The Significance of Institutional Culture in Enhancing the Validity of International Criminal Tribunals

Abstract

When considering the validity of international criminal tribunals, focus is typically and appropriately upon areas of substantive law and procedure and questions of prosecutorial policy. However, to the extent that it is within the capacity of judges to address and resolve challenges to the validity of the institution, in order for judges to formulate and implement effective solutions to those challenges it is imperative that an institutional culture is cultivated that is conducive to those ends. This paper explains the relationship between judicial culture and institutional legitimacy, and highlights how recent jurisprudence of the International Criminal Court (icc) suggests that there is a need for the adoption and implementation of measures to promote the development of a robust institutional culture conducive to resolving the challenges faced by the icc.

Control over the Theory: Reforming the icc’s Approach to Establishing Commission Liability?

“…Another virtue of the existence of a strong internal culture of collegiality among judges is its potential to enhance the perception that the court's legal decisions are authoritative and sound. 19 Overall, the internal culture of international organisations, including legal bodies, constitutes their identity as actors in the international arena.…”

‘The different sets of ideas at the back of our heads’: Dissent and authority at the International Court of Justice

“…It is possible that how individual judges use AOs may have a destructive effect upon judicial authorityboth that of the individual judge and that of the institution. As I have argued elsewhere, 123 although AOs are not inherently inconsistent with judicial authority (whether individual or institutional), the use of particular language in AOs, or the use of AOs to launch personal attacks against colleagues, can be harmful to judicial authority by undermining collegiality and by undermining the charismatic authority of judges. 124 For example, the image of judicial quarrelling generated by a number of AOs to the Nicaragua judgment that addressed allegations of partiality made by one judge against another, 125 was neither in the interests of the institution nor the individual judges concerned.…”