Podcasts about international criminal tribunals

In the current era of space exploration, various countries and private space companies have targeted celestial bodies like the moon, Mars, and asteroids for exploration. To facilitate their long-term presence on these bodies, programs such as Artemis led by the United States, and the International Lunar Research Station led by China plan to study the feasibility of extracting resources found on these celestial bodies.There are also ambitious plans to extract potentially valuable resources from the moon and asteroids and bring them back to Earth for utilization. This has led countries to enact policies and legislations to promote space resource activities and claim ownership over the resources extracted. India too has successfully performed missions to the moon through its Chandrayaan program and is planning to conduct more in the future, including collaboration with other international partners. Non-governmental entities in the country have also been encouraged to engage in the commercial recovery of space resources in accordance with applicable law, including its international obligations, under the Indian Space Policy, 2023. However, it is important to ensure that such activities are carried out in accordance with obligations under international law. For example, Article II of the Outer Space Treaty prohibits the appropriation of outer space including celestial bodies. There are also concerns that if space resource activities are not governed properly, conflicts may arise in outer space and back on Earth. To facilitate an inclusive and multi-stakeholder dialogue on this issue, the UN COPUOS established the Working Group on Legal Aspects of Space Resource Activities.How will this multilateral initiative function? What promises does this initiative hold in shaping the norms and future of space resource activities? And what is India's possible role in this initiative?Episode ContributorsSteven Freeland is emeritus professor of international law at Western Sydney University, where he was previously the dean of the School of Law. He represents the Australian Government at UN COPUOS meetings, and in June 2021, was appointed vice-chair for the Working Group on Legal Aspects of Space Resource Activities. Before academics, Freeland had a twenty-year career as an international commercial lawyer and an investment banker. He is a member of the Australian Space Agency Advisory Board and has been an advisor to governments in Australia, New Zealand, and Norway, among many others, on issues relating to national space legislative frameworks and policy.He has also been a visiting professional within the appeals chamber at the International Criminal Court, and a special advisor to the Danish Foreign Ministry in matters related to the International Criminal Court. In addition to co-editing the Annotated Leading Cases of International Criminal Tribunals book series, he also sits on the editorial and advisory Board of several internationally recognized academic journals. He has authored approximately 400 publications on various aspects of International Law and has been invited to present over 2,000 expert commentaries by national and international media outlets worldwide on a wide range of legal, policy and geopolitical issues.Tejas Bharadwaj is a research analyst with the Technology and Society Program at Carnegie India. He focuses on space law and policies and works on areas related to applications of artificial intelligence and autonomy in the military domain and U.S.-India export controls. Tejas is also part of the group that convened Carnegie India's annual flagship event, the Global Technology Summit, co-organized with the Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India. Currently a prospective member of the International Institute of Space Law (IISL), Tejas was part of its working group on “light pollution of the night sky from the space law perspective” from 2021 to 2023. He has contributed to UNOOSA, IAU, and ESO's Dark and Quiet Skies for Science and Society Working Group. Suggested ReadingsWorking Group on Legal Aspects of Space Resource Activities, UNOOSAThe Future of Geography: How Power and Politics in Space Will Change Our World by Tim MarshallSpace Resource Activities and the Evolution of International Space Law by Melissa De Zwart, Stacey Henderson and Michelle NeumannInternational Conference on Space Resources  Every two weeks, Interpreting India brings you diverse voices from India and around the world to explore the critical questions shaping the nation's future. We delve into how technology, the economy, and foreign policy intertwine to influence India's relationship with the global stage.As a Carnegie India production, hosted by Carnegie scholars, Interpreting India, a Carnegie India production, provides insightful perspectives and cutting-edge by tackling the defining questions that chart India's course through the next decade.Stay tuned for thought-provoking discussions, expert insights, and a deeper understanding of India's place in the world.Don't forget to subscribe, share, and leave a review to join the conversation and be part of Interpreting India's journey.

