ABSTRACT
Does the threat of international criminal prosecution restrain perpetrators of genocidal violence, crimes against humanity, and war crimes? Assumptions about the coercive effects of criminal prosecution clearly inform the way the International Criminal Court (ICC) operates, how states respond to wartime atrocities, and how human rights organizations advocate for appropriate responses to civilian violence. But are these assumptions valid? This chapter assesses what we know—and don’t know—about the coercive effects of international justice in active conflicts. Recent scholarship on the impact of criminal tribunals offers important insights, revealing the complex interaction between violent perpetrators and international prosecutions and showing that legal sanction may impact violent behavior in varied ways. This work has mostly confirmed that wartime coercion of violent actors is extremely difficult and is potentially effective only under very rare conditions and in combination with other more forceful measures to limit violence. Debate continues, however, over the precise mechanisms and conditions under which wartime prosecution restrains perpetrators, encourages more violence, or has no effect at all.
