محاکمة غیابی در دیوان کیفری بین‌المللی تأثیر متقابل پروندة کنیا و مصوبات مجمع عمومی کشورهای عضو

پژوهش نامه ایرانی سیاست بین الملل

مقاله 2، دوره 8، شماره 1، اسفند 1398، صفحه 23-48   

نوع مقاله: مقالات

شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22067/ijip.v8i1.72452

نویسندگان

سیده طاهره خبازی خادر^* ؛ سید مهدی سیدزاده ثانی

دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد

چکیده

در حقوق کیفری بین­المللی ممنوعیت محاکمه غیابی ارجحیت داشته و حضور متهم در دادرسی که بر اصولی نظیر اصل تناظر، تساوی سلاح­ها و حق دفاع برابر متکی است، به‌عنوان بخشی از حقوق وی برای رسیدگی عادلانه به رسمیت شناخته شده است. در راستای پذیرش چنین حقی در عرصه بین­الملل، یکی از متهمین پرونده­های مطروحه در دیوان کیفری بین­المللی خواستار چشم­پوشی از حق خود شده و درخواست معافیت از حضور در دادرسی را ارائه نمود. طرح این تقاضا موجب بروز مباحث چالشی و حتی بازبینی مقررات مربوط به حضور متهم در دادرسی­های دیوان کیفری بین‌المللی گردید. این مقاله ضمن بررسی پرونده ویلیام روتو و جاشوا سنگ مقررات اساسنامه را در این خصوص توضیح داده و نظرات شکل گرفته حول این مقررات را در قالب شرح و نقد آراء دیوان در رابطه با پرونده مذکور بیان می­نمـاید. تأثیر این پرونده بر مجمع عمومی کشـورهای عضو بخش دیگر این مقاله را به خود اختصاص می­دهد که موجبات بازبینی مقررات مربوط به محاکمه غیابی را تحت قواعد 134 مکرر، 134 سوم و 134 چهارم قواعد دادرسی و ادله فراهم آورد. با تصویب این قواعد، امکان رسیدگی غیابی و معافیت از حضور متهم در دادرسی، با لحاظ برخی شرایط، فراهم گردید.

کلیدواژه‌ها

دیوان کیفری بین المللی؛ محاکمه غیابی؛ حق حضور متهم در دادرسی؛ بازبینی مقررات؛ معافیت از حضور

مراجع

References

Aghaei Janatmakan, H. (2010). Absentia trial in criminal matters; Basics and reasons, Journal of Legal Studies, 2(1), 25-1 [in Persian].

Aghaei Janatmakan, H. (2010). Special tribunal for Lebanon; A different perspective in international criminal law, Private Law Studies Quarterly, 39(2), 23-44 [in Persian].

Ahmadi, K. (2017). Supervisory Board in the light of the principle of fair trial, International Journal of Nations Research, 2(18), 123-139. [in Persian]

Appeals Chamber/ Decision, Judgment on the Appeal of the Prosecutor against the Decision of Trial Chamber V (a) of 18 June 2013 Entitled “Decision on Mr Ruto’s Request for Excusal from Continuous Presence at Trial”, ICC-01/09-01/11-1066 (25 October 2013).

AU Assembly, ‘Decision on the Progress Report of the Commission on the Implementation of the Decisions on the ICC’, Doc. Assembly/AU/13(XXII), (30-31 January 2014).

Block M., N. (2014). The ICC and the situation in Kenya: impact and analysis of the Kenyatta and Ruto/Sang trials, A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degrees of master of arts in international studies master of public administration, University of Washington.

Cassese, A. (2008). International criminal law, (Translation: Piran, H.; Amirarjmand, A., & Mousavi, Z. (1st Edition), Tehran: Jungle [in Persian].

David, E. (1995). International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, (Translation: Rahimi, M.), International Law review, 13(18-19), 207-258 [in Persian].

Defence/Request, Defence Request for Conditional Excusal from Continuous Presence at Trial, ICC-01/09-02/11-809 (23 September 2013).

Defence/Request, Defence Request Pursuant to Article 63 (1) of the Rome Statute, ICC-01/09-01/11-685 (17 April 2013).

Defence/Request, Defence Request Pursuant to Article 63(1) of the Rome Statute and Rule134quater of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence to excuse Mr. William Samoei Ruto from Attendance at Trial, ICC-01/09-01/11-1124 (16 December 2013).

Hansen, O. T. (2013). Caressing the big fish? A critique of ICC trial chamber V(A)’s decision to grant Ruto’s request for excusal from continuous presence at trial, Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law, 22(31), 31-49.

International criminal court. (2018). From: https://www.icc-cpi.int/pages/cases. aspx.http://www.icicl.org/details.asp?id=248.

Jahed, M. A.; Khodadadi, Z., & Ghayour, Gh. (2014). An overview of basics, conditions and effects of protestation in absentia in criminal matters, a Biannual Journal Criminal Law Research, 5(1), 7-30 [in Persian].