In the 1990s, the promise of justice for atrocity crimes was associated with the revival of international criminal tribunals (ICTs). More recently, however, there has been a renewed emphasis on domestic accountability for international crimes across the globe. In identifying a 'complementarity turn', a paradigm shift toward domestic accountability in the field of international criminal justice, this book investigates how the shadow of international criminal tribunals influences the treatment of serious crimes at the national level. Drawing on research and interviews in Rwanda, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Sierra Leone, International Criminal Tribunals and Domestic Accountability: In the Court's Shadow (Oxford University Press, 2023) by Dr. Patryk I. Labuda develops a tripartite framework to analyse how states and tribunals work with, despite, or against one another in the fight against impunity. While international prosecutors and judges use the principle of complementarity to foster cooperation and decrease tension with government actors, Dr. Labuda argues that too much deference by ICTs toward states reduces the likelihood of accountability and may enable national elites to consolidate authoritarian power. By interrogating how international accountability stakeholders relate to their domestic counterparts, International Criminal Tribunals and Domestic Accountability advocates improvements to ICTs' institutional design and more dynamic interactions with states to strengthen the enforcement of international criminal law. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose forthcoming book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the 1990s, the promise of justice for atrocity crimes was associated with the revival of international criminal tribunals (ICTs). More recently, however, there has been a renewed emphasis on domestic accountability for international crimes across the globe. In identifying a 'complementarity turn', a paradigm shift toward domestic accountability in the field of international criminal justice, this book investigates how the shadow of international criminal tribunals influences the treatment of serious crimes at the national level. Drawing on research and interviews in Rwanda, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Sierra Leone, International Criminal Tribunals and Domestic Accountability: In the Court's Shadow (Oxford University Press, 2023) by Dr. Patryk I. Labuda develops a tripartite framework to analyse how states and tribunals work with, despite, or against one another in the fight against impunity. While international prosecutors and judges use the principle of complementarity to foster cooperation and decrease tension with government actors, Dr. Labuda argues that too much deference by ICTs toward states reduces the likelihood of accountability and may enable national elites to consolidate authoritarian power. By interrogating how international accountability stakeholders relate to their domestic counterparts, International Criminal Tribunals and Domestic Accountability advocates improvements to ICTs' institutional design and more dynamic interactions with states to strengthen the enforcement of international criminal law. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose forthcoming book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the 1990s, the promise of justice for atrocity crimes was associated with the revival of international criminal tribunals (ICTs). More recently, however, there has been a renewed emphasis on domestic accountability for international crimes across the globe. In identifying a 'complementarity turn', a paradigm shift toward domestic accountability in the field of international criminal justice, this book investigates how the shadow of international criminal tribunals influences the treatment of serious crimes at the national level. Drawing on research and interviews in Rwanda, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Sierra Leone, International Criminal Tribunals and Domestic Accountability: In the Court's Shadow (Oxford University Press, 2023) by Dr. Patryk I. Labuda develops a tripartite framework to analyse how states and tribunals work with, despite, or against one another in the fight against impunity. While international prosecutors and judges use the principle of complementarity to foster cooperation and decrease tension with government actors, Dr. Labuda argues that too much deference by ICTs toward states reduces the likelihood of accountability and may enable national elites to consolidate authoritarian power. By interrogating how international accountability stakeholders relate to their domestic counterparts, International Criminal Tribunals and Domestic Accountability advocates improvements to ICTs' institutional design and more dynamic interactions with states to strengthen the enforcement of international criminal law. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose forthcoming book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars.

In the 1990s, the promise of justice for atrocity crimes was associated with the revival of international criminal tribunals (ICTs). More recently, however, there has been a renewed emphasis on domestic accountability for international crimes across the globe. In identifying a 'complementarity turn', a paradigm shift toward domestic accountability in the field of international criminal justice, this book investigates how the shadow of international criminal tribunals influences the treatment of serious crimes at the national level. Drawing on research and interviews in Rwanda, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Sierra Leone, International Criminal Tribunals and Domestic Accountability: In the Court's Shadow (Oxford University Press, 2023) by Dr. Patryk I. Labuda develops a tripartite framework to analyse how states and tribunals work with, despite, or against one another in the fight against impunity. While international prosecutors and judges use the principle of complementarity to foster cooperation and decrease tension with government actors, Dr. Labuda argues that too much deference by ICTs toward states reduces the likelihood of accountability and may enable national elites to consolidate authoritarian power. By interrogating how international accountability stakeholders relate to their domestic counterparts, International Criminal Tribunals and Domestic Accountability advocates improvements to ICTs' institutional design and more dynamic interactions with states to strengthen the enforcement of international criminal law. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose forthcoming book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

