International criminal courts exist to help countries and communities move forward after atrocities and to bring those accused of war crimes to justice. Yet local residents and witnesses often perceive them to lack political legitimacy.Drawn from extensive primary research in Rwanda, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, and Kenya, Illegitimate Justice challenges the view that as long as international courts are striving for the concept of justice, establishing legal precedents, and prosecuting war criminals, they are fulfilling their purpose. Through interviews with individuals in the fields of education, law, religion, politics, the media, and civil society, Izabela Steflja listens to the people affected by conflict and by the justice processes meant to repair harm. She reveals how international courts have failed local communities through lack of accountability – even, at times, active disregard. The stories local people tell about international courts differ radically from those the international community tells itself about justice and reconciliation.Combining field research with an original comparative narrative model, Illegitimate Justice will be invaluable reading for people active in post-conflict communities and work, as well as for legal, political, and human rights students and scholars.

International criminal courts exist to help countries and communities move forward after atrocities and to bring those accused of war crimes to justice. Yet local residents and witnesses often perceive them to lack political legitimacy.Drawn from extensive primary research in Rwanda, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, and Kenya, Illegitimate Justice challenges the view that as long as international courts are striving for the concept of justice, establishing legal precedents, and prosecuting war criminals, they are fulfilling their purpose. Through interviews with individuals in the fields of education, law, religion, politics, the media, and civil society, Izabela Steflja listens to the people affected by conflict and by the justice processes meant to repair harm. She reveals how international courts have failed local communities through lack of accountability even, at times, active disregard. The stories local people tell about international courts differ radically from those the international community tells itself about justice and reconciliation.Combining field research with an original comparative narrative model, Illegitimate Justice will be invaluable reading for people active in post-conflict communities and work, as well as for legal, political, and human rights students and scholars.

International criminal courts exist to help countries and communities move forward after atrocities and to bring those accused of war crimes to justice. Yet local residents and witnesses often perceive them to lack political legitimacy.Drawn from extensive primary research in Rwanda, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, and Kenya, Illegitimate Justice challenges the view that as long as international courts are striving for the concept of justice, establishing legal precedents, and prosecuting war criminals, they are fulfilling their purpose. Through interviews with individuals in the fields of education, law, religion, politics, the media, and civil society, Izabela Steflja listens to the people affected by conflict and by the justice processes meant to repair harm. She reveals how international courts have failed local communities through lack of accountability even, at times, active disregard. The stories local people tell about international courts differ radically from those the international community tells itself about justice and reconciliation.Combining field research with an original comparative narrative model, Illegitimate Justice will be invaluable reading for people active in post-conflict communities and work, as well as for legal, political, and human rights students and scholars.

Women war criminals are far more common than we think. From the Holocaust to ethnic cleansing in the Balkans to the Rwandan genocide, women have perpetrated heinous crimes. Few have been punished. These women go unnoticed because their very existence challenges our assumptions about war and about women. Biases about women as peaceful and innocent prevent us from "seeing" women as war criminals—and prevent postconflict justice systems from assigning women blame.Women as War Criminals argues that women are just as capable as men of committing war crimes and crimes against humanity. In addition to unsettling assumptions about women as agents of peace and reconciliation, the book highlights the gendered dynamics of law, and demonstrates that women are adept at using gender instrumentally to fight for better conditions and reduced sentences when war ends.The book presents the legal cases of four women: the President (Biljana Plavšić), the Minister (Pauline Nyiramasuhuko), the Soldier (Lynndie England), and the Student (Hoda Muthana). Each woman's complex identity influenced her treatment by legal systems and her ability to mount a gendered defense before the court. Justice, as Steflja and Trisko Darden show, is not blind to gender.

International criminal courts exist to help countries and communities move forward after atrocities and to bring those accused of war crimes to justice. Yet local residents and witnesses often perceive them to lack political legitimacy.Drawn from extensive primary research in Rwanda, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, and Kenya, Illegitimate Justice challenges the view that as long as international courts are striving for the concept of justice, establishing legal precedents, and prosecuting war criminals, they are fulfilling their purpose. Through interviews with individuals in the fields of education, law, religion, politics, the media, and civil society, Izabela Steflja listens to the people affected by conflict and by the justice processes meant to repair harm. She reveals how international courts have failed local communities through lack of accountability – even, at times, active disregard. The stories local people tell about international courts differ radically from those the international community tells itself about justice and reconciliation.Combining field research with an original comparative narrative model, Illegitimate Justice will be invaluable reading for people active in post-conflict communities and work, as well as for legal, political, and human rights students and scholars.

International criminal courts exist to help countries and communities move forward after atrocities and to bring those accused of war crimes to justice. Yet local residents and witnesses often perceive them to lack political legitimacy.Drawn from extensive primary research in Rwanda, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, and Kenya, Illegitimate Justice challenges the view that as long as international courts are striving for the concept of justice, establishing legal precedents, and prosecuting war criminals, they are fulfilling their purpose. Through interviews with individuals in the fields of education, law, religion, politics, the media, and civil society, Izabela Steflja listens to the people affected by conflict and by the justice processes meant to repair harm. She reveals how international courts have failed local communities through lack of accountability even, at times, active disregard. The stories local people tell about international courts differ radically from those the international community tells itself about justice and reconciliation.Combining field research with an original comparative narrative model, Illegitimate Justice will be invaluable reading for people active in post-conflict communities and work, as well as for legal, political, and human rights students and scholars.

International criminal courts exist to help countries and communities move forward after atrocities and to bring those accused of war crimes to justice. Yet local residents and witnesses often perceive them to lack political legitimacy.Drawn from extensive primary research in Rwanda, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, and Kenya, Illegitimate Justice challenges the view that as long as international courts are striving for the concept of justice, establishing legal precedents, and prosecuting war criminals, they are fulfilling their purpose. Through interviews with individuals in the fields of education, law, religion, politics, the media, and civil society, Izabela Steflja listens to the people affected by conflict and by the justice processes meant to repair harm. She reveals how international courts have failed local communities through lack of accountability even, at times, active disregard. The stories local people tell about international courts differ radically from those the international community tells itself about justice and reconciliation.Combining field research with an original comparative narrative model, Illegitimate Justice will be invaluable reading for people active in post-conflict communities and work, as well as for legal, political, and human rights students and scholars.

Women war criminals are far more common than we think. From the Holocaust to ethnic cleansing in the Balkans to the Rwandan genocide, women have perpetrated heinous crimes. Few have been punished. These women go unnoticed because their very existence challenges our assumptions about war and about women. Biases about women as peaceful and innocent prevent us from "seeing" women as war criminals—and prevent postconflict justice systems from assigning women blame.Women as War Criminals argues that women are just as capable as men of committing war crimes and crimes against humanity. In addition to unsettling assumptions about women as agents of peace and reconciliation, the book highlights the gendered dynamics of law, and demonstrates that women are adept at using gender instrumentally to fight for better conditions and reduced sentences when war ends.The book presents the legal cases of four women: the President (Biljana Plavšić), the Minister (Pauline Nyiramasuhuko), the Soldier (Lynndie England), and the Student (Hoda Muthana). Each woman's complex identity influenced her treatment by legal systems and her ability to mount a gendered defense before the court. Justice, as Steflja and Trisko Darden show, is not blind to gender.