Victims and Transitional Justice: Voice, Agency and Blame

This article explores the construction of victimhood in transitional societies. Drawn from fieldwork in a dozen jurisdictions as well as elements of criminological, feminist, sociological, philosophical and postcolonial literature, the article focuses in particular on how victimhood is interpreted and acted upon in transitional contexts. It explores the ways in which victims’ voice and agency are realised, impeded or in some cases co-opted in transitional justice. It also examines the role of blame in the construction of victimhood. In particular, it focuses upon the ways in which the importance of blame may render victimhood contingent upon ‘blamelessness’, encourage hierarchies between deserving and undeserving victims and require the reification of blameworthy perpetrators. The article concludes by suggesting that the increased voice and agency associated with the deployment of rights discourses by victims comes at a price – a willingness to acknowledge the rights and humanity of the ‘other’ and to be subject to the same respectful critical inquiry as other social and political actors in a post-conflict society.

Reparative Complementarity: Ensuring an Effective Remedy for Victims in the Reparation Regime of the International Criminal Court

This article examines the reparation regime of the International Criminal Court in light of its first reparation decision. Based on the reparation jurisprudence established in international law and human rights law to provide victims of international crimes an effective remedy, this article suggests that in order for the International Criminal Court to achieve this objective it needs to go beyond individual criminal responsibility due to its limitations. This article considers the role of reparative complementarity in ensuring an effective remedy to victims of international crimes as part of the reparation regime of the International Criminal Court.

Justice for Victims before the International Criminal Court

Many prosecutors and commentators have praised the victim provisions at the International Criminal Court (ICC) as 'justice for victims', which for the first time include participation, protection and reparations. This book critically examines the role of victims in international criminal justice, drawing from human rights, victimology, and best practices in transitional justice.

Drawing on field research in Northern Uganda, Luke Moffet explores the nature of international crimes and assesses the role of victims in the proceedings of the ICC, paying particular attention to their recognition, participation, reparations and protection. The book argues that because of the criminal nature and structural limitations of the ICC, justice for victims is symbolic, requiring State Parties to complement the work of the Court to address victims' needs.

In advancing an innovative theory of justice for victims, and in offering solutions to current challenges, the book will be of great interest and use to academics, practitioners and students engaged in victimology, the ICC, transitional justice, or reparations.

The Role of Victims in the International Criminal Tribunals of the Second World War

This article analyses the role of victims within the founding international criminal tribunals of the Second World War, drawing from historical research of the practice and judgements of the Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals. While some commentators have decried the absence of victims at Nuremberg and Tokyo, numerous victim-witnesses testified before these tribunals. However, the outcome of these tribunals has been disappointing to victims who still seek justice over sixty-five years later. This article considers the implications of the Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals not providing justice to victims and how this has impacted on their legacy. Although these tribunals are neglected in contemporary discussions of victim provisions, they can still provide some important lessons for modern international criminal justice mechanisms, such as the International Criminal Court, to learn from.

Realising Justice for victims before the International Criminal Court

The International Criminal Court (ICC) has been celebrated for its innovative victim provisions, which enable victims to participate in proceedings, avail of protection measures and assistance, and to claim reparations. The impetus for incorporating victim provisions within the ICC, came from victims’ dissatisfaction with the ad hoc tribunals in providing them with more meaningful and tangible justice.1 The International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda (ICTY/R) only included victim protection measures, with no provisions for victims to participate in proceedings nor to claim reparations at them. Developments in domestic and international law, in particular human rights such as the 1985 UN Declaration on Justice for Victims and the UN Guidelines on Remedy and Reparations, and transitional justice mechanisms, such as truth commissions and reparations bodies, have helped to expand the notion of justice for international crimes to be more attuned to victims as key stakeholders in dealing with such crimes.