In the 1990s, the promise of justice for atrocity crimes was associated with the revival of international criminal tribunals (ICTs). More recently, however, there has been a renewed emphasis on domestic accountability for international crimes across the globe. In identifying a 'complementarity turn', a paradigm shift toward domestic accountability in the field of international criminal justice, this book investigates how the shadow of international criminal tribunals influences the treatment of serious crimes at the national level. Drawing on research and interviews in Rwanda, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Sierra Leone, International Criminal Tribunals and Domestic Accountability: In the Court's Shadow (Oxford University Press, 2023) by Dr. Patryk I. Labuda develops a tripartite framework to analyse how states and tribunals work with, despite, or against one another in the fight against impunity. While international prosecutors and judges use the principle of complementarity to foster cooperation and decrease tension with government actors, Dr. Labuda argues that too much deference by ICTs toward states reduces the likelihood of accountability and may enable national elites to consolidate authoritarian power. By interrogating how international accountability stakeholders relate to their domestic counterparts, International Criminal Tribunals and Domestic Accountability advocates improvements to ICTs' institutional design and more dynamic interactions with states to strengthen the enforcement of international criminal law. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose forthcoming book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

In the 1990s, the promise of justice for atrocity crimes was associated with the revival of international criminal tribunals (ICTs). More recently, however, there has been a renewed emphasis on domestic accountability for international crimes across the globe. In identifying a 'complementarity turn', a paradigm shift toward domestic accountability in the field of international criminal justice, this book investigates how the shadow of international criminal tribunals influences the treatment of serious crimes at the national level. Drawing on research and interviews in Rwanda, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Sierra Leone, International Criminal Tribunals and Domestic Accountability: In the Court's Shadow (Oxford University Press, 2023) by Dr. Patryk I. Labuda develops a tripartite framework to analyse how states and tribunals work with, despite, or against one another in the fight against impunity. While international prosecutors and judges use the principle of complementarity to foster cooperation and decrease tension with government actors, Dr. Labuda argues that too much deference by ICTs toward states reduces the likelihood of accountability and may enable national elites to consolidate authoritarian power. By interrogating how international accountability stakeholders relate to their domestic counterparts, International Criminal Tribunals and Domestic Accountability advocates improvements to ICTs' institutional design and more dynamic interactions with states to strengthen the enforcement of international criminal law. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose forthcoming book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs

In the 1990s, the promise of justice for atrocity crimes was associated with the revival of international criminal tribunals (ICTs). More recently, however, there has been a renewed emphasis on domestic accountability for international crimes across the globe. In identifying a 'complementarity turn', a paradigm shift toward domestic accountability in the field of international criminal justice, this book investigates how the shadow of international criminal tribunals influences the treatment of serious crimes at the national level. Drawing on research and interviews in Rwanda, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Sierra Leone, International Criminal Tribunals and Domestic Accountability: In the Court's Shadow (Oxford University Press, 2023) by Dr. Patryk I. Labuda develops a tripartite framework to analyse how states and tribunals work with, despite, or against one another in the fight against impunity. While international prosecutors and judges use the principle of complementarity to foster cooperation and decrease tension with government actors, Dr. Labuda argues that too much deference by ICTs toward states reduces the likelihood of accountability and may enable national elites to consolidate authoritarian power. By interrogating how international accountability stakeholders relate to their domestic counterparts, International Criminal Tribunals and Domestic Accountability advocates improvements to ICTs' institutional design and more dynamic interactions with states to strengthen the enforcement of international criminal law. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose forthcoming book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/african-studies

In the 1990s, the promise of justice for atrocity crimes was associated with the revival of international criminal tribunals (ICTs). More recently, however, there has been a renewed emphasis on domestic accountability for international crimes across the globe. In identifying a 'complementarity turn', a paradigm shift toward domestic accountability in the field of international criminal justice, this book investigates how the shadow of international criminal tribunals influences the treatment of serious crimes at the national level. Drawing on research and interviews in Rwanda, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Sierra Leone, International Criminal Tribunals and Domestic Accountability: In the Court's Shadow (Oxford University Press, 2023) by Dr. Patryk I. Labuda develops a tripartite framework to analyse how states and tribunals work with, despite, or against one another in the fight against impunity. While international prosecutors and judges use the principle of complementarity to foster cooperation and decrease tension with government actors, Dr. Labuda argues that too much deference by ICTs toward states reduces the likelihood of accountability and may enable national elites to consolidate authoritarian power. By interrogating how international accountability stakeholders relate to their domestic counterparts, International Criminal Tribunals and Domestic Accountability advocates improvements to ICTs' institutional design and more dynamic interactions with states to strengthen the enforcement of international criminal law. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose forthcoming book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

