Cosmopolitan Pluralist Hybrid Tribunals

Abstract

Hybrid tribunals (also known as internationalized criminal tribunals or hybrid courts) are ad hoc courts that have jurisdiction over atrocity crimes such as genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity and incorporate a blend of international and national components. Hybrid courts are expected to enable engagement between international and domestic legal systems and communities, and thereby to promote transitional justice and rule of law aims. But have hybrid tribunals succeeded in this function? Using cosmopolitan pluralism as a conceptual framework, this article examines the trends in hybrid courts’ original core features of mixed staffing, mixed law, domestic location, and close relationship to the national legal system, as well as the relevance of new elements such as victim participation and domestic outreach. It evaluates internationalized criminal tribunals’ efforts to promote the goals of domestic perceived legitimacy, capacity-building, and norm penetration, assesses the inclusivity of the court design processes. and considers hybrid tribunals’ participation in norm fragmentation in international criminal law. Overall, as institutions, some hybrid tribunals offer substantial opportunities for engagement between international and local actors, while others are significantly constrained by institutional design or operational choices.

Keywords: Hybrid courts, Internationalized criminal courts, Hybrid tribunals, International criminal law, Transitional justice, Post-conflict justice, Pluralism, Global legal pluralism, Cosmopolitan pluralism, Fragmentation

JEL Classification: K33, K14, N40