Accountability for Collective Wrongdoing
Tracy Isaacs, Richard Vernon
Cambridge University Press, Jan 31, 2011 - Law
Ideas of collective responsibility challenge the doctrine of individual responsibility that is the dominant paradigm in law and liberal political theory. But little attention is given to the consequences of holding groups accountable for wrongdoing. Groups are not amenable to punishment in the way that individuals are. Can they be punished – and if so, how – or are other remedies available? The topic crosses the borders of law, philosophy and political science, and in this volume specialists in all three areas contribute their perspectives. They examine the limits of individual criminal liability in addressing atrocity, the meanings of punishment and responsibility, the distribution of group punishment to a group's members, and the means by which collective accountability can be expressed. In doing so, they reflect on the legacy of the Nuremberg Trials, on the philosophical understanding of collective responsibility, and on the place of collective accountability in international political relations.
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Collective Responsibility and Postconﬂict Justice
State Criminality and the Ambition of International
A Critical Reading of the International
Joint Criminal Enterprise the Nuremberg Precedent and
Collective Responsibility and Transnational Corporate
Collective Punishment and Mass Conﬁnement
Other editions - View all
actions actors acts afﬁrmatively agency American Arendt argued Article beneﬁts blame Bosnia Bosnia and Herzegovina burden Cambridge University Press causal chapter citizens citizenship collective punishment collective responsibility collective sanctions committed concept conﬂict constitutional context Corporate Crime Court Criminal Responsibility crude–careful culpability customary international law David Luban deﬁned delinquency detention difﬁcult discussion dissident distribution entity Erskine Ethics example ﬁnd ﬁnes ﬁrst Framework global Grotian group members guilt held responsible human rights Ibid ICTY imposed institutional moral agents International Criminal Court international criminal law International Criminal Tribunal Iraq judgment jurisdiction justiﬁed Luban mass atrocity moral responsibility nation-state normative Nuremberg Nuremberg Principles obligations ofﬁcials one’s paras participation perpetrators person political principles prosecution Prosecutor question reﬂect regime reparative justice responsible for genocide retributive Richard Vernon Ruggie Rwanda sentencing Serb Serbia shared signiﬁcant speciﬁc Srebrenica SRSG state’s tion Transnational trial victims violations war crimes wrong wrongdoing York