In this episode we spoke with Patricia Sellers, an international criminal lawyer currently serving as the Special Advisor for Slavery Crimes for the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, where she previously served as the Special Advisor for Gender. During the episode, Patricia explains the unique ways in which gender makes one vulnerable to atrocities, as well as how the landmark judgements at the International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia have helped facilitate the future prosecution of acts of sexual violence as war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. She also highlights some key lessons learned regarding early warning signs of gendered crimes.

Russian attacks on eastern Ukraine have forced thousands to flee the area in search of safety. Matt Galloway hears the latest from Ukraine with Oleksiy Sorokin, the political editor for the Kyiv Independent; and discusses calls to hold Russian President Vladimir Putin accountable for alleged war crimes with Carla Del Ponte, who served as chief prosecutor on International Criminal Tribunals for both the former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda.

The Global Commission on Drug Policy was created in January 2011 to highlight the failure of the war on drugs and to call for a paradigm shift towards drug policies grounded in evidence, human rights, and public health. On this episode, Nate is joined by commissioner Louise Arbour to talk about domestic and global drug policy, the harms of prohibition, and why we need to decriminalize all drugs for personal use and then regulate all drugs according to their respective harms.Arbour has taken on an incredible number of impactful and interesting roles over her career. She served as the chief prosecutor of war crimes before the International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, as a justice of the Supreme Court of Canada, as the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, and as a Special Representative of the UN Secretary General for International Migration. As an SCC justice, Arbour dissented in Malmo-Levine, highlighting the harms of prohibition, and she has served as a commissioner of the Global Commission since its inception.You can watch Nate's speech in the House on Bill C-22 here. 

