DOCSLIB.ORG

General Rules and Principles of International Criminal Procedure Recommendations of the International Expert Framework

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
General Rules and Principles of International Criminal Procedure Recommendations of the International Expert Framework General Rules and Principles of International Criminal Procedure and Recommendations of the International Expert Framework October 2011 Related HiiL Research Theme: Criminal Process and International Crime PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/ee4de3/ The Hague Institute for the Internationalisation of Law (HiiL) is an international think tank on rule of law in a globalising world. We focus on the interaction between legal systems. We create actionable knowledge through debates, workshops, conferences, knowledge partnerships, action programmes and expert networks. Shaping the Law of the Future HiiL is venturing on a unique and ambitious mission to think ahead of the curve about the changing nature of law in the next 20 years. Visit Law of the Future website [ www.lawofthefuture.org ] Stimulating justice innovations HiiL is one of the founding partners of Innovating Justice, a new platform to improve the rule of law and access to justice. Visit Innovating Justice website [ www.innovatingjustice.com ] Strengthening research HiiL’s research pursues innovation in five themes, which together provide a coherent perspective on the challenges globalisation poses to legal systems. [ www.hiil.org ] 2 PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/ee4de3/ Table of Contents Introduction ...............................................................................................................4 A. Initiation of Investigations and Selection of Cases ........................................................7 Principles................................................................................................................7 Rules .....................................................................................................................8 Recommendations ...................................................................................................8 B. Investigation, Coercive Measures, Arrest and Surrender .............................................. 10 Principles.............................................................................................................. 10 Rules ................................................................................................................... 12 Recommendations ................................................................................................. 15 C. Charges, Confirmation, Res Judicata, Lis Pendens, Iura Novit Curia............................... 20 Principles.............................................................................................................. 20 Rules ................................................................................................................... 22 Recommendations ................................................................................................. 23 D. Trial Process ......................................................................................................... 26 Principles.............................................................................................................. 26 Rules ................................................................................................................... 34 Recommendations ................................................................................................. 44 E. Appeals, Reviews, and Reconsideration ..................................................................... 53 Principles.............................................................................................................. 53 Rules ................................................................................................................... 55 Recommendations ................................................................................................. 56 F. Law of Evidence..................................................................................................... 58 Principles.............................................................................................................. 58 Rules ................................................................................................................... 59 Recommendations ................................................................................................. 63 G. Deliberation, Dissent, Judgment .............................................................................. 65 Principles.............................................................................................................. 65 Rules ................................................................................................................... 66 Recommendations ................................................................................................. 66 H. Defence Issues ..................................................................................................... 68 Principles.............................................................................................................. 68 Rules ................................................................................................................... 71 Recommendations ................................................................................................. 74 I. Victim Issues: Participation, Protection, Reparation, and Assistance............................... 81 Principles.............................................................................................................. 81 Rules ................................................................................................................... 81 Recommendations ................................................................................................. 83 J. Negotiated Justice .................................................................................................. 87 Principles.............................................................................................................. 87 Rules ................................................................................................................... 87 Recommendations ................................................................................................. 88 List of IEF Researchers and Board Members .................................................................. 