Legality Matters: Crimes Against Humanity And The Problems And Promise Of The Prohibition On Other Inhumane Acts 28

This book examines the way international criminal courts and tribunals have interpreted the crimes against humanity proscription of other inhumane acts. This clause is consistently used in spite of the long list of more specific offences forbidden as crimes against humanity. The volume proposes that the current approach is based on a misunderstanding of the nature of the clause. Properly understood, the clause is an invitation to courts to create and apply retroactive criminal laws. This leads to a problem. A prohibition on the use of retroactive criminal laws, one which admits no exceptions, is deeply embedded in international law. The author argues that it is time to revisit the assumption that retroactive criminal laws can never be deployed in a fair legal system. Drawing lessons from an exploration on the way the prohibition on retroactive laws is applied in practice, she proposes a new framework for understanding the clause proscribing the commission of other inhumane acts. This book will be of relevance to anyone interested in international criminal law or criminal law theory. Gillian MacNeil is Assistant Professor at Robson Hall, the Faculty of Law of the University of Manitoba in Winnipeg, Canada. MuPDF error: syntax error: invalid key in dict MuPDF error: syntax error: invalid key in dict MuPDF error: syntax error: invalid key in dict MuPDF error: syntax error: invalid key in dict MuPDF error: syntax error: invalid key in dict MuPDF error: syntax error: invalid key in dict MuPDF error: syntax error: invalid key in dict MuPDF error: syntax error: invalid key in dict MuPDF error: syntax error: invalid key in dict Acknowledgements 6 Contents 7 Abbreviations 12 1 Introduction 13 1.1 Introduction 13 1.2 Expanding on the Elements 14 1.2.1 CAH: Not for the ICC Alone 14 1.2.2 The Broader Questions: Rethinking Retroactive Criminal Law and the Role of Courts 15 1.3 Looking Ahead: The Structure of My Argument 18 1.4 Conclusion 19 References 19 2 Theoretical Underpinnings: Understanding the Prohibition on Retroactive Criminal Law 20 2.1 Introduction and Overview 21 2.2 Preliminary Matters 23 2.2.1 Fuller: A Theory for All Systems 23 2.2.2 Legitimacy and Legality 24 2.3 Fuller’s Account: The Process of Law and the Legitimacy of the Law 25 2.3.1 Legitimate Law-Making is Reciprocal 25 2.3.2 Legal Subject as Law-Making Agent 26 2.3.3 A Duty to Obey Arises from Reciprocity 26 2.3.4 Reciprocity and Legitimacy; Focus on Process, Not Results 27 2.3.5 The Elements that Reciprocity Demands 27 2.3.6 When Process Fails 28 2.3.7 Implications: A Closer Look at the Details of Law-Making 28 2.3.8 The Place of Retroactive Laws in a Legitimate Legal System 29 2.3.9 Clarifying Fuller’s Theory: Retroactive Criminal Laws May Be Permissible 31 2.3.10 What Remains? 32 2.4 Summary 33 2.5 Implications for the Process of Law-Making 34 2.6 Application to International Criminal Law 36 References 36 3 The Prohibition on Retroactive Criminal Law in International Criminal Law 38 3.1 Introduction 39 3.2 Preliminary Matters 40 3.2.1 My Sources Explained 40 3.2.2 The Prohibition on Retroactive Criminal Law: A Variable Concept 42 3.3 Prologue: The Principle Prior to Nuremberg 44 3.3.1 Overview 44 3.3.2 The Prohibition Was Not a Treaty Norm 45 3.3.3 The Prohibition Was Not a Norm of Customary International Law 47 3.3.4 The Prohibition Was Not a General Principle of Law 49 3.3.5 A Brief Overview of Divergent Conceptions and Practice 50 3.3.6 Summary 56 3.4 The Opening Movement: The Acceptance of the Prohibition in International Criminal Law 56 3.4.1 Role of the International Military Tribunal 56 3.5 The International Courts Were Sources of Law 59 3.6 Subsequent Clarifications 60 3.6.1 The Nuremberg Military Tribunals Have a Say 60 3.6.2 Summary 62 3.7 IHRL Developments: The Contribution of Human Rights Law to the Prohibition on Retroactive Criminal Law 62 3.8 Recent ICL Developments: Clarifying the Prohibition in Customary and Conventional International Criminal Law 65 3.8.1 Overview 65 3.8.2 Customary Law Developments: The Contributions of the Ad Hoc Tribunals 66 3.8.3 The Special Court for Sierra Leone: Agreement with the ICTY 70 3.8.4 Summarizing the Tribunals’ Position 70 3.8.5 The International Criminal Court: Rome Provides a Different View 71 3.8.6 The Conventional Approach and Customary Law 71 3.9 The Customary Prohibition Unpacked 72 3.9.1 The Outlines of the Prohibition: The Content Clarified 72 3.10 The