The Gap between the International Criminal Court and Victims: Criminal Trial Reparations as a Case Study

IF 1.3 Q1 LAW
Laws Pub Date : 2023-08-16 DOI:10.3390/laws12040072
Yidou Yang
{"title":"The Gap between the International Criminal Court and Victims: Criminal Trial Reparations as a Case Study","authors":"Yidou Yang","doi":"10.3390/laws12040072","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although victims have the right to limited participation in trials and to seek reparations after sentencing, the legal structure of the International Criminal Court (ICC) prioritizes retributive justice over restorative justice and punishment over reparations. Thus, currently, although the perpetrators can be tried through the ICC, it is still difficult to obtain reasonable compensation for the damages suffered by the victims. On the one hand, the ICC’s reparation system may be restricted by the identity of the victim, ICC internal factors, and so on. The current structure of the ICC compensation system allows for hierarchical relationships between victims, while at the same time, there is tension between individual and collective types of compensation. These factors have led to a disconnect and gap between the protection of rights at the theoretical level and actual reparation. This dichotomy between the theoretical protection of the rights of victims and the real protection of victims in practice exists in the ICC. Victims are isolated from the field of vision due to potential repercussions. The idealistic illusion of justice is completed when the ICC stands on the stage and accepts the audience’s praise. However, for compensation in criminal courts, people are paying increasing attention to the legal process and content. In practice, the proportion of victims of international crimes is not low, and in some cases, victims are widespread. It can be seen that criminal compensation for victims is an issue that spans a vast range of people and regions. Nonetheless, there are still research gaps regarding reparation and other ideas of justice according to the ICC, how the ICC provides multifaceted safeguards for victims, and the limitations and influence of the mechanism of the ICC on the compensation of victims. Considering the above problems, this paper aims to analyze the International Criminal Court indemnity cases. This paper wishes to analyze reparations and other ideas of justice under the ICC, examining the approach of the ICC toward compensation for victims, where the ICC is heading regarding reparations for victims, how the reparations system works, and the advantages and disadvantages of the reparations system, as well as what are the potential problems of ICC related to reparations. What guarantees do the ICC’s mechanisms provide for victims to be able to receive reparations? How does the structure of the ICC reparations system conflict with victims’ reparations in practical terms? What are the potential obstacles and gaps between criminal trial reparations and victims? The first chapter wants to analyze the early Nuremberg tribunal, Tokyo tribunal, ICTY, and the ICTR by analyzing whether international criminal justice under these military tribunals was restorative justice or reparation justice and interspersed with analyses of reparation to victims under these tribunals. Then, it analyses it further about justice and reparation of the ICC, and it talks about the compensation for the victim and how the idea of compensation under the ICC has evolved. Using these arguments to analyze reparation and other different ideas of justice under the paly of ICC. The second chapter of the article analyzes the “participatate in trial for compensation”, “The limits of participating in trial”, “Safety protection for victims” to demonstrate the current protection and progress of the ICC system on the issue of victims’ compensation, this is because victims’ participation in the trial will bring a lot of help to the issue of compensation. The article analyses the significance and shortcomings of participation in a trial for compensation, which is necessary and meaningful to the issue of compensation because “participation in trial” and compensation are related and complementary to each other, as participation of the victims will bring a lot of help to the issue of compensation. The article analyses the section “Protection of the financial situation of victims: A possible alternative methods of reparation” because, to some extent, it can be seen as an alternative method of ICC compensation. The third chapter of the article hopes that by analyzing “Little compensation”, “The silence court put on victims’ rights of compensation”, “The ICC’s model of judicial administration remains optional” to argue and analyze how the structure of the ICC reparations system conflict with victim reparations in practical terms. Because the silence the court put on victims’ rights of compensation and the ICC’s model of judicial administration remains optional, both directly impact the issue of compensation. Chapter IV mainly aims to analyze some of the potential negative impacts of the ICC on victim reparations, specifically “The victim’s social death”, “Restrictions on “expression” between the victim and the court”, “Does the ICC hope to improve its attitude to victims?” to specifically analyze and argue these aspects of its potential negative impact on victim reparations. On this basis, this paper analyzes the gap between