The ICC vs. Ad Hoc Tribunals
Comparing the permanent ICC with the temporary tribunals for Yugoslavia, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, and Cambodia.
The Ad Hoc Model
Before the ICC, international criminal justice operated through ad hoc tribunals created for specific situations. The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY, 1993-2017) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR, 1994-2015) were both established by the UN Security Council. Hybrid courts, blending international and domestic elements, followed for Sierra Leone, Cambodia, Lebanon, and Kosovo.
Ad hoc tribunals had real advantages. They were tailored to one situation, could concentrate all resources on a single conflict, and drew legitimacy from a specific mandate. The ICTY developed extensive jurisprudence on the wars in the former Yugoslavia and convicted senior leaders including Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic. The ICTR convicted former Rwandan Prime Minister Jean Kambanda for genocide, the first time a head of government was convicted of that crime, and its Akayesu judgment was the first to treat rape as an act of genocide.
