
📌 The Problem
International criminal courts are frequently given mandates but lack the authority or resources to enforce them. The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) achieved compliance not through coercion but by assembling an accountability network that amplified its influence across the region.
📬 How the Court Built Its Accountability Network
The ICTY deliberately developed ties with a range of governmental and nongovernmental actors, using its expertise and institutional position to supply information and to frame a credible accountability architecture. At the same time, the court cultivated contacts so that governments and international organizations would pressure Balkan states to cooperate, effectively outsourcing enforcement.
Key components of this strategy included:
📧 What the Correspondence Shows
A newly assembled dataset of ICTY correspondence traces how the court’s outreach unfolded over time. The letters and exchanges document contacts, the flow of information, and explicit requests that enlisted third parties to press for cooperation. These documents reveal the tactical sequence by which the court converted limited formal power into practical leverage.
Main findings from the correspondence include:
🛠️ How the Evidence Was Constructed
🔎 Why It Matters
This case demonstrates that institutions without compulsory enforcement power can nonetheless act strategically to project "productive power" through networks. The findings reshape understandings of international accountability by showing how courts can leverage information, reputation, and partner pressure to achieve compliance—implications relevant for other international tribunals and weakly empowered organizations seeking to enforce norms.

| the Power of International Criminal Courts: Strategic Behavior and Accountability Networks was authored by Jennifer L. Miller and Patrice C. McMahon. It was published by Taylor & Francis in JHR in 2018. |