International Criminal Law

This article examines how the ICJ and ICC navigate legitimacy challenges in armed conflicts, testing their authority, fairness, and impact on global peace and justice.

Judicial involvement in ongoing armed conflicts should be examined from multiple vantage points: courts, victims, parties to conflict, and broader goals of peace and security.

For international criminal law to remain a compelling set of norms, the central principles that formed Nuremberg must be vigorously defended.

The ICC Appeals Chamber affirmed the case against Israeli leaders, narrowing Article 18 complementarity and raising concerns about the Court’s treatment of non-member states.

Why did Maduro tell the judge he's still president? One reason: under international law, one country's sitting head of state can’t be prosecuted in another country’s courts.

An amnesty in any future peace plan would be unlawful and a moral abdication of the pursuit of accountability for victims in Russia's war in Ukraine.

Compromising on prosecutions for Russian atrocities would erode the system of international justice built since Nuremberg and undermine the rule of law itself.

Clearly, U.S. actions are threatening to Venezuela. But do they amount to an unlawful threat under international law, or are they merely a lawful show of force?

Just Security, as a co-sponsor of International Law Weekend 2025, is pleased to feature a series centered around the event's theme: "Crisis as Catalyst in International Law."

Chiara Giorgetti, Milena Sterio, and Rebecca Hamilton join Just Security’s Managing Editor, Megan Corrarino, to discuss takeaways from ABILA's International Law Weekend. 

To see crisis as catalyst is to reject fatalism and to believe that law can be both a shield and a compass in turbulent times. #ILW2025 aims to honor that belief.

More cyber litigation will appear on the docket as pathways to legal accountability for unlawful State-sponsored cyber operations strengthen.