Development Of International Criminal Law Research Articles

Acceptance of international criminal justice in Bosnia and Herzegovina

When the XIV Winter Olympic Games took place in Sarajevo in 1984, nobody expected that war would begin only seven years later and kill hundreds of thousands of people living in the former Yugoslavia. That millions of them would be ethnically cleansed and displaced, most of them for good. That hundreds of mass graves would be scattered around, and that war crimes unseen in Europe since the Second World War would be repeated. That severe crimes like systematic rape, torture, and massive destruction of cultural heritage and property would finally culminate with genocide. Consequently, Bosnia and Herzegovina (and the countries of the former Yugoslavia) triggered an immense boost in international criminal law and international criminal justice. That experience, during and after the war that took place from 1992 to 1995, can offer lots of valuable input. Not everything that had been done was good or perfect, but it was of great importance for the further development of international criminal law and international criminal justice in a world that is still searching for appropriate responses to the grave war crimes that occur every day, and for the development of mechanisms and practices that will ensure justice for victims and society and be perceived as such. The atrocities of the Bosnian War served as a wake-up call for the international community, highlighting the urgent need for mechanisms to hold perpetrators of such heinous crimes accountable. The establishment of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia marked a significant milestone in this regard, pioneering the prosecution of individuals responsible for genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity committed during the conflict. However, challenges persist in ensuring access to justice for all victims and addressing the root causes of conflict to prevent future atrocities. The lessons learned in Bosnia and Herzegovina remain crucial in shaping efforts to achieve lasting peace and accountability worldwide.

Peculiarities of international criminal liability: legal realities and past experience

The relevance of the topic of international criminal responsibility in the modern context is emphasized not only by the need to improve the mechanisms of legal response to violations of the international legal order but also by the need to develop and apply effective strategies to combat the most important crimes. Crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide are catastrophic manifestations of violations of the basic principles of humanity and international law, which require immediate and decisive measures to ensure the accountability of those responsible for such acts.
 In the conditions of a constantly changing world order and new challenges facing the international community, the proper study and analysis of legal realities and experience in the field of international criminal justice acquires importance.
 In the context of the evolution of international criminal law and the deepening of international cooperation in the field of justice, this study sets itself the task of identifying and analyzing the trends in the development of international criminal responsibility, focusing on the need to improve existing tools and define new strategies for ensuring the effectiveness of justice in the context of changing challenges in the modern world.
 This research, aimed at promoting understanding and solving modern challenges in the field of international criminal responsibility, is of great practical importance for the development of effective measures to counter international crimes and to hold accountable those who commit such violations.
 The main importance of this study lies in the fact that it contributes not only to the scientific understanding of the theoretical aspects of international criminal responsibility but also to the formulation of practical recommendations for improving the existing mechanisms of countermeasures and bringing guilty persons to justice. The scientific contribution to this topic will allow us to develop and implement new strategies for ensuring justice, as well as to determine the ways of further development of this complex and important field of international law.

From War Crimes to Crimes against Humanity and Genocide: Turkish Responsibility after World War I

On 24 May 1915, the Triple Entente powers of Britain, France, and Russia issued a joint declaration that qualified the massacres, imprisonments and violence inflicted on the peaceful Armenian population as “crimes against humanity and civilization.” The concept of crimes against humanity was further developed and explained by the Commission on the Responsibility of the Authors of the War and on Enforcement of Penalties (hereinafter: Commission), which was formed during the Paris Peace Conference to investigate violations of the laws and customs of war and prosecute war criminals. This article traces the evolution of discussions held within the Commission regarding the atrocities committed by the Ottoman Turkish government against its Armenian population, which technically fell outside the jurisdiction of the crimes specified in these talks, as the atrocities were committed not against the population of a belligerent state but, rather, against their own nationals. These discussions played a major part in the development of international criminal law; particularly of the concept of crimes against humanity. The Armenian Memorandum and the list of perpetrators of the Armenian atrocities were also presented to the Commission, which (together with other data and information collected) identified the crimes committed against the Armenian population by the Ottoman authorities, thus defining the concept of crimes against humanity and the acts that fell within its scope. Although post-World War I efforts for justice are generally assessed as a failed effort, crimes against humanity first materialized as a term in international law during this period and its development was based on the Armenian atrocities, which provided a critical basis for the International Military Tribunal's later convictions and contributed to the concept's evolution into its present-day significance.

