scholarly journals THE GENESIS AND CRITICS OF THE PROSECUTORS AMICUS CURIAE IN INTERNATIONAL LAW

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 1187-1204
Author(s):  
Ekaterina A. Kopylova
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Central Component ◽  
Amicus Curiae ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Administration Of Justice

The article traces in detail the origins of the prosecutor amicus curiae in the practice of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. This mechanism will subsequently be endorsed by all the ad hoc international criminal tribunals. It is noted that their emergence is the result of an unsuccessful experience in prosecuting offences against the administration of justice by the Tribunal under the previous legal framework. It is also stressed that, despite its effectiveness, the prosecutor amicus curiae mechanism cannot constitute the central component of the policy of prosecuting such acts and that, at this stage, it may even be considered an obstacle to its formation, given the occasional nature of the prosecutor amicus curiaes intervention in the international criminal proceedings and lack of continuity. As an alternative, it is proposed to establish a special independent organ - the Prosecutor for the offences against the administration of justice - in the international criminal tribunals, including the International Criminal Court.

International legal immunities and privileges of the Рrosecutor amicus curiae

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 55-63
Author(s):  
EKATERINA A. KOPYLOVA ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Amicus Curiae ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Foreign Science

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.

Expediting the ICC Criminal Process: Striking the Right Balance between the ICC and States Parties

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 383-425
Author(s):  
Hirad Abtahi ◽  
Shehzad Charania
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Common Goal ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
State Involvement ◽  
Rules Of Procedure ◽  
The Right

When establishing the ICC, the sole permanent international criminal court, States ensured that they would play a legislative role larger and more direct than the ad hoc and hybrid courts and tribunals. States Parties have, however, acknowledged that, given the time they spend interpreting and applying the ICC legal framework, the judges are uniquely placed to identify and propose measures designed to expedite the criminal process. Accordingly, the ICC has followed a dual track. First, it has pursued an amendment track, which requires States Parties’ direct approval of ICC proposed amendments to the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Second, it has implemented practices changes that do not require State involvement. This interactive process between the Court and States Parties reflects their common goal to expedite the criminal proceedings. The future of this process will rely on striking the right equilibrium between the respective roles of States Parties and the Court.

New Mechanisms for the Enforcement of International Humanitarian Law

2001 ◽  
Vol 95 (4) ◽  
pp. 934-952 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daryl A. Mundis
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
International Community ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Domestic Courts

The international criminal court (ICC) will serve as a permanent institution dedicated to the enforcement of international humanitarian law sixty days after the sixtieth state has deposited its instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval, or accession to the Treaty of Rome with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.1 Pursuant to Article 11 of the ICC Statute, however, the ICC will have jurisdiction only with respect to crimes committed after the treaty comes into force.2 Consequently, when faced with allegations of violations of international humanitarian law in the period prior to the establishment of the ICC, the international community has five options if criminal prosecutions are desired.3 First, additional ad hoc international tribunals, similar to those established for the former Yugoslavia (International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, ICTY) and Rwanda (International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, ICTR) could be established.4 Second, "mixed" international criminal tribunals, which would share certain attributes with the ad hoc Tribunals, could be created.5 Third, the international community could leave the prosecution of alleged offenders to national authorities, provided that the domestic courts are functioning and able to conduct such trials. Fourth, in those instances where the national infrastructure has collapsed, international resources could be made available to assist with the prosecution of the alleged offenders in domestic courts. Finally, the international community could simply do nothing in the face of alleged violations of international humanitarian law.

Victims and the International Criminal Court: Three major issues

2003 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 345-367 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sam Garkawe
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Protective Measure ◽  
Legal Representation ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals

AbstractThe Statute of the permanent International Criminal Court (the "ICC") agreed to in Rome in 1998 contains many provisions that deal with the specific concerns and rights of victims and survivors of the international crimes that the ICC will have jurisdiction over. It consolidates the work of the two ad hoc international criminal Tribunals (the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda) in this area, but also further enhances the role and rights of victims in a number of innovative ways. These three international criminal Tribunals thus collectively represent an important step forward in the recognition of the suffering and the position of victims and survivors of international crimes. This article will examine three main issues in relation to victims and the ICC. First, after identifying the protective measures for victims allowed at the discretion of the international criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, it will focus on the most controversial measure (which the ICC can also order) - the non-disclosure to the defence of the identity of witnesses. Does this protective measure violate a defendant's right to a fair trial? The Statute of the ICC also allows, for the first time in international criminal justice, for the right of victims to obtain their own legal representation, subject to the discretion of the ICC. The second issue is how is this going to work in practice in light of the fact that international crimes normally involve hundreds, if not thousands or even tens of thousands, of victims? And finally, while the ICC Statute provides for the possibility of reparations to victims, where will the money come from, and thus what are the chances of victims actually being able to receive compensation?

