En framtida IS-tribunal – tomma ord eller en reell möjlighet?
(2019) LAGF03 20191Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract
- During the past five years, the Islamic State has been responsible for a large amount of pain and suffering. War crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide have been committed in the areas the group controlled in Iraq and Syria. Now as the Kalifate’s last strongholds have been defeated, the international community stands before a new task; how and where shall the individuals responsible be punished? Some politicians are now calling for an IS-tribunal as a solution to the problem.
Truthfully, it is very far from being that simple. Historically, the establishment of international tribunals is a rare occurrence. The ICTY and ICTR postulated a unified Security Council and the tribunals have been criticized for being both exceedingly... (More) - During the past five years, the Islamic State has been responsible for a large amount of pain and suffering. War crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide have been committed in the areas the group controlled in Iraq and Syria. Now as the Kalifate’s last strongholds have been defeated, the international community stands before a new task; how and where shall the individuals responsible be punished? Some politicians are now calling for an IS-tribunal as a solution to the problem.
Truthfully, it is very far from being that simple. Historically, the establishment of international tribunals is a rare occurrence. The ICTY and ICTR postulated a unified Security Council and the tribunals have been criticized for being both exceedingly expensive and ineffective. Other forms of tribunals have been established, so called hybrid tribunals. However, these have all resulted from prior agreements between the UN and the state in question. Furthermore, the ICC lacks jurisdiction over the situations in Syria and Iraq since neither have ratified the Rome Statute. The Security Council has the power to refer a situation to the ICC but both Russia and China have vetoed a resolution of that category. Lastly, the possibility for national courts to prosecute on basis of universal jurisdiction remains. A right most states recognize in theory, but rarely use in practice.
Furthermore, other parties to the conflict in Iraq and Syria are also committing international crimes. Supported by Russia, the Syrian regime’s systematic attacks on civilians amount to crime against humanity. Moreover, the Iraqi forces, the US-led coalition and other combating parties are responsible for war crimes. Due to the conflict’s current state and the political situation in the Security Council, remedy for all victims is practically impossible. Nevertheless, even if an IS-tribunal could be established the question remains; should the international community seek this kind of one-sided justice? (Less) - Abstract (Swedish)
- Islamiska Staten har de senaste fem åren orsakat oerhört mycket smärta och sorg. Krigsförbrytelser, brott mot mänskligheten och folkmord ska ha begåtts i de områden rörelsen kontrollerat i Irak och Syrien. Nu när kalifatets sista fästen besegrats står det internationella samfundet inför en ny utmaning; hur och var ska de ansvariga individerna straffas? Vissa politiker har numera hävdat att en IS-tribunal vore lösningen på problemet.
Så enkelt är det dock inte. Upprättandet av internationella tribunaler är historiskt sett en sällsynt företeelse. Jugoslavien- och Rwandatribunalerna förutsatte ett enat säkerhetsråd och processerna har anklagats för att både vara för dyra och långsamma. Andra varianter av tribunaler som upprättats, så... (More) - Islamiska Staten har de senaste fem åren orsakat oerhört mycket smärta och sorg. Krigsförbrytelser, brott mot mänskligheten och folkmord ska ha begåtts i de områden rörelsen kontrollerat i Irak och Syrien. Nu när kalifatets sista fästen besegrats står det internationella samfundet inför en ny utmaning; hur och var ska de ansvariga individerna straffas? Vissa politiker har numera hävdat att en IS-tribunal vore lösningen på problemet.
Så enkelt är det dock inte. Upprättandet av internationella tribunaler är historiskt sett en sällsynt företeelse. Jugoslavien- och Rwandatribunalerna förutsatte ett enat säkerhetsråd och processerna har anklagats för att både vara för dyra och långsamma. Andra varianter av tribunaler som upprättats, så kallade hybrida tribunaler, har alla byggt på ett samarbete mellan FN och den konfliktdrabbade staten i fråga. Därutöver har ICC inte jurisdiktion över situationerna i Syrien och Irak då ingen av staterna anslutit sig till Romstadgan. Säkerhetsrådet har dock makten att hänskjuta en situation till ICC men både Ryssland och Kina har använt sitt veto för att stoppa detta. Sedan kvarstår staters möjlighet att åtala med stöd av universell jurisdiktion. En rätt de flesta stater erkänner i teorin, men sällan tillämpar.
IS är dock inte den enda part som begått folkrättsliga brott i det konfliktdrabbade området. Syriska regimen stödda av Ryssland har använt kemiska vapen och utfört attacker av civila mål till den grad att det ansetts utgöra brott mot mänskligheten. Även irakiska staten, den USA-ledda koalitionen och andra stridande grupper ansvarar för krigsförbrytelser. Vad för rättvisa skulle egentligen skipas av en tribunal med mandat att enbart åtala en av de stridande parterna? Den komplicerade konflikten och det låsta läget i säkerhetsrådet omöjliggör dock i dagsläget upprättelse för alla offer. Även om en IS-tribunal skulle kunna upprättas återstår frågan: ska det internationella samfundet sträva efter sådan ensidig rättvisa? (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/8977075
- author
- Jagunic, Ana LU
- supervisor
-
- Per Nilsén LU
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20191
- year
- 2019
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- folkrätt, straffrätt Islamiska staten, Tribunal, Krigsförbrytelser, Folkmord, Brott mot mänskligheten, Naturrätt.
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 8977075
- date added to LUP
- 2019-09-16 10:31:41
- date last changed
- 2019-09-16 10:31:41
@misc{8977075, abstract = {{During the past five years, the Islamic State has been responsible for a large amount of pain and suffering. War crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide have been committed in the areas the group controlled in Iraq and Syria. Now as the Kalifate’s last strongholds have been defeated, the international community stands before a new task; how and where shall the individuals responsible be punished? Some politicians are now calling for an IS-tribunal as a solution to the problem. Truthfully, it is very far from being that simple. Historically, the establishment of international tribunals is a rare occurrence. The ICTY and ICTR postulated a unified Security Council and the tribunals have been criticized for being both exceedingly expensive and ineffective. Other forms of tribunals have been established, so called hybrid tribunals. However, these have all resulted from prior agreements between the UN and the state in question. Furthermore, the ICC lacks jurisdiction over the situations in Syria and Iraq since neither have ratified the Rome Statute. The Security Council has the power to refer a situation to the ICC but both Russia and China have vetoed a resolution of that category. Lastly, the possibility for national courts to prosecute on basis of universal jurisdiction remains. A right most states recognize in theory, but rarely use in practice. Furthermore, other parties to the conflict in Iraq and Syria are also committing international crimes. Supported by Russia, the Syrian regime’s systematic attacks on civilians amount to crime against humanity. Moreover, the Iraqi forces, the US-led coalition and other combating parties are responsible for war crimes. Due to the conflict’s current state and the political situation in the Security Council, remedy for all victims is practically impossible. Nevertheless, even if an IS-tribunal could be established the question remains; should the international community seek this kind of one-sided justice?}}, author = {{Jagunic, Ana}}, language = {{swe}}, note = {{Student Paper}}, title = {{En framtida IS-tribunal – tomma ord eller en reell möjlighet?}}, year = {{2019}}, }