Giustizia Penale internazionale. Verso un nuovo paradigma?

The last decade of the twentieth century witnessed the establishment of a variety of new international tribunals, including the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda. These developments gave momentum to the project for creation of the International Criminal Court, which has jurisdiction over war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. There is also a provision in the ICC-Statute for eventual jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (on the model of the Nuremberg and Tokio tribunals following the Second World War); but the Statute requires that a consistent definition of the crime of aggression be adopted before the Court could exercise this form of jurisdiction. The essay explores evolution, legitimacy and functions of the international criminal justice system, highlighting the contrast between the normative framework and the harsh reality of politics and the context of negotiating historical injustices in a world of expanding jurisdiction over international humanitarian law. A broad consensus seems to have emerged that completion of the current international jurisdictional system is necessary. Since states are not prepared naturally to comply with international criminal law, normative suggestions include the need to shape the courts’ abilities more convincingly, to induce states to participate in court proceedings and to comply with courts’ judgements. But the conservative force of the doctrine of state sovereignty remains the biggest impediment to the creation of strong institutions of international justice.;

Pier Paolo Portinaro, Giustizia Penale internazionale. Verso un nuovo paradigma? in "TEORIA POLITICA" 3/2005, pp , DOI: