国际法院和法庭的透明度

Q2 Social Sciences
Freya Baetens
{"title":"国际法院和法庭的透明度","authors":"Freya Baetens","doi":"10.1163/15718107-91040004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Transparency in international adjudication is often lauded as the hallmark of an effective judicial process; the goal to which all adjudicative bodies ought to aspire in order to enhance their legitimacy. This paper scrutinizes this perspective: while transparency certainly provides benefits to the international legal order, it needs to be balanced against other objectives in the pursuit of justice. The paper proceeds in two parts. First, it considers the status of transparency in various international courts and tribunals, across five main areas (requests, submissions, hearings, awards and compliance), arguing that most adjudicatory mechanisms have already achieved adequate transparency in the majority of areas. Second, it reviews the drawbacks to transparency, and how unbridled access may disrupt the adjudicative process, which rather ought to facilitate the resolution of a specific dispute and not a ‘trial by media’. Overall, achieving a balance between transparency and confidentiality generates the most optimal outcome for international dispute settlement.","PeriodicalId":34997,"journal":{"name":"Nordic Journal of International Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Transparency Across International Courts and Tribunals\",\"authors\":\"Freya Baetens\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15718107-91040004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Transparency in international adjudication is often lauded as the hallmark of an effective judicial process; the goal to which all adjudicative bodies ought to aspire in order to enhance their legitimacy. This paper scrutinizes this perspective: while transparency certainly provides benefits to the international legal order, it needs to be balanced against other objectives in the pursuit of justice. The paper proceeds in two parts. First, it considers the status of transparency in various international courts and tribunals, across five main areas (requests, submissions, hearings, awards and compliance), arguing that most adjudicatory mechanisms have already achieved adequate transparency in the majority of areas. Second, it reviews the drawbacks to transparency, and how unbridled access may disrupt the adjudicative process, which rather ought to facilitate the resolution of a specific dispute and not a ‘trial by media’. Overall, achieving a balance between transparency and confidentiality generates the most optimal outcome for international dispute settlement.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34997,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nordic Journal of International Law\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nordic Journal of International Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718107-91040004\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nordic Journal of International Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718107-91040004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

国际裁决的透明度经常被誉为有效司法程序的标志;所有裁决机构都应该追求的目标,以提高其合法性。本文件仔细审查了这一观点:虽然透明度肯定会为国际法律秩序带来好处,但在追求正义的过程中,它需要与其他目标相平衡。论文分为两个部分。首先,它考虑了各国际法院和法庭在五个主要领域(请求、提交、听证、裁决和遵守)的透明度状况,认为大多数裁决机制在大多数领域已经实现了足够的透明度。其次,它审查了透明度的缺陷,以及不受约束的访问可能会如何扰乱裁决过程,而裁决过程应该有助于解决特定争议,而不是“媒体审判”。总的来说,在透明度和保密性之间取得平衡是解决国际争端的最佳结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Transparency Across International Courts and Tribunals
Transparency in international adjudication is often lauded as the hallmark of an effective judicial process; the goal to which all adjudicative bodies ought to aspire in order to enhance their legitimacy. This paper scrutinizes this perspective: while transparency certainly provides benefits to the international legal order, it needs to be balanced against other objectives in the pursuit of justice. The paper proceeds in two parts. First, it considers the status of transparency in various international courts and tribunals, across five main areas (requests, submissions, hearings, awards and compliance), arguing that most adjudicatory mechanisms have already achieved adequate transparency in the majority of areas. Second, it reviews the drawbacks to transparency, and how unbridled access may disrupt the adjudicative process, which rather ought to facilitate the resolution of a specific dispute and not a ‘trial by media’. Overall, achieving a balance between transparency and confidentiality generates the most optimal outcome for international dispute settlement.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: Established in 1930, the Nordic Journal of International Law has remained the principal forum in the Nordic countries for the scholarly exchange on legal developments in the international and European domains. Combining broad thematic coverage with rigorous quality demands, it aims to present current practice and its theoretical reflection within the different branches of international law.
×
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