Rosemary Byrne

Drawing the Missing Map: What Socio-legal Research Can Offer to International Criminal Trial Practice

The nature of international criminal trial practice is integral to the perception of the legitimacy of international criminal justice. However, our understanding of what transpires within the trial chambers of international courts and tribunals (ICTs) comes primarily from the reports of judges, lawyers, and stakeholders within the system. This article argues that, while the vast body of international criminal justice scholarship barely draws on socio-legal research, empirical work can contribute to a more objective understanding of international criminal trial practice. It examines prevailing academic approaches to the study of international trial practice as a backdrop to the assessment of data from one of the most expansive empirical studies of international trial practice, undertaken during the second mandate (1999–2003) of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR). The findings illustrate significant variations in how judges in different Trial Chambers chose to exercise discretion, revealing the co-existence of two distinct modalities of practice in ‘proactive’ and ‘reactive’ Trial Chambers. Quantitative and qualitative data allow for an assessment of the efficiency of these modalities, revealing the critical role of the performance of the judge in the trial process. It is argued that these findings highlight the potential for further socio-legal research to motivate ‘light-touch reform’ within the international criminal justice system.

Globalizing Legal Process in the Struggle to Counter Impunity Efficiently

Globalization often serves as a perfunctory point of reference for positioning the development of international courts and tribunals (ICTs). The dominant scholarship in international law engages almost exclusively with formal law. This chapter argues that globalization-focused research can provide critical insights into how international justice can be delivered more efficiently. Empirical data illustrate the implications of the roles adopted by professionals in the courtroom and suggest how they can be adapted in future reforms to enhance trial efficiency. The conclusion argues that the observation of trial practice through the lens of international integration can oil the slow wheels of justice.