Between Fact and Opinion: The Sui Generis Approach to Expert Witness Testimony in International Criminal Trials

SSRN Pub Date : 2021-10-26 DOI:10.2139/ssrn.3950514
K. Richmond, S. Piccolo
{"title":"Between Fact and Opinion: The Sui Generis Approach to Expert Witness Testimony in International Criminal Trials","authors":"K. Richmond, S. Piccolo","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3950514","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nIt is a fundamental tenet of the law of evidence, spanning all jurisdictions, that witness testimony should ideally be delivered in open court by the individual who observed the event in question, or by the expert whose technical knowledge is relied upon. A notable exception to this principle has emerged in the field of international criminal justice, where courts and tribunals may allow ‘summarising witnesses’ to present a summation of witness testimony. In the case of Ayyash et al., the Special Tribunal for Lebanon extended the principle, allowing voluminous expert opinion evidence to be presented in factual summation. This article analyses such approaches, utilising doctrinal methods alongside empirical Wigmorean analysis, to assess the probity of these sui generis practices. The results are placed in legal and theoretical perspective, demonstrating that international courts and tribunals are departing from an overarching obligation to integrate international and domestic standards in respect of expert testimony.","PeriodicalId":74863,"journal":{"name":"SSRN","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SSRN","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3950514","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

It is a fundamental tenet of the law of evidence, spanning all jurisdictions, that witness testimony should ideally be delivered in open court by the individual who observed the event in question, or by the expert whose technical knowledge is relied upon. A notable exception to this principle has emerged in the field of international criminal justice, where courts and tribunals may allow ‘summarising witnesses’ to present a summation of witness testimony. In the case of Ayyash et al., the Special Tribunal for Lebanon extended the principle, allowing voluminous expert opinion evidence to be presented in factual summation. This article analyses such approaches, utilising doctrinal methods alongside empirical Wigmorean analysis, to assess the probity of these sui generis practices. The results are placed in legal and theoretical perspective, demonstrating that international courts and tribunals are departing from an overarching obligation to integrate international and domestic standards in respect of expert testimony.
在事实与意见之间:国际刑事审判中专家证人证言的独特方法
在所有司法管辖区,证据法的一项基本原则是,证人证词最好由目击有关事件的个人或其所依赖的技术知识的专家在公开法庭上提供。这一原则的一个明显例外出现在国际刑事司法领域,法院和法庭可以允许“总结证人”提出对证人证词的总结。在Ayyash等人的案件中,黎巴嫩问题特别法庭扩展了这一原则,允许以事实总结的方式提出大量专家意见证据。本文分析了这些方法,利用理论方法和实证威格莫兰分析,以评估这些自成一体的做法的公正性。结果从法律和理论的角度来看,表明国际法院和法庭正在背离在专家证词方面综合国际和国内标准的首要义务。
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