The Procedural Status of a Defendant in the International Criminal Justice

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

The article outlines the main elements of the procedural status of the defendant in international criminal justice bodies. The need to study this status together with the criminological concept of “personality of the criminal” is emphasised. This significantly enriches the doctrine of international criminal law and helps bridge the gap that has emerged between international law and the sciences of the criminal legal cycle. A conclusion is made about the special nature of the right to a fair trial, which has significant differences in international criminal justice compared to conventional law. Particular attention is paid to the right of the accused to defend himself in person. It is noted that if in domestic criminal proceedings this right is taken for granted, then taking into account the specifics of proceedings in international courts and tribunals (their cumbersomeness, a significant number of witnesses interrogated, etc.), this right can degenerate into its opposite, turning from a procedural guarantee into a means of abuse by the defendant. The article summarises the need to take into account, among other things, the individual features of the defendant, which make it possible to more correctly resolve the issue of bringing him to criminal responsibility under international law.

About the authors

Alexander Petrovich Evseev

HSE University

Email: apevseyev@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0697-0086
Candidate of Legal Sciences, Associate Professor, School of Criminal Law, Legal Process and Criminalistics, Faculty of Law, HSE University, Moscow, Russia

References

  1. Bohlander M. (2005) “A Fool for a Client” — Remarks on the Freedom of Choice and Assignment of Counsel at the ICTY. Criminal Law Forum, no.16, pp. 159–173. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10609-005-0566-6
  2. Borrelli K. (2019) Between Show-Trials and Utopia: a Study of the Tu Quoque Defence. Leiden Journal of International Law, no. 32, pp. 315–331. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1017/s0922156519000074
  3. Chernichenko S. V. (1971) Status podsudimykh v mezhdunarodnykh sudebnykh organakh [The Status of the Defendants in the International Judicial Bodies]. Sovetskoe Gosudarstvo i Pravo, no. 7, pp. 63–68. (In Russian).
  4. Clark R. (1975) Prestupnost' v SSHA [Crime in the USA], Moscow: Progress. (In Russian).
  5. Demidenko G. G. (2018) Sud nad Sokratom [Socrates Trial]. Kharkov: Pravo. (In Russian).
  6. Elberling B. (2012) The Defendant in International Criminal Proceedings, London: Hart Publising. DOI:https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472566157
  7. Esakov G. A. (2023) Roman L. N. Tolstogo «Voskresenie»: istoriko-pravovaya rekonstruktsiya [The Novel of L. N. Tolstoy “The Resurrection”: Historical and Legal Reconstruction], Moscow: Prospekt. (In Russian).
  8. Evseev A. (2023) Lichnost’ mezhdunarodnogo prestupnika (po materialam Nurnbergskogo i inykh sudebnykh razbiratel’stv) [The Personality of an International Criminal (on Materials of Nuremberg and Other Judicial Proceedings)]. Zhurnal VSHÉ po Mezhdunarodnomu Pravu (HSE University Journal of International Law), vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 77–91. (In Russian). DOI:https://doi.org/10.17323/jil.2023.17449
  9. Filimonova A. I. (ed.) (2009) Dvoynye standarty v zashchite prav cheloveka: kazus professora Sheshelya [The Double Standards in the Defence of Human Rights: the Sheshel’ Case], Moscow: Fond ist. perspektivy. (In Russian).
  10. Golovko L. V. (2020) Uchastie gosudarstva v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve: ot «ravenstva oruzhiya» k realistichnym kontseptsiyam [State Participation in the Criminal Procedure: From ‘Equality of Arms’ to Realistic Theories]. Gosudarstvo i parvo, no. 6, pp. 107–118. (In Russian). DOI:https://doi.org/10.31857/S013207690009942-8
