International Justice Eighty Years After Nuremberg: Genocide and the Pursuit of Accountability

This event is open to the public. To attend, please register by clicking the ‘Register Here’ button.

Speakers: To be confirmed

Chair:

Professor Devika Hovell, LSE Law School

Eighty years after the Nuremberg judgment, international law continues to confront a fundamental challenge: how can the prohibition of the gravest international crimes be translated into meaningful accountability for those responsible?

The forthcoming judgment of the International Court of Justice in The Gambia v Myanmar provides an important opportunity to examine this question. The proceedings concern Myanmar's responsibility under the Genocide Convention for its treatment of the Rohingya. They also raise fundamental questions about the role of international courts in enforcing obligations owed to the wider international community, the relationship between State responsibility and individual criminal accountability, and the practical consequences of judicial findings.

While the ICJ determines the international responsibility of States, the legacy of Nuremberg lies particularly in the principle that individuals, including political and military leaders, may be held criminally responsible for international crimes. The Myanmar proceedings therefore invite a further question: what avenues remain for pursuing individual accountability for atrocities against the Rohingya, and how might the ICJ's judgment contribute to those efforts?

Alongside the ICJ proceedings, efforts to secure individual criminal accountability have been pursued through the International Criminal Court and national judicial systems. These processes operate under different jurisdictional frameworks, evidentiary requirements and institutional constraints. Their relationship raises important questions about the possibilities and limits of international justice, particularly where those most responsible remain beyond the reach of criminal courts.

The challenges extend beyond prosecution. Even a judgment establishing State responsibility cannot, by itself, secure compliance, provide effective remedies for survivors or prevent further atrocities. What responsibilities fall upon other States and international institutions to respond to judicial findings, support accountability and ensure that the prohibition of genocide has practical effect?

Marking the eightieth anniversary of Nuremberg, this panel will bring together international lawyers, practitioners and advocates to examine the significance of the ICJ's judgment and the wider prospects for justice for the Rohingya. It will explore three interconnected questions:

· The ICJ judgment: What has the Court established about Myanmar's obligations under the Genocide Convention, and what are the judgment's implications for the law of genocide and international adjudication?

· The pursuit of individual accountability: What further avenues exist for prosecuting those responsible for atrocities against the Rohingya, including through the ICC and domestic courts? What contribution might the ICJ's judgment make to these efforts, and what obstacles remain?

· Beyond the courtroom: What responsibilities fall upon other States and international institutions following the judgment? How can judicial findings be translated into meaningful accountability, remedies and prevention?

Eighty years after Nuremberg, the central challenge remains not simply to articulate the legal prohibition of international crimes, but to ensure that those responsible can be held to account.

LSE holds a wide range of events, covering many of the most controversial issues of the day, and speakers at our events may express views that cause offence. The views expressed by speakers at LSE events do not reflect the position or views of the London School of Economics and Political Science.