This thesis examines the right to self-representation in international criminal procedure and analyses the current parameters of the right in light of its historical roots. After examining the polarised approaches of domestic common and civil law systems and the laws of the Nuremberg and Tokyo proceedings (which incorporate the right to selfrepresentation although it was not ultimately exercised), the thesis goes on to analyse the decisions of international human rights bodies and the jurisprudence of international criminal tribunals (mainly the ICTY). The thesis shows that international criminal tribunals have chosen to offer a right that was not obligatory under international law and the right has a fragmented basis in (i) domestic law, where there in an underlying lack of consensus on the right to self-representation and (ii) in international law, where there are drafting problems and clear differences in interpretation. The thesis critiques the main decisions of the ICTY in light of these issues and examines the framework developed by the ICTY for the exercise of the right to self-representation and the principles established in relation to the time of exercise, integrity of a request to exercise, fitness to exercise and time and facilities available to a self-representing defendant. Rather than curtailing the right to self-representation when trials are prolonged or disrupted, the ICTY has utilised traditional options such as standby counsel but has also created new roles such as the amicus curiae lawyer, 'issue' counsel and incourt legal associates with rights of audience to improve the quality of the defence conducted by a self-representing defendant. The thesis concludes that although defendants are provided with the right to self-representation, its exercise remains problematic as these options either provide a substitute for the role of assigned counsel or are not fully effective. The thesis concludes that the STL and ICC should respond robustly to any defendants seeking to represent themselves using considerations of competence and complexity to ensure a fair trial and drafters of the constitutionaldocuments of any future tribunals should carefully consider whether to include it.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:bl.uk/oai:ethos.bl.uk:654739 |
| Date | January 2011 |
| Creators | Harvey, Caroline |
| Publisher | Lancaster University |
| Source Sets | Ethos UK |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Electronic Thesis or Dissertation |
Page generated in 0.0039 seconds