War crimes, punishment and the burden of proof

Res Publica 16 (2):181-196 (2010)
Abstract
This paper argues that there is a default presumption that punishment has some deterrent effect, and that the burden of proof is upon those who allege that the costs of any particular penal system are insufficient to offset its deterrent benefits. This burden of proof transmits to the discussion of international law, with the conclusion that it is those who oppose international jurisdiction, rather than their opponents, who must prove their position. This they have so far failed to do.
Keywords Punishment  Deterrence  War crimes  International courts
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 12,095
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA
Anthony Ellis (2003). A Deterrence Theory of Punishment. Philosophical Quarterly 53 (212):337–351.
David Luban (2006). Beyond Moral Minimalism. Ethics and International Affairs 20 (3):353–360.
Larry May (2006). Crimes Against Humanity. Ethics and International Affairs 20 (3):349–352.

View all 8 references

Citations of this work BETA
Similar books and articles
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2010-03-20

Total downloads

35 ( #53,321 of 1,102,044 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

7 ( #41,676 of 1,102,044 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.