SORU: aşağıdaki parçaya göre cevaplayınız
One understands from the passage that people put on trial at an international criminal court today ----.
Supporters of today's international criminal tribunals
say that their work builds on the post-World War II
tribunals in Nuremberg and, to a lesser degree,
Tokyo. As a matter of legal doctrine, that is true.
The category of “crimes against humanity”, for
example, was developed at Nuremberg and is now
a central element in many prosecutions. But there is
a critical difference between now and then. The
courts in Nuremberg and Tokyo were part of a
broader political project that aimed to rehabilitate
Germany and Japan, respectively, both socially and
economically, not simply to try guilt or innocence or
hand out harsh punishments. These were military
courts that operated with military efficiency, and the
Allies could then focus fully on the reconstruction of
these countries. Yet, the international courts for the
former Yugoslavia, Rwanda, and the new
International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague, on
the other hand, operate under civilian law and
provide generous protection to defendants. The
result is a ballooning of the court timelines and
costs. For instance, it took the International Criminal
Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) 10 years to complete
the same number of trials that Nuremberg
conducted in less than a year. Indeed, it is clear
that, because of their protracted proceedings and
excessive costs, today's war crimes trials cannot
serve the decisive political and social function that
Nuremberg did.