Kosovo Specialist Chambers Jurisdiction and the International Criminal Court

A. Nagy
{"title":"Kosovo Specialist Chambers Jurisdiction and the International Criminal Court","authors":"A. Nagy","doi":"10.1163/15718123-bja10108","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThe establishment of the Kosovo Specialist Chambers as a local war crimes court is coming as a challenge to the overall authority and jurisdiction claimed by the International Criminal Court. These two courts are at the same time divided and connected in so many aspects. Kosovo war crimes have been dealt in the past by icty, unmik, eulex courts and now a specially made ksc. The ksc as being a local court is still practically having above it the icty and the Mechanism which inherited the icty but also the possible application of the icc. We will compare the ksc to other courts having local jurisdiction in Kosovo with an aim to understand if the ksc is an exception or a rule from now on in certain post-conflict societies. The exclusion of the icc from adjudicating in Kosovo is a challenge and potential solution to other post-conflict societies, and they can apply its various forms and practices and overall ignore the icc in the future. Although icc is the only international criminal court it is not the only specialised court dealing with war crimes now. The ksc and icc overall struggle for jurisdiction have been also shadowed by the global political struggle for primacy, leaving these and many other local and international institutions without a real power, functioning in a framework of and for various political aims. The special characteristics and mandate ksc has makes it worth researching in order to better understand the icc and the overall understanding of International War Crimes courts/Tribunal worldwide today and in the future.","PeriodicalId":55966,"journal":{"name":"International Criminal Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Criminal Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718123-bja10108","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The establishment of the Kosovo Specialist Chambers as a local war crimes court is coming as a challenge to the overall authority and jurisdiction claimed by the International Criminal Court. These two courts are at the same time divided and connected in so many aspects. Kosovo war crimes have been dealt in the past by icty, unmik, eulex courts and now a specially made ksc. The ksc as being a local court is still practically having above it the icty and the Mechanism which inherited the icty but also the possible application of the icc. We will compare the ksc to other courts having local jurisdiction in Kosovo with an aim to understand if the ksc is an exception or a rule from now on in certain post-conflict societies. The exclusion of the icc from adjudicating in Kosovo is a challenge and potential solution to other post-conflict societies, and they can apply its various forms and practices and overall ignore the icc in the future. Although icc is the only international criminal court it is not the only specialised court dealing with war crimes now. The ksc and icc overall struggle for jurisdiction have been also shadowed by the global political struggle for primacy, leaving these and many other local and international institutions without a real power, functioning in a framework of and for various political aims. The special characteristics and mandate ksc has makes it worth researching in order to better understand the icc and the overall understanding of International War Crimes courts/Tribunal worldwide today and in the future.
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
科索沃专家分庭的管辖权和国际刑事法院
设立科索沃专家分庭作为地方战争罪行法院,是对国际刑事法院所声称的全面权威和管辖权的挑战。这两个法院在很多方面既分开又有联系。科索沃战争罪行过去由城市、科索沃特派团、欧盟法院处理,现在由特别设立的科索沃法院处理。ksc作为一个地方法院实际上仍然拥有城市和继承城市的机制,但也可能适用国际刑事法院。我们将把科索沃最高法院与在科索沃拥有地方管辖权的其他法院进行比较,目的是了解科索沃最高法院从现在起在某些冲突后社会中是例外还是规则。将国际刑事法院排除在科索沃的裁决之外对其他冲突后社会来说是一种挑战,也是一种潜在的解决办法,它们可以在未来应用国际刑事法院的各种形式和做法,而完全忽略国际刑事法院。虽然国际刑事法院是唯一的国际刑事法院,但它并不是目前唯一处理战争罪行的专门法院。ksc和国际刑事法院争夺管辖权的整体斗争也受到全球政治斗争的影响,使这些机构和许多其他地方和国际机构没有真正的权力,在各种政治目标的框架内运作并为各种政治目标服务。为了更好地了解国际刑事法院以及今天和将来全世界对国际战争罪法院/法庭的总体了解,ksc的特殊特点和任务使其值得研究。
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
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: Thus there is also a need for criminological, sociological and historical research on the issues of ICL. The Review publishes in-depth analytical research that deals with these issues. The analysis may cover: • the substantive and procedural law on the international level; • important cases from national jurisdictions which have a bearing on general issues; • criminological and sociological; and, • historical research.
期刊最新文献
Positive Complementarity in Action: International Criminal Justice and the Ongoing Armed Conflict in Ukraine International Criminal Law, Complementarity and Amnesty Within the Context of Transitional Justice: Lessons from Uganda Atrocity Crime Responses in Bosnia and Herzegovina: Navigating Tensions in Multifaceted Approaches Trajectories of Contestation: Motivational Dynamics in Repressive Regimes Corruption: From International Law and Ethics to Realpolitik and Amoralism
×
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