Rethinking Synthesis in Global Criminal Justice

Abstract

Synthesising international criminal justice is more than reconciling alternative paradigms or contesting aims. More fundamental challenges for analysis and practice are presented when examining the nature and objectives of justice which are unique to this emerging jurisdiction. It is recognised among comparative legal theorists that little conceptual energy has been applied to constructing theories of criminal justice at the global level. Associated debate focuses either on whether the aims of formal international criminal justice have strayed too far from the retributive foundations of contemporary criminal justice, or whether peacemaking should be prioritised over justice when determining the preferred outcomes of international criminal justice. In our earlier work we have argued the international criminal trials should transform to more richly reflect the restorative aspirations of victim constituencies. In so doing, we appreciate the tensions this may produce against the determinants of domestic criminal justice, largely reflected as they are against due process protections for the accused. Above this we have also called for the evolution of a new normative framework for international criminal justice grounded in considerations of general ‘good’, or which is inextricably tied to the benefit of humanity.

The brief reflections in this paper return to questioning the nature of international criminal justice as a justice paradigm in an emerging age when in critical contexts of economic and social cost/benefit, retribution is being challenged in the major criminal justice traditions. The paper concludes by suggesting that if broken free of retributive principle, international criminal justice and take on a role in ensuring justice within global governance, beyond reflecting the individualized interests that confine adversarial justice modes.

Keywords: Retribution, Rights, Justice, Victim Interests, Governance

JEL Classification: K14