The prosecution’s duty of disclosure is at the heart of an accused’s right to a fair trial. Information and knowledge is power. Owing to the nature of criminal investigation, the prosecution almost always has more time and resources at its disposal in order to prepare its case than the defence. More importantly, the prosecution has access to certain information that the defence would not have and it has the means to access them. As a consequence, in order to ensure the fundamental rights of the accused are respected, it is crucial for the prosecution to disclose any relevant material to the defence in a timely manner so that the latter has a chance to prepare its case adequately. Despite the undeniable importance of this duty, prosecutors routinely violate their obligations of disclosing material to the defence that is of vital importance for case preparations. This thesis, accordingly, asks the question: why are disclosure problems so hard to resolve? Is the disclosure framework really workable in the international criminal tribunals? Public institutions, like the International Criminal Court, are supposed to be the epitome of justice; however, because of its unique characteristics, and perhaps ironically, international criminal law proved to be an ever harsher environment for the defendant when it comes to disclosure of evidence: the accused faces more obstacles when preparing its case and the Courts’ motivation to sanction prosecutors who fail to honour disclosure duties seems to be significantly lower when compared with national jurisdictions. In particular, due to certain difficulties and challenges faced by the international criminal tribunals and international prosecution, it is often argued that the standard of fairness can be different from the ones guaranteed to the accused in domestic courts. This thesis argues that these departures are not justified. Three main areas will be examined and analysed: the context in which the international criminal tribunals operate in, the nature of the prosecutor’s role, and the attitudes of the judges.

No momento em que se mostrou difícil reprimir o crime no âmbito interno dos países, a comunidade internacional passou a perseguir, também, os efeitos e proventos do crime, através do cumprimento de medidas cautelares patrimoniais para bloqueio e confisco de bens do acusado existentes no exterior. Tal intento foi atingido por meio da cooperação jurídica internacional, cujos instrumentos estão sujeitos ao due process of law. Contudo, por haver distintos sistemas processuais, o estranhamento do tratamento dispensado pelo ordenamento jurídico de um Estado em determinada matéria de Direito Processual Penal pode deflagrar, perante outro Estado, argumentos contrários ao atendimento do pedido de assistência jurídica, inviabilizando o fluxo cooperacional. Por isso, várias questões surgem quando se desloca as medidas cautelares patrimoniais penais no contexto da cooperação jurídica. A presente dissertação abordará o tema da cooperação jurídica internacional em matéria penal sob a perspectiva do devido processo legal e, a partir desse enfoque, identificará conflitos que eventualmente surgem dos pedidos de assistência jurídica para cumprimento de medidas cautelares patrimoniais. / Once it became difficult to restrain crime under domestic jurisdiction, international communities also started to go after the proceeds and instrumentalities of offenses, through enforcement of provisional measures, aiming at immobilization and forfeiture of defendant´s assets existing abroad. Said target was achieved by legal international cooperation, whose instruments are subject to the due process of law. However, as there are different procedure systems, the strangeness caused by treatment offered by the legal system of a State in a certain matter of Criminal Procedure Law may deflagrate before another State, opposite arguments to fulfillment of legal assistance order, making unfeasible the cooperation flow. That is why several issues come up when criminal provisional measures are moved in the context of legal cooperation. The current dissertation will discuss the international legal cooperation in criminal matter under the light of due process of law and thereinafter, it will identify conflicts that may eventually appear from orders of legal assistance for the enforcement of provisional measures.

