PRAVNI ZAPISI • Year XVI • no. 2 • pp. 309–344

BEYOND GUILTY PLEAS: THE PROCEDURALIZATION OF NEGOTIATED JUSTICE IN INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNALS

Language: English

Giovanni Chiarini

Vice-Dean of Research, Alfaisal University College of Law and International Relations, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
e-mail: gchiarini@alfaisal.edu
ORCID ID: 0000-0001-6734-7269

Pravni zapisi, No. 2/2025, pp. 309-344
Original Scientific Article
DOI: 10.5937/pravzap16-62354

KEY WORDS

International Criminal Court, International Criminal Procedure, Nuremberg Trials, United Nations Tribunals, Guilty Pleas, International Criminal Law, Comparative Criminal Procedure

ABSTRACT

Negotiated justice was first codified within the UN Ad Hoc Tribunals, where a consistent body of case law was developed. In contrast, plea-bargaining and guilty pleas were substantially denied in the earlier Nuremberg and Tokyo trials. The paper examines the theoretical and practical development of plea bargaining, tracing the proceduralization of negotiated justice in international criminal tribunals, which has ultimately resulted in the ICC’s abbreviated proceedings on an admission of guilt – a hybrid model incorporating features from civil law and common law systems, representing a compromise of Anglo-Saxon and European legal traditions. The paper also shows that at the ICC, the use of plea bargaining has reached an impasse, primarily due to two factors: its extremely limited application – reflected in only a single case to date – and unclear norms regarding the accused’s rights as well as the length of the proceedings.