By Errol P. Mendes

This text provides an analysis of the greatest challenge facing the International Criminal Court - a reconcilliation of the demands for justice for the most serious crimes known to humanity. The author argues that the Court is a product of centuries of efforts to reconcile peace with justice. The Court as offspring of centuries of peace with justice -- Is it peace or justice that ends the alleged first genocide of the 21st century? -- Is it peace, justice or a military solution in the tragedy of Northern Uganda? -- Reconciling peace with justice in the ICC through positive international complementarity -- The future of the Court : reassuring Africa, investigating Gaza, integrating America and seeking help from global finance.

Cheltenham, UK • Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar, 2010. 215p.

By Cenap Çakmak

This book offers a historical presentation of how international criminal law has evolved from a national setting to embodying a truly international outlook. As a growing part of international law this is an area that has attracted growing attention as a result of the mass atrocities and heinous crimes committed in different parts of the world. Çakmak pays particular attention to how the first permanent international criminal court was created and goes on to show how solutions developed to address international crimes have remained inadequate and failed to restore justice. Calling for a truly global approach as the only real solution to dealing with the most severe international crimes, this text will be of great interest to scholars of criminal justice, political science, and international relations.

Palgrave Macmillan, 2017. 305p.

By Yvonne Dutton

Dutton examines the ICC and whether and how its enforcement mechanism influences state membership and the court’s ability to realize treaty goals, examining questions such as:

• Why did states decide to create the ICC and design the institution with this uniquely strong enforcement mechanism?

• Will the ICC’s enforcement mechanism be sufficient to hold states accountable to their commitment so that the ICC can realize its goal of ending impunity for genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes?

• Will states view the ICC’s enforcement mechanism as a credible threat and refuse to join unless they already have good domestic human rights practices and institutions that are independent and capable of prosecuting human rights abuses?

• If states that most need to improve their domestic legal practices as relates to protecting against human rights abuses do not join the court, is there any hope that the threat of punishment by the ICC can play a role in bettering state’s human rights practices and deterring individuals from committing mass atrocities?

This work provides a significant contribution to the field, and will be of great interest to students and scholars of international law, international relations, international organizations and human rights.

Abingdon, Oxon; New York: Routledge, 2013. 216p.

By Sarah Babaian

This book provides an analysis of whether the International Criminal Court can be regarded as an International Criminal World Court, capable of exercising its jurisdiction upon every individual despite the fact that not every State is a Party to the Rome Statute. The analysis is based on a twin-pillar system, which consists of a judicial and an enforcement pillar. The judicial pillar is based on the most disputed articles of the Rome Statute; its goal is to determine the potential scope of the Court’s strength through the application of its jurisdiction regime. The enforcement pillar provides an analysis of the cooperation and judicial assistance mechanism pursuant to the Rome Statute’s provisions and its practical implementation through States’ practices. The results of the analysis, and the lack of an effective enforcement mechanism, demonstrate that the ICC cannot in fact be considered a criminal world court. In conclusion, possible solutions are presented in order to improve the enforcement pillar of the Court so that the tremendous strength of the ICC’s judicial pillar, and with it, the exercise of worldwide jurisdiction, can be effectively implemented.

Cham: Springer, 2018. 216p.

Edited  by The United Nations  

Seventy Years of the International Law Commission: Drawing a Balance for the Future brings together voices from academia and practice to celebrate and critically evaluate the work of the United Nations International Law Commission (ILC) over the past seventy years. The edited volume draws on the events commemorating the seventieth anniversary of the Commission, which took place in New York and Geneva in May and July 2018. At a time when multilateral law-making has become increasingly challenging, the edited volume appraises the role of one the most important driving forces behind the codification of international law and discusses the ILC’s future contribution to the development of international law. Readership: The prospective readership of the edited volume will be very diverse, including academics and practitioners of international law around the world.

Leiden; Boston: Brill Nijhoff,  2021. 475p.

