Pros And Consequences Of Atrocity Crimes

948 Words4 Pages
Over the past decades millions of civilians have been victims of those atrocity crimes as genocide, crimes against humanity, grave war crimes, and other gross human rights violations. As a response to these crimes it was voiced that these atrocities should never happen again and perpetrators should not go unpunished. Because, too often perpetrators committed atrocity crimes as a result of impunity. To close the “impunity gap” several tribunals were created, examples are the International Military Tribunal, the ICTY, and the ICTR. Still, with these tribunals, only a part of the perpetrators were reached and the “impunity gap” was still not closed. Therefore the idea started to rise that it was up to individual States to prosecute and try international crimes. Thus over the past decade, individual States started to break the pattern of impunity by trying perpetrators of these international crimes in national courts. This type of prosecution is called universal jurisdiction. In short, the essential elements of universal jurisdiction are providing access to justice for victims and bridging the impunity gap. The very essence is that national courts prosecute alleged criminals absent any connecting factors. Thus the…show more content…
Also in theory many States do acknowledge and support universal jurisdiction. Amnesty International reports that 163 of the 193 UN Member States can exercise universal jurisdiction over one or more crimes under international law, either as such crimes or as ordinary crimes under national law. Still, universal jurisdiction has been the subject of many debates in the international community. Some see it as a way to bring perpetrators of the most heinous crimes to justice. On the other hand, some see it as a danger to the international relations between States and the sovereign equality of
Open Document