Emory International Law Review

Volume 31Issue 2

Putting Peacetime First: Crimes Against Humanity and the Civilian Population Requirement

Leila Nadya Sadat | 31 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 197 (2017)

Unlike the ad hoc international criminal tribunals, the International Criminal Court (ICC) may often exercise its jurisdiction in peacetime as well as during armed conflict. Article 7 of the Rome Statute, on Crimes Against Humanity, reflects this development, but does not address how to resolve the interpretive difficulties that flow from it, particularly as regards the requirement that the crime requires an attack directed against a “civilian” population. This Article analyzes Article 7’s “civilian population” requirement, and argues it should be understood from the perspective of peacetime, rather than as an outgrowth of international humanitarian law (IHL). It is the first comprehensive and systematic treatment of this issue. The Article rejects ICC Chambers’ reliance upon Article 50 of Protocol I as the relevant test and instead proposes a three-part inquiry to establish whether or not an individual or population is “civilian” in character.

Read More »

The Karadžic Genocide Conviction: Inferences, Intent, and the Necessity to Redefine Genocide

Milena Sterio | 31 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 271 (2017)

In March 2016, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) convicted former Bosnian Serb leader, Radovan Karadžic, of genocide and crimes against humanity. According to the Trial Chamber, the crimes were committed as part of four joint criminal enterprises in which Karadžic was a protagonist. The Article will specifically focus on the interpretation of genocide by the ICTY judges in this recent decision. The Trial Chamber’s interpretation of the intent requirement under the Genocide Convention and the customary law definition of genocide is novel and had not been espoused by past tribunals. This Article will demonstrate that in modern-day conflicts, the finding of genocidal intent may be an impossible task for the prosecution and that the Trial Chamber’s method of inferring intent based on knowledge and other indirect factors may be the only way that prosecutors will be able to obtain future genocide convictions.

Read More »

LADO and the Need for Uniform Procedures in European Asylum Proceedings

Carla T. Elias Nava | 31 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 299 (2017)

Individuals’ linguistic features have often been used to provide evidence of speakers’ national origin. The use of language analysis for the determination of origin (LADO) in asylum proceedings has led to inconsistencies in the treatment of asylum applications, as different nations use different procedures of analysis. Although it has not responded specifically to the use of LADO, and the European Union has acknowledged the need for equal treatment of asylum applications through the development of the Common European Asylum System. This Comment applies the purpose of the CEAS to the use of LADO and argues that, like the CEAS, an established and trusted LADO procedure must be established. The lack of uniformity in LADO procedures had led to inaccurate conclusions—for nations to assess asylum applications consistently throughout the European Union, a standard LADO procedure must be implemented in the CEAS.

Read More »

The Prisoner as One of Us: Norwegian Wisdom for American Penal Practice

Emily Labutta | 31 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 329 (2017)

The United States has some of the highest crime and recidivism rates in the world, while Norway has some of the lowest. This Comment explores the factors behind these rates, including each country’s penal goals, structures, and laws. Major differentiating factors between the two systems include the sentencing structure of the U.S. and the Norwegian principle of normality. Under the principle of normality, Norway seeks to reintegrate its offenders into society. Norway combats the negative side effects of prison that isolate the prisoner from society, reinforce bad habits, and make reintegration upon release nearly impossible. This Comment proposes that the U.S. could achieve similar results by integrating its current focus on retribution with Norwegian-style rehabilitation. If the U.S. lowered its sentences and incorporated the principle of normality into prisoner treatment, the U.S. and its prisoners would benefit from lower crime and recidivism rates.

Read More »