Home
Current Issue
Developments
Archive
Table of Contents
Surveys
Book Reviews
Discussion Forum
Information
Reading Room
Links of Interest
Search
Join our email list
Translate this page
  

Previous PageTable of ContentsNext Page

'Transnational Criminal Law'?

Neil Boister*

Full text available: PDF format **

Abstract

International criminal law is currently subdivided into international criminal law stricto sensu - the so-called core crimes - and crimes of international concern - the so-called treaty crimes. This article suggests that the latter category can be appropriately relabelled transnational criminal law to find a doctrinal match for the criminological term transnational crime. The article argues that such a relabelling is justified because of the need to focus attention on this relatively neglected system, because of concerns about the process of criminalization of transnational conduct, legitimacy in the development of the system, doctrinal weaknesses, human rights considerations, legitimacy in the control of the system, and enforcement issues. The article argues that the distinction between international criminal law and transnational criminal law is sustainable on four grounds: the direct as opposed to indirect nature of the two systems, the application of absolute universality as opposed to more limited forms of extraterritorial jurisdiction, the protection of international interests and values as opposed to more limited transnational values and interests, and the differently constituted international societies that project these penal norms. Finally, the article argues that the term transnational criminal law is apposite because it is functional and because it points to a legal order that attenuates the distinction between national and international.

* BA., LL.B., LL.M. (Natal), Ph.D. (Nottingham), Senior Lecturer in Law, University of Canterbury, New Zealand. A version of this piece was presented to the Institute of Criminology, University of Cape Town, 11 October 2001. My thanks to Professor Nigel White, Professor Colin Warbrick, Dr Robert Cryer, Professor Paul Roberts, Dr Richard Burchill, and Professor Roger S. Clark, for criticism and comments.

Previous PageTable of ContentsNext Page





Top of Page

© 1990-2004 European Journal of International Law
All comments and suggestions should be sent to webmaster
This site is part of the Academy of European Law online, a joint partnership of the Jean Monnet Center at NYU School of Law and the Academy of European Law at the European University Institute.
This file was last modified: Friday, August 12, 2005 10:58AM