International criminal law is experiencing what has been termed as a ‘critical turn’. With several states declaring their intentions to withdraw from the International Criminal Court’s constituting treaty in 2016, it seems that critique has never been more timely or necessary. The body of work roughly grouped under an approach referred to as critical approaches to international criminal law has contributed to the debate by foregrounding a structural critique instead of an effectiveness critique (which asks how international criminal law can be improved). We propose that the structural critique may be further developed through an engagement with liberal peacekeeping critique. This body of work, which is critical of liberal peacebuilding practices, has many overlapping points of departure with ongoing work in critical approaches to international criminal law, including its focus on questions of political economy, its insistence on a historical sensitivity and its scepticism of a politics of interventionism. The two fields are also criticized in similar terms, including their tendency towards over-generalization and distance from issues relevant to practice. We argue that these disciplines can learn from one another’s strengths and weaknesses, thereby enriching discourses and practices of critique.

中文翻译：

---

纪律对接会

国际刑法正在经历所谓的“关键转折”。2016 年，随着多个国家宣布有意退出国际刑事法院的组成条约，批评似乎从未如此及时或必要。大体归入一种被称为国际刑法批判方法的工作主体通过突出结构性批判而不是有效性批判（询问如何改进国际刑法）为辩论做出了贡献。我们建议，可以通过参与自由维和批评来进一步发展结构性批评。这部批评自由建设和平做法的作品，与正在进行的国际刑法批判方法的工作有许多重叠点，包括它关注政治经济学问题，坚持历史敏感性以及对干预主义政治的怀疑。这两个领域也受到类似的批评，包括它们倾向于过度概括和与实践相关的问题相距甚远。我们认为，这些学科可以从彼此的长处和短处中学习，从而丰富批评的话语和实践。包括他们倾向于过度概括和远离与实践相关的问题。我们认为，这些学科可以从彼此的长处和短处中学习，从而丰富批评的话语和实践。包括他们倾向于过度概括和远离与实践相关的问题。我们认为，这些学科可以从彼此的长处和短处中学习，从而丰富批评的话语和实践。