A Spectrum of International Criminal Procedure: Shifting Patterns of Power Distribution in International Criminal Courts and Tribunals

Jessica Peake
{"title":"A Spectrum of International Criminal Procedure: Shifting Patterns of Power Distribution in International Criminal Courts and Tribunals","authors":"Jessica Peake","doi":"10.58948/2331-3536.1344","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"International criminal procedure is characterized by a fundamental structural shift in the allocation of power between the actors in a criminal trial – the judges, prosecution and defense - away from that traditionally ascribed under an adversarial system and towards the power distribution structure more common to the inquisitorial system. By looking at the Statutes and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC), it is possible to identify varying degrees of power shifts in each court: across each we see a convergence around the transferal of procedural powers away from the individual parties and into the hands of the judge(s), shifting the power structure away from adversarial norms in favor of more traditional inquisitorial role assignments. This degrees of shift evident at these courts and tribunals are worthy of exploration in order to illuminate the aspects of power distribution and procedural devices, originating from which system, have been employed in the new model(s) of ICP seen at these three courts. To call them models of procedure is more appropriate that talking of a single model applicable across all the international courts and tribunals, as each displays unique characteristics and with no precise uniformity in each court’s rules. What are evident are convergences around structural ideas relating to the power relationships between the three main actors in the system, and the adoption of devices in furtherance of the overall goal of each court of having the judge as an active participant in proceedings.","PeriodicalId":340850,"journal":{"name":"Pace International Law Review","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pace International Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.58948/2331-3536.1344","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

International criminal procedure is characterized by a fundamental structural shift in the allocation of power between the actors in a criminal trial – the judges, prosecution and defense - away from that traditionally ascribed under an adversarial system and towards the power distribution structure more common to the inquisitorial system. By looking at the Statutes and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC), it is possible to identify varying degrees of power shifts in each court: across each we see a convergence around the transferal of procedural powers away from the individual parties and into the hands of the judge(s), shifting the power structure away from adversarial norms in favor of more traditional inquisitorial role assignments. This degrees of shift evident at these courts and tribunals are worthy of exploration in order to illuminate the aspects of power distribution and procedural devices, originating from which system, have been employed in the new model(s) of ICP seen at these three courts. To call them models of procedure is more appropriate that talking of a single model applicable across all the international courts and tribunals, as each displays unique characteristics and with no precise uniformity in each court’s rules. What are evident are convergences around structural ideas relating to the power relationships between the three main actors in the system, and the adoption of devices in furtherance of the overall goal of each court of having the judge as an active participant in proceedings.
国际刑事诉讼程序的范围:国际刑事法院和法庭权力分配的变化模式
国际刑事诉讼程序的特点是,在刑事审判的行动者- -法官、控方和辩护方- -之间的权力分配发生了根本的结构性转变,从传统上归因于对抗制度的权力分配结构转向更常见的讯问制度的权力分配结构。通过查看前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭(前南问题国际法庭)、国际刑事法院(国际刑事法院)和柬埔寨法院特别分庭(柬埔寨法院特别分庭)的规约和《程序和证据规则》,可以确定每个法院的权力转移程度不同:在每一种情况下,我们都看到了一种趋同,即程序权从当事人个人手中转移到法官手中,将权力结构从对抗性规范转移到更传统的调查性角色分配上。这些法院和法庭明显的这种程度的转变值得探讨,以便阐明在这三个法院所看到的国际比较方案的新模式中所采用的源于哪个系统的权力分配和程序装置方面。将它们称为程序模式比谈论适用于所有国际法院和法庭的单一模式更为合适,因为每一种模式都具有独特的特点,而且每一法院的规则没有精确的一致性。显而易见的是,有关司法系统中三个主要行为者之间的权力关系的结构性观念趋同,以及为促进每个法院使法官积极参与诉讼的总体目标而采取的措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信