criminal trial reparations and victims to identify what negatives exist between the two.","PeriodicalId":30534,"journal":{"name":"Laws","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Laws","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/laws12040072","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although victims have the right to limited participation in trials and to seek reparations after sentencing, the legal structure of the International Criminal Court (ICC) prioritizes retributive justice over restorative justice and punishment over reparations. Thus, currently, although the perpetrators can be tried through the ICC, it is still difficult to obtain reasonable compensation for the damages suffered by the victims. On the one hand, the ICC’s reparation system may be restricted by the identity of the victim, ICC internal factors, and so on. The current structure of the ICC compensation system allows for hierarchical relationships between victims, while at the same time, there is tension between individual and collective types of compensation. These factors have led to a disconnect and gap between the protection of rights at the theoretical level and actual reparation. This dichotomy between the theoretical protection of the rights of victims and the real protection of victims in practice exists in the ICC. Victims are isolated from the field of vision due to potential repercussions. The idealistic illusion of justice is completed when the ICC stands on the stage and accepts the audience’s praise. However, for compensation in criminal courts, people are paying increasing attention to the legal process and content. In practice, the proportion of victims of international crimes is not low, and in some cases, victims are widespread. It can be seen that criminal compensation for victims is an issue that spans a vast range of people and regions. Nonetheless, there are still research gaps regarding reparation and other ideas of justice according to the ICC, how the ICC provides multifaceted safeguards for victims, and the limitations and influence of the mechanism of the ICC on the compensation of victims. Considering the above problems, this paper aims to analyze the International Criminal Court indemnity cases. This paper wishes to analyze reparations and other ideas of justice under the ICC, examining the approach of the ICC toward compensation for victims, where the ICC is heading regarding reparations for victims, how the reparations system works, and the advantages and disadvantages of the reparations system, as well as what are the potential problems of ICC related to reparations. What guarantees do the ICC’s mechanisms provide for victims to be able to receive reparations? How does the structure of the ICC reparations system conflict with victims’ reparations in practical terms? What are the potential obstacles and gaps between criminal trial reparations and victims? The first chapter wants to analyze the early Nuremberg tribunal, Tokyo tribunal, ICTY, and the ICTR by analyzing whether international criminal justice under these military tribunals was restorative justice or reparation justice and interspersed with analyses of reparation to victims under these tribunals. Then, it analyses it further about justice and reparation of the ICC, and it talks about the compensation for the victim and how the idea of compensation under the ICC has evolved. Using these arguments to analyze reparation and other different ideas of justice under the paly of ICC. The second chapter of the article analyzes the “participatate in trial for compensation”, “The limits of participating in trial”, “Safety protection for victims” to demonstrate the current protection and progress of the ICC system on the issue of victims’ compensation, this is because victims’ participation in the trial will bring a lot of help to the issue of compensation. The article analyses the significance and shortcomings of participation in a trial for compensation, which is necessary and meaningful to the issue of compensation because “participation in trial” and compensation are related and complementary to each other, as participation of the victims will bring a lot of help to the issue of compensation. The article analyses the section “Protection of the financial situation of victims: A possible alternative methods of reparation” because, to some extent, it can be seen as an alternative method of ICC compensation. The third chapter of the article hopes that by analyzing “Little compensation”, “The silence court put on victims’ rights of compensation”, “The ICC’s model of judicial administration remains optional” to argue and analyze how the structure of the ICC reparations system conflict with victim reparations in practical terms. Because the silence the court put on victims’ rights of compensation and the ICC’s model of judicial administration remains optional, both directly impact the issue of compensation. Chapter IV mainly aims to analyze some of the potential negative impacts of the ICC on victim reparations, specifically “The victim’s social death”, “Restrictions on “expression” between the victim and the court”, “Does the ICC hope to improve its attitude to victims?” to specifically analyze and argue these aspects of its potential negative impact on victim reparations. On this basis, this paper analyzes the gap between criminal trial reparations and victims to identify what negatives exist between the two.
