Word: bagosora
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 2002-2002
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
Katherine M. Dimengo ’04 worries that the legal defenses offered by Bagosora and Milosevic, by challenging the legitimacy of their UN tribunals, are putting the “delicate framework” of the international legal system in jeopardy (Op-Ed, “International Law Under Attack,” April 26). However, she is wrong. The international legal system is quite robust, having survived dozens of full-fledged wars between nations. What is in danger, however, is the pipe dream of an international justice system that will hold all people to some (Western-created) desired...
...terribly ironic that Dimengo, in calling for some impossible ideal of “international justice,” desires that Bagosora and Milosevic “not be given free reign [sic] in their trials” to offer their preferred legal defense. If she doesn’t feel that justice and impartiality have a place in these courts, then what would be the point of creating a permanent...
...without a genuine and realistic alternative to the ICC and the current special war crimes tribunals, we cannot allow the international legal system to fumble. For now, that means that Bagosora and Milosovic must not be given free reign in their trials. They destroyed their homelands; we cannot allow them to destroy the justice that the international legal system can bring...
...questions some Western governments—especially the U.S.—pose are precisely the ones that Bagosora and Milosovic are asking. Questioning physical evidence and direct testimony is not their game plan. Instead, they attack the court itself, as well as the “prejudiced” foreign prosecution...
This defense creates another defendant: the international legal system. Its delicate framework is in danger of being crushed. If Bagosora and Milosovic succeed in putting international law on trial, the world may lose this avenue of punishing crimes against humanity...