No momento em que se mostrou difícil reprimir o crime no âmbito interno dos países, a comunidade internacional passou a perseguir, também, os efeitos e proventos do crime, através do cumprimento de medidas cautelares patrimoniais para bloqueio e confisco de bens do acusado existentes no exterior. Tal intento foi atingido por meio da cooperação jurídica internacional, cujos instrumentos estão sujeitos ao due process of law. Contudo, por haver distintos sistemas processuais, o estranhamento do tratamento dispensado pelo ordenamento jurídico de um Estado em determinada matéria de Direito Processual Penal pode deflagrar, perante outro Estado, argumentos contrários ao atendimento do pedido de assistência jurídica, inviabilizando o fluxo cooperacional. Por isso, várias questões surgem quando se desloca as medidas cautelares patrimoniais penais no contexto da cooperação jurídica. A presente dissertação abordará o tema da cooperação jurídica internacional em matéria penal sob a perspectiva do devido processo legal e, a partir desse enfoque, identificará conflitos que eventualmente surgem dos pedidos de assistência jurídica para cumprimento de medidas cautelares patrimoniais. / Once it became difficult to restrain crime under domestic jurisdiction, international communities also started to go after the proceeds and instrumentalities of offenses, through enforcement of provisional measures, aiming at immobilization and forfeiture of defendant´s assets existing abroad. Said target was achieved by legal international cooperation, whose instruments are subject to the due process of law. However, as there are different procedure systems, the strangeness caused by treatment offered by the legal system of a State in a certain matter of Criminal Procedure Law may deflagrate before another State, opposite arguments to fulfillment of legal assistance order, making unfeasible the cooperation flow. That is why several issues come up when criminal provisional measures are moved in the context of legal cooperation. The current dissertation will discuss the international legal cooperation in criminal matter under the light of due process of law and thereinafter, it will identify conflicts that may eventually appear from orders of legal assistance for the enforcement of provisional measures.

This thesis seeks to answer the principal question as to whether international criminal justice systems can serve as adequate truth-ascertaining forums. In doing so, it reviews the practice of three international criminal justice systems: the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) and the International Criminal Court (ICC). It is not the purpose of this research to review the black letter law adopted and applied by these international tribunals and court, but rather to review the implementation of the legal principles in practice. It is a socio-legal research project which focuses on the practice of the tribunals and court. It discusses socio-legal, institutional and political issues relating to the ascertainment of the truth in international criminal justice. In addition, it examines the gaps between the theory and practice of ascertaining the truth in the ICTY, ICTR and ICC. It does so principally by exploring the roles of the parties, participants and judges in ascertaining the truth. This includes the obstacles they face in doing so and the responses given, if any, to accommodate these difficulties. Challenges include the politicised climate of most post-conflict societies, the remoteness of the crime base areas from the seat of the Court, the lack of enforcement mechanisms and reliance on State cooperation, as well as the unfamiliarities with the cultural and linguistic features of the affected communities. This thesis reveals that these difficulties are not the principal cause of truth-searching impediments. Indeed, it is asserted that the ascertainment of the truth can be fair and effective notwithstanding these difficulties. It also demonstrates that truth-ascertaining impediments are mainly caused by failures to adequately investigate the crimes and relevant evidence. At the ICTY, investigations have been carried out in the most efficient and fair manner possible under the circumstances. By contrast, the ICTR and ICC investigations are far from adequate and should be improved. The Prosecution should make more efforts to obtain the best evidence available. It further concludes that international justice systems have set their goals too highly. Instead of seeking to meet objectives such as reconciliation, peace and security, they should restrict their focus to the question as to whether the guilt of a particular accused has been established in respect of the crimes charged.

Právnická fakulta Univerzity Karlovy v Praze Katedra mezinárodního práva Mgr. Pavel Bureš Human Rights in International Criminal Procedure Praha 2011 2 Abstract The rapid development of International Criminal Law in the second half of 20th century and especially on its end is marked by a proliferation of international criminal judicial organs and thereby by a huge increase and development of procedural norms determining these organs' jurisdiction and functioning but also specifying procedural status of individuals - suspected and accused persons, victims. The submitted thesis focuses on one of the aspects of individuals procedural status, namely their procedural guarantees - human rights in international criminal procedure. The analyse of human rights in international criminal procedure (the proceedings before International Criminal Court) was done having been backed by statutory regulations of international military tribunals and ad hoc tribunal for Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda and their case-law. The hypothetical start point was to consider that procedural guarantees in the ICC procedure established by Rome Statute in 1998 are on a highest level and more detailed than these guarantees enshrined in ad hoc tribunals Statutes and even in international universal or regional human rights protecting...

