Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
  • Print publication year: 2011
  • Online publication date: August 2011

7 - Trial proceedings

Summary

Trial is the central and most visible phase of an international criminal prosecution. In all the international criminal tribunals examined in this series, it is the public forum in which the prosecution and defence question witnesses, present documentary and other evidence, and make legal arguments before a panel of judges who serve as finders of both fact and law. Since the majority of accused before international criminal tribunals choose to contest the charges against them rather than plead guilty, most cases to date have featured a trial, and the trial has usually been lengthy. Rarely has a trial chamber completed a trial in under a year, and trials lasting two or more years are common. While the extended length of these trials has been criticised for potentially violating the rights of accused, the reasons for delays are complex. Delay often occurs as a result of the unavoidable confluence of a challenging political context, complex substantive law, a heavy caseload, and persistent scarcity of resources.

This chapter explores the trial phase of international criminal prosecutions, focusing on the ad hoc Tribunals, the ICC, and the SCSL. While differences exist in the trial procedures of these tribunals, trial before all of them is largely adversarial and the corresponding rules are similar in nature, and they will thus be discussed in tandem. Section 7.1 begins by looking at the process for appointing judges to a trial bench.

Harmon, Mark B., ‘The Pre-Trial Process at the ICTY as a Means of Ensuring Expeditious Trials: A Potential Unrealized’, (2007) 5 Journal of International Criminal Justice377, 383–384
Rearick, Daniel J., ‘Innocent Until Alleged Guilty: Provisional Release at the ICTR,’ (2003) 44 Harvard International Law Journal577, 578
Kwon, O-Gon, ‘The Challenge of an International Criminal Trial as Seen from the Bench’, (2007) 5 Journal of International Criminal Justice360, 364
Wippman, David, ‘The Costs of International Justice’, (2006) 100 American Journal of International Law861, 875
Carroll, Christina M., ‘An Assessment of the Role and Effectiveness of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and the Rwandan National Justice System in Dealing with Mass Atrocities of 1994’, (2000) 18 Boston University International Law Journal163, 181–184
Bibas, Stephanos and Burke-White, William W., ‘International Idealism Meets Domestic-Criminal-Procedure Realism’, (2010) 59 Duke Law Journal637, 667–671
Voeten, Erik, ‘The Politics of International Judicial Appointments’, (2009) 9 Chicago Journal of International Law387, 390
Ambos, Kai, ‘“Witness Proofing” Before the International Criminal Court: A Reply to Karemaker, Taylor, and Pittman’, (2008) 21 Leiden Journal of International Law911, 915
Boas, Gideon, ‘The Case for a New Appellate Jurisdiction for International Criminal Law’, in Goran Sluiter and Sergey Vasiliev (eds.), International Criminal Procedure: Towards a Coherent Body of Law (2009), p. 445
Cockayne, James, ‘Special Court for Sierra Leone: Decisions on the Recusal of Judges Robertson and Winter’, (2004) 2 Journal of International Criminal Justice1154
Dechênes, Jules, ‘Excusing and Disqualification of Judges’, in Otto Triffterer (ed.), Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: Observers' Notes, Article by Article (1999), p. 626
Zagaris, Bruce, ‘Law of War: A Bomb Kills Croatian Witness Who Was Cooperating with War Crimes Tribunal’, (2000) 16 International Enforcement Law Reporter977
Scharf, Michael P., Balkan Justice (1997), pp. 171–72
Leigh, Monroe, ‘The Yugoslav Tribunal: Use of Unnamed Witnesses Against Accused’, (1996) 90 American Journal of International Law235
Chinkin, Christine M., ‘Due Process and Witness Anonymity’, (1997) 91 American Journal of International Law75
Leigh, Monroe, ‘Witness Anonymity Is Inconsistent with Due Process’, (1997) 91 American Journal of International Law80
Elberling, Björn, ‘The Next Step in History-Writing Through Criminal Law: Exactly How Tailor-Made Is the Special Tribunal for Lebanon?’, (2008) 21 Leiden Journal of International Law529, 535–538
Karemaker, Ruben, Taylor, B. Don III, and Pittman, Thomas Wayde, ‘Witness Proofing in International Criminal Tribunals: A Critical Analysis of Widening Procedural Divergence’, (2008) 21 Leiden Journal of International Law683
Karemaker, Ruben, B. Don Taylor III, and Thomas Wayde Pittman, ‘Witness Proofing in International Criminal Tribunals: Response to Ambos’, (2008) 21 Leiden Journal of International Law917
Jordash, Wayne, ‘The Practice of “Witness Proofing” in International Criminal Tribunals: Why the International Criminal Court Should Prohibit the Practice’, (2009) 22 Leiden Journal of International Law501
Vasiliev, Sergey, ‘Proofing the Ban on “Witness Proofing”: Did the ICC Get It Right?’, (2009) 20 Criminal Law Forum193
Gaparayi, Idi, ‘The Milošević Trial at the Halfway Stage: Judgement on the Motion for Acquittal’, (2004) 17 Leiden Journal of International Law737
Keller, Andrew N., ‘Punishment for Violations of International Criminal Law: An Analysis of Sentencing at the ICTY and ICTR’, (2001) 12 Indiana International and Comparative Law Review53, 73 (2001)
Wald, Patricia M., ‘The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia Comes of Age: Some Observations on Day-to-Day Dilemmas of an International Court’, (2001) 5 Washington University Journal of Law and Policy87, 93–94
Sluiter, Göran, ‘The ICTY and Offences against the Administration of Justice’, (2004) 2 Journal of International Criminal Justice631–632 (2004)
Mundis, Daryl A., ‘From “Common Law” Towards “Civil Law”: The Evolution of the ICTY Rules of Procedure and Evidence’, (2001) 14 Leiden Journal of International Law367