Reimagining Justice: Classical Foundations, Empirical Realities, and the Future of International Criminal Law

Abstract

This study explores how classical philosophies of justice can inform and challenge contemporary international criminal law. Drawing on the ideas of Plato, Aristotle, and Cicero, it examines three enduring dilemmas—selectivity in prosecution, inconsistency in command responsibility, and the erosion of procedural integrity. Through comparative analysis of cases such as the ICC prosecutions of Omar al-Bashir and Joseph Kony, the ICTY trial of Milošević, and the Habré case, the study shows how power, resources, and politics shape the application of justice. By integrating philosophical reasoning with empirical realities, this study argues that revisiting classical thought can reveal structural biases while offering principles for reform. It concludes that international criminal justice can become more fair and legitimate when grounded in critical yet adaptive interpretations of classical justice.