Professors and Lawyers Debate International Criminal Law, Acts of Aggression

UPDATED: April 13, 2017 at 9:11 p.m.

Professors and students at the Law School gathered on Tuesday to argue whether aggressive acts by international states should be included under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.

The panel explored accountability for the illegal use of force, in particular focusing on victim representation and which institutions should have jurisdiction to bring aggressive state actors to trial.

Harvard Law professor Alex Whiting and Middlesex University London professors William Schabas and Donald Ferencz spoke on the panel. Law School Dean Martha Minow and Law School professor Gerald L. Neuman '73 also spoke at the event.

In a pre-recorded video shown at the beginning of the panel, the only remaining prosecutor from the Nuremberg Trials Benjamin B. Ferencz spoke about his career in international criminal law and his role as Chief Prosecutor in the 1947 Einsatzgruppen Trial in Germany.

Ferencz reflected on the effects of aggression in international politics.

“The supreme international crime is committing aggressive war. It is a crime against humanity and should be condemned as such,” he said. “It’s time for the young people to be brave, have courage.”

The event continued with references to essays written by symposium contributors, including members of the Harvard International Law Journal that organized the symposium. Marissa R. Brodney, an executive editor of Harvard International Law Journal, wrote an essay on the designation for victims of aggression.

“The symposium explores what has always been a relevant question and has become an increasingly relevant question in our current geopolitical moment” Brodney said.

Neuman, Whiting, and Ferencz discussed the jurisdictional complexities of ICC, which was established in 1998 to investigate war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide.

Schabas, who has authored more than forty books on international criminal law, emphasized the limits of institutions.

The discussion shifted when an audience member questioned the power of the United Nations Security Council to respond to acts of aggression and what role the General Assembly could play.

Schabas, answered that involving the General Assembly would necessitate reforming the Charter of the United Nations of 1945. Still, he argued that having the Security Council make the decision on how to react to aggressive states presents an “unfair situation because it concentrates the authority in five permanent members.”

The symposium was recorded and will be published online alongside the essays already available online. The Harvard International Law Journal will host another day-long symposium on international law next week.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

CORRECTION: April 13, 2017

A previous version of this article incorrectly attributed two statements to Alex Whiting. In fact, William Schabas made the statements. It also incorrectly omitted Donald Ferencz, who also spoke on the panel.