ICC: Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen

The International Criminal Court for the first time found guilty and sentenced a perpetrator of gender-based crimes under international law. Moreover, it did so by defining a new crime of forced marriage, which was considered by the international criminal law as “other inhumane act.” In its judgements, the International Criminal Court dealt with the challenges based on violation of legality and non-retroactivity principles. Further, it dealt with distinguishing the crime from sexual-based crime of sexual slavery. It upheld that the forced marriage is distinctive crime from the sexual-based crimes like forced pregnancy, sexual slavery, or rape, and that the principle of speciality does not bar cumulative convictions. Regarding the definition of forced marriage, it is not necessary for its commission to conclude valid marriage and the crime itself is continuing one, thus not only the act of entry into marriage is considered as criminal, but the whole duration of forced marriage. The third chapter puts the present development of international criminal law in the broader perspective of attempts to prosecute gender-based crimes and to distinguish them from the sexual-based crimes. Author comes to conclusions that the gender has to be interpreted in a conservative way and more extensive understandings of gender would require revision of the Rome Statute. International Law Commission itself was not firm in answering what the current rules on gender are.

Genesis of legal cooperation of international criminal courts with states

We are examining the Institute of Cooperation between international criminal courts and states. By analyzing international legal doctrine, we have identified the main stages of development in international criminal justice. The influence of the humanist values of the 19th century and various pragmatic views and principles of international criminal law norms evolved as part of the international legal system, introducing prohibitions on certain criminal activities, including war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide, is shown.The Nuremberg and Tokyo International Military Tribunals were considered crucial benchmarks in the evolution of international criminal law. The International Military Tribunal for the Trial of Major War Criminals of European Countries has until now been created, as follows from Article 1 of the London Agreement, to try war criminals whose crimes are not connected to a specific geographical location, regardless of whether they are prosecuted individually or as members of organizations or groups, or in one or another capacity. It is shown that both Tribunals were historically necessary to carry out retribution for mass crimes committed by high-ranking military and civilian officials of Nazi Germany and Japan during World War II. It was noted that both Tribunals were subjected to fair criticism - both from the participants and later - for the legal imperfection of their institutional basis, selective administration of justice, and the retroactive effect of some essential material norms of criminal law.It was analyzed that the institution of cooperation was revealed in detail in the activities of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (from now on - ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (from now on - ICTR). Thus, the ICTY and ICTR were created based on resolutions of the Security Council, which, acting in accordance with Chapter VII of the UN Charter, decided that states should fully cooperate with these bodies of international criminal justice.The Department of Private International Law is shown as one of the divisions of the International Court of Justice, which, among other things, “resolves extremely important and nowadays most relevant extradition disputes and tries political criminals and anarchists. It was emphasized that the court should be independent, both from the parties whose case it decides and from any political movements and opinions in general.

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW AND INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE OBJECTIVES AND PURPOSE OF PUNISHMENT IN INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW THEORY AND PRACTICE

Insufficient development of International Criminal Law, as well as its development under the influence of different legal systems, brought forth the lack of clear definitions of certain criminal law concepts and institutes. When considering the goals of International Criminal Law in theory they are often confused with the goals of International Criminal Justice, but also with the purpose of punishment in International Criminal Law. In that sense, the aim of the paper is, first of all, to analyse theoretical understandings of the goals of International Criminal Law and Justice, as well as their definition in the acts within the field of International Criminal Law, in order to provide for the possible manner of defining and delimiting these terms. Further, the aim of the paper is to distinguish from these terms the purpose of punishment in International Criminal Law.

The Problem of ‘Uncertainty’ in International Criminal Law and the Common Law ‘Method’

Abstract International criminal law has evolved from abstract ideas of an international criminal jurisdiction in the early twentieth century to encompass a comprehensive set of tribunals, rules, and methods. This article explores the contribution of the common law to the development of international criminal law, drawing on two key historical episodes – the Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals, and the ad hoc International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) – to consider the common law’s historic influence over, and relationship to, uncertainty within the system of international criminal law. First, the article highlights how British jurists framed the normative uncertainty vis-à-vis the idea of international criminal justice in their contributions to this Yearbook. Second, it examines the characteristics shared between common law and international criminal law, with a view to appraising the potential relationship of both ‘systems’. Finally, it interrogates the differing treatments of the common law throughout the development of substantive international criminal law over time, considering how judges utilized the common law as they navigated the complex dialectic between ‘statutory’ and ‘judge-made’ law.

