000			01848nam a2200205 4500
005			20251120073005.0
022			_a0922-1565
040			_cKimhang
041			_heng
100			_aScheffer, David
245			_aA Review of the Experiences of the Pre-Trial and Appeals Chambers of the International Criminal Court Regarding the Disclosure of Evidence _b/ _c David Scheffer
260			_aCambridge, UK : _bCambridge University Press
300			_aLeiden journal of international law, 2008-03, Vol.21 (1), p.151-163 _b; _c.
520			_aNegotiators of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) did not intend the Pre-Trial Chamber (PTC) to act as a de facto investigating judge; rather, their intent was that the PTC ensure that the Prosecutor act responsibly and within well-defined limits. Several opportunities have arisen in the Lubanga case before the ICC's PTC and the Appeals Chamber to examine the Prosecutor's duty and performance in disclosing documentary evidence and the identities of witnesses at the pre-trial stage. International criminal tribunals necessarily must bridge the evidentiary magnitude of atrocity crimes with a pragmatic focus on one person's role. The PTC judge should aggressively narrow the charges and focus the Prosecutor on the requirement of minimal evidence to meet the sufficiency standard for the remaining charges, direct the Prosecutor to share existing and emerging evidence with the accused in a timely manner and not wait until 30 days prior to confirmation hearing, and use statutory power to ensure timely non-disclosure requests and determinations.
650		0	_aWar crimes
650		0	_aInternational law
650		0	_aCriminal procedure
856			_uhttps://unog.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/41UNOG_INST/1f1c8ab/cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_743016851
942			_cART
999			_c13868 _d13868