Surveying History at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

The Journal of Eurasian Law. 4(1): 1-39.

42 Pages Posted: 13 May 2011 Last revised: 9 Mar 2020

See all articles by Ahmad Wais Wardak

Ahmad Wais Wardak

University of Connecticut, Department of Political Science

Andrew Corin

Independent

Richard Ashby Wilson

University of Connecticut School of Law; Department of Anthropology, University of Connecticut

Date Written: May 10, 2011

Abstract

In the law and society literature, it is widely accepted that national criminal trials often fail to produce an adequate account of the historical context in which mass crimes occur. This article evaluates whether this view is applicable to trials at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. Drawing on the responses provided by a survey of former prosecutor and defense team members and expert witnesses, empirical evidence is presented with respect to the motivations for including historical evidence in cases and an overall assessment of the historical discussions at the ICTY. Survey results demonstrate agreement among respondents that international criminal trials tend to include more historical evidence than domestic trials, on the grounds that the crimes are more widespread and systematic and involve a collective dimension that requires broader historical analysis. A majority of respondents thought prosecutors use historical evidence to develop their theory of the case and, in genocide trials, such evidence can be relevant to the mental state of the accused. Prosecution and defense respondents profoundly disagreed on whether the ICTY has produced an accurate and comprehensive account of the armed conflicts of the 1990s in the former Yugoslavia. Prosecution respondents generally held that the ICTY’s historical discussions provided valuable insights into the conflict and enhanced the legitimacy of the Tribunal. Defense respondents were more critical of their own expert witnesses, perceived the ICTY judges as unreceptive to defense experts and maintained that the Tribunal’s legitimacy had been undermined by historical discussions. Our correlation analyses identified a divergence between those with two years or less involvement with the tribunal and those with more than 2 years involvement, suggesting that Tribunal tends to "socialize" participants into a shared view of historical evidence. We conclude with a discussion of the potential implications of the survey for creating a shared historical account and promoting reconciliation in the region.

Keywords: International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, historical evidence, expert witnesses

Suggested Citation

Wardak, Ahmad Wais and Corin, Andrew and Wilson, Richard Ashby, Surveying History at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (May 10, 2011). The Journal of Eurasian Law. 4(1): 1-39. , Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1837767 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1837767

Ahmad Wais Wardak

University of Connecticut, Department of Political Science ( email )

365 Fairfield Way, U-1024
Storrs, CT 06269-1024
United States

Andrew Corin

Independent ( email )

Richard Ashby Wilson (Contact Author)

University of Connecticut School of Law ( email )

65 Elizabeth Street
Hartford, CT 06105
United States

HOME PAGE: http://www.law.uconn.edu/faculty/profiles/richard-wilson

Department of Anthropology, University of Connecticut ( email )

354 Mansfield Road
Storrs, CT 06269-1176
United States

HOME PAGE: http://https://anthropology.uconn.edu/person/richard-ashby-wilson/

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
113
Abstract Views
1,139
rank
282,314
PlumX Metrics