| Abstract | The overarching argument of this thesis is that, contemporary international criminal courts and
tribunals have, to varying degrees, exerted significant impacts on judicial, legislative, and executive,
thoughts, processes, and actions within conflict, post-conflict and non-conflict states in the
Commonwealth. This thesis analyzes evidence of these impacts by examining states in the
Commonwealth, where contemporary international criminal courts and tribunals have operational and
jurisdictional relevance. It does this by categorizing such states into four groups of states, conflict,
post-conflict, non-conflict states and states where contemporary international criminal courts and
tribunals have made marginal impacts. The thesis evaluates the impacts of contemporary international
criminal courts and tribunals in these states by analyzing evidence, garnered from a study of judicial,
legislative and executive actions and processes influenced directly or indirectly by contemporary
international criminal courts and tribunals with operational and jurisdictional relevance in the
Commonwealth.
The thesis also undertakes an assessment of the overall impact of contemporary international criminal
courts and tribunals in the Commonwealth on judicial, legislative and executive thoughts, actions and
processes. In assessing the impact, the thesis is framed by two overarching arguments which set the
tone for the discussions and analysis undertaken here. The first is that, certain factors such as
engagement by the different courts and tribunals with states, the role of states actors and institutions;
have helped contemporary international criminal courts and tribunals exert marginal to major
influences on judicial, legislative and executive thoughts, processes and actions within the
Commonwealth. The second overarching argument made in the thesis in assessing the impact of these
contemporary international criminal courts and tribunals is that, certain factors such as the poor
visibility of international criminal courts and tribunals within Commonwealth States, conflicting
visions of justice that these courts and tribunals ought to dispense by relevant stakeholders and the
non-transposition of the norms of international criminal law and international humanitarian law within
Commonwealth States; have inhibited the impact of these courts and tribunals on judicial, legislative
and executive thoughts, processes and actions within the Commonwealth. It concludes by noting that
international criminal courts and tribunals have had different levels of impacts on states across the
Commonwealth due to the coalescence of the foregoing factors. |
|---|