ABSTRACT
Until recently, most Western thinkers have insisted that justice requires retribution and punishment.2 Appeal to legal institutions is, in many respects, the response generally accepted to deal with actions that ‘shock the conscience of humanity’ (Rome Statute: Preamble). The Preamble to the Rome Statute affirms the sentiment of its international drafters that the most serious crimes ‘must not go unpunished and that their effective prosecution must be ensured . . . [to] put an end to impunity for the perpetrators of these crimes and thus to contribute to the prevention of such crimes’ (Rome Statute: Preamble). The first chapters together argued that the processes of ICL – the prosecution and punishment of those convicted – are justified based on their considerable power to communicate the international community’s conceptual commitment to physical security human rights and to minimizing the risk inherent in political organization. However, for retributive justice to have a meaningful expressive power, it must evoke in its audience the right reaction. The audience must appreciate the significance of the communicative tool as it is meant.
