Self-Representation versus Assignment of Defence Counsel before International Criminal Tribunals |
| |
Authors: | Scharf Michael P. |
| |
Affiliation: | * Professor of Law and Director of the Frederick K. Cox International Law Center, Case Western Reserve University School of Law, USA. From 1989 to 1993, the author has served as the US State Department Lawyer responsible for issues relating to international war crimes trials. The author thanks Christopher Rassi, Esq., Assistant Director of the Cox Center's War Crimes Research Office, for his contributions to this article. |
| |
Abstract: | After examining the drafting history of Article 14 of the UNCovenant on Civil and Political Rights, which lays down a defendant'sright to defend himself in person or through legal assistanceof his own choosing the relevant national andinternational case law and scholarly commentary theauthor argues that the underlying purpose of the right at issueis to ensure a fair trial. This objective can best be met incases of former leaders accused of international crimes by assigningthe defendant a highly qualified attorney who is vigilantlycommitted to representing his client's interests. In his view,there are two main reasons why a court in international crimestrial should be able to require the defendant to work throughcounsel: (1) the likelihood that a defendant will act in a disruptivemanner; and (2) the unique need in a complex international crimescase for an orderly trial. |
| |
Keywords: | |
本文献已被 Oxford 等数据库收录! |
|