The International Criminal Standard of Proof at the ICC—Beyond Reasonable Doubt or Beyond Reason?

Abstract

Abstract Standards of proof are a common and essential feature of modern systems of adjudication. The definition of the criminal standard of proof before the ICC has, however, not been a straightforward matter. The Katanga judgment shows deep divisions among the judges on the interpretation of the international criminal standard of proof. This chapter discusses the theoretical choices involved in setting the standard of proof. It argues that any meaningful discussion of standards of proof must involve two different elements: the determination of a model of judicial fact-finding to determine how the standard of proof can be defined, and a complex balancing exercise of all the relevant interests in order to set the applicable standard.