{"title":"战犯有一些特别之处…","authors":"Barbora Holá, Maja Munivrana","doi":"10.1093/jicj/mqad006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article assesses how the rehabilitation of perpetrators of international crimes is being constructed and evaluated at the domestic level, in particular in Croatia, and how it compares to international practice at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) or International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (IRMCT). The analysis is based on a convenience sample of early release decisions issued by the Croatian judiciary and the most recent early release decisions issued by the IRMCT. Up until very recently, rehabilitation of war criminals has been approached through a rather conventional prism, both at the ICTY/IRMCT and domestically. The most recent IRMCT early release decisions, however, developed a sui generis approach focusing primarily on an offender’s critical reflection on crimes, gravity of the offence and views of the larger community. At the same time, the Croatian approach to assessing rehabilitation remained centred around the perceived risk of reoffending. Due to inconsistencies in incorporating the various factors, however, there seems to be double standards being applied along ethnic lines. In this article, we analyse and contrast rehabilitation assessments and early release practices at the ICTY/IRCMT and Croatia and ask the proverbial question whether there is anything special about rehabilitating war criminals.","PeriodicalId":46732,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Criminal Justice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"There is Something Special about War Criminals … \",\"authors\":\"Barbora Holá, Maja Munivrana\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jicj/mqad006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This article assesses how the rehabilitation of perpetrators of international crimes is being constructed and evaluated at the domestic level, in particular in Croatia, and how it compares to international practice at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) or International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (IRMCT). The analysis is based on a convenience sample of early release decisions issued by the Croatian judiciary and the most recent early release decisions issued by the IRMCT. Up until very recently, rehabilitation of war criminals has been approached through a rather conventional prism, both at the ICTY/IRMCT and domestically. The most recent IRMCT early release decisions, however, developed a sui generis approach focusing primarily on an offender’s critical reflection on crimes, gravity of the offence and views of the larger community. At the same time, the Croatian approach to assessing rehabilitation remained centred around the perceived risk of reoffending. Due to inconsistencies in incorporating the various factors, however, there seems to be double standards being applied along ethnic lines. In this article, we analyse and contrast rehabilitation assessments and early release practices at the ICTY/IRCMT and Croatia and ask the proverbial question whether there is anything special about rehabilitating war criminals.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46732,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of International Criminal Justice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of International Criminal Justice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqad006\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Criminal Justice","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqad006","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
This article assesses how the rehabilitation of perpetrators of international crimes is being constructed and evaluated at the domestic level, in particular in Croatia, and how it compares to international practice at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) or International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (IRMCT). The analysis is based on a convenience sample of early release decisions issued by the Croatian judiciary and the most recent early release decisions issued by the IRMCT. Up until very recently, rehabilitation of war criminals has been approached through a rather conventional prism, both at the ICTY/IRMCT and domestically. The most recent IRMCT early release decisions, however, developed a sui generis approach focusing primarily on an offender’s critical reflection on crimes, gravity of the offence and views of the larger community. At the same time, the Croatian approach to assessing rehabilitation remained centred around the perceived risk of reoffending. Due to inconsistencies in incorporating the various factors, however, there seems to be double standards being applied along ethnic lines. In this article, we analyse and contrast rehabilitation assessments and early release practices at the ICTY/IRCMT and Croatia and ask the proverbial question whether there is anything special about rehabilitating war criminals.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of International Criminal Justice aims to promote a profound collective reflection on the new problems facing international law. Established by a group of distinguished criminal lawyers and international lawyers, the Journal addresses the major problems of justice from the angle of law, jurisprudence, criminology, penal philosophy, and the history of international judicial institutions. It is intended for graduate and post-graduate students, practitioners, academics, government officials, as well as the hundreds of people working for international criminal courts.