Disciplinary Matchmaking

Bibliographic Data

ID12734682
AuthorsPádraig McAuliffe (0000-0002-7712-5472, University of Liverpool, corresponding author), Christine Schwöbel-Patel (0000-0002-2103-3405, University of Warwick)
Year2018
Volume16
Issue5
Pages985-1009
Publication date2018-10-11
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of International Criminal Justice (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1478-1395 • E-ISSN: 1478-1387
PublisherOxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1093/jicj/mqy057
OpenAlexW2920201935
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited15

International criminal law is experiencing what has been termed as a ‘critical turn’. With several states declaring their intentions to withdraw from the International Criminal Court’s constituting treaty in 2016, it seems that critique has never been more timely or necessary. The body of work roughly grouped under an approach referred to as critical approaches to international criminal law has contributed to the debate by foregrounding a structural critique instead of an effectiveness critique (which asks how international criminal law can be improved). We propose that the structural critique may be further developed through an engagement with liberal peacekeeping critique. This body of work, which is critical of liberal peacebuilding practices, has many overlapping points of departure with ongoing work in critical approaches to international criminal law, including its focus on questions of political economy, insistence on a historical sensitivity and scepticism of a politics of interventionism. The two fields are also criticized in similar terms, including their tendency towards over-generalization and distance from issues relevant to practice. We argue that these disciplines can learn from one another’s strengths and weaknesses, thereby enriching discourses and practices of critique

Discipline · Political science · Sociology · Competency Development and Evaluation · Research in Social Sciences · Law

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub