SavedAdd your journal

Journals / İnönü Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi / 2014 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 2

Why Should The International Criminal Court Adopt Plea Bargaining?

Uluslararası Ceza Mahkemesi Uzlaşma Kurumunu Neden Kabul Etmeli?

Volkan MAVİŞ
Pages
459–488
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In this regard, it will also consider the pros and cons of adopting a plea bargaining system in achieving justice for the victims of the world’s most heinous atrocities

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Since its establishment in 2002, the International Criminal Court (ICC) has faced many obstacles in bringing the instigators and perpetrators of crimes to justice.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Many solutions have been offered on solving these difficulties which are mainly legal, procedural and economical.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In this regard, it will also consider the pros and cons of adopting a plea bargaining system in achieving justice for the victims of the world’s most heinous atrocities
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2002 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Uzlaşma · Uluslararası Ceza Mahkemesi · yapıcı adalet

Abstract

Since its establishment in 2002, the International Criminal Court (ICC) has faced many obstacles in bringing the instigators and perpetrators of crimes to justice. Many solutions have been offered on solving these difficulties which are mainly legal, procedural and economical. One suggestion which has been made is the issue of plea bargaining. This procedure, which is controversial both in national and international level, has already been applied by other international criminal tribunals such as the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), and International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR). However, there is a danger that the misuse of plea bargaining by these international tribunals plants since of doubt on lawyers’ minds. In this article, the author discusses the possibility of the ICC adopting plea bargaining system and its proceedings. In this regard, it will also consider the pros and cons of adopting a plea bargaining system in achieving justice for the victims of the world’s most heinous atrocities

Özet

Uluslararası Ceza Mahkemesi, 2002’de kurulmasından bu yana failleri ve azmettirenleri adalet önüne getirmekte sorunlar yaşamakta. Özellikle hukuksal, usule ilişkin ve ekonomik içerikli bu sorunlara yönelik pek çok çözüm yöntemi tartışılmış bulunmaktadır. Uzlaşma kurumu da bu çözüm yöntemlerinden birisidir. Gerek iç hukukta gerekse uluslararası hukukta tartışmalı olan bu kurum, Eski Yugoslavya Uluslararası Ceza Mahkemesi ve Ruanda Uluslararası Ceza Mahkemesi gibi diğer uluslararası mahkemeler tarafından uygulanmaktadır. Öte yandan, uzlaşma kurumunun hatalı kullanımı hukukçuları kuşkuya sevk etmiştir. Bu makalede, Uluslararası Ceza Mahkemesinin uzlaşma kurumunu kabul etmesi ihtimali tartışılacaktır. Bu bağlamda, dünyanın en ağır ihlallerine karşı mağdurlara adalet sunulması bakımından kurumun olumlu ve olumsuz yönleri incelenecektir

🔖

Cite This Article

MAVİŞ, V. (2022). Why Should The International Criminal Court Adopt Plea Bargaining?. İnönü Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 2, 459–488. https://ajindex.com/articles/548023

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Assembly of State Parties, ‘Report of the Court on Impact of Measures to Bring the Level of the International Criminal Court’s Budget for 2014 in Line with the Level of the 2013 Approved Budget’, ICC-ASP/12/1, (29.06.2013).
  2. Bassiouni, M. Cherif (1996) ‘Searching for Peace and Achieving Justice: the Need for Accountability’, Law and Contemporary Problems, 59(4), pp.9-28.
  3. Cassese, Antonio (2011) ‘Reflections of International Criminal Justice’, Journal of International Criminal Justice, 9(1), pp.271-275.
  4. Clark, Phil (2010)
  5. The Gacaca Courts, Post-Genocide Justice and Reconciliation in Rwanda, Cambridge: Cambridge U.P. Clark, Theresa Marie (2003) ‘Transplant Justıce?: The Effıcacy of a Purely Common Law Concept in the International Criminal Forum’, (2003) 9 Buffalo Human Rıghts Law Review 75. Combs, Nancy A. (2002) ‘Copping a Plea to Genocide: The Plea Bargaining of International Crimes’, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 151(1), pp.1-157.
  6. Combs, Nancy A. (2007) Guilty Pleas in International Criminal Law: Constructing a Restorative Justice Approach, California: Stanford U.P. Cook, Julian A. (2005) ‘Plea Bargaining at the Hague’, The Yale Journal of International Law, 30(2), pp.473-506.
  7. Cryer, Robert / Friman, Hakan / Robinson, Darryl / Wilmshurst, Elizabeth (2010) An Introduction to International Criminal Law and Procedure, Cambridge U.P. Damaska, Mirjan (2004) ‘Negotiated Justice in International Criminal Courts’, Journal of International Criminal Justice, 2(4), pp.1018-1039.
  8. Damaska, Mirjan (2009) “The International Criminal Court between Aspiration and Achievement”, University of California Los Angeles Journal of International Law and Foreign Affairs, 14(1), pp.19-36.
  9. Dinstein, Y., Non-International Armed Conflicts in International Law, Cambridge U.P., 2014, p. 177. Fischer, Peter G. (2003) ‘The Victims’ Trust Fund of the International Criminal Court – Formation of a Functional Reparations Scheme’, Emory International Law Review, 17(1), pp.187-240.
  10. Friman, Hakan (2008) ‘Cooperation with the International Criminal Court: Some Thoughts on Improvements under the Current Regime’, in M. Politi & F. Gioia (eds.), The International Criminal Court and National Jurisdictions, Aldershot: Ashgate, at 93-103.
  11. Funk, T.M. (2010) Victims’ Rights and Advocacy at the International Criminal Court, Oxford U.P., at 128. Gray, Kevin R. (2004) ‘Evidence before the ICC’, in D. McGoldrick, D. (ed.), The Permanent International Court, Portland: Hart Publishing, at 287-314. Hen