The Rome statute: Global justice and the asymmetries of recognition

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

Given the emergence of challenges that are increasingly global in nature, and given the irreducible contingency of state borders, it would seem that justice must become global justice: justice that takes shape through a legal order that holds for all of humanity and everywhere. But is justice for all and everywhere possible? At issue, in this question, is not a rearguard defense of the state and state law. Instead, the question concerns the globality of global law and global justice. Is any legal order possible, global or otherwise, that organizes itself as an inside without an outside, that is, which is all-inclusive? A prima facie candidate for such an order is the Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court to investigate and prosecute genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. Yet careful consideration of the scope of the Rome Statute shows that it cannot realize global justice as criminal justice without excluding other forms of justice, for example restorative justice, thereby both recognizing and misrecognizing the victims of the crimes the International Criminal Court is called on to investigate and prosecute. Humanity is inside and outside the Rome Statute’s invocation of ‘the international community as a whole.’ Because it organizes itself as an inside vis-à-vis an outside, the Rome Statute, like all global law and justice, is local law and justice. If, as this article argues, the inside/outside contrast is constitutive for any imaginable legal order, it also draws on the asymmetries of processes of collective recognition to articulate a concept of global justice that is neither universalist nor particularist, neither all-encompassing nor relativistic.
LanguageEnglish
Pages671-700
Number of pages10
JournalIndiana Journal of Global Legal Studies
Volume25
Issue number2
StateAccepted/In press - 2019

Fingerprint

asymmetry
statute
justice
legal order
International Criminal Court
offense
local law
war crime
Law
state law
genocide
contingency
aggression
candidacy

Keywords

  • global justice
  • Rome Statute
  • complementarity

Cite this

@article{7b3fb0f9ed3944e7ba26905919c02edc,
title = "The Rome statute: Global justice and the asymmetries of recognition",
abstract = "Given the emergence of challenges that are increasingly global in nature, and given the irreducible contingency of state borders, it would seem that justice must become global justice: justice that takes shape through a legal order that holds for all of humanity and everywhere. But is justice for all and everywhere possible? At issue, in this question, is not a rearguard defense of the state and state law. Instead, the question concerns the globality of global law and global justice. Is any legal order possible, global or otherwise, that organizes itself as an inside without an outside, that is, which is all-inclusive? A prima facie candidate for such an order is the Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court to investigate and prosecute genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. Yet careful consideration of the scope of the Rome Statute shows that it cannot realize global justice as criminal justice without excluding other forms of justice, for example restorative justice, thereby both recognizing and misrecognizing the victims of the crimes the International Criminal Court is called on to investigate and prosecute. Humanity is inside and outside the Rome Statute’s invocation of ‘the international community as a whole.’ Because it organizes itself as an inside vis-{\`a}-vis an outside, the Rome Statute, like all global law and justice, is local law and justice. If, as this article argues, the inside/outside contrast is constitutive for any imaginable legal order, it also draws on the asymmetries of processes of collective recognition to articulate a concept of global justice that is neither universalist nor particularist, neither all-encompassing nor relativistic.",
keywords = "global justice, Rome Statute, complementarity",
author = "Hans Lindahl",
year = "2019",
language = "English",
volume = "25",
pages = "671--700",
journal = "Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies",
issn = "1080-0727",
publisher = "Indiana University Press",
number = "2",

}

The Rome statute : Global justice and the asymmetries of recognition. / Lindahl, Hans.

In: Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, Vol. 25, No. 2, 2019, p. 671-700.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Rome statute

T2 - Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

AU - Lindahl,Hans

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - Given the emergence of challenges that are increasingly global in nature, and given the irreducible contingency of state borders, it would seem that justice must become global justice: justice that takes shape through a legal order that holds for all of humanity and everywhere. But is justice for all and everywhere possible? At issue, in this question, is not a rearguard defense of the state and state law. Instead, the question concerns the globality of global law and global justice. Is any legal order possible, global or otherwise, that organizes itself as an inside without an outside, that is, which is all-inclusive? A prima facie candidate for such an order is the Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court to investigate and prosecute genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. Yet careful consideration of the scope of the Rome Statute shows that it cannot realize global justice as criminal justice without excluding other forms of justice, for example restorative justice, thereby both recognizing and misrecognizing the victims of the crimes the International Criminal Court is called on to investigate and prosecute. Humanity is inside and outside the Rome Statute’s invocation of ‘the international community as a whole.’ Because it organizes itself as an inside vis-à-vis an outside, the Rome Statute, like all global law and justice, is local law and justice. If, as this article argues, the inside/outside contrast is constitutive for any imaginable legal order, it also draws on the asymmetries of processes of collective recognition to articulate a concept of global justice that is neither universalist nor particularist, neither all-encompassing nor relativistic.

AB - Given the emergence of challenges that are increasingly global in nature, and given the irreducible contingency of state borders, it would seem that justice must become global justice: justice that takes shape through a legal order that holds for all of humanity and everywhere. But is justice for all and everywhere possible? At issue, in this question, is not a rearguard defense of the state and state law. Instead, the question concerns the globality of global law and global justice. Is any legal order possible, global or otherwise, that organizes itself as an inside without an outside, that is, which is all-inclusive? A prima facie candidate for such an order is the Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court to investigate and prosecute genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. Yet careful consideration of the scope of the Rome Statute shows that it cannot realize global justice as criminal justice without excluding other forms of justice, for example restorative justice, thereby both recognizing and misrecognizing the victims of the crimes the International Criminal Court is called on to investigate and prosecute. Humanity is inside and outside the Rome Statute’s invocation of ‘the international community as a whole.’ Because it organizes itself as an inside vis-à-vis an outside, the Rome Statute, like all global law and justice, is local law and justice. If, as this article argues, the inside/outside contrast is constitutive for any imaginable legal order, it also draws on the asymmetries of processes of collective recognition to articulate a concept of global justice that is neither universalist nor particularist, neither all-encompassing nor relativistic.

KW - global justice

KW - Rome Statute

KW - complementarity

M3 - Article

VL - 25

SP - 671

EP - 700

JO - Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

JF - Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

SN - 1080-0727

IS - 2

ER -