Elements of the principle of determination of truth in the procedural rules of the International Criminal Court (original) (raw)
Related papers
Процесноправни значај општепознатих чињеница и чињеница утврђених у правоснажним судским одлукама
Универзитет у Београду, 2014
Doctoral dissertation about ''Generally Known and Adjudicated Facts in Criminal Procedure-Judicial Notice'', mostly deals with facts and factual issues in criminal procedure, both in terms of mixed and inquisitorial model of procedure, traditionally represented in the countries of continental Europe, and from the perspective of adversarial model, that was introduced in Serbia by the CPC of 2011. Basic purpose of the research was to provide certain, practically implemented answers on these ''factual issues'', that were showed as the most problematic in the practice of the courts, and which require a different answers, in accordance with the newly adopted procedural model. In addition, the subject of research is the institute of judicial notice, related to generally known and adjudicated facts in Serbian, comparative and international criminal law. Regarding this, case-law of the International Criminal Tribunals for former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, related to Rule 94 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence is matter of detailed analysis. The research showed that the main problems in the application of the Rule 94 emerged from unclear distinction between factual and legal categories, uncertain Tribunal's jurisprudence that frequently changed and differently interpreted the admissibility requirements, that judicially noticed adjudicated facts without the consent of the parties, what resulted in transfer of the burden of the proof on the defendant, and put under the question the other principles of the fair trial. The issue of judicial notice, adjudicated and generally known facts could not be analyzed separately from the issue of the facts in general and their determination in different procedural models. Serbian criminal procedure traditionally based on the ''principle of truth'' that implies the active judge and passive parties, recently experienced the radical reforms, transferring to the adversarial model where the parties have the ''main word'' in collection and presentation of evidence. Therefore, the old procedural dilemmas like differentiation between facts and law, identity of the indictment and judgment, burden of proof and presumptions, etc, are analyzed through the lens of recently adopted adversarial model, adjusted to Serbian circumstances. In the scope of the vii part that deals with adjudicated or final facts, the matter of particular examination is ne bis in idem rule (or double jeopardy prohibition), extraordinary legal remedies and prejudicial question in criminal procedure. The research is primarily based on case-study method, which sources of data are decisions of Serbian courts, common-law decisions, ICTY and ICTR decisions as well as decisions of European Court of Human Rights. In addition to that, comparative, normative and historical methods of legal research are used as well. The basic purpose of the research is to provide a comprehensive study of the factual issues in criminal procedure, and to serve as some kind of guidance for the courts and legal practice.
Право и государство, 2018
Принципы международного уголовного права составляют его Общую часть и формулируют основания и условия для привлечения лиц к уголовной ответственности за совершение преступлений по международному праву (геноцида, преступлений против человечности, военных преступлений и преступления агрессии) и иных преступлений против мира и безопасности человечества. Принципы международного уголовного права в значительной степени имплементированы в уголовное законодательство Республики Казахстан. В статье анализируются пробелы в имплементации Общей части международного уголовного права и предлагаются пути дальнейшего совершенствования уголовного законодательства Республики Казахстан.
Thesis for PhD in International Law, 2004
The thesis is devoted to the study of procedural aspects of the activity of international criminal courts. Chapter 1 describes the evolution of international criminal justice. Chapter 2 defines the legal nature, organisation, jurisdiction (types and limitations), sources of procedural rules and all the procedural stages of the ad hoc international criminal tribunals. Chapter 3 is devoted to the procedural aspects of the ICC's activity; it describes the legal nature of the Court, its jurisdiction (types and limitations), the specifics of the ICC organisation, functions and status of the main organs, the procedural role and rights of all the participants, the main tasks of the procedural stages, the specifics of the cooperation with the states and the UN. The thesis suggests the author's approach to the phasing of criminal stages of each of the international criminal courts and reveals the interaction of Anglo-American and continental legal traditions in the formation of procedural rules regulating the activity of the ICC in their comparison to the rules of the ad hoc tribunals.
