Universal Jurisdiction of International Crimes: From Punishment to Protection?

• In Event: Human Rights Promotion and Protection on the Global Stage

Abstract

States often use their domestic courts to prosecute individuals for serious international crimes that occur outside their territory. Historically, the intellectual and political justification for universal jurisdiction has been that it is necessary to punish criminals that would otherwise live with impunity. However, recent lawsuits in France and Germany involve states asserting universal jurisdiction to protect the human rights of political dissidents who are wanted for prosecution in Rwanda and Syria. Why has universal jurisdiction shifted from a tool of criminal punishment to a tool of human rights protection? We argue that changing patterns of warfare, migration, and judicial cooperation have created a class of individuals who are simultaneously criminals and refugees, both entitled to international protection and deserving of international punishment. We illustrate this growing class of individuals using data on universal jurisdiction defendants and we highlight the legal paradoxes inherent in these cases using case studies of Rwandan and Syrian defendants.

Authors

• Natalie Marisa Bryce, University of California, Los Angeles

• Leslie Johns, University of California, Los Angeles

• Maximo Langer