Departures: The Permissible Categories of Retroactive Criminal Law 74 3.10.1 Clarifications of General Prohibitions 74 3.10.2 The ECtHR in Support: The Case of CR v. UK 75 3.10.3 The CR Case in Domestic Courts: Background 75 3.10.4 The CR Case in Domestic Courts: The Trial 76 3.10.5 The CR Case in Domestic Courts: The First Appeal 77 3.10.6 The CR Case in Domestic Courts: A Second Appeal 78 3.10.7 The CR Case: An Analysis of the Decisions 78 3.11 The Implications of the CR Decisions 80 3.11.1 Looking at CR Through a Fullerian Lens 80 3.11.2 The Clarification Exception: Further Support 81 3.11.3 Elaborations of the Law: Another Acceptable Exception to the Prohibition 82 3.11.4 Acceptable (Accepted) Elaborations in Early ICL Developments 83 3.11.5 Recently Accepted Elaborations: Confirmation of the Acceptability of the Practice 84 3.11.6 An Explanation of Why Elaborations Are Acceptable 85 3.12 Critiquing the Tribunals Approach: Lessons from Fuller 85 References 88 4 Crimes Against Humanity: Introduction, Development and Acceptance 91 4.1 Introduction 92 4.2 The Evolution of Crimes Against Humanity 94 4.2.1 Overview 94 4.2.2 The IHL origins of Crimes Against Humanity: Pre-World War II Developments 95 4.2.3 World War II and Post-War Developments 97 4.2.4 International and National Advance and Harmonization 107 4.3 Explaining the Adherence 112 4.3.1 Crimes Against Humanity: Retroactive Criminal Laws 112 4.3.2 The Acceptance, and Acceptability of Crimes Against Humanity: A Look Through a Fullerian Lens 115 4.3.3 The Problem of Opposite Notice 119 4.3.4 Summary 125 4.4 A Final Point 125 References 126 5 Other Inhumane Acts: Development and Critique 129 5.1 Introduction 130 5.2 Terminology 132 5.3 Contrasting the Articulations 132 5.4 Interpreting the Instruments: From Characterization to Consistency 133 5.4.1 Introduction 133 5.4.2 The Early Characterizations 134 5.4.3 Evolving Analyses 135 5.5 Comparing and Critiquing the Interpretation 141 5.5.1 Methodological Flaws 141 5.5.2 Identifying Some Deeper Problems 148 5.5.3 Possible Alternatives to the Current Approach 154 5.6 Re-thinking the Residual Clause: The Problem of Its Nature 155 5.6.1 Introduction 155 5.6.2 The Gravity Requirement: An Opening to Uncertain Applications of the Law 156 5.6.3 Arguing for a New Understanding 157 5.6.4 Re-reading the Clause: An Invitation, not a Prohibition 158 5.6.5 The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties: Why More Is Needed 160 5.7 A Look Through a Fullerian Lens 161 References 163 6 A New Way Forward: Advocating a Fullerian Approach to Other Inhumane Acts 165 6.1 Introduction 166 6.2 Outline 167 6.3 Courts as Law-Makers 169 6.4 Articulating a New Framework 172 6.4.1 Identifying the Elements 172 6.4.2 Defining Inhumanity 173 6.5 Inhumanity: A Criminal Law Look 182 6.5.1 Introduction 182 6.5.2 Inhumanity: The Proper Focus 183 6.5.3 Victim Focus: Should Elements Be Divisible? 184 6.5.4 A Case Study: Deportation as Dehumanization 189 6.6 Developing Identifiers 190 6.6.1 Introduction 190 6.6.2 Bodily Harm as an Indicator 190 6.6.3 Mental Harm: An Alternative Indication 191 6.6.4 Denial of Choice; A Possible Indicator 192 6.7 Summary 194 6.8 Justifying the New Approach 194 6.9 Identifying the Elements 196 6.9.1 Introduction 196 6.9.2 Identifying the Elements: Essential on Any Approach 196 6.10 The Evidence and Process 199 6.11 Conclusion 200 6.12 Some Final Thoughts 200 References 202 Index 204 Présentation de l'éditeur : "This book examines the way international criminal courts and tribunals have interpreted the crimes against humanity proscription of other inhumane acts. This clause is consistently used in spite of the long list of more specific offences forbidden as crimes against humanity. The volume proposes that the current approach is based on a misunderstanding of the nature of the clause. Properly understood, the clause is an invitation to courts to create and apply retroactive criminal laws. This leads to a problem. A prohibition on the use of retroactive criminal laws, one which admits no exceptions, is deeply embedded in international law. The author argues that it is time to revisit the assumption that retroactive criminal laws can never be deployed in a fair legal system. Drawing lessons from an exploration on the way the prohibition on retroactive laws is applied in practice, she proposes a new framework for understanding the clause proscribing the commission of other inhumane acts. This book will be of relevance to anyone interested in international criminal law or criminal law theory."