A tribunal serves the purpose of serving justice to a member of society who has committed crimes against humanity. Cambodia’s genocide is a distinctive case which takes a whole assembly of members who participated in the genocide. In terms of justice, it is served when the tribunals sentence all of the leaders who carried out the orders of Pol pot as their leader. The question on the floor of many scholarly authors is how we can prosecute these murderers with few evidence besides the testimony of eye witnesses.

One author Preez, Wilhelmus Petrus Du in his book Genocide: The Psychology of Mass Murder talks in depth regarding what these guards were thinking as they stood by and both physically and mentally tortured the estimated two million plus victims. The author, a psychologist of human behavior, presents his findings on the motivation behind Mass Murders. The book that discusses the relationship between genocide and the psychology behind the act. The author seeks to unravel the questions of why people commit the crimes that they do and what is the intent behind their action. It builds on what takes place behind the minds of these leaders. It also puts genocide in an interesting context by framing it as something of the present day and not something of the past.

This portion focuses on where the future of genocide is heading for the world communities. It is extremely important to understand why genocide has happened in the past in order to solve the upcoming dilemmas of the future. The author concludes his thesis by demonstrating that there is a method to this madness that society must look to unfold. I would like to pose the question of the psychology of serving justice and how society should deal with these murderers. The psychology behind forgiving and serving justice would take the idea of tribunals to a new level. By analyzing what truly affects those who took the lives of so many is the important goal and ultimately what punishment serves revenge.

Another recent issue came up with the recent tribunals of the Khmer Rouge leader known as “Duch.” He was a leader who oversaw the main torture prison known as Tuol Sleng. The author Grant Peck of a recent article from the associated press discusses how disabled victims feel about the tribunal. As the article goes on it discusses the hardship of the victims to view the murderer who caused so much harm to their families. The ease comes because this time the victims see “Duch” being persecuted.

The biggest stronghold of the recent arguments being documented by scholarly Authors is the evidence being brought into these trials. For the most part authors focus on the ability to bring evidence into the trial to convict those who are indicated.

Michael P Scharf is the author of “Tainted Provenance: When, If Ever, Should Torture Evidence Be Admissible?” this article also focuses on the evidence being brought into the tribunals in the case of Cambodia. He talks about torture evidence not being allowed into the tribunals to prosecute leaders. This author is just another example of the continuing argument surrounding prosecution. None of these authors push it one step forward and debate whether or not justice is ever served from these tribunals, Only time will tell.