This project analyses why justice was prioritised over peace in the Darfur case of the ICC. The claim that justice was prioritised over peace is made based on peacebuilding theory and English School theory which have been applied to the analysis of the case. Elaborated, peacebuilding theory theorises how conflict and development should be prioritised over security and order to pursue a lasting and positive peace, while English School theory theorises how law and order do not function independently but requires cooperation. This creates the criterions for prioritising peace over justice: Cooperation and development. This is then analysed within the Darfur case of the ICC and found to be not the case. In accordance with the analysis, three aspects of the Darfur case argue that justice was prioritised over peace. Firstly, analysis of the discussions within the ICC reveals a focus on security, legitimacy of the institution, and explicit rejections of prioritising peace. Secondly, analysis of the ICC in Darfur reveals a neglect of cooperation, a neglect of reconciliation, and a focus on negative peace as well. Thirdly, analysis of other case studies and ICC principles reveal a neglect of subjectivity and yet again a focus on negative peace and on legitimising the institution of the ICC. Altogether, the analysis argues that the ICC prioritised justice over peace in the Darfur case in order to validate the Court’s own existence. This resolves in the discussion raising the question of what the purpose of justice and the ICC is if the aim is not peace and saving the most lives.
|Uddannelser||Internationale Studier, (Bachelor/kandidatuddannelse) Bachelor|
|Udgivelsesdato||23 maj 2018|