The Legitimacy of International Criminal Tribunals

The article considers the international legal regime of immunities and privileges of amicus curiae prosecutors of international criminal courts which are intended to ensure independent and unhindered performance of their functions in prosecuting crimes against the administration of justice. Due to the lack of doctrinal research in this field, whether in the domestic or foreign science of international law, the study is characterized by scientific novelty. Its empirical basis is constituted of the provisions of international treaties governing the immunities and privileges of staff of the ad hoc international criminal tribunals and the International Criminal Court. It is noted that today the state of international legal regulation of immunities and privileges of amicus curiae prosecutors is not quite satisfactory as it contains significant gaps. Two possible approaches to determining the scope of the immunities and privileges of amicus curiae prosecutors are identified: the first based on their status and the second – on the functions they perform. Their critical analysis leads to the conclusion that the functional approach is more in line with the principle of equality of arms in international criminal proceedings. As a result of its application, the scope of the immunities and privileges of amicus curiae prosecutors coincides with the scope of the immunities and privileges granted to staff of the Offices of Prosecutors at the international criminal tribunals.

Download Full-text

Contemporary International Tribunals

10.1093/oso/9780190848194.003.0011 ◽

2017 ◽

Author(s):

Antonio Augusto Cançado Trindade Trindade

Keyword(s):

Ad Hoc ◽

International Criminal ◽

Case Law ◽

Nuclear Disarmament ◽

International Human Rights ◽

International Criminal Tribunals ◽

The Icj ◽

The Common ◽

International Human ◽

International Tribunals

In the course of 2016, international human rights tribunals (ECtHR, IACtHR and ACtHPR) kept on making cross-references to each other’s case-law, as well as to that of other international tribunals. The same has taken place on the part of international criminal tribunals (ICC and ICTFY), at a time of special attention to the preservation of the legacy of the ad hoc tribunals (ICTFY and ICTR). One could have expected the same from the ICJ, as to the case-law of other international tribunals, in its recent decisions in the cases concerning the Obligation of Nuclear Disarmament (2016), keeping in mind the common mission (of realization of justice) of contemporary international tribunals from an essentially humanist outlook.

Download Full-text

Contemporary International Tribunals

10.1093/oso/9780190923846.003.0009 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Antônio Augusto ◽

Cançado Trindade

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Law ◽

Ad Hoc ◽

International Criminal ◽

International Human Rights ◽

International Criminal Tribunals ◽

International Human ◽

International Tribunals ◽

Cross Fertilization

More recently, jurisprudential cross-fertilization has kept on being pursued in particular by international human rights tribunals and international criminal tribunals. This is reassuring, as, despite their distinct jurisdictions, their work is complementary, in their common mission of imparting justice, in distinct domains of international law. Jurisprudential cross-fertilization fosters cohesion and the unity of law. Particularly attention is currently devoted to the preservation of the legacy of the ad hoc international criminal tribunals.

Download Full-text

International Criminal Tribunals and Hybrid Courts

International and Transnational Crime and Justice ◽

10.1017/9781108597296.070 ◽

2019 ◽

pp. 427-432

Author(s):

Gloria J. Browne-Marshall

Keyword(s):

International Criminal ◽

International Criminal Tribunals

Download Full-text

The Anatomy of the Deliberation Process at International Criminal Tribunals

Collective Judging in Comparative Perspective ◽

10.1017/9781839700804.015 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 267-282

Author(s):

Theodor Meron ◽

Christos Ravanides

Keyword(s):

International Criminal ◽

International Criminal Tribunals ◽

Deliberation Process

Download Full-text

Improving the Operation and Functioning of the International Criminal Tribunals

The American Journal of International Law ◽

10.2307/2589804 ◽

2000 ◽

Vol 94 (4) ◽

pp. 759-773 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Daryl A. Mundis

Keyword(s):

United Nations ◽

International Criminal ◽

International Criminal Tribunal ◽

Secretary General ◽

General Assembly ◽

Expert Group ◽

International Criminal Tribunals ◽

International Tribunals ◽

The United Nations

Since the establishment of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, both International Tribunals have grown tremendously in terms of resources. Despite this growth, the International Tribunals have rendered judgments in only fifteen cases and conducted inordinately long trials—a fault for which, perhaps more than any other, they can be justly criticized. The Secretary- General of the United Nations recently appointed an expert group to review the efficiency of the operation of the International Tribunals and make recommendations for improvement. Following the release of the group's report, the General Assembly requested that the Secretary-General obtain comments from the International Tribunals on the experts’ recommendations. The ICTYjudges, for their part, considered these recommendations in a report to the United Nations setting forth a long-term strategy for improving the operation of the Tribunal.

Download Full-text