Judicial lawmaking and general principles of law in international criminal law

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

General principles of law are a primary mechanism for "gap-filling" in international criminal law. However, their interpretation by tribunals has been fitful, contradictory, and misguided. Given that general principles have been used to settle crucial legal issues that affect the rights of the accused, the confusion concerning their application threatens the legitimacy of international criminal justice. This Article critiques the various conceptions of general principles developed by scholars and tribunals based on the criteria of formal and material validity and exposes the problems with their application in light of comparative law and criminal law theory. The Article challenges international criminal tribunals' reliance on surveys of municipal legal rules as the primary tool for the derivation of general principles. It recommends a more limited role for general principles focused on material validity in the development of international criminal law. Additionally, it urges tribunals to engage with other sources, especially treaties, to alleviate the problem of gaps in international criminal law.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)111-150
Number of pages40
JournalHarvard International Law Journal
Volume57
Issue number1
StatePublished - Dec 1 2016

Fingerprint

criminal law
international law
Law
accused
treaty
legitimacy
justice
interpretation

Cite this

Judicial lawmaking and general principles of law in international criminal law. / Jain, Neha.

In: Harvard International Law Journal, Vol. 57, No. 1, 01.12.2016, p. 111-150.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{dfa59e70ac244acc81ee3c727d57144d,
title = "Judicial lawmaking and general principles of law in international criminal law",
abstract = "General principles of law are a primary mechanism for {"}gap-filling{"} in international criminal law. However, their interpretation by tribunals has been fitful, contradictory, and misguided. Given that general principles have been used to settle crucial legal issues that affect the rights of the accused, the confusion concerning their application threatens the legitimacy of international criminal justice. This Article critiques the various conceptions of general principles developed by scholars and tribunals based on the criteria of formal and material validity and exposes the problems with their application in light of comparative law and criminal law theory. The Article challenges international criminal tribunals' reliance on surveys of municipal legal rules as the primary tool for the derivation of general principles. It recommends a more limited role for general principles focused on material validity in the development of international criminal law. Additionally, it urges tribunals to engage with other sources, especially treaties, to alleviate the problem of gaps in international criminal law.",
author = "Neha Jain",
year = "2016",
month = "12",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "57",
pages = "111--150",
journal = "Harvard International Law Journal",
issn = "0017-8063",
publisher = "Harvard University",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Judicial lawmaking and general principles of law in international criminal law

AU - Jain, Neha

PY - 2016/12/1

Y1 - 2016/12/1

N2 - General principles of law are a primary mechanism for "gap-filling" in international criminal law. However, their interpretation by tribunals has been fitful, contradictory, and misguided. Given that general principles have been used to settle crucial legal issues that affect the rights of the accused, the confusion concerning their application threatens the legitimacy of international criminal justice. This Article critiques the various conceptions of general principles developed by scholars and tribunals based on the criteria of formal and material validity and exposes the problems with their application in light of comparative law and criminal law theory. The Article challenges international criminal tribunals' reliance on surveys of municipal legal rules as the primary tool for the derivation of general principles. It recommends a more limited role for general principles focused on material validity in the development of international criminal law. Additionally, it urges tribunals to engage with other sources, especially treaties, to alleviate the problem of gaps in international criminal law.

AB - General principles of law are a primary mechanism for "gap-filling" in international criminal law. However, their interpretation by tribunals has been fitful, contradictory, and misguided. Given that general principles have been used to settle crucial legal issues that affect the rights of the accused, the confusion concerning their application threatens the legitimacy of international criminal justice. This Article critiques the various conceptions of general principles developed by scholars and tribunals based on the criteria of formal and material validity and exposes the problems with their application in light of comparative law and criminal law theory. The Article challenges international criminal tribunals' reliance on surveys of municipal legal rules as the primary tool for the derivation of general principles. It recommends a more limited role for general principles focused on material validity in the development of international criminal law. Additionally, it urges tribunals to engage with other sources, especially treaties, to alleviate the problem of gaps in international criminal law.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84981275208&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84981275208&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:84981275208

VL - 57

SP - 111

EP - 150

JO - Harvard International Law Journal

JF - Harvard International Law Journal

SN - 0017-8063

IS - 1

ER -