Fairness and Rights in International Criminal Procedure

Calls for the realignment of fairness and the rights of the accused in procedural decision-making in international criminal trials Recent controversial cases such as the Karadzic trial and the Bemba acquittal have highlighted the importance of fairness in international criminal trials. Through an in-depth critical analysis of procedural decisions at the ICTY and ICC between 2008 and 2018, Sophie Rigney shows that there is a clear separation between fairness and rights in practice. Rigney demonstrates the various ways that fairness is invoked in international criminal law decisions - ways that are not always consistent, and are frequently at odds with defendants' rights. She builds a new theoretical framework for understanding the concept and application of fairness and rights in international trials. In this way, she offers new paths for solving the problems currently plaguing those researching, designing, practising, adjudicating and being judged by international criminal law. Key features - Weaves insights from original interviews with international criminal judges and lawyers into the analysis, to examine what the jurisprudence and academic literature mean for legal procedure in practice - Analyses primary texts from the ICTY and the ICC, including the statutes, Rules of Procedure and Evidence and Regulations - Includes case studies on disclosure, the use of adjudicated facts and the protection of witnesses - issues that are integral to the operation of rights in international criminal trials Sophie Rigney is a Senior Research Associate at the University of New South Wales.