Transitional Justice, State Accountability and the Crime of Aggression is a Successful Transitional Justice Process Possible without State Accountability?
Transitional Justice, State Accountability and the Crime of Aggression is a Successful Transitional Justice Process Possible without State Accountability?

Summary/Abstract: The ICTY is considered to be an institution fulfilling the “legacy of Nuremberg” and, while this is true in many aspects, yet there is a difference. What is very often omitted is the fact that the main crimes that the Nazis were tried for were crimes against peace, better known as crimes of aggression. After Nuremberg and Tokyo, and until 2010 when the First Review Conference of the States Parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court was held, the international community had not been able to agree on how to define aggression as a criminal act. As a consequence of that, the ICTY did not possess jurisdiction over this crime. Due to the inability of the international community to define the crime of aggression, state accountability was lost from theorizations of transitional justice. This paper analyzes whether it is possible to have a successful transitional justice process without state accountability and whether the TJ process in Bosnia and Serbia failed because it took place in the gap between Nuremberg and the First Review Conference, when the crime of aggression was introduced once again.

• Details
• Contents