Welcome to Heels of Justice; these are the stories of women lawyers who are trailblazers in their field and paved the way for the rest of us.   The Honorable retired Judge Ann Claire Williams is a trailblazer and leader devoted to promoting the effective delivery of justice worldwide, particularly in Africa. She has partnered with judiciaries, attorneys, NGOs, and the U.S. Departments of Justice and State to lead training programs in Ghana, Indonesia, Kenya, Liberia, Namibia, Nigeria, Rwanda, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia. She also has taught at the International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia.   Judge Williams has led a brilliant career heading a series of firsts for both women and persons of color, she joins the podcast today to share her trailblazing stories and experience. Tune in for an insightful discussion about the ever-changing and evolving world we live in and the pivotal place lawyers take in it.   Key Takeaways [1:00] Sarita welcomes Judge Ann Claire Williams and asks her to share a little bit about where she grew up, why she began teaching so early, and how she started law school on a dare!   [4:34] Though she had no idea what law school would be like, Judge Williams shares the insight she had that led her to believe she actually could be a lawyer: teachers teach and lawyers teach.   [8:06] Judge Williams shares advice for young aspiring law students from what it means to get a great grade point on your first year, to asking the questions to get the answers you need, getting mentors and sponsors to get recommendation letters, joining the Moot Court and affinity groups, and much, much more! Fifty percent of the game is believing in yourself.   [17:50] Starting her legal career was partly thanks to having made an impression on the Dean at law school, Judge Williams shares how she came to clerk, for whom and how she changed his hiring practice. She shares the three lessons she learned from getting that position: 1- You never know who is looking at you and evaluating you 2- We are not in the rooms where decisions are made so you need allies and mentors to pitch for you 3- Mentors come in all colors and ages   [21:04] Judge Williams talks about how she started as an Assistant U.S. Attorney and the conversation she agreed to have with Marianne Jackson that sparked her interest in the AUSA. She shares her experience there and the sensitivity she hopes to have brought to the position.   [27:11] Sarita lays out the long list of “firsts” that Judge Williams has had the courage and grace to accomplish for all those who came after her. Judge Williams shares what these have meant to her.   [30:33] Judge Williams shares what it is that judges want, and what you should avoid at all costs — don’t ruin your own credibility: you want an assumption that the arguments you’re making are strong and to the point. Also, “Judges talk, just like lawyers, and we talk about lawyers!”   [35:45] Having loved being a trial lawyer and a trial judge, our guest shares what pulled her from the bench. She touches on the differences and challenges in tackling the Court of Appeals cases.   [39:39] Judge Williams speaks to having begun her work in Africa in 2002, what that burgeoned into over the years and what personal dream she was able to fulfill by doing so. She opens up about the kind of work she has been able to do through her current counsel practice at Jones Day.   [46:32] Having had the opportunity to work on multiple continents, Judge Williams shares some of the differences and similarities she’s had the pleasure of witnessing first hand. One common thread linking most is a belief in the rule of law and the accessibility of law for the people of their countries.   [48:25] The amount of work Judge Williams had done outside of her “job” is impressive; she speaks to the reasons that drove her to accomplish this much and launch these organizations.   [55:00] Judge Williams explains how she started the bar review program. One person can make a difference and you shouldn’t let your robe get in the way of your humanity.   [1:01:08] George Floyd.   [1:10:03] A salient career moment, Judge Williams shares a story of Judge Hugh Will and how he encouraged her to go to a particular meeting where — unbeknownst to her — he had decided to make her treasurer of the Federal Judges Association which put her on track to become the first person of color to become an officer and eventually president.   She also shares a beautiful personal story about having the privilege and honor of introducing President Obama as well as having her mother meet him.   [1:15:50] Judge Williams shares her mantras going through COVID-19.   [47:10] Sarita thanks Judge Williams for sharing so much of her story and experience on the Heels of Justice podcast and she signs off until next time.   That’s it for this episode of Heels of Justice; if you like the stories we’re telling, please visit our website. You can join our mailing list, learn more about our guests, and see what we have planned for the future.   You can also follow us on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.   Disclaimer: The opinions you have heard are ours or our guests’ alone. They’re not the opinions of our employers, or our clients, or our bosses, and not our husbands, kids, or pets, or anyone else’s.   More about the Heels of Justice hosts Sarita Venkat, and Katherine Minarik Heels of Justice on the Web Heels of Justice on Twitter Heels of Justice on Instagram Heels of Justice on Facebook   Sarita Venkat on LinkedIn Katherine Minarik on LinkedIn Katherine Minarik on Twitter Katherine Minarik at cleverbridge   More about our guest Judge Ann Claire Williams on LinkedIn   Mentioned in this episode Jones Day Just The Beginning Equal Justice Works Black Women Lawyers’ Association Minority Legal Education Resource

Our guest this episode is Sydney McIvor, a 3L student. Sydney mentions a play for her law-related entertainment -- What the Constitution Means to Me by Heidi Schreck -- which she saw on Broadway. (Lucky her! -- but also lucky for those who have access to Amazon Prime as it is available for streaming: https://www.amazon.com/What-Constitution-Means-Me/dp/B08KRB3FQ4)   Sydney talks about two internships/placements she's had, both of which took her outside of Canada. First, during her 1L summer she was with the World Bank Group in Washington DC -- an internship funded through Osgoode Hall Law School (there's another position funded through Western Law); and second, a term spent at The Hague in the Residual Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals - which related to matters left over from the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. Richard thought she was paid for these positions, but she assured us she wasn't.   Felicity is curious as to why Sydney hates Canada because she's always off galivanting around the world. Sydney's answer is much more sophisticated: she sees law as a somewhat limited licensed profession because expertise in it is not all that transferable, unlike other professions. For her, committing to one jurisdiction (as you pretty much need to do if you're going to have a career in professional practice) can be daunting for someone just starting out, and the barriers to moving around are high.   Sydney's advice if you want to do international law work: think about going to law school in the place you want to be; but if that's not possible, realize that a common law degree is a good backstop, particularly if the law school has an international reputation (which many in Canada do).     Music Attribution: What's Love Got to Do With It by Tina Turner Soundcloud: What's Love Got to Do with It

