弱者の保護と強者の処罰

― 《保護する責任》 と 《移行期の正義》 が語られる時代―

抄録

  The UN General Assembly's “Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples” in 1960 rejected the imposed international standard of domestic governance. But the recent wave of responsibility to protect and transitional justice (including the establishment of International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and International Criminal Court) resurrected the practice which the international society of sovereign states abandoned half a century ago. A variety of atrocities are now considered to be crimes of international concern so that the state, in which they take place, is held responsible to protect their victims and prosecute their perpetrators while the international society is prepared to intervene if it fails to do so.
  Realists would argue that this combination of protection of the weak and prosecution of the strong deprive the latter of their incentives to make political compromises at the table of international or domestic bargaining, and as a result impede “negotiated settlement” and “negotiated transition.” The primary purpose of this article is to examine and question the validity of this realist claim.