Tribunal for the Russian Aggression in Ukraine: The Need for Accountability

The Russian aggression against Ukraine has raised the need for accountability and international rule of law. Russia through committing the supreme international crime has deliberately violated basic international principles and norms such as state sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine and the prohibition of the use of force. Member states of the United Nations drafted and agreed to create the International Criminal Court to punish the most serious crimes. The Kampala amendments of the Rome Statute on aggression, adopted a decade later, can be activated if the two states concerned have accepted ICC jurisdiction. Russia and Ukraine are not members of ICC, although the unilateral declarations of Ukraine accepting ICC jurisdiction can be exercised for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide committed in the territory of Ukraine. The lack of an international mechanism to punish the crime of aggression against Ukraine have triggered calls and actions to create a special tribunal with a limited focus on that crime, based on the development of international criminal law over the past eighty years. The EU recently agreed to establish an International Center for the prosecution of the crime of aggression – to preserve evidence and prepare the analysis of the evidence for the prosecution for future national or international trials – which is considered a first step in that direction. This research will analyze options to create either a special international tribunal or a hybrid tribunal to investigate whether Russia’s acts of violence in Ukraine constitute a crime of aggression and their prosecution. It will examine the legal basis of its establishment and functioning of the tribunal based on previous precedents, such as the International Military Tribunal (Nuremberg), or other specialized courts integrated in a national justice system with international judges – hybrid court. It will also explore the indispensable role of the United Nations in establishing such a tribunal and its implications in ending the conflict.
 
 Received: 13 January 2023 / Accepted: 17 March 2023 / Published: 20 March 2023

Notes on the genesis and historical development of International Criminal Law

El trabajo que se pone a consideración del lector, persigue dar cuenta de la génesis del derecho penal internacional así como de su desarrollo histórico ex antede la creación de la Corte Penal Internacional, incluyendo los principios del derecho internacional y de los procesos penales internacionales establecidos por los tribunales militares internacionales de Núremberg y Tokio; adicionalmente, se presenta un panorama de los tribunales penales internacionales ad hoc y se cierra con algunas consideraciones finales.

Wpływ Międzynarodowego Trybunału dla Dalekiego Wschodu na rozwój Międzynarodowego Prawa Humanitarnego Konfliktów Zbrojnych w aspekcie przemocy seksualnej

The Second World War caused the collapse of the rules prevailing in the world so far. The cruelty of warfare, which also affected civilians, made the international community aware that the principles of humanitarianism adopted so far are insufficient. The world demanded that war criminals be brought to justice. At that point, no international court existed to take on the challenge. Two tribunals were established – the International Military Tribunal based in Nuremberg and the International Tribunal for the Far East based in Tokyo, whose task was to try the most serious crimes committed during II World War. The civilian population, especially women, suffered from sexual violence and rape. The International Tribunal for the Far East did not remain silent on the subject of sex crimes and undertook to judge war criminals who were also responsible for rapes. The actions of the International Tribunal for the Far East were one of the first steps in history in the field of punishing the crime of rape committed during armed conflicts and influenced the development of international criminal law in this area.

Rachel Auerbach and the Eichmann Trial: A New Conception of Victims’ Testimonies

ABSTRACT Since the 1990s, international criminal law has struggled to find the proper role for victims in mass-atrocities trials. Notwithstanding the rise of the victim-centered trial, victims still participate in these trials mainly as witnesses for the prosecution, but not as full and proactive participants. In this article, I return to the forgotten contribution of Rachel Auerbach (1903-1976), a Jewish-Polish journalist, historian, and Holocaust survivor, and explore her important contribution to the Eichmann Trial, where she helped shape a new paradigm of a victim-centered atrocity trial in the wake of World War II. Auerbach's vision for the trial, as I shall present in this article, can be understood as an early precursor of later developments in both international criminal law and, more broadly, in the field of transitional justice. The contribution of women to the development of international criminal law has been marginalized for many years. Similarly, Auerbach's contribution to the Eichmann Trial has long been viewed as merely technical, limited to finding relevant witnesses for the trial as part of her work as the director of the Testimony Collection Department of Yad Vashem. I show that Auerbach had a groundbreaking vision of the Eichmann Trial and of the way law should perceive victims' testimonies in such trials, based on her “translation” of the legacy of the clandestine Oyneg Shabes archive enterprise in the Warsaw ghetto into a legal setting. In her view, the trial would become victim-centered, not only due to the survivors' testimonies, but also because it would recognize their initiative and agency in promoting a new conception of testimony. I argue that her approach to victims' testimonies and its connection to the crime of cultural genocide are still highly relevant to the ongoing legal and historical discussion about atrocity trials.