国际刑事法院与受害者之间的差距:刑事审判赔偿个案研究
虽然受害者有权有限地参与审判并在判刑后寻求赔偿,但国际刑事法院的法律结构优先考虑报复性司法而不是恢复性司法,优先考虑惩罚而不是赔偿。因此,目前虽然可以通过国际刑事法院对肇事者进行审判,但仍然难以对受害者所遭受的损害获得合理的赔偿。一方面,国际刑事法院的赔偿制度可能受到受害人身份、国际刑事法院内部因素等方面的制约。目前国际刑事法院赔偿制度的结构允许受害者之间的等级关系,同时,个人赔偿和集体赔偿之间存在紧张关系。这些因素导致了理论层面的权利保护与实际赔偿之间的脱节和差距。这种对受害者权利的理论保护与对受害者权利的实际保护之间的二分法存在于国际刑事法院。由于潜在的影响,受害者被隔离在视野之外。当ICC站在舞台上接受观众的赞美时,正义的理想主义幻想就完成了。然而,对于刑事法院的赔偿,人们越来越关注其法律程序和内容。在实践中,国际罪行受害者的比例并不低,在某些情况下,受害者是广泛的。由此可见,受害人的刑事赔偿是一个涉及广泛人群和地区的问题。然而,在国际刑事法院的赔偿和其他司法理念、国际刑事法院如何为受害者提供多方面保障以及国际刑事法院对受害者赔偿机制的局限性和影响等方面,仍存在研究空白。鉴于上述问题,本文旨在对国际刑事法院赔偿案件进行分析。本文希望分析国际刑事法院下的赔偿和其他司法理念,研究国际刑事法院对受害者赔偿的做法,国际刑事法院在受害者赔偿方面的发展方向,赔偿制度是如何运作的,赔偿制度的利弊,以及国际刑事法院在赔偿方面的潜在问题。国际刑事法院的机制为受害者能够获得赔偿提供了哪些保证?国际刑事法院赔偿制度的结构在实践中与受害者赔偿有何冲突?刑事审判赔偿与受害者之间的潜在障碍和差距是什么?第一章对早期的纽伦堡法庭、东京法庭、前南问题国际法庭和卢旺达问题国际法庭进行分析,分析这些军事法庭下的国际刑事司法是恢复性司法还是赔偿司法,并穿插分析这些法庭下对受害者的赔偿。在此基础上,进一步分析了国际刑事法院的司法与赔偿,并对受害人的赔偿以及国际刑事法院赔偿理念的演变进行了探讨。运用这些观点分析了国际刑事法院审判下的赔偿与其他不同的司法理念。文章第二章通过对“参与审判赔偿”、“参与审判的限制”、“对被害人的安全保护”等问题的分析,展示了目前国际刑事法院制度在被害人赔偿问题上的保护与进步,这是因为被害人参与审判会给被害人赔偿问题带来很大的帮助。本文分析了参与审判赔偿的意义和不足,因为“参与审判”与赔偿是相互联系、相辅相成的,被害人的参与将给赔偿问题带来很大的帮助,因此对赔偿问题的解决是必要的和有意义的。本文分析了“保护受害者的财务状况:一种可能的替代赔偿方法”一节,因为在某种程度上,它可以被视为国际刑事法院赔偿的一种替代方法。文章的第三章希望通过对“小额赔偿”、“法院对受害人赔偿权利的沉默”、“国际刑事法院的司法行政模式任意性”等问题的分析,来论证和分析国际刑事法院赔偿制度的结构与受害人赔偿在现实中的冲突。由于法院对受害者赔偿权利的沉默和国际刑事法院的司法行政模式仍然是可选择的,两者都直接影响到赔偿问题。 第四章主要分析国际刑事法院对受害者赔偿的一些潜在负面影响,具体包括“受害者的社会死亡”、“对受害者与法院之间“表达”的限制”、“国际刑事法院是否希望改善其对受害者的态度?”具体分析和论证其对受害者赔偿的潜在负面影响。在此基础上,本文分析了刑事审判赔偿与被害人之间的差距,以确定两者之间存在哪些负面影响。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Laws
Laws LAW-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
16.70%
发文量
77
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信