No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 February 2017
This paper is an abstract of Coming to Terms with Ruthlessness: Sovereign Equality, Global Pluralism, and the Limits of International Criminal Justice, 8 Santa Clara J. Int’l L. 231 (2010).
1 For contrasting perspectives on the tendency toward such gap-filling in international criminal law, see Schaack, Beth Van, Crimen Sine Lege: Judicial Lawmaking at the Intersection of Law and Morals, 97 Geo. L. J. 119 (2008)Google Scholar; Robinson, Darryl, The Identity Crisis of International Criminal Law 21 Leiden J. Int’l L. 925 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.