The Efficiency of Intersectionality: Labelling the Benefits of a Rights-Based Approach to Interpret Sexual and Gender-Based Crimes

IF 1.2 Q1 LAW Human Rights Review Pub Date : 2024-01-30 DOI:10.1007/s12142-024-00714-x
Ana Martin
{"title":"The Efficiency of Intersectionality: Labelling the Benefits of a Rights-Based Approach to Interpret Sexual and Gender-Based Crimes","authors":"Ana Martin","doi":"10.1007/s12142-024-00714-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>International criminal law (ICL) has traditionally overlooked sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) and struggles to understand it. Prosecutions have been largely inefficient and not reflective of gender harms. The Rome Statute requires interpreting SGBV as a social construction (article 7(3)), in consistency with international human rights law (IHRL) and without discrimination (article 21(3)). There is, however, little guidance to implement these approaches. This article argues that intersectionality, an IHRL-based approach that reveals compounded discrimination, is an efficient tool to interpret SGBV and, therefore, should be integrated in ICL. The article traces the origins of intersectionality in feminism and its recognition by IHRL dealing with violence against women. It establishes the applicability of intersectionality in ICL that it demonstrates with a comparative analysis of the <i>Lubanga</i> and <i>Ntaganda</i> cases. The findings show that intersectionality suits ICL’s specific needs which allows labelling and explaining some of those contributions throughout the judicial process.</p>","PeriodicalId":45171,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights Review","volume":"226 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Rights Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12142-024-00714-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

International criminal law (ICL) has traditionally overlooked sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) and struggles to understand it. Prosecutions have been largely inefficient and not reflective of gender harms. The Rome Statute requires interpreting SGBV as a social construction (article 7(3)), in consistency with international human rights law (IHRL) and without discrimination (article 21(3)). There is, however, little guidance to implement these approaches. This article argues that intersectionality, an IHRL-based approach that reveals compounded discrimination, is an efficient tool to interpret SGBV and, therefore, should be integrated in ICL. The article traces the origins of intersectionality in feminism and its recognition by IHRL dealing with violence against women. It establishes the applicability of intersectionality in ICL that it demonstrates with a comparative analysis of the Lubanga and Ntaganda cases. The findings show that intersectionality suits ICL’s specific needs which allows labelling and explaining some of those contributions throughout the judicial process.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
交叉性的效率:用基于权利的方法解释性犯罪和基于性别的犯罪的好处
国际刑法(ICL)历来忽视性暴力和基于性别的暴力(SGBV),并努力去理解它。起诉在很大程度上效率低下,不能反映性别伤害。罗马规约》要求将性暴力和基于性别的暴力解释为一种社会建构(第 7 条第 3 款),与国际人权法(IHRL)保持一致,且不得存在歧视(第 21 条第 3 款)。然而,目前几乎没有实施这些方法的指导。本文认为,交叉性这一基于国际人权法的方法揭示了复合歧视,是解释性暴力和基于性别的暴力的有效工具,因此应纳入国际人权法。文章追溯了交叉性在女权主义中的起源,以及处理暴力侵害妇女问题的国际人权法对交叉性的认可。文章通过对卢班加案件和恩塔甘达案件的对比分析,证明了交叉性在国际刑院中的适用性。研究结果表明,交叉性适合国际刑院的特殊需要,可以在整个司法过程中对其中的一些贡献进行标注和解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
14.30%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: Human Rights Review is an interdisciplinary journal which provides a scholarly forum in which human rights issues and their underlying empirical, theoretical and philosophical foundations are explored. The journal seeks to place human rights practices and policies within a theoretical perspective in order to link empirical research to broader human rights issues. Human Rights Review welcomes submissions from all academic areas in order to foster a wide-ranging dialogue on issues of concern to both the academic and the policy-making communities. The journal is receptive to submissions drawing from diverse methodologies and approaches including case studies, quantitative analysis, legal scholarship and philosophical discourse in order to provide a comprehensive discussion concerning human rights issues.
期刊最新文献
Manifestation of Women’s Rights in School Textbooks? Evidence from Social Science Textbooks in India Making Tangible the Long-Term Harm Linked to the Chilling Effects of AI-enabled Surveillance: Can Human Flourishing Inform Human Rights? Freedom of Religion and Non-discrimination Based on Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation in Ukraine: Corporate Policy Commitments in Situations of Conflicting Social Expectations The Venezuelan Migrant Population’s Right to Health in the Bucaramanga Metropolitan Area A step in the right direction, or more of the same? A systematic review of the impact of human rights due diligence legislation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1