000			02405 a2200193 4500
005			20250304112229.0
020			_a9789462654297
082			_a345.01 BOR
100			_aBorda,Aldo Zammit
245			_aHistories Written by International Criminal Courts and Tribunals: Developing a Responsible History Framework
260			_bT.M.C. Asser Press _c2021 _aBerlin, Germany
300			_a258
440			_aInternational Criminal Justice Series _v26
520			_aThis book argues for a more moderate approach to history-writing in international criminal adjudication by articulating the elements of a "responsible history" normative framework. The question of whether international criminal courts and tribunals (ICTs) ought to write historical narratives has gained renewed relevance in the context of the recent turn to history in international criminal law, the growing attention to the historical legacies of the ad hoc Tribunals and the minimal attention paid to historical context in the first judgment of the International Criminal Court. The starting point for this discussion is that, in cases of mass atrocities, prosecutors and judges are inevitably understood to be engaged in writing history and influencing collective memory, whether or not they so intend. Therefore, while writing history is an inescapable feature of ICTs, there is still today a significant lack of consensus over the proper place of this function. Since Hannah Arendt articulated her doctrine of strict legality, in response to the prosecutor's expansive didactic approach in Eichmann, the legal debate on the subject has been largely polarised between restrictive and expansive approaches to history-writing in mass atrocity trials. What has been noticeably missing from this debate is the middle ground. The contribution this book seeks to make is precisely to articulate a framework that occupies that ground. The book asks: what are the lenses through which judges of ICTs interpret historical events, what kind of histories do ICTs write? and what kinds of histories should ICTs produce? Its arguments for a more moderate approach to history-writing are based on three distinct, but interrelated grounds: (1) Truth and Justice; (2) Right to Truth; and (3) Legal Epistemology.
650			_aInternational Criminal Courts
650			_aTribunals
650			_aInternational Criminal Justice
942			_cBK _2ddc
999			_c49341 _d49341