ABSTRACT
This chapter explores how international lawyers drew on the logic of the Eichmann narrative to construct a moralist horizon and how they were able to manoeuvre into a hegemonic position within the debate from the mid-1990s until International Court of Justice's judgment in the Arrest Warrant case. It discusses how competing positions in legal discourse are indistinguishable at the structural level of argument, because each position simultaneously draws on both positions and therefore, they merge into one another. Structuralist approach associating the two logics with either the state or humanity, the deconstructionist technique illustrates how state and humanity are both a moralist and formalist position. Schwoebel argues that the practice of international criminal institutions tend to depoliticize victims, forcing victims to ascribe to a particular model of justice. The Eichmann narrative informed the debate surrounding the 'fight against impunity' and the drive for securing universal accountability, including through criminal trials.
