NCJ Number
99640
Journal
Journal of International Law Volume: 15 Issue: 1 Dated: (Winter 1983)
Date Published
1983
Length
22 pages
Annotation
This historical analysis of theories underlying punishments proscribed by international law concludes that deterrence is the major justification and that retribution appears only periodically when particular wrongful acts shock the international conscience.
Abstract
A brief examination of the 1948 Genocide Convention shows that international criminal law after the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg developed on two parallel tracks. First, criminal offenses which pertained to individuals and were to be handled by the international system of law were created. Second, international tribunals were eventually created, but in the interval, adjudication occurred in domestic tribunals of the states with territorial jurisdiction over the offender. The paper explores the influence of deterrence, retribution, and rehabilitation theories on punishments inflicted on individuals under international law. Rehabilitation is eliminated as a justification. Although retribution is not a significant part of evolutionary trends, it was a significant component of punishments awarded at Nuremberg. The deterrent aspect, however, was also apparent in the long-range objective of preventing future atrocities like those perpetrated by the Nazis. The paper discusses the strong influence of municipal jurisprudence on international crimes and trends in international law. It includes 85 footnotes.