Minow's dilemma critical evaluation Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Minows dilemma critical evaluation - Essay ExampleWhile forgetting may seem an alluring option for some, un departing as they are to face the disquietude brought ab expose by rousing old skeletons, t here(predicate) is a greater ethical and moral imperative to exhume the noncurrent if only to serve as lessons for the future. In her important book entitled Between Vengeance and benignity Facing History After Genocide and Mass Violence, Martha Minow looks at the range of institutional responses that pay off been crafted with the end in view of seeking nicety for the victims of mass atrocities and considering accountability from the perpetrators. The ethical imperative of incorporating justice into efforts to state of wards peace in a post-conflict context is at the heart of the transitional justice project. Its premise is that war and conflict have brought about a slew of human rights and international humanitarian law violations which demand accountability from its perpetrators and reparation for its victims. Minow uses this framework in her book as she problematizes the difficulties of navigating the daedal road to justice, in the complex terrain and conditions of a post-conflict situation. Minow, however, presented a crucial dilemma when she stated that The central premise of individualistic responsibility portrays defendants as separate people capable of autonomous choice- when the phenomena of mass atrocities render that assumption at best subtle (1998 46). This is a dilemma because it articulates a conflict between the desire to prosecute individual perpetrators for war crimes and crimes against humanity, and the identification that the mass atrocities were taking place amid extraordinary conditions and assigning individual criminal responsibility to the perpetrators even if they were the leaders or the heads of the military does not capture the depth and breadth and magnitude of the phenomenon at hand. This paper will explore this dilemma eve n further, and will demonstrate that while there is persuasive value to individual criminal responsibility, it is an injustice to constrain or limit oneself to the institutional and legal mechanisms that seek accountability for individual criminal behavior without looking at the conditions that gave rise to the atrocity. To quote Franke (2001 1), Justice is, of course, a very complex ethical, legal, institutional and emotional problem, and its aspirations are rendered all the more difficult in transitional societies that are try with unstable governance, security and economic institutions.. Certainly, there are cases where individual criminal responsibility may be very clearly gleaned. Historical accounts have it that on April 25, 1987, Slobodan Milosevic, the fallen President of Serbia, went to Kosovo Polje and was met with a crowd of cardinal thousand Serbs, including an old man who suddenly shouted to Milosevic that the ethnic Albanians were beating them. Milosevic responded by calling out to the man, No one shall dare beat you again. As if these remarks were not incendiary enough, he proceeded to say, This is your land, your fields, your gardens your memories are here. A decade later, under Milosevics watch, in defense of fields, gardens and memories, Serbian forces unleashed ethnic