O objetivo desta tese é demonstrar como se pode alcançar, na cooperação jurídica internacional, o respeito ao devido processo legal, ao mesmo tempo em que sejam respeitados os ordenamentos jurídicos envolvidos. Pluralidade de ordenamentos, confiança mútua, respeito aos direitos fundamentais e o dever/necessidade de cooperar conduzem a aparentes dicotomias na apreciação da matéria, como aquela que contrapõe eficiência e garantismo. Contextualizada a cooperação e analisadas suas principais caraterísticas, afirmamos que cooperação eficaz, reconhecimento da diversidade de sistemas jurídicos e direitos dos concernidos constituem os principais vetores do instituto, cujo equilíbrio é essencial a sua correta aplicação. Partindo desta premissa, a cooperação não pode ser entendida como instrumento dedicado primordialmente ao uso da acusação, como mais uma ferramenta de combate ao crime, mas como procedimento que tem por finalidade a consecução de um processo justo. Para problematizar a forma com a qual seria garantido este processo justo, parte-se do estudo da relação bilateral entre Brasil e Estados Unidos, que congrega os principais desafios a uma cooperação embasada no respeito aos direitos fundamentais, que deve permear todos os ramos do direito e, em especial, no respeito aos direitos da defesa, que são os mais atingidos na prática deste instituto. Analisa-se também o sistema estadunidense de cooperação jurídica internacional, com ênfase em sua legislação e jurisprudência sobre o tema. Esta análise é oportuna, pois a atuação dos Estados Unidos na área é bastante intensa e sua disciplina exaustiva, constituindo o estudo do direito comparado vantajoso à tentativa de propositura de soluções a questões não resolvidas no ordenamento brasileiro, cuja carência de regulamentação conduz a incertezas. Estas incidem principalmente na salvaguarda dos direitos da defesa, alijada do processo de desenvolvimento do instituto e excluída da utilização do MLAT (Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty) e da possibilidade de interferir no deslinde da execução de um pedido de assistência. Uma vez identificados pontualmente os principais problemas, prosseguimos com a apresentação de soluções gerais, consubstanciadas em propostas de interpretação de nossa legislação. Em síntese, estas propostas são direcionadas à proteção da ampla defesa, demonstrando-se a necessidade de disponibilizar meios adequados de atuação à defesa que, em homenagem ao corolário da paridade de armas, devem ser proporcionais aos meios que possui a acusação. Além disso, a defesa deve ter a oportunidade de se manifestar em todos os momentos do cumprimento do pedido de cooperação, não devendo se constituir em regra o contraditório diferido. Por fim, as sugestões voltar-se-ão ao papel que as tradicionais causas de restrição à assistência podem desempenhar na salvaguarda dos direitos aqui estudados. / The goal of this thesis is to demonstrate how the respect to the due process of law can be achieved at the same time that the legal systems involved are respected on an international legal cooperation. The plurality of jurisdictions, mutual confidence, respect for fundamental rights and duty/need to cooperate lead to apparent dichotomies when evaluating the matter, such as the one that contrasts efficiency and guaranteeism. However, when contextualizing the cooperation and analyzing its main features, we affirm that the effective cooperation, recognition of the diversity of legal systems and the rights of those concerned are the main vectors of the institute, whose balance is essential to its correct application. Starting from this premise, cooperation cannot be understood as an instrument dedicated primarily to the use of the prosecution as another crime-fighting tool, but rather as a procedure whose purpose is to achieve a fair trial. To discuss the way in which this fair trial would be guaranteed, we start by studying the bilateral relations between Brazil and United States, which brings together the main challenges to a cooperation based on the respect for fundamental rights, which must permeate all branches of law, and, in particular, the respect to the rights of the defense, which are the ones hit the hardest in the practice of this institute. Then, the American system of international legal cooperation will be also analyzed with an emphasis on its legislation and jurisprudence on the subject. This analysis is timely, as the performance of the United States in the area is quite intense and its discipline is exhaustive, which makes the study of the comparative law beneficial to the attempt at propositioning solutions to unresolved issues in the Brazilian system, whose lack of regulation leads to uncertainty. These mainly focus on safeguarding