Abstract
The topic under consideration at the XVIIIth International Congress of AIDP is fundamentally the same as that dealt with at the XIIth Congress – the protection of human rights in criminal proceedings. Even at that time, it was not a new issue – in 1953, under the title of ‘The Protection of personal freedoms during criminal proceedings’, the VIth Congress dealt with the same problems. It is remarkable that the term ‘human rights’ was not yet mentioned, even though the European Convention had been adopted almost three years earlier. In the meantime the subject has become a central concern for the international community which is demonstrated by the present publication which unites the General Report of the AIDC with that of the AIDP. I regard it as a very friendly gesture that the AIDP General Rapporteur of 1979 has been invited to contribute an epilogue to this publication. It provides an opportunity to look back and to reflect on the developments which we have witnessed over the last thirty years. Of course, the temptation to embark upon a detailed comparison of what was examined and determined then and now is enormous. It is equally obvious that this is not the place for an in-depth study of this kind. Even without addressing the details, one has to admit that over the last thirty years there have been significant developments. ‘Human Rights’ in the context of criminal proceedings has practically become a household term. At the time of the VIIth Congress, the ECrtHR had passed less than three-dozen judgments of which less than a third concerned criminal proceedings; now the number exceeds 10,000. There is also a wealth of academic publications in many languages. A number of landmark judgments have extended the very notion of ‘criminal proceedings’, many guarantees have been developed in detail, and, with a few exceptions – Murray v United Kingdom for instance – the scope of guarantees has been expanded.
Highlights
The topic under consideration at the XVIIIth International Congress of AIDP is fundamentally the same as that dealt with at the XIIth Congress – the protection of human rights in criminal proceedings. It was not a new issue – in 1953, under the title of ‘The Protection of personal freedoms during criminal proceedings’, the VIth Congress dealt with the same problems
In the meantime the subject has become a central concern for the international community which is demonstrated by the present publication which unites the General Report of the AIDC with that of the AIDP
International criminal law exemplified by the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials which had been almost forgotten by most, save for a few specialists, has had a revival, first with the ad hoc Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and Rwanda (ICTR), and since with a number of other Tribunals set up to judge persons suspected of having committed serious crimes against humanitarian law and the law of war – in Sierra Leone, Cambodia and the Lebanon, to give but a few examples – and the International Criminal Court (ICC)
Summary
This phenomenon can still be observed in the preparation of international criminal law. Article 20(1) states: ‘The Trial Chambers shall ensure that a trial is fair and expeditious and that proceedings are conducted in accordance with the rules of procedure and evidence, with full respect for the rights of the accused and due regard for the protection of victims and witnesses’. What I find quite remarkable about this sentence is that it refers to fairness without limitation to the accused as is the case with International Human Rights instruments. As victims have no locus standi at all before the Tribunal, their interests are those represented by the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) Witnesses are yet another special group which must be protected. The most remarkable aspect of this lies in the procedural sphere: The Office of the Prosecutor is entitled to file an interlocutory appeal whenever it comes to the conclusion that a Trial Chamber has gone too far in the recognition of defence rights, so that the interests of the victims cannot be effectively brought before the Judges
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