Dr. Payam Akhavan joins the Rotary Club of Milwaukee for its 15th annual U.N. Day Program. He teaches and researches on public international law, international dispute settlement, international criminal law, human rights and cultural pluralism at McGill University. In 2017, he delivered the CBC Massey Lectures, In Search of a Better World. A Human Rights Odyssey, in five different Canadian cities. He was the first Legal Advisor to the Prosecutor’s Office of the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda at The Hague (1994-2000) and made significant contributions to its foundational jurisprudence. He has also served in the field with the UN in Bosnia, Croatia, Cambodia, Guatemala, Timor Leste, and Rwanda. He is a member of the Law Society of Upper Canada and the New York State bar and has appeared as counsel and advocate in leading cases before the various international courts and the Supreme Courts of Canada and the United States. In partnership with the Rotary Club of Milwaukee.

Can we reliably predict whether the populations affected by mass atrocities will believe in the accounts of the facts and criminal responsibility that are produced by international criminal tribunals? Drawing on research in social psychology and on a seri In that regard, a negative reaction by dominant local political, media and intellectual elites becomes more likely if there is a significant degree of continuity with the elites that were dominant in the particular group when the atrocities took place, the more authoritarian the relevant society is, and the greater the perception of the threat that the tribunal’s work poses to the dominant position of these elites. That means that some tribunals, like the Yugoslav one, but not necessarily all tribunals, are from the outset doomed to fail as vehicles of transitional justice, since they would in most instances be powerless to overcome determined local opposition. Dr Marko Milanovic is associate professor at the University of Nottingham School of Law. He obtained his first degree in law from the University of Belgrade Faculty of Law, his LL.M from the University of Michigan Law School, and his PhD in international law from the University of Cambridge. He is Vice-President and member of the Executive Board of the European Society of International Law, an Associate of the Belgrade Centre for Human Rights, and co-editor of EJIL: Talk!, the blog of the European Journal of International Law, as well as a member of the EJIL’s Editorial Board. He was Law Clerk to Judge Thomas Buergenthal of the International Court of Justice in 2006/2007. He has published in leading academic journals, including the European Journal of International Law and the American Journal of International Law; his work has been cited, inter alia, by the UK Supreme Court and by the International Law Commission. He was counsel or advisor in cases before the International Court of Justice, the European Court of Human Rights, and the Constitutional Court of Serbia.

Second panel in the Innovative Media for Change in Transitional Justice conference, A Debate between Journalists, Academics and Practitioners on Transitional Justice, Media and Conflict held on 22-23 June 2015. It is well known that open sources and in particular journalistic sources can play a key role in providing information on the commission of international crimes and as such are relevant to the work of International Criminal Tribunals (ICTs). When it comes to gathering and disclosing information, however, the relationship between media and ICTs becomes complicated: On the one hand, investigators and prosecutors may need open sources and journalistic information to build their cases; material gathered by people in the field might perform an essential function in this respect. At the same time, they are faced with stringent legal requirements that apply to evidence and procedure. On the other hand, journalists are often the first and sometimes the only professionals who witness and record events that are relevant for criminal investigations and prosecutions. However, in the performance of their tasks, they are bound by their own professional obligations – which do not necessarily reflect the interest of law enforcement agencies – and may be faced with various dilemmas when asked to provide information to ICTs or evidence as expert witnesses. In short, the cooperation between media and ICTs is often times fraught with tensions and ambiguities. The panel will use this insight as a starting point to explore the following questions: What are the concerns and expectations of both sides in terms of information gathering and sharing? What are ways of creating a constructive debate between both sides? What principles can be established to ensure a fruitful cooperation? Against this backdrop, the panel aims to discuss first ideas around best practices directed at both practitioners from ICTs and journalists. Panelists: Payam Akhavan – Professor of International Law, McGill University, Montreal, Former First Legal Advisor to the ICTY-ICTR, served with the UN in Bosnia, Croatia, Cambodia, Guatemala, Rwanda, and Timor Leste. Nerma Jelacic – Head of External Relations for the Commission for International Justice and Accountability (CIJA), London, Former Spokesperson and Head of Outreach and Communications for the ICTY, Ella McPherson – Lecturer in the Sociology of New Media and Digital Technology, University of Cambridge, Don Ferencz (Facilitator) – Convenor of the Global Institute for the Prevention of Aggression, Research Associate at the Centre for Criminology, Faculty of Law, University of Oxford