the rights of the defense, jettisoned from the development process of the institute and excluded from the use of MLAT (Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty) and from the possibility of interfering in the outcome of the execution of a request for assistance. After promptly identifying the main problems, we proceed with the presentation of general solutions embodied in proposals for interpretation and amendment of our legislation. In summary, these proposals are directed to the protection of being heard, which demonstrate the need of making available appropriate means of action to the defense that should be proportional to the means that the prosecution has in honor of the corollary of parity of weapons. In addition, the defense should have the opportunity to manifest itself at all times of the execution of the request for cooperation and the deferred adversary proceeding should not become the rule. Finally, the suggestions will return to the role that the traditional causes of restriction to the assistance can play when safeguarding the rights studied herein.

Das Verfahren der internationalen ad hoc Strafgerichtshöfe für das ehemalige Jugoslawien und für Ruanda kann als die erste völkerstrafverfahrensrechtliche Ordnung betrachtet werden. Von den Richtern selbst ausgearbeitet und entwickelt, orientierte sich dieses Verfahren ursprünglich sehr an dem angloamerikanischen Strafprozessmodell. Mangels geeigneter Präzedenzfälle und angesichts der vielen Analogiefaktoren zwischen dem innerstaatlichen Strafverfahrensrecht und dem Völkerstrafverfahrensrecht haben sich die Richter -insbesondere während der ersten Tätigkeitsjahre ihrer Gerichtshöfe- öfter auf innerstaatliche Rechtspraxen bei der Anwendung ihrer Verfahrens- und Beweisordnungen bezogen. Die vorliegende Arbeit untersucht diese Bezugnahme auf innerstaatliches Recht anhand der Rechtsprechung beider ad hoc Strafgerichtshöfe im Bereich des Beweisrechts. Die Gründe und Formen der Bezugnahme auf innerstaatliches Recht werden zuerst dargestellt und anschließend analysiert. Aus der Untersuchung der Rechtsprechung ergibt sich eine insgesamt unsystematische und pragmatische Nutzung des innerstaatlichen Rechts, welches meistens dazu dient, die für den Einzelfall geeignetste Lösung zu liefern und/ oder die von den Richtern getroffene Entscheidung zu legitimieren. Solch eine Vorgehensweise birgt zweierlei Probleme: Ein Legitimitätsproblem angesichts der Internationalität des Verfahrens der ad hoc Strafgerichtshöfe und ein Problem hinsichtlich der Vorhersehbarkeit der Anwendung ihrer Verfahrens- und Beweisordnungen. Abschließend widmet sich diese Arbeit dementsprechend der Frage nach einer methodischen Herangehensweise, welche zu mehr Legitimität und Vorhersehbarkeit bei der Anwendung der Verfahrensregeln internationaler Strafgerichtshöfe beitragen könnte, und dies abgesehen davon, ob sich die Richter dabei auf externe normative Räume, wie diejenigen innerstaatlicher Rechtsordnungen, beziehen oder nicht. / The procedure of the ad hoc international criminal tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda can be regarded as the first set of rules of international criminal procedure. This procedural law, constructed and developed by the judges themselves was primary inspired by the common law approach to criminal proceedings. In the absence of precedents, and given the numerous potential analogies between domestic criminal procedure and international criminal procedure, the judges often referred to domestic legal practices - particularly during the ad hoc tribunals’ first years of activity - when applying rules of procedure and evidence. The present work investigates this reference to domestic law by examining the ad hoc tribunals’ jurisprudence regarding the law of evidence. The reasons for and forms of the reference to domestic law are first presented and then analysed. This study concludes that, on the whole, domestic law is referred to in an unsystematic and pragmatic manner: It is mostly used by the judges in order to provide the most suitable solution for the particular case before them and/ or to legitimate a decision they have already made on the basis of their own procedural rules. Such an approach raises two problems: a legitimacy deficit in regard to the internationality of the ad hoc tribunals’ procedure and a lack of predictability in the application of the rules of procedure and evidence. This study deals therefore finally with the possibility of a methodical approach, which could contribute to more predictability and legitimacy in the application of the procedural rules of international criminal tribunals, regardless of whether or not the judges refer to external normative systems, such as domestic legal orders.

