This article examines whether, given the Rawlsian procedural distinction between pure, perfect and imperfect procedural justice, a purely procedural theory of global criminal justice is conceptually possible. It argues that it is not. It does so against the recently held view – I call this "the strong proceduralist thesis" – that procedural fairness is sufficient to ensure justificatory rightness. The strong proceduralist thesis is found wanting on two accounts. First, it cannot address the specific normative logic of punitive practice. Second, it leads to an unacceptable justice principle for the regulation of societies, whether national or international. Such a principle would amount to justifying the existence and functioning of societies on account of their punishing their own members.
Key words: procedures, global criminal justice, pure proceduralism, justification, normative tracking.