  11. Grodzinskij M. M. (1916) Sudebnoe issledovanie lichnosti obvinyaemogo po deystvuyushchemu pravu [The Judicial Investigation of the Personality of the Defendant in Current Law]. Zhurnal Ministerstva yustitsii, no. 8, pp. 24–69. (In Russian).
  12. Gumpert B., Nuzban Y. (2021) Length of Proceedings at the International Criminal Court: Context, Latest Developments and Proposed Steps to Address the Issue. In: Heinze A., Dittrich V. (eds.) The Past, Present and Future of the International Criminal Court. Brus.: TOAEP, pp. 553–587.
  13. Hartmann F. (2018) Mir i nakazanie: taynye voyny mezhdunarodnoy politiki i pravosudiya [The Peace and Punishment: the Secret Wars of International Politics and Justice], Kharkov: Yurait. (In Russian).
  14. Kalamkaryan R. A. (1997) Povedenie storon na stadii otkrytiya mezhdunarodnogo sudebnogo proizvodstva [The Behavior of Parties at the Stage of Opening the International Judicial Proceedings]. Gosudarstvo i parvo, no. 3, pp. 98–111. (In Russian).
  15. Kalamkaryan R. A. (1997) Povedenie storon na stadii otkrytiya mezhdunarodnogo sudebnogo proizvodstva [The Behavior of Parties at the Stage of Opening the International Judicial Proceedings]. Gosudarstvo i pravo, no. 4, pp. 70–82. (In Russian).
  16. Kaminskaya V. I. (1960) Pokazaniya obvinyaemogo v sovetskom ugolovnom protsesse [The Testimonies of the Defendant in the Soviet Criminal Process], Moscow: Izd-vo AN SSSR. (In Russian).
  17. Kovler A. I. (2002) Antropologiya prava: Uchebnik dlya vuzov [The Anthropology of Law: University Textbook], Moscow: Norma. (In Russian).
  18. Laughland J. (2009) Parodiya na pravosudie [The Parody on Justice], Moscow: Russkaya panorama. (In Russian).
  19. Mezyaev A. (2005) Protsess protiv S. Miloshevicha v Gaagskom tribunale. Zapiski iz zala suda [The Trial against S. Milosevic in the Hague Tribunal. The Notes from the Courtroom]. Vol. 1. Obvinitel'naya chast' [The accusatorial phase]. Kazan': Titul-Kazan'. (In Russian).
  20. Mezyaev A. B. (2005) Naznachenie advokata na processe protiv s. miloshevicha v gaagskom tribunale: nekotorye mezhdunarodno-pravovye voprosy [The Appointment of the Lawyer at the Milosevic Trial: Several International Legal Issues]. Moskovskiy zhurnal mezhdunarodnogo prava, no. 2, pp. 99–118. (In Russian). DOI:https://doi.org/10.24833/0869-0049-2005-2-99-118
  21. Mezyaev A. B. (2014) Zashchita prav obvinyaemykh v sovremennom mezhdunarodnom ugolovnom protsesse: aktual'nye voprosy teorii i praktiki [The Defence of Defendants’ Rights in the Current International Criminal Procedure: the Actual Issues of Theory and the Practice], Kazan': Un-t upravl. «TISBI». (In Russian).
  22. Morshchakova T. G. (2014) Mezhdunarodno-pravovye osnovy [The International Basics]. In: Morshchakova T. G. (ed.) Peresmotr sudebnykh aktov v grazhdanskom, arbitrazhnom i ugolovnom protsesse [The Revision of Judicial Acts in the Civil, Commerce and Criminal Procedure], Moscow: Yurait. (In Russian).
  23. Nyurnbergskiy process: sb. materialov, v 8 tomakh, tom 1 [The Nuremberg trial. Collection of texts. In 8 vols. Vol. 1], Moscow: Yurid. lit., 1987. (In Russian).
  24. Payne L. (2020) Unsettling Accounts. In: Knittel S. and Goldberg Z. (eds.) The Routledge International Handbook of Perpetrator Studies, London; New-York: Routledge, pp. 130–141. DOI:https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315102887-12
  25. Petrovic V. (2015) Slobodan Milosevic in the Hague: Failed Success of a Historical Trial. In: Tismaneanu V., Iacob B. (eds.) Remembrance, History and Justice, Budapest: Central European University Press, pp. 295–310. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1515/9789633860939-012
  26. Ponte K. del, Sudetich C. (2008) Okhota. Ya i voennye prestupniki [The Hunting. I and the War Criminals], Moscow: Eksmo. (In Russian).
  27. Sassoli M., Buv'e A. (2009) Pravovaya zashchita vo vremya voyny [The Legal Defence During the War]: In 4 vol. / Vol. IV, Moscow: MKKK.