O objetivo desta tese é demonstrar como se pode alcançar, na cooperação jurídica internacional, o respeito ao devido processo legal, ao mesmo tempo em que sejam respeitados os ordenamentos jurídicos envolvidos. Pluralidade de ordenamentos, confiança mútua, respeito aos direitos fundamentais e o dever/necessidade de cooperar conduzem a aparentes dicotomias na apreciação da matéria, como aquela que contrapõe eficiência e garantismo. Contextualizada a cooperação e analisadas suas principais caraterísticas, afirmamos que cooperação eficaz, reconhecimento da diversidade de sistemas jurídicos e direitos dos concernidos constituem os principais vetores do instituto, cujo equilíbrio é essencial a sua correta aplicação. Partindo desta premissa, a cooperação não pode ser entendida como instrumento dedicado primordialmente ao uso da acusação, como mais uma ferramenta de combate ao crime, mas como procedimento que tem por finalidade a consecução de um processo justo. Para problematizar a forma com a qual seria garantido este processo justo, parte-se do estudo da relação bilateral entre Brasil e Estados Unidos, que congrega os principais desafios a uma cooperação embasada no respeito aos direitos fundamentais, que deve permear todos os ramos do direito e, em especial, no respeito aos direitos da defesa, que são os mais atingidos na prática deste instituto. Analisa-se também o sistema estadunidense de cooperação jurídica internacional, com ênfase em sua legislação e jurisprudência sobre o tema. Esta análise é oportuna, pois a atuação dos Estados Unidos na área é bastante intensa e sua disciplina exaustiva, constituindo o estudo do direito comparado vantajoso à tentativa de propositura de soluções a questões não resolvidas no ordenamento brasileiro, cuja carência de regulamentação conduz a incertezas. Estas incidem principalmente na salvaguarda dos direitos da defesa, alijada do processo de desenvolvimento do instituto e excluída da utilização do MLAT (Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty) e da possibilidade de interferir no deslinde da execução de um pedido de assistência. Uma vez identificados pontualmente os principais problemas, prosseguimos com a apresentação de soluções gerais, consubstanciadas em propostas de interpretação de nossa legislação. Em síntese, estas propostas são direcionadas à proteção da ampla defesa, demonstrando-se a necessidade de disponibilizar meios adequados de atuação à defesa que, em homenagem ao corolário da paridade de armas, devem ser proporcionais aos meios que possui a acusação. Além disso, a defesa deve ter a oportunidade de se manifestar em todos os momentos do cumprimento do pedido de cooperação, não devendo se constituir em regra o contraditório diferido. Por fim, as sugestões voltar-se-ão ao papel que as tradicionais causas de restrição à assistência podem desempenhar na salvaguarda dos direitos aqui estudados. / The goal of this thesis is to demonstrate how the respect to the due process of law can be achieved at the same time that the legal systems involved are respected on an international legal cooperation. The plurality of jurisdictions, mutual confidence, respect for fundamental rights and duty/need to cooperate lead to apparent dichotomies when evaluating the matter, such as the one that contrasts efficiency and guaranteeism. However, when contextualizing the cooperation and analyzing its main features, we affirm that the effective cooperation, recognition of the diversity of legal systems and the rights of those concerned are the main vectors of the institute, whose balance is essential to its correct application. Starting from this premise, cooperation cannot be understood as an instrument dedicated primarily to the use of the prosecution as another crime-fighting tool, but rather as a procedure whose purpose is to achieve a fair trial. To discuss the way in which this fair trial would be guaranteed, we start by studying the bilateral relations between Brazil and United States, which brings together the main challenges to a cooperation based on the respect for fundamental rights, which must permeate all