LAJPCIŠKI PROCESI – PRILOG PROUČAVANJU ISTORIJE MEĐUNARODNOG KRIVIČNOG PRAVA

The historical development of International Criminal Law in the period leading up to the First World War was of negliable value, especially when compared to the post-war period from 1918 to 1939. In Versailles Europe matured an idea, whose roots stemmed from much earlier, an idea of establishing an International Criminal Court which would protect basic human values, shared by all states no matter the form of government or political affiliations. Having noticed the link between world conflict and the development of International Criminal Law comes the conclusion that this idea first came to life after the Great War in 1918. This is how for the first time in history an institute of responsibility was formed for the rulers and military commanders concerning the war crimes committed by the state - these first examples being the trial of German Kaiser Vilhelm II and the individual Leipzig trials involving officers of the German army. Although the Kaisers trial was a failed attempt, and the Leipzig trials are considered failures due to material and formal deficiencies, especially concerning their outcomes, these parts represented an experimental phase of a historical process crucial to the forming of the international criminal justice system. Europe was aware that the modus operandi taken in this direction didn’t pass the test, and that the state and economy matters would always come first in the Versailles world. However, the repetition of this scenario wasn’t allowed during the Second World War and we can confidently say that the Nuremberg trials found their foundations stemming from Leipzig’s lessons. In the European law legacy Leipzig created the first written documents which would serve as waypoints in the further codification of International Criminal Law. Lastly, it can be said that in the period from 1918 to 1939 the European policy was introduced to the problem of realising that all further processes leading to the constitution of a uniform and legitimate international criminal justice system would undeniably lead to the redefining of two fundamental dogmas of international order: the principle of (absolute) state sovereignty and the (non)existence of international law subjectivity (and therefore the responsibility) of an individual.

Book Review: The Legal Legacy of the Special Court for Sierra Leone (2020), ISBN-13: 978-1107178311, by Charles C. Jalloh

This article reviews the book by Professor Charles C. Jalloh, <strong>The Legal Legacy of the Special Court for Sierra Leone</strong>, published in 2020 by Cambridge University Press. In this book, the author examines the “hybrid” international/national criminal tribunal, known as the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL), which was created under a pathbreaking bilateral treaty between the United Nations (UN) and the country of Sierra Leone as a UN member state. Jalloh seeks to evaluate the contributions made by SCSL to the development of international criminal law. In particular, he assesses the scope and significance of SCSL legal contributions from its solutions to problems arising between its opening and the completion of its work in 2013, having to do with personal and temporal jurisdiction; gender crimes as crimes against humanity; recruitment of children as war crimes; head-of-state immunity; amnesty; and tensions between criminal tribunals and truth commissions. <strong>Keywords:</strong> ICTR; Kabbah, Ahmad Tejan; Liberia; Lomé Peace Agreement; Rome Statute; RUF; Sierra Leone civil war; Sierra Leonean law; SCSL appeals chamber, trial chambers, registrar's office, prosecutor's office, and defense office; Taylor, Charles; temporal jurisdiction; The Hague; Truth and Reconciliation Commission; United Nations (UN) Secretary-General, Security Council, and Resolution 1315

Special Tribunal for Lebanon and progressive development of international criminal law