By Farhad Malekian

The goal of this book is to minimize the misunderstandings and conflicts between International law and Islamic law. The objective is to bring peace into justice and justice into peace for the prevention of violations of human rights law, humanitarian law, international criminal law, and impunity. Readership: This book offers a peaceful resolution into international justice for researchers, students, practicing lawyers, military personnel, governmental officials, diplomats, judges, and prosecutors. It constitutes a prized addition to university and public libraries.

Leiden; Boston: Brill Nijhoff, 2011. 476p.

By Alexandre Skander Galand

Galand critically spells out a comprehensive conception of the nature and effects of Security Council referrals that responds to the various limits to the International Criminal Court’s exercise of jurisdiction over situations that concern nationals and territories of non-party States.

Leiden; Boston: Brill Nijhoff, 2018. 279p.

By Christopher Rudolph

Human rights advocates have long pressed for international institutions to prosecute crimes against humanity. With its global reach and mandate to investigate and prosecute some of the world's most severe crimes (genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity) the creation of the International Criminal Court in 2002 was hailed as a landmark event in the evolution of truly global society. Supporters argue that the ICC and other transnational tribunals will deter the commission of atrocities and contribute to global peace and stability, and they laud its independence and its potential to check the arbitrary use of power against the powerless. To better understand how international criminal courts function and determine their broader implications for global society, this book examines the factors that led to the creation and evolution of international criminal courts, the nature of the support for and opposition to such institutions, and how they function.

Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 232p.

Edited by Joel D. Lieberman and Daniel A. Krauss

This is the first volume of an important new two-volume work on the Psychology of the Courtroom. Taken together, the two volumes offer a definitive account of the problems created by or influencing courtroom procedure and trial outcome from a psychological perspective. Each volume is also designed to be consulted separately. In "Jury Psychology: Social Aspects of the Trial Processes" a highly respected group of scholars explore the influence of trial procedures on juror decision-making. A wide range of topics are covered including pretrial publicity and inadmissible evidence, jury selection, jury instruction, and death penalty cases, as well as decision-making in civil trials. In addition, a number of global issues are discussed, including procedural justice issues and theoretical models of juror decision-making. A consideration of methodological issues relevant to the study of juror behavior is provided. All of these topics are discussed from a psychological perspective. Throughout the volume the authors make recommendations for improving trial procedures where jurors are involved, and they discuss how the problems and potential solutions are relevant to courts around the world.

Abingdon, Oxon; New York: Routledge. 2009. 240p.

Edited by Bruce A. Arrigo

A critical look at the relationship between law and psychology.

Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2004. 250p.

By R. D. Mackay

Mental condition defences have been used in several high-profile and controversial criminal trials in recent years. indeed, mental abnormality is increasingly an important yet complex source of defence within the criminal trial process. The author offers a detailed critical analysis of those defences within the Criminal Law where the accused relies on some form of mental abnormality as a source of defence. Topics covered include: the defences of automatism, insanity, diminished responsibility, and infanticide; self-induced incapacity; and the doctrine of fault. It also includes a chapter on unfitness to plead, which although not a defence has been included because of its important relationship to mental disorder within the criminal process. Drawing upon a wide variety of legal, psychiatric, and philosophical sources, this is a timely contribution to a controversial and complex topic.

Oxford, UK; New York: Oxford University Press, 1996p. 278p.

Edited by Antony Duff

Five preeminent legal theorists tackle a range of fundamental questions on the nature of the philosophy of criminal law. Their essays explore the extent to which and the ways in which our systems of criminal law can be seen as rational and principled. The essays discuss some of the principles by which, it is often thought, a system of law should be structured, and they ask whether our own systems are genuinely principled or riven by basic contradictions, reflecting deeper political and social conflicts

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1998. 272p.