September 10, 2010 War Crimes Research Symposium Frederick K. Cox International Law Center Case Western Reserve University School of Law Moderator: Prof. Milena Sterio, Cleveland-Marshall College of Law, Cleveland State University Speakers: Prof. William Schabas, Irish Centre for Human Rights, National University of Ireland, Galway Prof. William J. Aceves, associate dean, California Western School of Law Prof. Laurie Blank, Director, International Humanitarian Law Clinic, Emory University School of Law Prof. Michael Newton, Vanderbilt University Law School Summary: Traditionally "Lawfare" was defined as "a strategy of using—or misusing—law as a substitute for traditional military means to achieve an operational objective." But lately, commentators and governments have applied the concept to International Criminal Tribunals, the defense counsel's tactics challenging the detention of al Qaeda suspects in Guantanamo Bay, and as indicated in the quote above to the controversial Goldstone Commission Report. This symposium and Experts Meeting, featuring two-dozen leading academics, practitioners, and former government officials from all sides of the political spectrum, will examine the usefulness and appropriate application of the "Lawfare" concept.

September 10, 2010 War Crimes Research Symposium Frederick K. Cox International Law Center Case Western Reserve University School of Law Moderator: Prof. Jonathan Adler, Case Western Reserve University School of Law Speakers: Prof. Melissa Waters, Washington University School of Law (St. Louis) Sandy Hodgkinson, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Detainee Affairs, U.S. Dept. of Defense Prof. David Frakt, former Lead Defense Counsel, Military Commissions, Guantanamo Bay, Barry University School of Law Michael Lebowitz, Prosecutor, Office of Military Commissions, Guantanamo Bay Closing Remarks: Prof. Shannon French, Ph.D., director, Inamori International Center for Excellence & Ethics Case Western Reserve University Summary: Traditionally "Lawfare" was defined as "a strategy of using—or misusing—law as a substitute for traditional military means to achieve an operational objective." But lately, commentators and governments have applied the concept to International Criminal Tribunals, the defense counsel's tactics challenging the detention of al Qaeda suspects in Guantanamo Bay, and as indicated in the quote above to the controversial Goldstone Commission Report. This symposium and Experts Meeting, featuring two-dozen leading academics, practitioners, and former government officials from all sides of the political spectrum, will examine the usefulness and appropriate application of the "Lawfare" concept.

September 10, 2010 War Crimes Research Symposium Frederick K. Cox International Law Center Case Western Reserve University School of Law Moderator: Prof. Michael Kelly Speakers: Hon. James Ogoola, Principal Judge, Ugandan High Court Robert Petit, former International Prosecutor, Cambodia Tribunal, Counsel, War Crimes Section, Federal Department of Justice, Canada Prof. David Crane, founding Prosecutor, Special Court for Sierra Leone, Syracuse University College of Law Prof. Jens Meierhenrich, London School of Economics & Political Science, author, Lawfare: The Formation and Deformation of Gacaca Jurisdictions in Rwanda Amb. David Scheffer, Northwestern University School of Law, former U.S. Ambassador at Large for War Crimes Issues Summary: Traditionally "Lawfare" was defined as "a strategy of using—or misusing—law as a substitute for traditional military means to achieve an operational objective." But lately, commentators and governments have applied the concept to International Criminal Tribunals, the defense counsel's tactics challenging the detention of al Qaeda suspects in Guantanamo Bay, and as indicated in the quote above to the controversial Goldstone Commission Report. This symposium and Experts Meeting, featuring two-dozen leading academics, practitioners, and former government officials from all sides of the political spectrum, will examine the usefulness and appropriate application of the "Lawfare" concept.