branches of law, and, in particular, the respect to the rights of the defense, which are the ones hit the hardest in the practice of this institute. Then, the American system of international legal cooperation will be also analyzed with an emphasis on its legislation and jurisprudence on the subject. This analysis is timely, as the performance of the United States in the area is quite intense and its discipline is exhaustive, which makes the study of the comparative law beneficial to the attempt at propositioning solutions to unresolved issues in the Brazilian system, whose lack of regulation leads to uncertainty. These mainly focus on safeguarding the rights of the defense, jettisoned from the development process of the institute and excluded from the use of MLAT (Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty) and from the possibility of interfering in the outcome of the execution of a request for assistance. After promptly identifying the main problems, we proceed with the presentation of general solutions embodied in proposals for interpretation and amendment of our legislation. In summary, these proposals are directed to the protection of being heard, which demonstrate the need of making available appropriate means of action to the defense that should be proportional to the means that the prosecution has in honor of the corollary of parity of weapons. In addition, the defense should have the opportunity to manifest itself at all times of the execution of the request for cooperation and the deferred adversary proceeding should not become the rule. Finally, the suggestions will return to the role that the traditional causes of restriction to the assistance can play when safeguarding the rights studied herein.

Les statuts et les règlements des juridictions internationales pénales reconnaissent la plupart des garanties du droit à un procès équitable prévues par les instruments internationaux relatifs aux droits de l’homme. Pourtant, si on examine le volume du contentieux pénal international, nous allons vite nous apercevoir que les allégations relatives à la violation de ce droit occupent une place importante. C’est pourquoi, il nous paraissait nécessaire de déceler et d’analyser les raisons de cette distorsion. Pour faire une telle étude, nous avons préalablement avancé qu’au-delà de la dimension originelle de la procédure pénale internationale visant à mettre en œuvre les règles du droit international pénal, deux autres dimensions se sont confirmées aussi bien à travers les textes que dans la pratique. Il s’agit de la dimension humaniste d’une part et de la dimension managériale d’autre part. Partant de ce constat, nous avons voulu lever le voile sur les impacts de ses dernières sur la mise en œuvre effective du droit à un procès équitable, et ce, en procédant à une analyse critique. Le but de cette démarche est de démontrer que ces dimensions intrinsèques de la procédure pénale internationale, ont des effets directs et indirects sur le caractère équitable des procès pénaux internationaux / The statutes and the rules of international criminal courts recognize most of the guarantees of the right to a fair trial under international instruments on human rights. However, if we examine the size of international criminal litigation, we will soon realize that the allegations relating to the violation of this right take a large place. Therefore, it seemed necessary to identify and analyze the reasons for this distortion. To do such a study, we have previously argued that beyond the original dimensions of the international criminal procedure to implement the rules of international criminal law, two others dimensions were confirmed by the texts and the practice. There are the humanist and the managerial dimensions. With this in mind, we wanted to uncover their impact on the effective implementation of the right to a fair trial, conducting a critical analysis. The purpose of this approach is to demonstrate that these intrinsic dimensions of international criminal procedure have direct and indirect effects on the fairness of international criminal trials