National Law: A Small but Neat Utensil in the Toolbox of International Criminal Tribunals

2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-241 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harmen van der Wilt
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
National Legislation ◽  
Territorial State ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals

AbstractThis article explores to what extent the ad hoc tribunals have made use of the national law of the state where the crimes have allegedly been committed in their quest for elements of crimes, concepts of criminal responsibility, grounds for excluding criminal responsibility and guidelines for sentencing. At first sight, one would expect the legislation of the territorial state to feature only as an indication of 'general principles of law' or 'international customary law'. However, the investigation of case law reveals that the law of the territorial state holds a far more prominent place. In search for rationales, the author suggests that, initially, national legislation has been used to plug the legal gaps in international criminal law. However, more recently the ad hoc tribunals have canvassed the national legislation of the territorial state, in order to find out whether this state would qualify to take over criminal proceedings against mid-level perpetrators. The author suggests that the International Criminal Court might follow suit, in order to give shape to its policy of 'positive complementarity'.

Barasa, Bribery and Beyond: Offences against the Administration of Justice at the International Criminal Court

2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (6) ◽  
pp. 1123-1149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mayeul Hiéramente* ◽  
Philipp Müller ◽  
Emma Ferguson
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Academic Field ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Administration Of Justice ◽  
The One

Through the most recent proceedings initiated by the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) against Walter Barasa, the issue of proceedings for alleged offences against the administration of justice pursuant to Article 70 of the Rome Statute has gained relevance for both legal practice and in the academic field. The regime established by the article differs significantly from the one applicable to the ad-hoc tribunals as it shifts power from the Chamber to the Prosecution. This article aims at exploring the implications this changed legal framework has for the upcoming legal proceedings, taking into account in particular the rights of the accused and the risks of the OTP’s investigatory and prosecutorial monopoly. It will further explore the legal tools available to ICC judges in order to remedy these implications and discuss the possibilities for applying lessons learned.

International Criminal Court and Ad Hoc Tribunals

2008 ◽  
pp. 462-478
Author(s):  
Richard Goldstone
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Single Model ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals

This article discusses contemporary international efforts to consolidate and codify significant portions of existing customary international law. It studies the ad hoc tribunals of the UN and pinpoints the successes and failures of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. The ‘completion strategy’ of both international criminal tribunals is discussed. The article also covers the creation of ‘mixed’ courts and a single model for international criminal justice, namely the International Criminal Court.

Criminal Proceedings before the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda

2006 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 89-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fausto Pocar
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Entire Body ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals

AbstractThe ad hoc Criminal Tribunals have shown, by their case law, how practically to go about judicial enforcement of international humanitarian law at the international level and have guided the formation of other international and mixed criminal courts. Following the precedent set at the Nuremberg trials, the most important legacy of the ad hoc Tribunals has been the development and effective enforcement of the entire body of international humanitarian law put into place since the end of World War II, which seeks to maintain a proper balance between prosecuting individuals for grave breaches of international humanitarian law and upholding due process norms including protection of the rights of the accused. The path paved by the ad hoc Tribunals is crucial for the future regulation of the behaviour of States and individuals in times of conflict and has triggered increased attention to and enforcement of international humanitarian law in various other jurisdictions, including, in the first place, in the International Criminal Court. These are some of the author's conclusions following an analysis of the challenges faced by the ad hoc Tribunals.

scholarly journals The International Criminal Court: Promise and Politics

2015 ◽  
Vol 109 ◽  
pp. 269-272
Author(s):  
Makau Mutua
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals

The International Criminal Court (ICC or Court) is an institution born of necessity after a long and arduous process of many false starts. The struggle to establish a permanent international criminal tribunal stretches back to Nuremberg. The dream, which was especially poignant for the international criminal law community, for a permanent international criminal tribunal was realized with the adoption in 1998 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The treaty entered into force in 2002. Those were heady days for advocates and scholars concerned with curtailing impunity. No one was more ecstatic about the realization of the ICC than civil society actors across the globe, and particularly in Africa, where impunity has been an endemic problem. Victims who had never received justice at home saw an opportunity for vindication abroad. This optimism in the ICC was partially driven by the successes, however mixed, of two prior ad hoc international criminal tribunals—the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.

Individual Criminal Responsibility before the International Criminal Court

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Goy
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Individual Criminal Responsibility

For more than 15 years the two ad hoc Tribunals, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), have interpreted the requirements of different forms of individual criminal responsibility. It is thus helpful to look at whether and to what extent the jurisprudence of the ICTY/ICTR may provide guidance to the International Criminal Court (ICC). To this end, this article compares the requirements of individual criminal responsibility at the ICTY/ICTR and the ICC. The article concludes that, applied with caution, the jurisprudence of the ICTY/ICTR – as an expression of international law – can assist in interpreting the modes of liability under the ICC Statute. ICTY/ICTR case law seems to be most helpful with regard to accessorial forms of liability, in particular their objective elements. Moreover, it may assist in interpreting the subjective requirements set out in Article 30 ICC Statute.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document