Challenging Punishment as the Justice Norm in the Face of Ongoing Atrocities

International criminal law constitutes the culmination of the ‘anti-impunity agenda’ within international law, policy, and practice. This agenda, often advanced under the rallying cry of ‘never again’ – a pledge to never let atrocities like those of World War II happen again, to anyone – is driven by the conviction that criminal sanctions are essential for fulfilling this promise and conveying collective condemnation of such horrors. This results in what we term the ‘penal accountability paradigm’ in relation to atrocities: positioning punishment at the forefront of the prevention of, and justice and accountability for, atrocities. This paper examines some of the damaging implications of this paradigm within and beyond international criminal law, particularly its distorting effects on responses to ongoing atrocities in Palestine. We suggest that, in the context of these ongoing atrocities, the framing of punishment as justice harms the ‘never again’ promise in several important ways: (1) it gives states the (undue) benefit of the doubt; (2) it decontextualizes, individualizes, and exceptionalizes atrocities; (3) it monopolizes discourses of accountability and condemnation, while sanitizing the suppression of dissenting voices; and (4) it lends support to retaliatory impulses, distorting the discourse around the legitimate or lawful use of force in response to atrocities. We conclude by outlining the need to turn to more diverse and materially informed words, tools, and paradigms for naming, preventing, and standing in solidarity against abuses, in Palestine and elsewhere, that go beyond penal responses and directly engage with broader political and ethical conceptions of justice.