The Interplay Between International Humanitarian and Human Rights Law When Applied During International Criminal Trials

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-19
Author(s):  
Rogier Bartels
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Criminal Trials ◽  
International Criminal Trials

scholarly journals Muzzling the Press

2020 ◽  
pp. 307-336
Author(s):  
Audrey Fino ◽  
Sandra Sahyouni
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Freedom Of The Press ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Criminal Trials ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
The Press ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

Chapter 16 deals with contempt cases against journalists. Restrictions on freedom of the press have been striking at international criminal tribunals, where violations of protective measures granted to, for example, witnesses have led to several landmark yet controversial prosecutions of journalists for contempt of court. This chapter examines these practices from a human rights law perspective, as part of the recognized exceptions to the principle of public trials. In doing so, it reviews the law and jurisprudence of international and hybrid tribunals, including the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL), and the International Criminal Court (ICC). In addition, it surveys contempt of court, offences against the administration of justice, and the law on reporting restrictions in a number of common law and civil law domestic jurisdictions. It concludes that the right to freedom of the press in the context of international criminal trials is not absolute, and that limits ordered by international tribunals, despite the polemics they may cause, are actually fully in line with both human rights law and domestic legal trends.

Evidence in International Criminal Trials: Lessons and Contributions from the Special Court for Sierra Leone

2009 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 96-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Matthew Hassan-Morlai
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Sierra Leone ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Trials ◽  
Rules Of Evidence ◽  
International Criminal Trials

AbstractThis article aims to contribute to the discourse on the development of a system of international criminal justice. The paper discusses the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL), in particular, certain of its rules of evidence and their role in ensuring just, fair and expeditious trials for breaches of international humanitarian and international human rights law during the Sierra Leone conflict which lasted between 1991 and 2002. In the conclusion, the author considers whether the manner in which the SCSL interpreted and applied specific rules of evidence helped it to meet and contribute to the objectives of a system of international criminal justice. These objectives include holding violators of international norms accountable; guaranteeing procedural proprietary; giving legitimacy to the process and bestowing confidence in international criminal justice institutions. Though not without criticism, the author concludes that they did.

s.V Modalities, Ch.20 The Right to Truth in International Criminal Law

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bilsky Leora
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Criminal Trials ◽  
The Right ◽  
Personal Interests ◽  
International Criminal Trials

This chapter asks whether victims have a ‘right’ to the truth, and if they do, whether international trials are the appropriate vehicle for vindicating that right. Many have argued for a limited role for international criminal trials, focused exclusively on the fate of individual defendants, while others seek to subordinate criminal trials to larger, historiographic goals of constructing a definitive record of atrocities and other violations. The chapter reframes these debates around the concept of ‘victim rights’, especially since the Rome Statute provides a privileged place for victims in the procedural mechanics of the International Criminal Court. The argument here is then developed through discussion of four areas of doctrine: the victims’ ‘personal interests’ in the determination of guilt, the recharacterization of charges against the defendant, the right of victims to introduce evidence, and victims’ obligation to disclose exonerating evidence. The chapter concludes that these developments, combined with the role of human rights law, has ushered in an ‘emerging truth regime’.

scholarly journals Ending Impunity: The Case for War Crimes Trials in Liberia

2005 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 53-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alhagi Marong ◽  
Chernor Jalloh
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Charles Taylor ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Sierra Leonean ◽  
Post Conflict

AbstractThis article argues that Liberia owes a duty under both international humanitarian and human rights law to investigate and prosecute the heinous crimes, including torture, rape and extra-judicial killings of innocent civilians, committed in that country by the warring parties in the course of fourteen years of brutal conflict. Assuming that Liberia owes a duty to punish the grave crimes committed on its territory, the article then evaluates the options for prosecution, starting with the possible use of Liberian courts. The authors argue that Liberian courts are unable, even if willing, to render credible justice that protects the due process rights of the accused given the collapse of legal institutions and the paucity of financial, human and material resources in post-conflict Liberia. The authors then examine the possibility of using international accountability mechanisms, including the International Criminal Court, an ad hoc international criminal tribunal as well as a hybrid court for Liberia. For various legal and political reasons, the authors conclude that all of these options are not viable. As an alternative, they suggest that because the Special Court for Sierra Leone has already started the accountability process for Liberia with the indictment of Charles Taylor in 2003, and given the close links between the Liberian and Sierra Leonean conflicts, the Special Court would be a more appropriate forum for international prosecutions of those who perpetrated gross humanitarian and human rights law violations in Liberia.

scholarly journals Trial and (Potential) Error: Conflicting Visions on Reparations Within the ICC System

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 221-248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alina Balta ◽  
Manon Bax ◽  
Rianne Letschert
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Criminal Trials ◽  
Conflict Situations ◽  
International Criminal Trials

Twenty years ago, the International Criminal Court (hereinafter ICC or the Court) was established holding the aim of placing victims at the heart of international criminal justice proceedings and delivering justice to them through, among others, reparations. Article 75 of the Rome Statute lays out the reparations regime, and, in practice, court-ordered reparations are a means of delivering such justice. Focusing on Court decisions on reparations, our analysis takes stock of all developments before the ICC and attempts to highlight the mismatch between characteristics inherent to the objectives of international criminal trials such as providing accountability and punishment of the accused and delivering justice for victims of mass crimes—the so-called procedural challenges. We also submit that the Court is facing conceptual challenges, related to an apparent misunderstanding of the various concepts at stake: reparations as such and the various modalities and channels of enforcing them. We conclude that although the ICC’s reparation regime may not be the best reparative response to provide justice to victims in conflict situations affected by mass victimization, we suggest that improving the ICC’s approach includes, at a minimum, tackling these challenges.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document