The subject. The article analyses the practice of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon and its Judgement of 18 August 2020, rendered against those found guilty of a terrorist act and the impact on the progressive development of international criminal law.The purpose. This article seeks to define what goal the international community pursued in establishing the Special Tribunal for Lebanon from the perspective of international security law, international criminal justice, and counter-terrorism cooperation. The legal nature of the terrorist attack of 14 October 2005 is essential in this regard: is the crime is comparable in its gravity and consequences to the crimes of genocide or war crimes in the territory of the former Yugoslavia or Rwanda, which predetermined the subsequent establishment of ad hoc international criminal tribunals? Further, was the establishment of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon an attempt to make the crimes of terrorism an international crime in practice? Finally, was the establishment of the Tribunal an attempt to lay the groundwork for a new type of international judicial bodies with jurisdiction over crimes of terrorism? The methodology. The authors use such general theoretical and specific scientific methods as comparative analysis, generalization, interpretation and classification as well as systemic analysis and formal logical methods.The main results. The legal qualification and analysis of the circumstances of the terrorist attack do not enable the conclusion that the bomb explosion in Beirut was comparable in danger and consequences to any international crimes or was a threat to international peace and security. In its turn, the involvement of the Security Council in the establishment of the Tribunal does not unequivocally evidence its alleged attempt to create a purely international criminal structure.The choice of applicable law granted to Lebanon and the fact that the crime committed solely affected the interests of that State would qualify the Tribunal as an internationalized judicial body, whose work would focus on defining the crime of terrorism through a broader lens of interpreting national legislation. In other words, the impetus for development has been given not to international but national criminal law.The Tribunal was created neither to progressively develop international criminal law with regard to defining terrorism as an international crime nor to advance the international criminal justice system. Rather, it was an attempt to address Lebanon’s specific political and legal challenges.Conclusions. The outcome of the Tribunal’s work could have a rather negative impact on the development of international criminal law, discrediting the very idea of enabling “peace through justice” and uniform, consistent application and interpretation of international criminal law.

Asia and the ICC: The Development of International Criminal Law in a World Changing Order

Summary Although Asia houses over 50 percent of world’s population, it is under-represented in the ICC. This underrepresentation is due to rationales both legal and political in nature. While the Asian nations do lack enthusiasm towards ratifying the Rome Statute, there could be tangible benefits to becoming a part of the ICC. This could help in the ongoing development of international law in Asia as well as greater recognition of human rights, international justice and accountability, thus, further emphasizing the importance of the rule of law in the continent. The benefits of ratifying the Rome Statute outweigh any disadvantages, real or perceived, and thus, domestic steps need to be undertaken to lead to eventual ratification. This paper will trace the histories of International Criminal Law and analyse the Asian participation in its discourse while further exploring the reasons for the disinclination of the Asian nations to join the ICC.

Systematic hierarchical nature of sources of international criminal law: methodological aspects

The article considers the sources of international criminal law and notes that the system of sources of this branch is based on the principles of building a system of sources of international law as a whole. Based on the provisions of Article 38 of the Charter of the International Court of Justice, in which the main sources of international law (international conventions, international custom, general principles of law) are enshrined, current trends in the theory of sources of law from a broad approach are taken into account. Emphasis is placed on such features of the sources of law as structure, hierarchy, consistency, interconnection. The imperative nature of the norms of international criminal law, which is inherent in universal sources (principles of law, treaties), is taken into account. Auxiliary sources of law (decisions of international organizations, court decisions, national legislation), which are of a recommendatory nature, are also considered.The author notes that the systematic hierarchical nature inherent in the sources of international criminal law is in the process of formation and results from the state of development of international law. The system of sources consists of general principles of law, principles of international law, principles of international criminal law, treaties (conventions), which are imperative, and ancillary sources that contribute to the formation and development of international criminal law (court precedent, decisions of international organizations, court decisions, national legislation) and are of a recommendatory nature. The main source of international criminal law is a treaty (convention), which has such distinctive features as the consistency of the positions of member states, the existence of a normative form, the imperative nature of the provisions contained therein. International treaties of criminal law content are imperative in terms of implementation mechanism, while the decisions of international organizations are mainly of a recommendatory nature. At the same time, the decisions of international organizations create a conceptual basis for international agreements, determine their common direction, goal-setting. These are primarily the decisions of such international organizations as the General Assembly and the UN Security Council. The task of codification of norms of international criminal law content is urgent.

Criminal Law Reform Toward Deprivation of Property Resulting from Corruption Criminal Acts