90 3 PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/ee4de3/ Introduction International criminal procedure is the body of international law that has as an objective the effective and fair enforcement of substantive international criminal law and has been developed for operation in the context of the international legal order. Barely in existence two decades ago, this legal phenomenon has undergone a tremendous growth as result of the rapid proliferation of international and hybrid criminal courts in the post-Cold War era (ICTY, ICTR, Special Court for Sierra Leone, ICC, Special Panels for Serious Crimes in East Timor, ECCC and most recently STL). The frantic institution-building in the realm of core crimes adjudication in the international arena required the development of a sophisticated criminal procedure. This took place in an individualized, ad hoc and uncoordinated way and could not but lead to diversification and fragmentation among various courts. There is truth in the assertion that international tribunals are better enabled to deliver justice in the fairest and most efficient manner possible with tailored institutional frameworks and procedures. On the other hand, the existence in the law of international criminal procedure of multiple legislative solutions that address the same procedural issues somewhat differently might call in question the coherence and authority of that body of law. In particular, in their quest for the highest standards of international procedural justice and the best trial practices in cases of international crimes, national criminal justice systems have increasingly turned, and may be expected to continue doing so in the future, to the seminal experience of international courts. However, for now, it is our view that the guidance they could draw from the latter is on many essential matters too contradictory, unprincipled or inconclusive to be useful. The three-year Research Project of International Expert Framework on International Criminal Procedure (IEF) was launched jointly by the Amsterdam Center for International Law of the University of Amsterdam and the Hague Institute for the Internationalization of Law in 2009. The aim has been to address the perceived problem of the disparate and fragmented nature of procedural law in international crimes adjudication. The hypothesis at the heart of the IEF project is that despite the many differences, a number of fundamental and shared standards, being the ‘principles’ and ‘general rules’, of international criminal procedure can nevertheless be identified. These principles and rules are the normative core of that body of law which cements it together into a unified corpus of norms.1 The starting point is that they can be discerned by systematically and uniformly analyzing and comparing the procedural law and practice of nine major historical and contemporary international or hybrid criminal courts (or courts of internationalized character) that have existed to date: IMT, IMTFE, ICTY, ICTR, SCSL, ICC, SPSC, ECCC and STL. The shared standards could be qualified as general rules or principles of international criminal procedure only if they are of such nature and authority as to withstand the rigorous and multi-layered test under a number of external
Load more

Recommended publications
  • University of Helsinki Faculty of Law JURA NOVIT CURIA IN
    University of Helsinki Faculty of Law JURA NOVIT CURIA IN INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION Master’s Thesis Procedural Law September 2013 Supervisor: Dan Frände Author: Marta Viegas de Freitas Monteiro TABLE OF CONTENTS BIBLIOGRAPHY .............................................................................................................. III Literature .................................................................................................................................... III Case Law .................................................................................................................................. VIII Miscellaneous ............................................................................................................................ XII ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................................................................... XIV 1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Background ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Subject and Research Questions....................................................................................... 4 1.3 Methodology and Sources ................................................................................................. 5 1.4 Structure ............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Authorities in International Law – Phd Thesis
    “Authorities” in International Dispute Settlement: a Data Analysis Damien Charlotin Corpus Christi College June 2020 This dissertation is submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2 Preface This dissertation is the result of my own work and includes nothing which is the outcome of work done in collaboration except as declared in this Preface and specified in the text. It is not substantially the same as any that I have submitted, or, is being concurrently submitted for a degree or diploma or other qualification at the University of Cambridge or any other University or similar institution except as declared in the Preface and specified in the text. I further state that no substantial part of my dissertation has already been submitted, or, is being concurrently submitted for any such degree, diploma or other qualification at the University of Cambridge or any other University or similar institution except as declared in the Preface and specified in the text. This thesis, including footnotes, does not exceed the permitted length. 3 Introduction This thesis regards legal argumentation in international law. Its main object are the precedents and doctrinal teachings that enter this argumentation as “authorities”. The argument starts with an uncontroversial observation: international litigation and arbitration, indeed every kind of international legal advocacy, to a large extent turns on the use (and, sometimes, misuse) of authorities. Parties and adjudicators spend time and effort marshalling supportive authorities, distinguishing or refuting unhelpful ones, and monitoring legal developments in unrelated cases and in academic debates to bolster their arguments. This practice is essentially the same before all international courts and tribunals, although the most relevant authorities can change.