By Andrew Ashworth

Written by Andrew Ashworth, a well-known expert in the field of criminal law, this book offers a set of essays, old and new, that examine the positive obligations of individuals and the State in matters of criminal law. The centerpiece is a new, extended essay on the criminalization of omissions - examining the duty to act that is imposed upon individuals and organizations by the criminal law, and assessing their moral and social foundations. Alongside this is another new essay on the State's positive obligations to put in place criminal laws to protect certain individual rights. Introducing the volume is Ashworth's much-cited essay on criminalization: Is the Criminal Law a Lost Cause? The book sheds new light on contemporary arguments about the proper boundaries of the criminal law, not least by exploring the justifications for imposing positive duties (reinforced by the criminal law) on individuals and their relation to the positive obligations of the State.

Oxford, UK; Portland, OR: Hart Publishing, 2013. 233p.

Edited by Julian V Roberts and Lucia Zedner

Celebrating the scholarship of Andrew Ashworth, Vinerian Professor of English Law at the University of Oxford, this collection brings together leading international scholars to explore questions of principle and value in criminal law and criminal justice. Internationally renowned for elaborating a body of principles and values that should underpin criminalization, the criminal process, and sentencing, Ashworth's contribution to the field over forty years of scholarship has been immense. Advancing his project of exploring normative issues at the heart of criminal law and criminal justice, the contributors examine the important and fascinating debates in which Ashworth's influence has been greatest.

The essays fall into three distinct but related areas, reflecting Ashworth's primary spheres of influence. Those in Part 1 address the import and role of principles in the development of a just criminal law, with contributions focusing upon core tenets such as the presumption of innocence, fairness, accountability, the principles of criminal liability, and the grounds for defences. Part 2 addresses questions of human rights and due process protections in both domestic and international law. In Part 3 the essays are addressed to core issues in sentencing and punishment: they explore questions of equality, proportionality, adherence to the rule of law, the totality principle (in respect of multiple offences), wrongful acquittals, and unduly lenient sentences. Together they demonstrate how important Ashworth's work has been in shaping how we think about criminal law and criminal justice, and make their own invaluable contribution to contemporary discussions of criminalization and punishment.

Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 375p.

By Reid Griffith Fontaine

In American criminal law, if a defendant demonstrates that they lack certain psychological capabilities, they may be excused of blame and punishment for wrongdoing. However, criminal defense law often fails to consider the developmental science of individual differences in ability and functioning that may inform jurisprudential issues of rational capacity and responsibility in criminal law. This book discusses the excusing nature of a range of both traditional and nontraditional criminal law defenses and questions the structure of these defenses based on scientific findings from social and developmental psychology. This book explores how research on individual differences in the development of social perception, judgment, and decision making explain why some youths and adults develop psychological tendencies that favor criminal behavior, and considers how developmental science can guide the understanding of criminal excuses and affirmative defense law.

Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012. 282p.

By R.A. Duff

This book reflects the belief that a careful study of the Law of Attempts should be both interesting in itself, as well as being a productive route into a number of larger and deeper issues in criminal law theory and in the philosophy of action. By identifying the legal doctrines which courts and legislatures have developed or adopted, the author goes on to ask whether and how they can be rationalized or rendered persuasive. Such an approach involves paying detailed attention to cases. The book is also unusual in that it grapples with English, Scots and US law, showing great breadth of research as well as philosophical sophistication.

Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1997, 448p.

