Exploring the Contemporary Practice of Universal Criminal Jurisdiction: Institutional Frameworks and Survivors’ Access to Justice

The research conducts a phenomenological inquiry on the implementation system of universal jurisdiction. This principle has evolved as a tool to fight against impunity within the international criminal justice arena. Although its domestic nature makes it independent of the political and legal constraints of the international mechanisms, first among all the International Criminal Court, power dynamics still influence its exercise. As a result, legitimacy and selectivity issues raised by critical theories are not ruled out. Moving from a critical understanding of international criminal law, the study aims to assess the exercise of universal jurisdiction as a tool to pursue accountability, taking into account the perspectives of those affected by the prosecuted crimes. The research aims to answer the following research question: In the last two decades, after the establishment of the International Criminal Court, how has the practical application of universal jurisdiction evolved in terms of operational frameworks and impact on survivors’ access to justice? The first chapter of the thesis is dedicated to framing the legal concept of universal jurisdiction and to identify its present-day structure. Adopting an institutional perspective, the second chapter looks into the implementation of the principle. Accordingly, it examines the actors involved in the employment of such a tool nowadays, highlighting a cooperation network following horizontal and vertical streams, and identifies challenges and achievements of its operationalisation. The third and final chapter embraces a bottom-up perspective looking at the universal jurisdiction system. Firstly, it questions the limits posed by a retributive justice process in terms of survivors’ and affected communities’ participation. Through the analyses of two case studies, namely universal jurisdiction trials addressing international crimes committed in the Gambia and Syria, it draws conclusions on the impact of the principle on survivors’ access to justice. Taking advantage of the benefits of an interdisciplinary approach to deal with the complexity of a socio-legal phenomenon, the traditional theoretical legal analysis is combined with a more qualitative empirical method. In this regard, interviews were conducted with practitioners and activists directly involved in this kind of proceedings. In addition, participant-observation was carried out at TRIAL International, an NGO active in the litigation of universal jurisdiction cases and support to survivors, contributing to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the topic.