International Courts

The International Criminal Court's split opinion in the Situation in the Philippines highlights the possibility that the question of temporal jurisdiction is far from over and…

It is not too soon to consider the role of accountability, particularly criminal accountability, in peace talks between Russia and Ukraine.

Russia's justifications for its invasion of Ukraine and the international response demonstrate the enduring relevance of international law.

The increasingly polarized debate over the tribunal’s institutional design – international or hybrid – goes to the heart, and core purpose, of international criminal justice,…

Congress can bring justice for victims of crimes against humanity by passing a statute with universal jurisdiction.

The International Criminal Court's policy on gender persecution covers a wide range of rights under international law.

Despite a tendency to analyze global divisions over aggression trials through a “West” versus “Global South” binary, the longer-term stakes of accountability for Ukraine…

Biden's decision may end a dangerous practice of wishful thinking about U.S. exposure to the ICC’s jurisdiction, one that has helped enable U.S. policies ranging from attacks…

The US, Russia, and other world powers have avenues both to halt the current situation and to pursue justice and accountability.

If the International Court of Justice approaches Iran’s claims against Canada the same way it approached Germany’s claims against Italy, Canada should prevail.

Following Russia's withdrawal from the Black Sea Grain Initiative, what does IHL have to say on food security, Russia's attacks on Ukrainian food export infrastructure, and the…

Accountability for the crime of aggression matters because acts of aggression can lead to other grave crimes, including war crimes and crimes against humanity.