Commentary (Analysis of Decisions on Interim Release at the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC))

TY - GEN

T1 - Commentary (Analysis of Decisions on Interim Release at the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC))

AU - Appazov, Artur

PY - 2015/12/1

Y1 - 2015/12/1

N2 - As of today, the decision-making organs of the ECCC have issued a number of decisions on applications of suspects and accused persons for provisional release. One only one such application has been successful so far. This situation is regarded as acceptable in other international criminal jurisdictions for the reasons of unavailability of reliable enforcement mechanisms. This is said to justify the pre-trial detention to be de facto the rule rather than exception. However, specific conditions of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC) warrant a differing appraisal. The commentary examines a tendency of the decision-makers of the ECCC uncritically to accept arguments in the submissions of the Co-Prosecutors to the effect that the continuous provisional detention is in each case the necessary measure in accordance with the law of the ECCC. At that, the quality of judicial inquiry into factual submissions of the Co-Prosecutors seems to suffer from the absence of regard to evidentiary support. As a result, the decisions are founded on the mere acceptance of the ipse dixit of the Co-Prosecutors rather than on reference to evidentiary foundation.

AB - As of today, the decision-making organs of the ECCC have issued a number of decisions on applications of suspects and accused persons for provisional release. One only one such application has been successful so far. This situation is regarded as acceptable in other international criminal jurisdictions for the reasons of unavailability of reliable enforcement mechanisms. This is said to justify the pre-trial detention to be de facto the rule rather than exception. However, specific conditions of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC) warrant a differing appraisal. The commentary examines a tendency of the decision-makers of the ECCC uncritically to accept arguments in the submissions of the Co-Prosecutors to the effect that the continuous provisional detention is in each case the necessary measure in accordance with the law of the ECCC. At that, the quality of judicial inquiry into factual submissions of the Co-Prosecutors seems to suffer from the absence of regard to evidentiary support. As a result, the decisions are founded on the mere acceptance of the ipse dixit of the Co-Prosecutors rather than on reference to evidentiary foundation.

M3 - Comment

SN - 978-1-78068-197-9

VL - 43

T3 - Annotated Leading Cases of International Criminal Tribunals

SP - 163

EP - 170

BT - Annotated Leading Cases of International Criminal Tribunals

A2 - Klip, André

A2 - Freeland, Steven

PB - Intersentia

CY - Cambridge, Antwerp, Portland

ER -