International Courts

Think Again

Human-rights activists envision international courts as a source for justice and peace. Author Helena Cobban, however, questions the worth of international courts, especially when cases are prolonged as in the case of Slobodan Milosevic, former president of Serbia. In Rwanda, the court has spent more than $1 billion prosecuting about 25 cases from the 1994 genocide. Cobban says the court organizers have good intentions, but the “threats of prosecution can actually impede peacemaking, prolong conflict, and multiply the atrocities.” For her, the evidence is not clear that international courts deter war crimes or genocide. Cobban recommends speedy resolutions to conflict, basic protections and rights for citizens in troubled nations, accountability and a system that makes courts a part of a political process that pursues economic and social rehabilitation and not merely punishment. Initiatives such as education or economic development can also end conflicts and contribute to reconciliation. – YaleGlobal