Génocide, Crime contre l'humanité et Crimes et délits de guerre, Tribunal de Grande Instance de Paris.
Br J Sociol. 2018 Dec;69(4):962-983. doi: 10.1111/1468-4446.12604. Epub 2018 Oct 9.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) investigates international crimes committed in different parts of the world. Earlier scholarly analysis of the work performed by the ICC judges has pointed out that judges often lack cultural and national understanding of the local norms and customs of regions where defendants come from. This article treats this lack of contextual knowledge displayed by the court as a case of structural ignorance rather than an aberration to be 'exposed' or censured. International lawyers indeed must ground their legal narratives with plausible sociological explanations of contextual elements to overcome their lack of familiarity with the field and the scarcity of their investigative resources. By uncovering the role of 'folk sociological theories' (FSTs) in the establishment of facts in a court context, this article addresses the debate over the efficiency of international criminal justice by highlighting the need to bring historical truth back in. The empirical evidence is based on several years of participant observation in the ICC during the trials against Mathieu Ngudjolo and Germain Katanga, two militiamen from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).
国际刑事法院（ICC）调查世界各地发生的国际犯罪。早期对 ICC 法官所做工作的学术分析指出，法官往往缺乏对被告来源地区当地规范和习俗的文化和国家理解。本文将法院表现出的这种缺乏背景知识视为结构性无知的情况，而不是需要“揭露”或谴责的异常现象。国际律师确实必须将其法律叙述建立在对背景因素的合理社会学解释之上，以克服他们对该领域的不熟悉和调查资源的匮乏。本文通过揭示“民间社会学理论”（FSTs）在法庭背景下建立事实的作用，解决了关于国际刑事司法效率的争论，强调了需要将历史真相重新纳入其中。实证证据基于在 ICC 参与观察数年，涉及对来自刚果民主共和国的两名民兵 Mathieu Ngudjolo 和 Germain Katanga 的审判。