  28. Scharf M. (2016) Slobodan Milosevic. In: Schabas W. (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to International Criminal Law, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 295–311. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781107280540.016
  29. Scharf M. (2019) Combatting Chaos in the Courtroom. In: Sterio M., Scharf M. (eds.) The Legacy of Ad Hoc Tribunals in International Criminal Law, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 286–304. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108277525.014
  30. Scharf M., Schabas W. (2002) Slobodan Milosevic on Trial: a Companion, N. Y. – L.: Continuum.
  31. Schomburg W. (2009) The role of International Criminal Tribunals in Promoting Respect for Fair Trial Rights. Northwestern Journal of International Human Rights, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1–29.
  32. Schomburg W. (2011) Some Reflections on the Right to Self-Representation before International Tribunals. ERA Forum, no. 12, pp. 189–195. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-011-0199-7
  33. Sharyy A. (2003) Tribunal [The tribunal], Moscow: Prava cheloveka. (In Russian).
  34. Stahn C. (2019) A Critical Introduction to International Criminal Law, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12644
  35. Steinitz M. (2005) “The Milosevic Trial – Live!”. Journal of International Criminal Justice, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 103–123. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/3.1.103
  36. Stolk S. (2018) A Sophisticated Beast? On the Construction of an ‘Ideal’ Perpetrator in the Opening Statements of International Criminal Trials. European Journal of International Law, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 677–701. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chy041
  37. Tochilovsky V. (2004) International Criminal Justice: “Strangers in the Foreign System”. Criminal Law Forum, no. 15, pp. 319–344. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10609-005-2324-1
  38. Tochilovsky V. (2014) The Law and Jurisprudence of the International Criminal Tribunals and Courts, Cambridge: Intersentia.
  39. Tulupova E. O., Demidova T. K. (2023) Uchastie advokatov v Nyurnbergskom protsesse [The Participation of lawyers in the Nuremberg Trial]. Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava, vol. 27, no. 7, pp. 133–145. (In Russian). DOI:https://doi.org/10.12737/jrp.2023.084
  40. Ushatska A. (2009) MUS i pravo na spravedlivoe sudebnoe razbiratel'stvo [ICC and the Right to a Fair Trial]. In: Bogush G. I., Trikoz E. N. (eds.) Mezhdunarodnoe ugolovnoe pravosudie: sovremennye problemy [The International Criminal Justice: the Current Problems], Moscow, pp. 275–294. (In Russian).
  41. Vorozhejkin E. M. (1958) Sudebnye Rechi Izvestnykh Russkikh Yuristov [The Trial Speeches of Famous Russian Lawyers], Moscow: Gosyurizdat. (In Russian).
  42. Wladimiroff M. (2012) Rassuzhdeniya o statuse zashchitnika v mezhdunarodnyh sudebnyh razbiratel'stvakh [A Defence Counsel’s Reflection on International Trials]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie, no. 3, pp. 62–70. (In Russian).
  43. Zahar A. (2008) Legal Aid, Self-Representation and the Crisis at the Hague Tribunal. Criminal Law Forum, no. 19, pp. 241–263. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10609-008-9063-z
  44. Épple N. (2020) Neudobnoe proshloe: pamyat' o gosudarstvennyh prestupleniyakh v Rossii i drugikh stranakh [The Uncomfortable Past: the Memory of State Crimes in Russia and Other Countries], Moscow: Novoe lit. obozrenie. (In Russian).

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Copyright (c) 2025 Evseev A.P.

Согласие на обработку персональных данных

 

Используя сайт https://journals.rcsi.science, я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных») даю согласие на обработку персональных данных на этом сайте (текст Согласия) и на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика» (текст Согласия).