Scholarlink

<p>The International Criminal Court (ICC) faces the critical challenge of balancing its mandate to adjudicate individual criminal responsibility by integrating victims’ narratives into its proceedings. While the ICC readily incorporates victims’ firsthand evidence addressing disputed facts, it struggles to accommodate broader historical and emotional narratives. These accounts often clash with the adjudicative framework of international trials, which reduces them to factual details. This process, termed ‘skeletonization’, excludes essential socio-historical dimensions and diminishes the Court’s truth-seeking objectives.</p><p>This article identifies a dyadic tension between legal truth and expansive victim narratives, arguing that critiques of narrow legal scrutiny and calls for inclusivity are both legitimate and necessary. Drawing on Robinson’s concept of a ‘zone of permission,’ it identifies two critical zones allowing procedural flexibility. The first, <i>truth and justice</i>, highlights trials’ role in fostering a collective understanding of atrocities beyond determining guilt or innocence. The second, <i>victims’ right to truth</i>, underscores the legal imperative to allow victims to share their experiences beyond binary adjudicative frameworks.</p><p>The article evaluates adversarial and non-adversarial evidence presentation models to operationalise these zones of permissions, proposing a hybrid model: judge-led direct examinations followed by cross-examinations. This model ensures comprehensive victim narratives while safeguarding procedural fairness. It demonstrates how the ICC’s statutory and procedural framework can accommodate the historical and emotional dimensions of victims’ testimonies. By adopting a narrative-sensitive approach, the ICC can reinforce its commitment to truth, justice, and accountability while fostering a more inclusive understanding of mass atrocities.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

THE DYADIC TENSION OF JUSTICE: INTEGRATING VICTIMS’ NARRATIVES IN PROCEEDINGS AT THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年2月18日

查看全文
  • Alessandra Cuppini

摘要

The International Criminal Court (ICC) faces the critical challenge of balancing its mandate to adjudicate individual criminal responsibility by integrating victims’ narratives into its proceedings. While the ICC readily incorporates victims’ firsthand evidence addressing disputed facts, it struggles to accommodate broader historical and emotional narratives. These accounts often clash with the adjudicative framework of international trials, which reduces them to factual details. This process, termed ‘skeletonization’, excludes essential socio-historical dimensions and diminishes the Court’s truth-seeking objectives.

This article identifies a dyadic tension between legal truth and expansive victim narratives, arguing that critiques of narrow legal scrutiny and calls for inclusivity are both legitimate and necessary. Drawing on Robinson’s concept of a ‘zone of permission,’ it identifies two critical zones allowing procedural flexibility. The first, truth and justice, highlights trials’ role in fostering a collective understanding of atrocities beyond determining guilt or innocence. The second, victims’ right to truth, underscores the legal imperative to allow victims to share their experiences beyond binary adjudicative frameworks.

The article evaluates adversarial and non-adversarial evidence presentation models to operationalise these zones of permissions, proposing a hybrid model: judge-led direct examinations followed by cross-examinations. This model ensures comprehensive victim narratives while safeguarding procedural fairness. It demonstrates how the ICC’s statutory and procedural framework can accommodate the historical and emotional dimensions of victims’ testimonies. By adopting a narrative-sensitive approach, the ICC can reinforce its commitment to truth, justice, and accountability while fostering a more inclusive understanding of mass atrocities.