Person: Aksenova, Marina
Loading...
Email Address
Birth Date
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Job Title
First Name
Marina
Last Name
Aksenova
Affiliation
IE University
School
IE Law School
Department
Public Law and Global Governance
Identifiers
Name
4 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
Publication The ICC Involvement in Colombia: Walking the Fine Line Between Peace and Justice(Torkel Opsahl Academic EPublisher (TOAEP), 2018-09-06) Aksenova, Marina; Bergsmo, Morten; Stahn, Carsten; https://ror.org/02jjdwm75-Publication The Future of the International Criminal Court: A Non-human Rights Body?(Cambridge University Press, 2018-10-11) Aksenova, Marina; De Hert, Paul; Smis, Stefaan; Holvoet, Mathias; https://ror.org/02jjdwm75Discussion about the interaction between human rights law (HRL) and international criminal law (ICL) is gaining momentum in scholarly circles. This is not unexpected. Human rights issues are continuously lurking in the background of international criminal trials. It is difficult to imagine international criminal justice without its HRL component – legal guarantees afforded to different parties in the process as well as principles underlying substantive offences in international law. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) expressly requires that the legal sources used by the Court must be interpreted consistently with internationally recognised human rights standards. The relevance of HRL for international criminal trials seems to be implicitly acknowledged, but is rarely studied or analysed systematically. However, can one equate the ICC to a human rights body? To what extent does its mission converge with the mandate of its regional human rights counterparts – the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the Inter- American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) – in upholding and reinforcing human rights? Vasiliev has argued that there exists a strong normative pull to ensure the tribunals’ (and presumably the ICC's) conformity with HRL. It results in an informal hierarchy, in which deference to human rights courts is seen as an aspect of good judging. This tendency stems from a concern shared by both sets of courts to protect human rights from abuses as well as to ensure fair administration of criminal justice. Informal supremacy of human rights case law – or ‘the asymmetry of influence’ – is the result of the uneven mutual substantive relevance of the two disciplines reinforced by the expectation that the ad hoc tribunals would treat human rights jurisprudence with deference – a belief internalised by international judges. Vasiliev has acknowledged the links between ICL and IHRL, but has argued against the normative rhetoric of ‘cross-fertilisation’ – widely accepted in scholarly circles – as it misconstrues the tribunals’ engagement with the regional human rights courts and is incapable of enhancing human rights compliance by the ad hoc tribunals. This chapter continues this line of discourse by invoking an empirical example evidencing the limitations that the ICC faces when incorporating human rights norms in its judicial reasoning.Publication The Emerging Right to Justice in International Criminal Law: A Case Study of Colombia(Cambridge University Press, 2019-06) Aksenova, Marina; Scheinin, Martin; https://ror.org/02jjdwm75This chapter uses the case study of Colombia to argue that there is an emerging right to justice born out of the aspirations of international criminal law. This right comprises several elements, each finding its own unique realisation in the context of Colombia’s transition to peace. More specifically, the chapter discusses the right to see perpetrators of mass atrocities held accountable, the right to peace and reconciliation, the right not to face repetition of collective violence, victims’ right to justice, the right to truth, and, finally, the right to local administration of justice. The International Criminal Court (ICC) plays a role in enforcing these various elements of the overarching right to justice but with clear limitations dictated by the nature of international criminal law as a discipline relying on State cooperation and its own moral appeal. Such process is best understood if one sees the ICC as the enforcer at the domestic level of the generic right to justice.Publication Reinventing or rediscovering international law? The Russian Constitutional Court’s uneasy dialogue with the European Court of Human Rights(Oxford University Press, 2019-01-21) Aksenova, Marina; Marchuk, Iryna; https://ror.org/02jjdwm75This article discusses interactions between the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the European Court of Human Rights. More specifically, it critically examines evolving legal reasoning of the CC with respect to its interpretation of international law. Furthermore, it reflects on broader implications of the CC’s recent rulings that reaffirm the primacy of the Constitution of the Russian Federation over the ECtHR judgments in part where they appear to be contrary to the constitutional law provisions. These rulings are anticipated to have a long-lasting effect on the Russian legal system. They reflect a changing relationship between international and domestic law and signal a shift in Russia toward a more autonomous understanding of international law rooted in the principle of sovereignty that differs from the Western narrative of the discipline. Even more broadly, these emerging new interpretations support the idea of fragmentation of international law not only from a strictly legal perspective—as a plethora of conflicting sources of law—but also from a socio-legal perspective as a discipline harboring conflicting narratives.