By Jeremy Horder

A number of jurisdictions world-wide have changed or are considering changing their homicide laws. Important changes have now been recommended for England and Wales, and these changes are an important focus in this book, which brings together leading experts from jurisdictions across the globe — England, Wales, the US, Canada, France, Germany, Scotland, Australia, Singapore, and Malaysia — to examine key aspects of the law of homicide. Key areas include the structure of the law of homicide and the meaning of fault elements. For example, the definition of murder, or its equivalent, is very different in France and Germany when compared to the definition used in England and Wales. French law, like the law in a number of US states, ties the definition of murder to the presence or absence of premeditation, unlike the law in England and Wales. Unlike most other jurisdictions, German law makes the killer's motive, such as a sadistic sexual motive, relevant to whether or not he or she committed the worst kind of homicide. England and Wales are in a minority of English-speaking jurisdictions in that these two countries do not employ the concept of 'wicked' recklessness, or of extreme indifference, as a fault element in homicide. Understanding these often subtle differences between the approaches of different jurisdictions to the definition of homicide is an essential aspect of the law reform process, and of legal study and scholarship in criminal law. Every jurisdiction tries to learn from the experience of others.

Oxford, UK: Hart Publishing, 2007. 265p.

By Cody Tuttle

I test for racial disparities in the criminal justice system by analyzing abnormal bunching in the distribution of crack-cocaine amounts used in federal sentencing. I compare cases sentenced before and after the Fair Sentencing Act, a 2010 law that changed the 10-year mandatory minimum threshold for crack-cocaine from 50g to 280g. First, I find that after 2010, there is a sharp increase in the fraction of cases sentenced at 280g (the point that now triggers a 10-year mandatory minimum), and that this increase is disproportionately large for black and Hispanic offenders. I then explore several possible explanations for the observed racial disparities, including discrimination. I analyze data from multiple stages in the criminal justice system and find that the increased bunching for minority offenders is driven by prosecutorial discretion, specifically as used by about 20-30% of prosecutors. Moreover, the fraction of cases at 280g falls in 2013 when evidentiary standards become stricter. Finally, the racial disparity in the increase cannot be explained by differences in education, sex, age, criminal history, seized drug amount, or other elements of the crime, but it can be almost entirely explained by a measure of state-level racial animus. These results shed light on the role of prosecutorial discretion and potentially racial discrimination as causes of racial disparities in sentencing.

College Park, MD: University of Maryland, 2019. 121p.

By Color Of Change and ACLU’s Campaign for Smart Justice

Every year in the United States, millions of people are forced to pay cash bail after their arrest or face incarceration before trial. This is despite the fact that they are presumed innocent and have not been convicted of a crime. To avoid being locked up while their cases go through the courts—which can sometimes take months or even years—people who cannot afford bail must pay a non-refundable fee to a for-profit bail bonds company to front the required bail amount. The financial burden of this fee harms individuals, it harms families, and it disproportionately affects Black and low-income communities. The only winner is the bottom line of big for-profit businesses. These harms are perpetuated by the large insurance corporations that control the two-billion dollar for-profit bail bonds industry, which is both unaccountable to the justice system and unnecessary to justice itself. Large companies whose only goal is profit should not be the gatekeepers of pretrial detention and release. The for-profit bail system in the United States fuels mass incarceration and contributes to racial and economic inequalities. It is a destructive force that undermines the rights of people who come into contact with the criminal justice system, and it must be abolished.

New York: American Civil Liberties Union, 2017. 64o,

By Christopher T. Lowenkamp, Marie VanNostrand and Alexander Holsinger,

Each time a person is arrested and accused of a crime, a decision must be made as to whether the accused person, known as the defendant, will be detained in jail awaiting trial or will be released back into the community. But pretrial detention is not simply an either-or proposition; many defendants are held for a number of days before being released at some point before their trial. The release-and-detention decision takes into account a number of different concerns, including protecting the community, the need for defendants to appear in court, and upholding the legal and constitutional rights afforded to accused persons awaiting trial. It carries enormous consequences not only for the defendant but also for the safety of the community" (p. 3). This study examines the relationship between pretrial detention and sentencing. Sections following an executive summary include: introduction; sample description; and findings for eight research questions regarding the relations between pretrial detention and sentencing. Defendants who are detained for the entire pretrial period are three times more likely to be sentenced to jail or prison and to receive longer jail and prison sentences.

Houston, TX: Laura and John Arnold Foundation, 2013. 21p.