| Property | Value |
|---|
|
?:about
|
|
|
?:abstract
|
-
At the turn of this century, a number of hybrid courts were established to prosecute the most severe crimes committed in warring and post-conflict societies. It was hoped that the decisions would be viewed as more legitimate and the courts could be more efficient through local integration rather than the use of purely international criminal courts. However, interference by local elites, recurrent funding shortfalls and a lack of ownership by international actors quickly cooled enthusiasm for hybrid criminal prosecution. Since 2013, however, a new generation of hybrid institutions has been established. Lisbeth Zimmermann looks at what has been learned from the mistakes of the first generation, and what significance hybrid courts could have in the future.
(xsd:string)
|
|
?:contributor
|
|
|
?:dateModified
|
|
|
?:datePublished
|
|
|
?:duplicate
|
|
|
?:hasFulltext
|
|
|
is
?:hasPart
of
|
|
|
?:inLanguage
|
|
|
?:isbn
|
|
|
?:linksURN
|
|
|
?:location
|
|
|
is
?:mainEntity
of
|
|
|
?:name
|
-
Pragmatism as Principle: the Comeback of Hybrid Courts
(xsd:string)
|
|
?:provider
|
|
|
?:publicationType
|
-
Arbeitspapier
(xsd:string)
|
|
?:sourceInfo
|
|
|
rdf:type
|
|
|
?:url
|
|
|
?:urn
|
-
urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-59497-9
()
|
|
?:volumeNumber
|
|
![[This page as RDF]](https://data.gesis.org/gesiskg/static/rdf-icon.gif){kind=icon}