    [Show full text]
  • Revisiting the “Content-Of-Laws” Enquiry in International Arbitration
    Louisiana Law Review Volume 78 Number 3 Spring 2018 Article 7 4-9-2018 Revisiting the “Content-of-Laws” Enquiry in International Arbitration Soterios Loizou Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/lalrev Part of the Law Commons Repository Citation Soterios Loizou, Revisiting the “Content-of-Laws” Enquiry in International Arbitration, 78 La. L. Rev. (2018) Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/lalrev/vol78/iss3/7 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews and Journals at LSU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Louisiana Law Review by an authorized editor of LSU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Revisiting the “Content-of-Laws” Enquiry in International Arbitration Soterios Loizou* Establishing the content of the applicable law is one of the most important, albeit seldom examined, topics in the theory and practice of international arbitration. Setting as the point of departure the regulatory vacuum in nearly all national laws on international arbitration, this study examines in depth this “content-of-laws” enquiry in an attempt to foster doctrinal integrity, legal certainty, and predictability in arbitral proceedings. Specifically, this study encompasses a three level analysis of the topic. Firstly, it explores the theoretical underpinnings and the various approaches articulated in legal theory to the establishment of the content of the applicable law in international litigation and arbitration. Secondly, on the basis of an elaborate comparative review of the various legal regimes and jurisprudence in the most frequently selected venues of arbitration, namely England & Wales, France, Hong Kong, Singapore, Switzerland, the State Copyright 2018, by SOTERIOS LOIZOU.
    [Show full text]
  • Transplanting Swedish Law? the Legal Sources at the Livonian Courts 238 5.1 the Theory of Legal Spheres 238 5.2 the Ius Commune in the Livonian Court Records 239
    Conquest and the Law in Swedish Livonia (ca. 1630–1710) <UN> The Northern World North Europe and the Baltic c. 400–1700 ad. Peoples, Economics and Cultures Editors Jón Viðar Sigurðsson (Oslo) Ingvild Øye (Bergen) Piotr Gorecki (University of California at Riverside) Steve Murdoch (St. Andrews) Cordelia Heß (Gothenburg) Anne Pedersen (National Museum of Denmark) VOLUME 77 The titles published in this series are listed at brill.com/nw <UN> Conquest and the Law in Swedish Livonia (ca. 1630–1710) A Case of Legal Pluralism in Early Modern Europe By Heikki Pihlajamäki LEIDEN | BOSTON <UN>  This title is published in Open Access with the support of the University of Helsinki Library. This is an open access title distributed under the terms of the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, which permits any non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided no alterations are made and the original author(s) and source are credited. Further information and the complete license text can be found at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ The terms of the CC license apply only to the original material. The use of material from other sources (indicated by a reference) such as diagrams, illustrations, photos and text samples may require further permission from the respective copyright holder. Cover illustration: Livoniae Nova Descriptio, cartographers: Johannes Portantius and Abraham Ortelius (Antwerp 1574). Collection: National Library of Estonia, digital archive digar (http://www.digar.ee/arhiiv/ nlib-digar:977, accessed 18 August 2016). Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Pihlajamaki, Heikki, 1961- author.
