Victor ' s justice The label " victor ' s justice " ( in German , " " ) is a situation in which an entity partakes in carrying out " justice " on its own basis of applying different rules to judge what is right or wrong for their own forces and for those of the ( former ) enemy . Advocates generally charge that the difference in rules amounts to hypocrisy and leads to injustice . Targets of the label may consider it derogatory . Closely related is " vae victis behaviour " , where victor unilaterally changes the agreed treaties or their interpretations and is seen as a form of victor ' s justice . History of the laws of war . Legal constraints on the conduct of war in ancient Rome appear in Cicero : " As for war , humane laws touching it are drawn up in the fetial code of the Roman People . " Specifically , " no war is just , unless it is entered upon after an official demand for satisfaction has been submitted or warning has been given and a formal declaration made . " Breaches of this duty by Roman citizens were adjudicated at trial . But to enemies of war , Roman law attributed neither duties nor rights ; hence judgment – and punishment – of defeated foes was at Roman discretion . Still , the exercise of that discretion must serve justice , Cicero argued : " . . . when the victory is won , we should spare those who have not been blood - thirsty and barbarous in their warfare " ( warmaking being excused only when " we may live in peace unharmed " in no other way ) . The Western tradition of thinking on just war continues into Christendom and then Modernity , and from the late 19th century becomes codified in international conventions , most notably those of Geneva and the Hague , then said to express laws of war . Allegations of victor ' s justice . A stark and detailed example of victor ' s justice is presented by James Madison Page in his 1908 book " The True Story of Andersonville Prison " , subtitled " A Defense of Major Henry Wirz . " After describing his months as a prisoner of war of the Confederacy , the author recounts the imprisonment and trial of Major Henry Wirz , CSA , commandant of the prison camp operated at Andersonville , Ga . during the American Civil War . Many of the phenomena and issues later observed in the war - crimes trials following the Second World War may be seen in this account of Wirz ' s trial , conviction , sentencing , and execution . The Nuremberg Criminal Court for war crimes ( and subsidiary courts like the Dachau International Military Tribunal ) prosecuted only Axis nationals or collaborators . However , it is usual that the armed forces of a civilized country will issue their forces with detailed guidance on what is and is not permitted under their military code . These are drafted to include any international treaty obligations and the customary laws of war . For example , at the trial of Otto Skorzeny , his defense was in part based on the Field Manual published by the War Department of the United States Army , on 1 October 1940 , and the " American Soldiers ' Handbook " . If a member of the armed forces breaks their own military code , they can expect to face a court martial . When members of the Allied armed forces broke their military codes , they could be tried , as for example the Dachau massacre or the Biscari Massacre trials . The unconditional surrender of the Axis powers was unusual and led directly to the formation of the international tribunals . Usually international wars end conditionally and the treatment of suspected war criminals makes up part of the peace treaty . In most cases those who are not prisoners of war are tried under their own judicial system if they are suspected of committing war crimes – as happened at the end of WWII in Finland , where Allied Control Commission provided a list of occurrences of war crimes and crimes against peace and the investigation and judgment of these cases were left to Finnish courts according to Finnish law . However , an ex post facto law had to be instated for those cases , as the Finnish Criminal Act didn ' t contain a concept of being responsible for politics resulting in a war . In restricting the international tribunal to trying suspected Axis war crimes , the Allies were acting within normal international law . Attempts to ensure the fairness of war crimes prosecutions . Since World War II , the accusation of victor ' s justice has arisen in every subsequent conflict where war crimes prosecutions have been made . Examples of include the wars in the former Yugoslavia , in Rwanda and Afghanistan . The International Criminal Court was set up in 2003 as a treaty arrangement between member states in an attempt to provide a neutral international court that avoids the accusation of " victor ' s justice " , and that would prosecute all alleged war crimes , on either side of any conflict . The United States has not joined the ICC , and critics of this decision sometimes claim that this comes out of a desire for victor ' s justice .