We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Mordechai Kremnitzer emphasizes retribution as a rationale of punishment for international crimes, opposing the claim that it should be dismissed or marginalized. While not rejecting deterrence, he brings forward a number of reasons why the retributivist rationale is important. First, for Kremnitzer only punishment based on retribution is morally justified and, in particular from the offender’s human dignity, legitimate. Second, retribution helps to secure the principle of proportionality in sentencing in international criminal law and in this way counter the dangerous trend of overpunishing the ‘small fish’ – in particular ‘victimizers-victims’, i.e., ‘Kapos’ or child soldiers – while underpunishing the big ones. In this regard, Kremnitzer develops the ‘theoretical move’ that retributive justice should be implemented by the ‘principle of conservation of criminal energy’: the ‘small fish’s’ reduced guilt serves as aggravating circumstance to the deeds of the ‘big fish’. As a result, the ‘big fish’ should be in the focus of any prosecutorial strategy of international criminal tribunals, and the problem of (vertical) selectivity due to limited state cooperation should be overcome by (fair) trials in absentia.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.