    [Show full text]
  • The Arbitral Tribunal's Duty and Power to Address Corruption Sua Sponte
    KluwerArbitration Document information The Arbitral Tribunal’s Duty and Power to Address Author Corruption Sua Sponte Domitille Baizeau Domitille Baizeau; Tessa Hayes Tessa Hayes (*) (**) I Introduction: Scope of the Question Publication In late March 2016, just days before news broke of the massive “Panama Papers” document leak International Arbitration and exposing widespread use of offshore shell companies for tax evasion and other financial the Rule of Law: Contribution crimes, (1) journalists reported on another leak of internal documents, this one concerning a and Conformity little-known Monaco-based company called Unaoil. (2) Although the Unaoil leak itself was comparatively small in size, the illegal behaviour it allegedly unmasked was on a grand scale. According to the investigative report, Unaoil’s emails revealed that billions of dollars of Bibliographic reference government contracts around the world had been awarded as a result of bribes paid by Unaoil as an intermediary for major multinational corporations. The documents also apparently Domitille Baizeau and Tessa showed that some clients knew about and intended Unaoil’s bribery of officials, but that others Hayes, 'The Arbitral Tribunal’s thought they were contracting for legitimate consulting services. (3) Unaoil had in fact Duty and Power to Address previously been declared clean in reports issued not only by a prominent international law Corruption Sua Sponte', in firm and major accounting firms, but also by a noted anti-bribery compliance firm, TRACE Andrea Menaker (ed), P 225 International. (4) The episode illustrates the pervasiveness of the problem of corruption, International Arbitration and as well as how hard it can be to vet intermediaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Principle Iura Novit Curia in International Commercial
    правова держава 22’2016 181 UDC 341.637 O.V. Koch, Master of Law Odessa I.I. Mechnikov National University the Department of General and International Law Frantsuzskiy Boulevard, 24/26, Odessa, 65058, Ukraine Supervisor: E.J. Streltsova, Candidate of Juridical Sciences, Associate Professor, Honored Scientific Worker of Education of Ukraine PRINCIPLE IURA NOVIT CURIA IN INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION The article is devoted to the analysis of the perspectives of application of civil law principle Iura novit curia to international commercial arbitration with an aim to ensuring effective dispute resolution. It is considered that the application or non-application of the principle Iura novit curia may be evaluated as a violation of the arbitral procedure, and consequently, risks of refusal recognition and enforcement of arbitral award by national court may arise. The analysis of the latest research and case law demonstrates that the way of application of Iura novit curia to arbitration depends on the applicable law to arbitration procedure and on judicial system of national court that is entitled to recognize the arbitral award. The research argues that besides the fact that there is no standardization in this field, there are specific conditions of application of the Iura novit curia to arbitration such as: conformity to principles of due process and a right to be heard, and also a permissive approach. Key words: international commercial arbitration, principle Iura novit curia, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of arbitral award. Problem statement. The application of the concept of civil law Iura novit curia and its adaptation to international commercial arbitration (hereinafter – arbitration) have recently become a subject of worldwide discussions.
    [Show full text]
  • Domestic Law As a Matter of Fact in the International Investment Agreements Signed by the European Union: Some Practical Reflections
    LAwTTIP Working Papers 2020/2 Domestic law as a matter of fact in the international investment agreements signed by the European Union: Some practical reflections Enrico Tinti LAwTTIP Working Papers 2020/2 All opinions expressed are personal to the author. Enrico Tinti holds a Law Degree from Alma Mater Studiorum – University of Bologna and an LLM in International Financial Law from King’s College London. Email: [email protected]. LAwTTIP Working Papers 2020/2 Domestic law as a matter of fact in the international investment agreements signed by the European Union: Some practical reflections Enrico Tinti LAwTTIP Working Papers 2020/2 LAwTTIP Working Papers 2020/2 Editorial Board Prof. Andrea Biondi (King’s College London) Prof. Isabelle Bosse-Platière (Université de Rennes 1) Prof. Federico Casolari (University of Bologna) Prof. Giacomo Di Federico (University of Bologna) Sir Francis Jacobs (King’s College London) Prof. Marc Maresceau (Ghent University) Prof. Nanette Neuwahl (University of Montreal) Prof. Cécile Rapoport (Université de Rennes 1) Prof. Lucia Serena Rossi (University of Bologna) Prof. Takis Tridimas (King’s College London) Editorial Policy This text may be downloaded for personal research purposes only. Any additional reproduction, whether in hard copy or electronically, requires the consent of the author(s), editor(s). If cited or quoted, reference should be made to the full name of the author(s), editor(s), the title, the working paper series, the year and the publisher. The author(s), editor(s) should inform the Editorial Board if the paper is to be published elsewhere, and should also assume responsibility for any subsequent obligation(s).
