The (In)visible Courts: Disaggregating the Impact of International Criminal Justice During Ongoing Conflicts

This article investigates the impact of international criminal justice proceedings on state-sponsored violence against civilians during armed conflicts. While most studies focus on the International Criminal Court (ICC), I consider how ICC proceedings differ from another overlooked yet prominent aspect of international criminal justice: extra-territorial proceedings in national courts under the principle of universal jurisdiction. This comparative re-conceptualization of international criminal justice not only provides relevant empirical insights, but it also advances knowledge on the conditions and mechanisms under which international justice produces deterrence. In contrast to existing yearly research, the analysis considers short-term effects and uses monthly data on the initiation of proceedings at various stages – from investigations to sentencing – during conflicts at the ICC and in foreign national courts globally from 1989 to 2023. I find that, while ICC actions are consistently associated with a decrease in violence against civilians within months, proceedings in foreign national courts have a weaker and slower effect. I argue that this is because ICC interventions impose both legal and social costs to perpetrators while national courts mostly impose legal costs. Two main factors can explain this difference: (a) the large resources devoted to support and mediatize ICC proceedings; and (b) the limited jurisdictional reach of national courts.