September 10, 2010 War Crimes Research Symposium Frederick K. Cox International Law Center Case Western Reserve University School of Law Moderator: Daniel Moulthrop, Executive Director, "The Civic Commons," former producer/host, WCPN 90.3 FM ideastream (NPR Cleveland) Speakers: Pro: Major General Charles Dunlap, Jr., Deputy Judge Advocate General, U.S. Air Force Prof. Paul Williams, American University, Exec. Dir., Public International Law and Policy Group Con: Scott Horton, Contributing Editor, Harpers Magazine, Lecturer, Columbia Law School Prof. Leila Nadya Sadat, Washington University School of Law (St. Louis) Summary: Traditionally "Lawfare" was defined as "a strategy of using—or misusing—law as a substitute for traditional military means to achieve an operational objective." But lately, commentators and governments have applied the concept to International Criminal Tribunals, the defense counsel's tactics challenging the detention of al Qaeda suspects in Guantanamo Bay, and as indicated in the quote above to the controversial Goldstone Commission Report. This symposium and Experts Meeting, featuring two-dozen leading academics, practitioners, and former government officials from all sides of the political spectrum, will examine the usefulness and appropriate application of the "Lawfare" concept.

September 10, 2010 War Crimes Research Symposium Frederick K. Cox International Law Center Case Western Reserve University School of Law Moderator: Prof. Tawia Ansah, Visiting Professor, Case Western Reserve University School of Law Speakers: Prof. Wouter Werner, VU University, Amsterdam Prof. Susan Tiefenbrun, Thomas Jefferson School of Law Summary: Traditionally "Lawfare" was defined as "a strategy of using—or misusing—law as a substitute for traditional military means to achieve an operational objective." But lately, commentators and governments have applied the concept to International Criminal Tribunals, the defense counsel's tactics challenging the detention of al Qaeda suspects in Guantanamo Bay, and as indicated in the quote above to the controversial Goldstone Commission Report. This symposium and Experts Meeting, featuring two-dozen leading academics, practitioners, and former government officials from all sides of the political spectrum, will examine the usefulness and appropriate application of the "Lawfare" concept.

September 10, 2010 War Crimes Research Symposium Frederick K. Cox International Law Center Case Western Reserve University School of Law Speakers: Dean Robert Rawson, Case Western Reserve University School of Law Prof. Michael Scharf, director, Cox Center, Case Western Reserve University School of Law Prof. Michael Kelly, president, AIDP, Creighton University School of Law Summary: Traditionally "Lawfare" was defined as "a strategy of using—or misusing—law as a substitute for traditional military means to achieve an operational objective." But lately, commentators and governments have applied the concept to International Criminal Tribunals, the defense counsel's tactics challenging the detention of al Qaeda suspects in Guantanamo Bay, and as indicated in the quote above to the controversial Goldstone Commission Report. This symposium and Experts Meeting, featuring two-dozen leading academics, practitioners, and former government officials from all sides of the political spectrum, will examine the usefulness and appropriate application of the "Lawfare" concept.

September 9, 2011 International Law in Crisis - Main Lecture Frederick K. Cox International Law Center Case Western Reserve University School of Law Speaker: Honorable Richard Goldstone, former Justice, Constitutional Court of South Africa; former Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda

In the last twenty years several international courts have been established to try crimes committed in armed conflicts. Public expectation of what these courts may achieve is high; but are the courts living up to that expectation? Is the public expectation realistic and part of a...

United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights from 2004 to 2008. Ms. Arbour, a Canadian national, was appointed in 1996 by the Security Council of the United Nations as Chief Prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugo...

United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights from 2004 to 2008. Ms. Arbour, a Canadian national, was appointed in 1996 by the Security Council of the United Nations as Chief Prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugo...

Peace and security are international public goods, but have traditionally been the preserve of state actors. This is changing. An increasingly vocal global civil society is emerging, as new challenges and conflicts test conventional, state-based approaches to preventing and resolving war. Civil society actors now play multiple roles in maintaining peace and security – early warning, identifying neglected conflicts, formulating policy responses, mobilizing public opinion, even directly assisting peace talks. Philanthropy has proven indispensable to civil society’s influence and its ability to pursue a global public good. Louise Arbour will examine public interest diplomacy, and the crucial roles of civil society and philanthropy in maintaining peace and security. Before being named President CEO of the International Crisis Group, she served as United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, as well as the Chief Prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda.

Professor Payam Akhavan of McGill’s Faculty of Law. He was the first Legal Advisor to the Prosecutor's Office of the International Criminal Tribunals for Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, integral to the development of its foundational jurisprudence.

Professor Payam Akhavan of McGill’s Faculty of Law was the first Legal Advisor to the Prosecutor's Office of the International Criminal Tribunals for Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, integral to the development of its foundational jurisprudence.