Proof and Consequences: An Analysis of the Tadic & (and) Akayesu Trials
![handle is hein.journals/deplr49 and id is 991 raw text is: PROOF AND CONSEQUENCES: AN ANALYSIS OF THE
TADIC & AKAYESU TRIALS
INTRODUCTION
The wrongs which we seek to condemn and punish have been so
calculated, so malignant, and so devastating, that civilization cannot
tolerate their being ignored, because it cannot survive their being re-
peated.1 In 1945, Justice Robert Jackson used this poetic phrase in
his opening statement at the Nuremberg Trials.2 Unfortunately, it ap-
pears that the wrongs he spoke of have been repeated in the former
Yugoslavia, Rwanda, Cambodia, and many other regions all over the
world. Through the formation of ad hoc International Criminal Tribu-
nals, the world has acted to condemn and punish those who have com-
mitted wrongs in the renewed hope that such wrongs will not continue
to occur.
The International Military Tribunal for the Prosecution and Punish-
ment of the Major War Criminals of the European Axis (IMT) cre-
ated by the Allies of World War II in Nuremberg, Germany3 stands as
the only precedent involving the trial of international criminals by an
internationally-created adjudicating body.4 The work of the Tribunal
at Nuremberg contributed greatly to the development of international
law. It promulgated the idea that no one should be left totally aban-
doned to the vagaries of his or her government and that.., the inter-
1. TELFORD TAYLOR, THE ANATOMY OF THE NUREMBERG TRIALS 167 (1992) (quoting open-
ing statement of Justice Jackson at the Nuremberg Trials).
2. See id.
3. Agreement for the Prosecution and Punishment of the Major War Criminals of the Euro-
pean Axis, Aug. 8, 1945, 59 Stat. 1544, 82 U.N.T.S. 279. The IMT Charter was annexed to this
document.
4. The International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE) was created a year after
the one in Nuremberg, on January 19, 1946. See M. Cherif Bassiouni, The Sources and Content
of International Criminal Law: A Theoretical Framework, in 1 INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW 3,
6 n.12 (M. Cherif Bassiouni ed., 2d ed. 1999) [hereinafter Bassiouni, Sources and Content]. It
was modeled exclusively after the IMT at Nuremberg and the trials that took place under the
IMTFE, known as the Tokyo trials. See id. The IMT and IMTFE are the only adjudicating
bodies in history to have the ability to directly enforce their decisions. See id. at 14. In other
words, because the Allies controlled both Germany and Japan entirely, the IMT did not need to
rely on the cooperation of the offending countries' domestic laws to enforce its judgments. See
id. at 6-7. This is much different from the to-be-discussed current international tribunals, that
rely heavily on the cooperation of the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda at every step of adjudica-
tion-from the indictment stage to the sentencing stage. See id. at 14.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/deplr49&div=48&collection=journals&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Proof and Consequences: An Analysis of the Tadic & (and) Akayesu Trials
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most