The application of the Daubert standard in the commissions of inquiry assessment of warfare’s psychological impact

The last few years have seen the international community addressing international disputes through the establishment of quasi-judicial bodies, like Commissions of Inquiry. These bodies have inter alia a stark facet of therapeutic justice, meant to hear and address the suffering of civilians exposed to warfare acts, healing thus the wounds of a conflict. Yet, I would like to argue that in order for such wounds to close, accountability must come for the perpetrators of human rights or laws of war violations and this accountability cannot be asserted in the way Commissions of Inquiry conclude that civilians have sustained ‘serious mental harm’, without though any further elaboration on why any cited trauma symptoms coincide with the perception of what constitutes such harm, as this perception emerges from the international criminal courts’ jurisprudence.