Human Rights Review

, Volume 8, Issue 4, pp 319–339 | Cite as

Punishing Genocidaires: A Deterrent Effect or Not?

  • Martin MenneckeEmail author

More than sixty years after the seminal Nuremberg trials, different forms of transitional justice mechanisms abound around the world. Above all, the International Criminal Court started recently the hearings in its very first case. Reading the document containing the charges against Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, a militia leader accused of horrendous war crimes committed in the Democratic Republic of Congo, the question of why to punish perpetrators of atrocity crimes seems almost ludicrous. However, concerns that international prosecutions inadvertently prolong or even exacerbate conflicts do require a response. Most proponents of international criminal tribunals argue that prosecutions have a deterrent effect. This article reviews the deterrence argument, highlights its inherent complexities, and proposes a refined approach to meet both the realities of atrocity crimes and international prosecutions.


Security Council International Criminal Court International Criminal Deterrent Effect Rome Statute 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Akhavan, Payam. 2001. “Beyond Impunity: Can International Criminal Justice Prevent Future Atrocities?” American Journal of International Law, 95(1): 7–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Akhavan, Payam. 2005. “The Lord’s Resistance Army Case: Uganda’s Submission of the First State Referral to the International Criminal Court.” American Journal of International Law, 99(2): 403–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amnesty International. 2004. Justice and the Rule of Law: The Role of the United Nations. Statement by Amnesty International. September 30. Available at (last visited 10 October 2005).
  4. Bjørnlund, Matthias, Eric Markusen, and Martin Mennecke. 2005. “Que es el genocidio? En la busqueda de un denominador comun entre definiciones juridicas y no jurìdicas.” In Daniel Feierstein (ed.) Genocidio: La Administracion de la Muerte en la Modernidad. Blackwell, London. 17–48.Google Scholar
  5. Bolton, John R. 2002. “The United Status and the International Criminal Court.” Remarks at the Aspen Institute. Berlin, Germany, September 16. Available at (last visited on 11 October 2005).
  6. Crane, David, Luis Moreno Ocampo, Carla Del Ponte, and Hassan Bubacar Jallow. 2004. Joint Statement of the Prosecutors of the International Criminal Court, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and the Special Court for Sierra Leone, November 27. Available at
  7. D’Amato, Anthony. 1994. “Peace vs. Accountability in Bosnia.”American Journal of International Law, 88(3): 500–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Del Ponte, Carla. 2005. “The Dividends of International Criminal Justice.” Address at Goldman Sachs, London, October 6. URL:
  9. Douglas, Lawrence. 2001. The Memory of Judgment: Making Law and History in the Trials of the Holocaust. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Hamann, Louis, Warren Hoge, and Tom Jenkins. 2004. “Preventing Genocide: Interview with Juan E. Mendez.” World Chronicle, September 7, No. 947. Available at
  11. Human Rights Watch. 2005a. “UN Security Council: Ensure Justice in West Africa.” Press release, May 24. Available at
  12. Human Rights Watch. 2005b. Uprooted and Forgotten: Impunity and Human Rights Abuses in Northern Uganda. Human Rights Watch Report. New York: September 23. Available at
  13. International Criminal Court. 2005. Report of the International Criminal Court to the United Nations. (UN Doc. GA/60/177, 1 August 2005).Google Scholar
  14. International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. 1996. The Prosecutor v. Erdemovic, Case No. IT-96-22-T, Sentencing Judgement. (29 November).Google Scholar
  15. International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. 1999. The Prosecutor v. Dusko Tadic, Case No. IT-94-1. Sentencing Judgement (11 November).Google Scholar
  16. International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. 1998. The Prosecutor v. Jean Kambanda, Case No. ICTR 97-23-S. Judgement (Trial Chamber). (4 September).Google Scholar
  17. International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.1998. The Prosecutor v. Jean–Paul Akayesu, Case No. ICTR-96-4-T. Sentence. (2 October).Google Scholar
  18. International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. 1999. The Prosecutor v. Clément Kayishema and Obed Ruzindana, Case No. ICTR-95-1-T. Sentence (Trial Chamber). (21 May).Google Scholar
  19. International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. 1999b. The Prosecutor v. Omar Serushago, Case No. ICTR-98-39-S. Sentence. (5 February).Google Scholar
  20. Klabbers, Jan. 2001. “Just Revenge? The Deterrence Argument in International Criminal Law.” Finnish Yearbook of International Law, 12:249–267.Google Scholar
