Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Deference in International Courts and TribunalsStandard of Review and Margin of Appreciation$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Lukasz Gruszczynski and Wouter Werner

Print publication date: 2014

Print ISBN-13: 9780198716945

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: November 2014

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198716945.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 20 July 2019

Deference in the ICC Practice Concerning Admissibility Challenges Lodged by States

Deference in the ICC Practice Concerning Admissibility Challenges Lodged by States

Chapter:
(p.355) 19 Deference in the ICC Practice Concerning Admissibility Challenges Lodged by States
Source:
Deference in International Courts and Tribunals
Author(s):

Karolina Wierczynska

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198716945.003.0019

This chapter analyses the approach of the ICC in admissibility proceedings initiated by States, concentrating on the same person and same conduct tests, as well as the criteria used to assess the quality of a national proceeding. In this context, the chapter pays special attention to two related mechanisms that control the extent of the Court’s scrutiny: standard of review and standard of proof. After examining the relevant case law, it concludes that both standards are still in statu nascendi, with the ICC applying a case-by-case methodology. The chapter calls for a more principled approach, which would provide States with a clear set of the criteria that make a particular case admissible. In doing so, it argues that although the Court needs into account different objectives of the Rome Statute, a special place should be occupied by the complementarity principle.

Keywords:   International Criminal Court, ICC, challenge of admissibility, complementarity, standard of proof, standard of review, deference

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .