The Evolution of International Criminal Procedure: from Nuremberg and Tokyo to The Hague

This thesis analyzes the evolution of international criminal procedure from Nuremberg and Tokyo to The Hague. The analysis includes a study of the International Military Tribunals’ legacy on the modern International Criminal Procedure, exploring procedural rules using the Nuremberg and Tokyo statutory law as a normative paradigm. This academic work is mainly based on a purely normative-jurisprudential approach to the procedural rules, comparing both norms and jurisprudence of the following courts: A) International Military Tribunal (IMT, Nuremberg). B) International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE, Tokyo). C) Ad Hoc Tribunals (ICTY, for the former Yugoslavia, and ICTR, for Rwanda, now IRMCT “International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals”). D) International Criminal Court (The Hague). The thesis showcases the possibility of finding a legacy of the International Military Tribunals (namely Nuremberg and Tokyo) on the procedural rules of both the United Nations Tribunals and the International Criminal Court, as well as the main procedural traits that characterize international criminal procedure as a whole and its evolution. Procedural rules are compressed into nine procedural macro-categories, inherently extracted from both the IMT and IMTFE statutes, namely: 1) principles of jurisdiction. 2) composition and powers of the tribunal. 3) rules of procedure and the rights of the accused. 4) guilty plea and negotiated justice. 5) victims’ rights and their representations. 6) judges’ role related to rules of evidence. 7) appeals or remedies. 8) dissenting, concurring, and separate opinions. 9) penalties and the execution or review of the sentence. The thesis findings show the possibility of classifying “International Criminal Procedure” as an autonomous concept and field of study, which is constantly evolving due to the interaction of different legal cultures that characterizes this subject matter and is derived from the varied procedures of 123 countries as established in both statutory law and jurisprudence. Finally, the evolution of international criminal procedure is reflected in all nine macro categories analyzed, with the only exception being the jurisdiction ratione personae. The new theory of international criminal procedure is found here, as a result of both normative and case-law approaches of the previous international tribunals, from Nuremberg and Tokyo to the Hague. Although the International Military Tribunals’ legacy on International Criminal Procedure does not influence the entire procedural structure of modern International Criminal Tribunals, the impact still constitutes an important landmark in the field of international criminal justice, representing the procedural core of the current international criminal procedure.