With the first convictions secured at the ICC and the victim participation and reparation regime taking form, it is worth evaluating the extent to which these innovative provisions have translated into justice for victims. The first part of this paper outlines what justice for victims of international crimes entails, drawing from victimology and human rights. The second section surveys the extent to which the ICC has incorporated justice for victims, in procedural and substantive terms, before concluding in looking beyond the Court to how state parties can complement the ICC in achieving justice for victims. This paper argues that while much progress has been made to institutionalise justice for victims within the Court, there is much more progress needed to evolve and develop justice for victims within the ICC to avoid dissatisfaction of past tribunals.

Πολιτικες ασύλου της ΕΕ- A critical review of the European policies of asylum: The re-positioning of asylum seekers from refugees/victims in need of protection to criminals (illegal immigrants)

This publication traces how asylum seekers are repositioned in the existing European asylum legislation from asylum seekers as victims in need of protection, to criminals . It is argued that this is due to the European legislation concerning the area of freedom, security and justice. The latest asylum legislation seems to undermine the refugee status which -as it is widely known- is safeguarded by the 1951 Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its relevant 1967 Protocol. Additionally, in this paper the role of social workers and other social scientists to protect the rights of asylum seekers and question the existing legislation is presented.

When terror hits home: Identity Fused Americans who saw Boston bombing victims as “family” provided aid

When tragedy strikes a group, only some group members characteristically rush to the aid of the victims. What motivates the altruism of these exceptional individuals? Here, we provide one set of answers based on data collected before and shortly after the 15 April 2013, Boston Marathon bombings. The results of three studies indicated that Americans who were strongly “fused” with their country were especially inclined to provide various forms of support to the bombing victims. Moreover, the degree to which participants reported perceiving fellow Americans as psychological kin statistically mediated links between fusion and pro-group outcomes. Together, these findings shed new light on relationships between personal and group identity, cognitive representations of group members, and personally costly, pro-group actions.

Elaborating Justice for Victims at the International Criminal Court: Beyond Rhetoric and the Hague

Justice for victims has often been invoked as the raison d’être of international criminal justice, by punishing perpetrators of international crimes. This article attempts to provide a more holistic account of justice for victims by examining victims’ needs, interests, and rights. The International Criminal Court itself includes participation, protection and reparation for victims, indicating they are important stakeholders. This article also suggests that victims are integral to the purpose of the ICC in ending impunity by ensuring transparency of proceedings. However, there are limits to the resources and capacity of the ICC, which can only investigate and prosecute selected crimes. To overcome this justice gap, this article directs the debate towards a victim-orientated agenda to complementarity, where state parties and the Assembly of State Parties should play a greater role in implementing justice for victims domestically. This victim-orientated complementarity approach can be achieved through new ASP guidelines on complementarity, expanding universal jurisdiction, or seeking enforcement and cooperation through regional and international bodies and courts, such asUniversal Periodic Review or the African Court’s International Criminal Law Section. In the end, ifwe are serious about delivering justice for victims we need to move beyond the rhetoric, with realistic expectations of what the ICC can achieve, and concentrate our attention to what states should bedoing to end impunity.

Meaningful and Effective? Considering Victims’ Interests Through Participation at the International Criminal Court

This article explores the role of victims in the criminal proceedings of the International Criminal Court and the extent to which their interests have impacted upon the ICC judges’ decision making in light of human rights law and victimological theorisation. The article begins by first outlining how victims’ interests can be considered in international criminal proceedings, before contrasting this role with the purpose of international criminal justice. The second part of the article examines victim participation within the ICC and how this has affected judicial decision making to assess its effectiveness. The contest between the rights of victims and the role of Prosecutor in determining the selection of charges and perpetrators is also examined in an effort to add to the current debate on victim participation at the ICC. The author finds that at the ICC, despite innovative victim provisions, victims’ interests have little impact on outcomes of the Court. The author argues that in order to ensure the Court is more responsive to victims understanding of justice it should give greater weight to their interests, which in turn is likely to improve their satisfaction with the ICC, as well as public confidence and legitimacy of the work of the Court.