Criminal law reform is part of criminal law policy and is closely related to law enforcement policies, criminal policies and social policies. One of the forms of national legal development reform is the Reform of the Criminal Justice System (SPP) which is an integral part of a sub-system, namely legal substance, legal structure, and legal culture. Corruption as an organized crime in Indonesia is categorized as extra ordinary crimes that have an impact on the creation of injustice in society. One of the injustices referred to is related to the non-return of state losses stolen by corruptors. Whereas efforts to recover state losses are closely related to legal instruments in force in a country. In Indonesia, the Criminal Code and the Law on the Eradication of Corruption places the confiscation of proceeds of corruption only as an additional punishment and does not have a clear formula for the mechanism of deprivation of properties, resulting in unclarity/obscurity of norms. This condition should not occur, therefore it is necessary to reform the criminal law immediately by studying the criminal perpetrators of a criminological perspective, which is related to the factors that cause people to commit criminal acts of curruption. This article is a study of the author concerning the importance of making legal arrangements regarding the deprivation of properties from the proceeds of corruption to mitigate the state losses. This article is compiled by applying normative legal research using statutory approaches, historical approaches, conceptual approaches and comparative approaches. It is concluded that there must be immediate reform of criminal law in Indonesia, especially regarding the deprivation of properties from the criminal act of corruption based on the development of criminal behavior (criminology) and the development of international criminal law concerning corruption.

Prosecutor v. Ayyash et al. (Special Trib. Leb.)

The establishment of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 1998 constitutes a landmark in the development of International Criminal Law (ICL), which gained its first momentum after World War II through the foundation of International Military Tribunals in Nuremberg and Tokyo. ICL is, however, not confined to these most prominent courts or their statutes providing for definitions of international crimes under their respective jurisdiction; rather, ad hoc international, or internationalized and hybrid special tribunals and criminal chambers also contribute to the development and shape of ICL and reflect its diverse legal and institutional basis. Perceived as another tribunal of “international character,” on August 18, 2020, the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) pronounced its judgment on the merits in the Ayyash case. The long-awaited verdict raises the question of the Tribunal's contribution to the further evolution of ICL.

International Law and American Criminology: Lessons of Racist Torture and Reparations from Geneva to Chicago

This paper considers the development of international criminal law and as a field of study in American criminology. Despite the important U.S. role in establishing the International Military Tribunal and war crimes trials at Nuremberg following World War II, American politicians and criminologists did little to advance the further development of international criminal law or courts. Post-war Cold War tensions between the Soviet Union and the U.S., and domestic research preoccupations of American criminologists, discouraged further contributions. Finally, following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the outbreak of atrocities and war crimes in the Balkans, the United States took renewed interest and helped to create an ad hoc International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia [ICTY]. However, when the U.N. established a permanent International Criminal Court [ICC] to handle the prosecution of war crimes, American enthusiasm and support waned, and it ceased during the Trump Administration. Yet there were other signs international criminal law could still be significant. When the U.S. was revealed to be torturing detainees in Iraq, and a police detective was found to be operating a torture squad in Chicago, the U.N. High Commission on Human Rights [UNHCHR] used its procedures to pressure the U.S. and the city of Chicago to investigate. Later, the same procedures were used to pressure Chicago to support a reparations program for victims and families of police torture. International criminal law was more resilient and relevant than is commonly believed.

Dissenting on Genocide: The Impact of Separate Opinions on International Criminal Law

Dissents have had a tumultuous history in the United States and throughout the world. Initially reviled, dissents have come to be a well-accepted, even praiseworthy, component of the American judicial system, and they have traversed the same trajectory in other countries as well as in international courts and tribunals. Particularly noteworthy among international courts are those created to prosecute perpetrators of mass atrocities, such as genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. And nowhere are dissents more common than in these mass atrocity courts. Yet, as prevalent as these dissents are, they have received virtually no scholarly or practical attention. Only a few articles consider international criminal law dissents, and these reflexively praise them for enhancing the legitimacy of the international criminal tribunals. This article takes issue with that claim, maintaining that it has no empirical basis. To prove that point, this article, the first in a series, launches a comprehensive empirical treatment of international criminal law separate opinions. The foundation of this project is my careful review of every separate opinion in every Trial Chamber and Appeals Chamber judgment at the four, core international criminal tribunals. My fine-grained assessment of these nearly 300 separate opinions provides a solid basis for my normative conclusions, conclusions that go against the grain of decades of non-empirical legal scholarship on separate opinions. As the first component of a larger project, this article makes two substantial contributions: First, it lays the foundation for the remainder of the project by providing core information and statistics about international criminal law’s separate opinions. Second, the article inaugurates the project’s normative analyses by empirically assessing one of the most common claims made by proponents of separate opinions: that they help to develop the law. This article employs a variety of empirical methods to evaluate that claim, including citation counts and a painstaking content analysis of the separate opinions, among others. Each of these analyses points to the same conclusion: international criminal law’s separate opinions, though numerous and voluminous, have had minimal impact on the development of international criminal law.