Excesses of Responsibility: The Limits of Law and the Possibilities of Politics [Abstract]

Ethics & International Affairs, Volume 25.4 (Winter 2011)

Ethics & International Affairs

Since 1945 responsibility for atrocity has been individualized, and international tribunals and courts have been given effective jurisdiction over it. This article argues that the move to individual responsibility leaves significant "excesses" of responsibility for war crimes unaccounted for. When courts do attempt to recognize the collective nature of war crime perpetration, through the doctrines of "command responsibility," "joint criminal enterprise" and "state responsibility," the application of these doctrines has, it is argued, limited or perverse effects. The article suggests that instead of expecting courts to allocate excesses of responsibility, other accountability mechanisms should be used alongside trials to allocate political (rather than legal) responsibility for atrocity. The mechanisms favored here are "Responsibility and Truth Commissions," i.e., well-resourced non-judicial commissions which are mandated to hold to account individual and collective actors rather than simply to provide an account of past violence.

To read or purchase the full text of this article, click here.

Read More: Human Rights, International Criminal Court , International Law

blog comments powered by Disqus
Search Our Site

People  |  Advanced Search

Join our Mailing Lists
Online Magazine

Online Magazine

Social Network

Social Network

The Journal

The Journal