Методологічні засади дослідження принципу законності в кримінальному праві
Питання боротьби зі злочинністю, 2021
У статті через аналіз правової природи принципів права формується підхід до їх розуміння як відображення цінностей, що через динамічний розвиток об’єктивуються у різних формах права. Прагнення до дослідження позитивного права виступає ключовим суперечливим моментом у науці кримінального права. Тому автор підтримує науковців, що вказують на кризу догматичного підходу до вивчення кримінального права, та обґрунтовано доводить необхідність орієнтування юридичної науки на потреби практики. Дуалістичний характер принципів прав (галузевих у тому числі) створює труднощі у досягненні таких характеристик наукового знання, що їх вивчає, як об’єктивність, істинність та неупередженість. Тому важливим є вибір концептуального підходу, який береться за основу наукового дослідження. Розвиток правової науки, орієнтування на можливість використання результатів наукового правничого знання на вирішення соціологічних, політологічних проблем, яких є чимало на шляху розвитку держави України, зумовлює використання різних прийомів та засобів наукового дослідження. Автор обґрунтовує використання методів ідеалістичного підходу для цього дослідження.
Liber Amicorum prof. dr Milenko Kreća : međunarodno javno i krivično pravo u XXI veku, 2020
The jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court is specific with respect to other international judicial bodies. First of all, it is complementary to national legislation. Preference is given to the criminal proceedings before domestic courts, and only if the competent State does not take procedural steps will the Court have jurisdiction. Also, the crime itself must be of such a gravity that it falls within the jurisdiction of the Court. The Court may exercise its jurisdiction if the following States are Parties to the Statute: the State on the territory of which the crime was committed and the State of which the person accused of the crime is a national. A particular issue is the jurisdiction of the Court for nationals of Non-States Parties of the Statute. Also, Court does not accept the immunity of persons acting in an official capacity. This does not apply to Heads of States that are not parties of the Statute, with the sole exception that the Court may exercise jurisdiction over them when proceedings are initiated by the Security Council. The issue of special importance is investigation – who is authorized to initiate it and which evidence level is necessary to establish grounds for suspicion that the crime committed was within the jurisdiction of the Court. Much of these issues have remained open and are resolved in the Court's jurisprudence, and it will be so in the future.
Theory of principle in International law
Ukrainian Yearbook of International Law , 2009
Since Middle Ages international legal studies have recognized certain fundamental norms generically defined as principles that fell outside the conventional framework of legal sources, i.e. treaties and customs. These occupy important place in international discourse and jurisprudence. However, only the general principles of law were accorded formal standing in international law under Art. 38 of the ICJ Statute. Despite the eminence of principles in international law textbooks and legal writing, theoretical foundations are still debated in international legal theory. The article explores various categories of principles in international law, including general principles of law, principles of international law, their relationship to jus cogens and erga omnes rules. It contains two parts, the first exploring the current uses of the notion of “principle” in international jurisprudence and case law and the second being devoted to an attempt to develop a theory of principles in international law through the lens of legal regimes. Principles in international law operate with distinct methodology compared with national legal systems. Lacking centralized legislation and law enforcement system international law matured into a dispersed system based on the concept of plenitude of the law, i.e. ability to address any future question when it arises. The function of safeguarding such plenitude is with the principles in international law. The article proposes the following definition of a principle in international law: principles are generalities that serve as foundations of international legal order and reflect or summarize fundamental ideas and are accorded with (1) special normative universality, (2) stability, and (3) special significance. Special normative universality here refers to the lack of specific addressee of the principle, its applicability to undefined number of cases regardless of their subject-matter. Stability means that principles structure the international legal order by forming historical, axiological, and structural basis for the system of international law within the tradition of international legal system. Special significance of principles derives from those values that form their content and this brings about the legal effect of optimization and balancing described by R. Dworkin and R. Alexy. The article argues that principles in international law can be divided into three categories: (1) axiomatic principles that form the public order of the international law and include ius cogens and other fundamental principles such as bona fidae, pacta sunt servanda, par in parem non habet potestas, sovereignty principle etc.; (2) structural principles that define the structure, specificities and fundamentals of autonomous and self-contained regimes in international law (UN Charter non-cogent principles, sectoral principles of various branches of international law), and (3) common principles that reflect the logic of the system of international law.