This study is based on an examination of all available records in the field of evidence from the 18th century to date. Acid-free reprint of University of Virginia Press, 1975. Distributed by William S. Hein & Co., Inc.

Fact-Finding before the International Court of Justice examines a number of significant recent criticisms of the way in which the ICJ deals with facts. The book takes the position that such criticisms are warranted and that the ICJ's current approach to fact-finding falls short of adequacy, both in cases involving abundant, particularly complex or technical facts, and in those involving a scarcity of facts. The author skilfully examines how other courts such as the WTO and inter-State arbitrations conduct fact-finding and makes a number of select proposals for reform, enabling the ICJ to address some of the current weaknesses in its approach. The proposals include, but are not limited to, the development of a power to compel the disclosure of information, greater use of provisional measures, and a clear strategy for the use of expert evidence.

The Iran-United States Claims Tribunal is arguably the most significant arbitral institution of the twentieth century. Although the completion of its last few cases could take a long time, the Tribunal's impressive work must be made available now as a guide to the resolution of ongoing disputes and for future tribunals. The Tribunal has, by this point, disposed of well over 98 percent of its caseload. Little more remains for its participants to learn, but the Tribunal shows no signs of fading away. Both of the two States Parties, for different reasons, see greater advantage in the Tribunal's prolongation than in its elimination. The authors have succeeded in dealing with all of the most deserving Tribunal subjects. Moreover, their intimate involvement in and knowledge of the Tribunal ensure that their book is a fascinating, important, and indispensable contribution to the literature of International Law. This is a definitive book on a monumental event in the law and in history at the close of a century. "The Iran-United States Claims Tribunal" was awarded the ASIL Certificate of Merit.

Domestic lawyers are, above all, officers of the court. By contrast, the public international lawyer representing states before international tribunals is torn between loyalties to the state and loyalties to international law. As the stakes increase for the state concerned, the tension between these loyalties can become acute and lead to practices that would be condemned in developed national legal systems but have hitherto been ignored by international tribunals in international legal scholarship. They are the 'dirty stories' of international law. This detailed and contextually sensitive presentation of eight important cases before a variety of public international tribunals dissects some of the reasons for the resort to fraudulent evidence in international litigation and the profession's baffling reaction. Fraudulent evidence is resorted to out of greed, moral mediocrity or inherent dishonesty. In public international litigation, by contrast, the reasons are often more complex, with roots in the dynamics of international politics.

Some recent contentious issues about the use of evidence in cases before the International Court of Justice have highlighted the importance of fact-finding and the use of evidence before this Court. This major study on the issue of evidence before the International Court of Justice has examined all aspects of the Court's relationship with facts in both contentious and advisory proceedings from the recently refined procedure for submitting late evidence, to the hearing of live witness testimony in the Peace Palace. Considerations of flexibility and respect for the sovereignty of the State Parties before the Court have traditionally deterred the Court from constructing concrete rules on matters of evidence, but the increasing numbers of cases, in which a thorough consideration of the facts has been essential, has highlighted that some detailed procedural guidance is necessary in order to ensure a well-functioning system of adjudication. It is apparent that the Court has paid an incre

Principles of Evidence in International Criminal Justice provides an overview of the procedure and practice concerning the admission and evaluation of evidence before the international criminal tribunals. The book is both descriptive and critical and its emphasis is on day-to-day practice, drawing on the experience of the Yugoslavia, Rwanda and Sierra Leone Tribunals. This book is an attempt to define and explain the core principles and rules that have developed at those ad hoc Tribunals; the rationale and origin of those rules; and to assess the suitability of those rules in the particular context of the International Criminal Court which is still at its early stages. The ICC differs in structure from the ad hoc Tribunals and approaches the legal issues it has to resolve differently from its predecessors. The ICC is however confronted with many of the same questions. The book examines the differences between the ad hoc Tribunals and the ICC and seeks to offer insights as to how and in which circumstances the principles established over years of practice at the ICTY, ICTR and SCSL may serve as guidance to the ICC practitioners of today and the future. The contributors represent a cross-section of the practicing international criminal bar, drawn from the ranks of the Bench, the Prosecution and the Defence and bringing with them different legal domestic cultures. Their mixed background underlines the recurring theme in this book which is the manner in which a legal culture has gradually taken shape in the international Tribunals, drawing on the various traditions and experiences of its participants.

(3) The ISS Case.