‘Admission’ v. ‘Submission’ of Evidence at the International Criminal Court

Abstract

A recent string of decisions by Trial Chambers of the International Criminal Court moves away from the classic common law rooted approach to admissibility of evidence, which so far had been dominant in international criminal jurisdictions. The new approach defers any determination on admissibility and its constituent elements to the final phase of the proceedings; the evidence is therefore not treated as ‘admitted’ but as ‘formally submitted’ at trial. This article explores how this new trend fits within the framework of the Court’s Basic Documents, discusses the...

Abstract

A recent string of decisions by Trial Chambers of the International Criminal Court moves away from the classic common law rooted approach to admissibility of evidence, which so far had been dominant in international criminal jurisdictions. The new approach defers any determination on admissibility and its constituent elements to the final phase of the proceedings; the evidence is therefore not treated as ‘admitted’ but as ‘formally submitted’ at trial. This article explores how this new trend fits within the framework of the Court’s Basic Documents, discusses the historical developments underlying both the ‘admission’ and ‘submission’ models and offers a comparative analysis.