Theory and Practice of Mixing Procedural Models in the Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Court

INTRODUCTION. In the context of the active development of information technologies and their integration into the main models of judicial proceedings, the functions and role of the court in considering a criminal case on its merits have become a highly relevant topic of modern science. On one hand, many scientists have focused on strengthening the adversarial nature of legal proceedings, ensuring a balance of power between the parties, and building mechanisms to guarantee the right to judicial protection. However, legal proceedings that do not pursue any normatively fixed goals lead to excessive formalism, as the adversarial system remains the only proven method for establishing the circumstances of a case. This approach does not fully align with the principles of justice and fairness in the final verdict. The International Criminal Court (ICC) embodies a scientific approach to solving the problem of combining various forms of legal proceedings and ensuring a balance of power between the parties, partly by assigning an active role to the court and aiming to achieve truth in the process. The ICC’s criminal process results from scientific modeling that considers identified doctrinal trends. The high degree of commonality in the approaches of leading lawyers within the Rome Statute of the ICC suggests their universality. This article explores the theoretical and practical aspects of combining process models in the ICC Trial Chamber activities.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. The methodological basis of this article comprises general scientific and special methods for understanding legal phenomena and processes in the field of international criminal procedure. These include the method of system-structural analysis, the formal logical method, the method for synthesizing sociolegal phenomena, and historical description.

RESULTS. This article confirms the relevance of addressing the functions and role of the court in considering a criminal case and its merits in modern criminal procedure research. Using the ICC Trial Chamber’s regulatory and organizational peculiarities, it substantiates that the adversarial model of the criminal process does not preclude assigning an active role to the court in examining the facts to be proved. It also supports setting the goal of achieving material truth, which is essential for completing a complete, comprehensive, and objective study of the case materials. Furthermore, there are three levels in the structure of the ICC Trial Chamber’s functions and powers, each of which is embodied in law enforcement practice to facilitate a special and flexible combination of the adversarial and investigative principles of legal proceedings.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION. This article proves that a court’s active role in criminal proceedings does not conflict with the adversarial nature of proceedings. An analysis of the provisions of the Rome Statute of the ICC, the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, and the jurisprudence of international tribunals highlights the advantages and disadvantages of the ICC Trial Chamber.