  21. Markusen, Eric. 2003. “The Genocidal Mentality at the Dawn of the Twenty-First Century.” The Aegis Review on Genocide, 1:11–14.Google Scholar
  22. McGoldrick, Dominic. 1999. “The Permanent International Criminal Court: An End to the Culture of Impunity?” Criminal Law Review, August, 627–655.Google Scholar
  23. McGoldrick, Dominic. 2004. “Legal and Political Significance of a Permanent ICC.” In Dominic McGoldrick, Peter Rowe and Eric Donnelly (eds.), The Permanent International Criminal Court: Legal and Policy Issues. Studies in International Law, Volume 5. Oxford: Hart Publishing. 453–478.Google Scholar
  24. Mendez, Juan E. 2005. “Opening Address.” Ultimate Crime, Ultimate Challenge–Human Rights and Genocide: International Conference. Yerevan, Armenia, April 20, 2005. Available at
  25. Mennecke, Martin and Eric Markusen. 2003. “The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the Crime of Genocide.” In Steven L. B. Jensen (ed.), Genocide: Cases, Comparisons and Contemporary Debates. Copenhagen: Danish Institute for International Studies. 293–359.Google Scholar
  26. “Moscow Declaration on Atrocities, issued on 1 November 1943. Signed by President Roosevelt, Prime Minister Churchill and Premier Stalin.” Available at
  27. Penal Reform International. 2004. From Camp to Hill: The Reintegration of Released Prisoners. Research Report on the Gacaca. Report VI. Available at
  28. Power, Samantha. 2005. “Court of First Resort.” The New York Times, February 10, A23.Google Scholar
  29. Report of the High–level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change. 2004. A More Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility. Report to the Secretary–General Kofi Annan. December. Available at
  30. Rone, Jemera. 2005. “Darfur, War Crimes, the International Criminal Court, and the Quest for Justice.” Transcript of a Brookings Briefing on Friday, February 25, 2005. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution. Available at
  31. Sarooshi, Dan. 2004. “The Peace and Justice Paradox: The International Criminal Court and the UN Security Council.” In Dominic McGoldrick, Peter Rowe and Eric Donnelly (eds.), The Permanent International Criminal Court: Legal and Policy Issues. Studies in International Law, Volume 5. Oxford: Hart Publishing. 95–122.Google Scholar
  32. Sayers, Steven M. 2003. “Defence Perspectives on Sentencing Practice in the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.” Leiden Journal of International Law, 16:751–776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Schabas, William A. 2005. “The Odious Scourge: Evolving Interpretations of the Crime of Genocide.” Speech presented at “Ultimate Crime, Ultimate Challenge – Human Rights and Genocide: An International Conference,” Yerevan, Armenia, April 20. Available at
  34. Schabas, William A. 2006. The UN International Criminal Tribunals – The former Yugoslavia, Rwanda and Sierra Leone. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Snyder, Jack and Leslie Vinjamuri. 2003–2004. “Trials and Errors. Principle and Pragmatism in Strategies of International Justice.” International Security, 28(3): 5–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Trial of the Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal, Vol. II. 1947. (November 14–30, 1945), Nuremberg: International Military Tribunal.Google Scholar
  37. United Nations General Assembly. 2002. “General Assembly President Says Permanent International Criminal Court Will Provide Much Stronger Deterrence Than Ad Hoc Tribunals.” Press release. (UN Doc. GA/SM/282, L/T/4367, 11 April 2002). Available at
  38. United Nations Office of Legal Affairs, Codifications Division. 1998–1999. “Overview of Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.” Available at
  39. United Nations Security Council. 2005. United Nations Resolution 1593. (UN Doc. S/Res/1593, 31 March 2005). Available at
  40. United Nations Secretary General. 2004a. “'Risk of Genocide Remains Frighteningly Real' Secretary–General Tells Human Rights Commission as He Launches Action Plan to Prevent Genocide.” Press release, April 7. (UN Doc. SG/SM/9245, AFR/893, HR/CN/1077). Available at
  41. United Nations Secretary General. 2004b. The Rule of Law and Transitional Justice in Conflict and Post–conflict Societies: Report of the Secretary–General. (UN Doc. S/2004/616, 23 August 2004).Google Scholar
  42. Whitaker, Benjamin. 1985. Revised and Updated Report on the Question of the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. UN Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1985/6.Google Scholar
  43. Wippman, David. 1999. “Atrocities, Deterrence, and the Limits of International Justice.” Fordham International Law Journal, 23(2): 473–488.Google Scholar
  44. Wood, Nicholas. 2005. “From List of 19,000, 90 More Trials.” International Herald Tribune. October 6, n. p.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Danish Institute for International StudiesCopenhagenDenmark

Personalised recommendations