Benjamin Ferencz and the Treatment of Victims in International Criminal Law: Mapping Out Lex Lata and Lex Ferenda (Ferencza?) in an Emerging Field

IF 0.8 Q2 LAW
G. S. Gordon
{"title":"Benjamin Ferencz and the Treatment of Victims in International Criminal Law: Mapping Out Lex Lata and Lex Ferenda (Ferencza?) in an Emerging Field","authors":"G. S. Gordon","doi":"10.1163/15718123-bja10145","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThis piece examines a hitherto underexplored legal history chapter in international criminal law pioneer Benjamin Ferencz’s career, and, based on that, offers fixes for problems in current atrocity victim law. Known primarily for his Nuremberg prosecutorial exploits, Ferencz actually spent most of his career innovatively seeking reparations for Holocaust survivors and then later, with the benefit of such experience, sought to ensure coverage of victims in the International Criminal Court’s Rome Statute. After examining this history, the article maps Ferencz’s trailblazing practices onto the atrocity victim lex lata. It then considers that law’s deficits, including front-end and back-end problems (i.e., at the investigation and early release application phases), International Criminal Court retributive versus reparative mission dissonance, inadequate funding, hindrances to proactive victim participation and victim exclusion in prosecuting aggression. For each problem, Ferencz’s history offers viable solutions, such as victim-oriented investigations, bifurcated retribution/restitution processes, bilateral treaty funding, transnational victim networking, and charging illegal use of force as crimes against humanity. As a result, perhaps such proposed modifications of the framework should not be called lex ferenda, but rather ‘lex ferencza.’","PeriodicalId":55966,"journal":{"name":"International Criminal Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Criminal Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718123-bja10145","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This piece examines a hitherto underexplored legal history chapter in international criminal law pioneer Benjamin Ferencz’s career, and, based on that, offers fixes for problems in current atrocity victim law. Known primarily for his Nuremberg prosecutorial exploits, Ferencz actually spent most of his career innovatively seeking reparations for Holocaust survivors and then later, with the benefit of such experience, sought to ensure coverage of victims in the International Criminal Court’s Rome Statute. After examining this history, the article maps Ferencz’s trailblazing practices onto the atrocity victim lex lata. It then considers that law’s deficits, including front-end and back-end problems (i.e., at the investigation and early release application phases), International Criminal Court retributive versus reparative mission dissonance, inadequate funding, hindrances to proactive victim participation and victim exclusion in prosecuting aggression. For each problem, Ferencz’s history offers viable solutions, such as victim-oriented investigations, bifurcated retribution/restitution processes, bilateral treaty funding, transnational victim networking, and charging illegal use of force as crimes against humanity. As a result, perhaps such proposed modifications of the framework should not be called lex ferenda, but rather ‘lex ferencza.’
Benjamin Ferencz与国际刑法中的受害者待遇:在一个新兴领域中绘制Lex Lata和Lex Ferenda(Ferencza?)
这篇文章探讨了国际刑法先驱本杰明·费伦茨职业生涯中迄今为止未被充分挖掘的法律史章节,并在此基础上为当前暴行受害者法中的问题提供了解决方案。费伦茨主要以其在纽伦堡的检察功绩而闻名,事实上,他职业生涯的大部分时间都在创新地为大屠杀幸存者寻求赔偿,后来,凭借这些经验,他试图确保国际刑事法院《罗马规约》涵盖受害者。在研究了这段历史之后,文章将费伦茨的开创性做法映射到暴行受害者lex lata身上。然后,它审议了该法律的缺陷,包括前端和后端问题(即在调查和提前释放申请阶段)、国际刑事法院报复性任务与补救性任务不协调、资金不足、阻碍受害者积极参与和排斥受害者起诉侵略行为。对于每一个问题,费伦茨的历史都提供了可行的解决方案,例如以受害者为导向的调查、分叉的报复/归还程序、双边条约资助、跨国受害者网络以及将非法使用武力指控为反人类罪。因此,也许对该框架的这种拟议修改不应被称为拟议法,而应被称之为“拟议法”
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
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: Thus there is also a need for criminological, sociological and historical research on the issues of ICL. The Review publishes in-depth analytical research that deals with these issues. The analysis may cover: • the substantive and procedural law on the international level; • important cases from national jurisdictions which have a bearing on general issues; • criminological and sociological; and, • historical research.
×
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