First Decisions on the Admission of Evidence at ICC Trials: A Blending of Accusatorial and Inquisitorial Models?

Abstract

The aim of this article is to analyse some aspects of the law of evidence provided for by the rules applicable to proceedings before the International Criminal Court (ICC). The article will specifically address the admission provisions to ascertain whether the merging of different legal traditions may be considered successful or subject to criticism. For this purpose, in the analysis of the first decisions adopted by the ICC concerning evidence, resort will be made to the widely known accusatorial versus inquisitorial partition. The conclusion reached is that some changes in the interpretation and application of the ICC sources concerning the law of evidence would be advisable, in order to rectify certain inconsistencies. Among them, the author suggests that greater space should be given to the orality principle. On the basis of the case law of the ad hoc tribunals, the author suggests the Court could consider distinguishing between acts and conduct of the defendant and other contextual aspects of the indictment, and more rigorously apply the orality principle to the former.