    [Show full text]
  • Conquest and the Law in Swedish Livonia (Ca
    Conquest and the Law in Swedish Livonia (ca. 1630–1710) Heikki Pihlajamäki - 978-90-04-33153-2 Downloaded from Brill.com02/24/2020 11:16:42AM via University of Helsinki <UN> The Northern World North Europe and the Baltic c. 400–1700 ad. Peoples, Economics and Cultures Editors Jón Viðar Sigurðsson (Oslo) Ingvild Øye (Bergen) Piotr Gorecki (University of California at Riverside) Steve Murdoch (St. Andrews) Cordelia Heß (Gothenburg) Anne Pedersen (National Museum of Denmark) VOLUME 77 The titles published in this series are listed at brill.com/nw Heikki Pihlajamäki - 978-90-04-33153-2 Downloaded from Brill.com02/24/2020 11:16:42AM via University of Helsinki <UN> Conquest and the Law in Swedish Livonia (ca. 1630–1710) A Case of Legal Pluralism in Early Modern Europe By Heikki Pihlajamäki LEIDEN | BOSTON Heikki Pihlajamäki - 978-90-04-33153-2 Downloaded from Brill.com02/24/2020 11:16:42AM via University of Helsinki <UN>  This title is published in Open Access with the support of the University of Helsinki Library. This is an open access title distributed under the terms of the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, which permits any non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided no alterations are made and the original author(s) and source are credited. Further information and the complete license text can be found at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ The terms of the CC license apply only to the original material. The use of material from other sources (indicated by a reference) such as diagrams, illustrations, photos and text samples may require further permission from the respective copyright holder.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Certainty and Legal Methods: a European Alternative to American Legal Indeterminacy? James Maxeiner University of Baltimore School of Law, [email protected]
    University of Baltimore Law ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law All Faculty Scholarship Faculty Scholarship Spring 2007 Legal Certainty and Legal Methods: A European Alternative to American Legal Indeterminacy? James Maxeiner University of Baltimore School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/all_fac Part of the International Law Commons, and the Legislation Commons Recommended Citation Legal Certainty and Legal Methods: A European Alternative to American Legal Indeterminacy?, 15 Tul. J. Int'l & Comp. L. 541 (2007) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Legal Certainty: A European Alternative to American Legal Indeterminacy? James R. Maxeiner' Americans are resigned to a high level oflegal indetenninacy. This Article shows that Europeans do not accept legal indetenninacy and instead have made legal certainty a general principle of their law. This Article uses the example ofthe German legal system to show how Gennan legal methods strive to realize this general European principle. It suggests that these methods are opportunities for Americans to develop their Ow.11 system to reduce legal indeterminacy and to increase legal certainty. I. LEGAL CERTAINTY IN EUROPE ......................................................... 545 A. Legal Certainty and the Fonnal Rule ofLaw ........................ 545 B. General Principles ofEuropean Union Law.......................... 547 C Legal Certainty as a General Principle ofEuropean Law .......................................................................................... 549 D.
