International Criminal Justice on Trial.

Conceived first and foremost as a case-reduction
mechanism, the ICTY and ICTR case referral practice is a novel experiment in the
laboratory of international criminal justice. It illustrates in a highly concrete
manner various legal challenges arising from pluralistic accountability mechanisms in
the prosecution of international crimes. By analysing the legal problems highlighted
by this practice, identifying possible normative and contextual root causes, and
formulating potential solutions that may also be relevant for the International
Criminal Court, the author sheds light on the shifting dynamic between the main
actors involved in the prosecution of international crimes.

The 20th century has witnessed the rapid
proliferation of a variety of international and internationalized criminal courts and
tribunals. Their creation has been justified by the international community’s resolve
to punish perpetrators of the gravest crimes so as to contribute to restoring peace
and justice to (post-)conflict regions. However, the specific contours of the
relationship between these international courts and tribunals and relevant national
accountability mechanisms continue to be the subject of some uncertainty, not least
in light of the fact that national courts have increasingly begun to prosecute
international crimes. Given the sheer scale of the crimes committed and the limited
resources of international judicial institutions, it is crucial that these courts
function in parallel with local courts in a pluralistic, integrative system of
international criminal law. At the same time, parallel judicial activities are giving
rise to an array of complex legal conundrums.

Conceived first and foremost as a case-reduction mechanism, the ICTY and ICTR case
referral practice – as part of the UN Security Council Completion Strategy – is a
novel experiment in the laboratory of international criminal justice. It illustrates
in a highly concrete manner various legal challenges arising from pluralistic
accountability mechanisms in the prosecution of international crimes. By analysing
the legal problems highlighted by this practice, identifying possible normative and
contextual root causes, and formulating potential solutions that may also be relevant
for the International Criminal Court (the latter of which is contemplating its own
»completion« scenarios), the author sheds light on the shifting dynamic between the
main actors involved in the prosecution of international crimes.

Chapter 1: The international criminal courts and
tribunals and their relationship to national accountability mechanisms

The core mandates and current practice of the ICTY and ICTR – The core mandate and
current practice of the ICC

Chapter 2: The referral practice to national courts as a crucial component of the
ICTY and ICTR Completion Strategy and legal problems resulting from its
implementation

Origins of the Completion Strategy – Goals of the Completion Strategy – The
Completion Strategy's referral practice: features and legal problems – The ICTY and
ICTR experiences compared

Chapter 3: Possible root causes of legal problems resulting from the implementation
of the ICTY/ICTR referral practice to national courts

Normative factors: discrepancies in applicable legal norms – Contextual factors:
national context as a crucial criterion for referral

Chapter 4: The ICTY/ICTR referral practice: impact and possible solutions

Impact of the ICTY/ICTR referral practice – Possible solutions to some legal problems
identified

Chapter 5: ICTY/ICTR referral practice: What relevance for the ICC?

Relevance despite different jurisdictional frameworks – Referral regulations in the
Rome Statute of the ICC – Referral as an illustration of complementarity in practice:
difficulties and prospects – Some possible lessons learned from the ICTY and ICTR
referral practice for the ICC

Conclusion and outlook

• By (author) Jennifer Schuetze-Reymann