engleski

Negotiated Justice Before the International Criminal Court – Myth or Reality?

Settlements in criminal proceedings are one of the most intriguing challenges faced by modern criminal justice. This controversial institute of criminal procedure aimed at quick and efficient resolution of criminal cases has found its place in proceedings before International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), whose decisions paved the way for its final form in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Following the first decision in the Al Mahdi case, four years later, on October 2020, The ICC Prosecutor released Guidelines for agreements regarding the admission of guilt. Given the complexity and sensibility of the proceedings before the ICC on the one hand, and the real connotations that the agreement transmits to the international community as a whole, this document is an important step towards consolidating the plea negotiations before the ICC. This paper first theoretically considers the justification of plea agreements in international criminal justice. Then, through a normative analysis of Guidelines as well as jurisprudence of the ICTY and ICTR it explains the development of negotiated justice before the ICC. Finally, the future of plea agreements before the ICC is critically examined and some contradictions and ambiguities in the formation of international justice based on the plea agreement are pointed out in order to understand the real potential of plea negotiations for administration of justice before the ICC.

Criminal procedure ; Negotiated justice ; Plea agreement ; International Criminal Court

nije evidentirano