This work deals with the exclusion of illicitly obtained evidence at the International Criminal Court. At the level of domestic law, the so-called exclusionary rule has always been a very prominent topic. The reason for this is that the way a court of law deals with tainted evidence pertains to a key aspect of procedural fairness. It concerns the balancing of the right to a fair trial with the interest of society in effective law enforcement. At the international level, however, the subject has not yet been discussed in detail. The present research intends to fill this gap. It provides an overview of the approaches of a number of domestic legal systems as well as of the approaches of the UN ad hoc tribunals and the European Court of Human Rights and uses the different perspectives to develop a version of the exclusionary rule which fits the International Criminal Court. The book is highly recommended for practitioners and researchers in the field of international criminal law and especially the law of international criminal evidence. Petra Viebig is a Public Prosecutor at the Staatsanwaltschaft Hamburg, Germany.

The volume edited by Bartłomiej Krzan offers different perspectives on the prosecution of international crimes. The analyses contained therein reflect different backgrounds, mainly legal, combining several disciplines, and making it a multidisciplinary study. The main (but definitely not the exclusive) point of reference is that of international law. In addition, other perspectives, those of legal history or sociology of law and obviously the one of criminal law (both substantive and procedural) provide useful alternatives or in most occasions complementary approaches to the examination of the prosecution of international crimes. The book combines different views, backgrounds and underlying assumptions. But gathered together they, it is to be hoped, shed some additional, useful light that might be helpful for identifying new dimensions of the reaction (judicial or other) towards international crimes. Contributors: Władysław Czapliński, Patrycja Grzebyk, Witold Jakimko, Wojciech Jasiński, David Kohout, Karolina Kremens, Bartłomiej Krzan, Krzysztof Masło, Neringa Mickevičiūtė, Robert Uerpmann-Wittzack, Regina Valutyté, Karolina Wierczyńska, Joachim Wolf, Loammi Wolf, and Justinas Žilinskas.

This open access publication discusses exclusionary rules in different criminal justice systems. It is based on the findings of a research project in comparative law with a focus on the question of whether or not a fair trial can be secured through evidence exclusion. Part I explains the legal framework in which exclusionary rules function in six legal systems: Germany, Switzerland, People’s Republic of China, Taiwan, Singapore, and the United States. Part II is dedicated to selected issues identified as crucial for the assessment of exclusionary rules. These chapters highlight the delicate balance of interests required in the exclusion of potentially relevant information from a criminal trial and discusses possible approaches to alleviate the legal hurdles involved.

This book offers the first comprehensive and in-depth analysis of the provisions of the ‘Malabo Protocol’—the amendment protocol to the Statute of the African Court of Justice and Human and Peoples’ Rights—adopted by the African Union at its 2014 Summit in Malabo, Equatorial Guinea. The Annex to the protocol, once it has received the required number of ratifications, will create a new Section in the African Court of Justice and Human and Peoples’ Rights with jurisdiction over international and transnational crimes, hence an ‘African Criminal Court’. In this book, leading experts in the field of international criminal law analyze the main provisions of the Annex to the Malabo Protocol. The book provides an essential and topical source of information for scholars, practitioners and students in the field of international criminal law, and for all readers with an interest in political science and African studies. Gerhard Werle is Professor of German and Internationa l Crimina l Law, Criminal Procedure and Modern Legal History at Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin and Director of the South African-German Centre for Transnational Criminal Justice. In addition, he is an Extraordinary Professor at the University of the Western Cape and Honorary Professor at North-West University of Political Science and Law (Xi’an, China). Moritz Vormbaum received his doctoral degree in criminal law from the University of Münster (Germany) and his postdoctoral degree from Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin. He is a Senior Researcher at Humboldt-Universität, as well as a coordinator and lecturer at the South African-German Centre for Transnational Criminal Justice.

This systematic, contextual and practice-oriented account of complementarity explores the background and historical expectations associated with complementarity, its interpretation in prosecutorial policy and judicial practice, its context (ad hoc tribunals, universal jurisdiction, R2P) and its impact in specific situations (Colombia, Congo, Uganda, Central African Republic, Sudan and Kenya). Written by leading experts from inside and outside the Court and scholars from multiple disciplines, the essays combine theoretical inquiry with policy recommendations and the first-hand experience of practitioners. It is geared towards academics, lawyers and policy-makers who deal with the impact and application of international criminal justice and its interplay with peace and security, transitional justice and international relations.

The Rome Statute establishing the International Criminal Court (ICC or Court) entered into force on July 1, 2002. With the Court now established and developing a track record of engagement in situations, such as Darfur, that are of great interest to the United States, it seemed that there might be important ways in which the United States might engage and support the Court, whether joining it or short of joining it. This Task Force has undertaken such a review, hearing from more than a dozen experts and officials representing a variety of perspectives on the ICC. Our conclusion, detailed in the recommendations in this report, is that the United States should announce a policy of positive engagement with the Court, and that this policy should be reflected in concrete support for the Court's efforts and the elimination of legal and other obstacles to such support. The Task Force does not recommend U.S. ratification of the Rome Statute at this time. But it urges engagement with the ICC and the Assembly of States Parties in a manner that enables the United States to help further shape the Court into an effective accountability mechanism. The Task Force believes that such engagement will also facilitate future consideration of whether the United States should join the Court.