Skip Navigation


Journal of International Criminal Justice Advance Access originally published online on November 22, 2005
Journal of International Criminal Justice 2006 4(1):31-46; doi:10.1093/jicj/mqi084
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
4/1/31    most recent
mqi084v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Scharf, M. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© Oxford University Press,2006, All rights reserved. For permissions please email journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Self-Representation versus Assignment of Defence Counsel before International Criminal Tribunals

Michael P. Scharf*

* 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.

[mps17{at}case.edu]

After examining the drafting history of Article 14 of the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which lays down a defendant's right ‘to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing’ — the relevant national and international case law and scholarly commentary — the author argues that the underlying purpose of the right at issue is to ensure a fair trial. This objective can best be met in cases of former leaders accused of international crimes by assigning the defendant a highly qualified attorney who is vigilantly committed to representing his client's interests. In his view, there are two main reasons why a court in international crimes trial should be able to require the defendant to work through counsel: (1) the likelihood that a defendant will act in a disruptive manner; and (2) the unique need in a complex international crimes case for an orderly trial.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.