Description
There is significant interest in holding States accountable for breaches of their obligations vis-à-vis genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes (combined also ‘atrocity crimes’). Contemporary events have sparked a plethora of new commentary as to the ability to hold States and individuals accountable for the commission of atrocity crimes and failures to prevent these crimes, and the need for independent accountability mechanisms. Access to justice for atrocity crimes and the creation of dedicated networks to assist accountability mechanisms frequency receive much media interest.
Although the possibility exists to hold States responsible for breaches of their international legal obligations vis-à-vis atrocity crimes, an analysis of case law demonstrates inherent difficulties in adjudicating cases concerning atrocity crimes before domestic and international judicial bodies. The invocation of State responsibility is marred with political, operational, and legal barriers. It is important to consider potential mechanisms and their hurdles for invoking responsibility methodically to understand and remedy any potential barriers to accountability. This presentation demonstrates that while all judicial bodies may be faced with some controversial legal questions concerning atrocity crimes, the primary issues of concern to international bodies will likely centre on the establishment of jurisdiction, the determination of facts, and the collection of evidence. These issues are compounded in relation to authoritarian regimes. The presentation demonstrates how jurisdictional and admissibility obstacles, as well as coherence and fragmentation concerns, may result in State responsibility for violations of obligations vis-à-vis atrocity crimes to simply remain out of reach in some situations.
