The politics of gender justice
Abstract views: 151
/ 
PDF downloads: 110
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31039/ejohe.2021.4.48Keywords:
gender politics, women’s court, responsibility to protectAbstract
The clash between liberalism and realism as international relations theories and states practices is a driving force within the international criminal justice as well. Liberal peace theory embodied with set of interventionist norms on one hand and doctrine of sovereign equality plus non-intervention political pattern as a realist theory on the other hand, make up for the debate all over the years of doing and undoing politics and gender politics recently. This paper seeks to provide insights on how the international community can and have to enforce accessibility for the gender crimes in armed conflict situations. The discussion based on political and legal scholars, aim to identify challenges and efforts that international community face with regard to sexual crimes and the responsibility to hold accountable based on gender approach crimes done against humanity. The international attempts to reform international legal order will be analyzed through the Rome Statute and the International Criminal Court (ICC), Responsibility to protect norm in lenses of: sovereignty as responsibility, right or duty to intervene, gender articulation of war crimes, principle of complementarity and institutional legitimacy.
References
Annika Bjorkdahl, Johanna Mannergren Selimovic. (2017). Gender and Transitional Justice . In O. Simic, An Introduction to Transitional Justice (pp. 69-91). Routledge .
Bassiouni, C. (2009). Advancing the Responsibility to Protect through International Criminal Justice. In J. K. Richard Cooper, Responsibility to Protect. The global moral compact for the 21st century (pp. 31-43). Palgrave Macmillan.
Bellamy, A. (2020, September 21). Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect. Retrieved from https://www.globalr2p.org/publications/the-responsibility-to-protect-at-15-a-promise-unfulfilled/
Bodansky, D. (2012). Legitimacy in International law and International Relations . Working Paper for the Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law. Phoenix: Arizona State University
Campbell, J. (2004). Institutional change and globalization . Princeton University Press.
Chapell, L. (2016). The politics of gender justice at the International Criminal Court: legacies and legitimacy. Oxford University Press.
Duncanson, C. (2016). Gender and peacebuilding . Polity Press.
Ercan, P. (2016). Debating the future of the Responsibility to Protect. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Mateus Kowalski, Patricia Teles. (2017). International Criminal Justice, a dialogue between two cultures. Lisboa: Observare.
Megret, F. (2011). Too much of a good thing? Implementation and the uses of complementarity. In M. E. Carsten Stahn, The International Criminal Court and Complementarity (pp. 361-390). Cambridge University Press.
Michael Barnett, Martha Finnemore. (2004). Rules for the World: International organizations in Global politics . Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Nations, U. (1988). Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court . United Nations .
Prosecutor, T. O. (2014). Policy Paper on Sexual and Gender-based crimes . International Criminal Court .
Radnitz, S. (2011). Informal politics and the state. Comparative Politics, 43(3), 351-371.
Schabas, W. (2011). An Introduction to the International Criminal Court. Cambridge University Press.
Schiff, B. (2010). Evolution of International Criminal Court legitimacy. International Studies Association Annual Meeting . New Orleans.
Vivien Lowndes, Mark Roberts . (2013). Why Institutions matter : The new institutionalism in Political Science . Palgrave Macmillan .
Zyberi, G. (2013). An Institutional Approach to the Responsibility to Protect . Cambridge University Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Ines Stasa
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
