Comparative law and the ad hoc Tribunals: the dangers of a narrow inquiry

Zammit Borda, Aldo (2012) Comparative law and the ad hoc Tribunals: the dangers of a narrow inquiry. International Journal of Legal Information, 40 (1-2). pp. 22-38. ISSN 2331-4117

[img]
Preview
Text
Published Version
Available under the following license: Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (892kB) | Preview
Official URL: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0731126500006387

Abstract

This article focuses on the distinctions that the ad hoc Tribunals have drawn between the comparative law method and the review of evidence for clarifying customary international law and general principles of law. It outlines the dangers in the readiness of some international judges to accept narrow inquiries, which at best attach special weight and at worst restrict the scope of inquiry to a single, specific legal system. The readiness of some international judges to simply elevate legal rules and concepts with which they are familiar from their own legal education and practice to the level of universal truths may imply a failure to understand the other legal traditions on offer. The article concludes by showing that, unless the dangers inherent in the readiness to accept narrow inquiries are clearly emphasized, the achievement of an international criminal justice that is truly tolerant of plurality is a long way off.

Item Type: Journal Article
Faculty: ARCHIVED Faculty of Arts, Law & Social Sciences (until September 2018)
Depositing User: Repository Admin
Date Deposited: 23 Dec 2013 09:30
Last Modified: 09 Sep 2021 19:02
URI: https://arro.anglia.ac.uk/id/eprint/308941

Actions (login required)

Edit Item Edit Item