The conclusion summarizes the inherent dilemmas of international justice, reiterating that political interests often hinder the delivery of comprehensive justice and reconciliation in post-conflict contexts.
Keywords
International Criminal Law, Khmer Rouge Tribunal, ECCC, International Criminal Court, Genocide, Crimes Against Humanity, War Crimes, Political Compromise, Transitional Justice, Peace-building, Sovereignty, Accountability, Human Rights, Judicial Cooperation, Impunity
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this research paper?
The paper examines the international cooperation involved in establishing judicial mechanisms to address international crimes, specifically analyzing the political dynamics surrounding the Khmer Rouge Tribunal.
What are the core themes addressed in the work?
Key themes include the evolution of international criminal law, the structural challenges of hybrid courts, the balance between political interests and judicial independence, and the requirements for effective post-conflict reconciliation.
What is the central research question?
The paper asks whether the international cooperation between the UN and the Cambodian government has been successful in seeking justice for the victims of the Khmer Rouge regime, and to what extent political manipulation has hindered this goal.
Which scientific methods or approaches are applied?
The study employs a qualitative analysis of historical developments, legal frameworks (specifically the Rome Statute and ECCC Statute), and political science theories regarding international cooperation and conflict resolution.
What topics are discussed in the main body of the paper?
The main body covers the legal definitions of international crimes, the history of ad hoc and permanent international courts, the creation of the ECCC, and a critique of its jurisdictional limitations and voting formulas.
What are the primary keywords that characterize the research?
Key concepts include the Khmer Rouge Tribunal (ECCC), international criminal justice, political compromise, sovereignty, and the challenges of achieving accountability in post-conflict transitions.
Why does the author argue that the ECCC is a risky approach to justice?
The author argues that the ECCC is a "highly risky approach" because its statute contains loopholes, such as narrow temporal and territorial jurisdiction, which potentially shield various actors from prosecution.
How does the "supermajority formula" impact the trial process at the ECCC?
The author suggests that the supermajority formula, combined with the composition of judges, creates a risk of political interference, potentially leading to a deadlock where no final decision can be reached.
What is the significance of the "March Agreement" mentioned in the paper?
The March Agreement is identified as the foundational agreement between the UN and the Cambodian government, which the author claims was heavily influenced by political considerations, ultimately shaping a limited mandate for the ECCC.
- Citar trabajo
- Sopheada Phy (Autor), 2009, International Cooperation in Dealing with International Crimes under International Criminal Law: The Case of the Khmer Rouge Tribunal, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/149283