    [Show full text]
  • Arbitrators' Initiatives to Obtain Factual and Legal Evidence
    The Journal of the London Court of International Arbitration Arbitrators’ Initiatives to Obtain Factual and Legal Evidence Phillip Landolt Volume 28 Number 2 2012 ISSN: 09570411 MISSION STATEMENT A forum for the rigorous examination of the international arbitral process, whether public or private; to publish not information or news, but contributions to a deeper understanding of the subject. Editorial Board GENERAL EDITOR Professor William W. Park DEPUTY GENERAL EDITOR (PUBLIC) Ruth Teitelbaum DEPUTY GENERAL EDITOR (COMMERCIAL) Thomas W. Walsh EDITORS Professor Anthony G. Guest, CBE, QC Professor Dr. Klaus Peter Berger Nigel Blackaby Paul Friedland Professor Dr. Richard Kreindler Professor Dr. Loukas Mistelis Salim Moollan Karyl Nairn Dr. Hege Elisabeth Kjos SPECIAL ISSUES EDITOR V.V.Veeder, QC PRODUCTION EDITOR Ethu Crorie Kluwer Law International LCIA 250 Waterloo Road 70 Fleet Street London SE1 8RD London EC4Y 1EU United Kingdom telephone: +44 (0) 20 7936 7007 www.kluwerlaw.com fax: +44 (0) 20 7936 7008 e-mail: [email protected] www.lcia.org All review copies of books should be sent to Thomas W. Walsh, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, 125 Broad Street, New York, NY 10004-2498, USA. Arbitration International seeks independent scholarship and cannot accept material from authors with direct professional involvement in cases forming the focus of an article. Editorial decisions are made based on full articles or notes, rather than topic proposals, submitted by the authors themselves. Please address all editorial correspondence (including submission
    [Show full text]
  • The Pro Homine Framework and the Roman Law Spirit of International Human Rights Law
    THE PRO HOMINE FRAMEWORK AND THE ROMAN LAW SPIRIT OF INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW by Dilton Rocha Ferraz Ribeiro A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Law In conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Queen’s University Kingston, Ontario, Canada (October, 2015) Copyright ©Dilton Rocha Ferraz Ribeiro, 2015 Abstract The Romans were the first civilization that envisaged an international legal system rooted in the human person and for all humankind. The innovation of this concept was precisely its universality centered on the human conscience, which, different from past approaches to international law, was not theoretically limited to a group of people or a religion. Although still deprived of universal de facto application, the Roman concept of the law of nations or jus gentium guided, to a greater or lesser extent, all subsequent writings on the subject until its complete limitation to a law between states and its current revival within the theoretical framework of international human rights law. The general framework of human rights is the Roman notion that international law flows from an universal reason of all humankind and is equally observed by all peoples and used as law by all peoples or nations. It is this definition, looked through the perspective of modern times, which forms the pro homine framework. Both the European and Inter-American human rights courts unconsciously follow the precepts of the Roman jus gentium. They contribute to the reaffirmation that international human rights is indeed centered on the human person as the end and source of law. This individual-centric and Roman- based conception guide the transformation, application and interpretation of international human rights law setting the basic parameters of individuals as bearers of rights, duties, capacity and interests at the international level.
    [Show full text]
  • Book Chapter Reference
    Book Chapter General principles of procedural law KOLB, Robert Reference KOLB, Robert. General principles of procedural law. In: Zimmermann, Andreas, Tomuschat, Christian & Oellers-Frahm, Karin. The statute of the International Court of Justice : a commentary. Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2006. p. 871-908 Available at: http://archive-ouverte.unige.ch/unige:44997 Disclaimer: layout of this document may differ from the published version. 1 / 1 General Principles of Procedural Law MN A Introduction 1-8 I. 'Principles' an.d 'Rules' 2 II. The Notion of 'Procedure' 3-5 III. General Principles 6 IV. Adjudication and Arbitration 7 V. Survey of the Procedural Princip les Addressed 8 B. Structural and Constitutional Principles 9-26 I. Equality of the Parties 9-21 1. General Considerations 9-11 2. Equality as a Principle of Procedure 12-15 3. Equality as a Constitutional Principle 16-18 4. Equality as Reciprocity 19-21 II. The Principle of Proper Administration of Justice 22-26 C. Procedural Principles stricto sensu 27-62 I. General Considerations 27-30 II. The Definition of the Object of the Dispute: The Rule 'ne eat judex ultra petita partium' · 31-42 1. Content and Scope of the Principle 31-34 2. Limitations on the Principle 35-41 3. Action infra petita 42 III. Matters of Evidence and Burden of Proof 43-62 1. General Considerations 43 2. The Principle of Free Assessment of Evidence 44 3. The Burden of Proof 45-49 4. Limitations on the Burden of Proof 50-58 a) Jura novit curia 50-51 b) Particular Forms of Evidence 52 c) The Role of Presumptions 53 d) Negative Facts and Related Issues 54-55 e) Further Issues 56-58 5.
    [Show full text]