Knottnerus, A. (2014). The International criminal court on presence at trial: the (in) validity of Rule 134quater, Groningen: International crimes database, edition 5.

Mehrafshan, A. (2012). Electronic proceeding: A new concept in judicial justice, Journal of Studies in Islamic Law & Jurisprudence, 3(5), 119-147 [in Persian].

Mehrafshan, A. (2014). The trial of defendant through video conferencing, Journal of Legal Studies, 6(4), 155-182 [in Persian].

Moazami, Sh. & namamian, P. (2015). Third Generation Procedure of International Criminal Tribunals, Journal of Criminal Law Research, 3(11), 113-146 [in Persian].

Nikoyee, S. (2006). The requirements of a public hearing in the light of fair trial, The Judiciary Law Journal, 70(56-57), 219-240 [in Persian].

Nobahar, R. (2010). The legality principle of punishment (1st Edition), Tehran: Shahredanesh. [in Persian]

Nobahar, R. (2013). The legality principle of punishments, Criminal Law Doctrines, 5, 65-96. [in Persian]

Office of the Prosecutor/Appeal, Prosecution Appeal against the “Decision on Mr Ruto’s Request for Excusal from Continuous Presence at Trial”, ICC-01/09-01/11-831 (29 July 2013).

Office of the Prosecutor/Application, Prosecution’s Application for Leave to Appeal the Decision on Excusal from Presence at Trial under Rule134quater, ICC-01/09-01/11-1189 (24 February 2014).

Office of the Prosecutor/Application, Prosecutor’s Application Pursuant to Article 58 as to William Samoei Ruto, Henry Kiprono Kosgey and Joshua arap Sang, ICC-01/09-30-Red (15 December 2010).

Office of the Prosecutor/Application, Prosecutor’s Application Pursuant to Article 58 as to Francis Kirimi Muthaura, Uhura Muigai Kenyatta and Mohammad Hussein Ali, ICC-01/09-31-Red (15 December 2010).

Office of the Prosecutor/Motion, Prosecutor’s Motion for Reconsideration of the “Decision on Defence Request for Conditional Excusal from Continuous Presence at Trial” and in the Alternative, Application for Leave to Appeal, ICC-01/09-02/11-837 (28 October 2013).

Office of the Prosecutor/ Request, Request for Authorization of an Investigation Pursuant to Article 15, ICC-01/09-3 (26 November 2009).

Office of the Prosecutor/Response, Prosecution Response to Defence Request Pursuant to Article 63(1) and Rule134quater for Excusal from Attendance at Trial for William Samoei Ruto, ICC-01/09-01/11-1135 (8 January 2014).

Office of the Prosecutor/Response, Prosecution’s Response to the Defence Request for Conditional Excusal from Continuous Presence at Trial, ICC-01/09-02/11-818 (01 October 2013).

Omidi, J. (2000). Human rights in criminal cases based on international and regional documents, Law and Political Science, 49, 5-33 [in Persian].

Open Society Justice Initiative. (2013). “Briefing paper, Kenya: Trial of William Samoei Ruto and Joshua arap Sang at the international criminal court”. Available at https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/briefing-papers/kenya-trial-william-samoei-ruto-and-joshua-arap-sang-international-criminal-court

Orina, D. M. (2014). A critical evaluation of the cases of Kenyatta and Ruto before the International Criminal Court, A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of an LLM degree, University of The Western Cape.

Pre-Trial Chamber II/Decision, Decision on the Prosecutor’s Application for Summons to Appear for William Samoei Ruto, Henry Kiprono Kosgey and Joshua arap Sang, ICC-01/09-01/11-1 (8 March 2011).

Pre-Trial Chamber II/Decision, Decision on the Prosecutor’s Application for Summonses to Appear for Francis Kirimi Muthaura, Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta and Mohammed Hussein Ali, ICC-01/09-02/11-1 (8 March 2011).

Pre-Trial Chamber II/Decision, Decision Pursuant to Article 15 of the Rome Statute on the Authorization of an Investigation into the Situation in the Republic of Kenya, ICC-01/09 (31 March 2010).

Razavifard, B., & Ghorbanzadeh, H. (2016). The right to public proceeding as one of the defensive rights of the accused in international criminal tribunals procedure, Comparative Law Review, 7(1), 163-176 [in Persian].

Rostami Ghazani, O. (2013). Right to Counsel at the International Criminal Trials, The Judiciary Law Journal, 77(83), 63-87 [in Persian].

Saghian, M. M. (2006). The principle of equality of arms in the criminal process (based on French and Iranian law), The Judiciary Law Journal, 70(56-57), 79-110 [in Persian].

Shams, A. (2002). Civil procedure, Vol. 2, (1st Edition), Tehran: Mizan [in Persian].

The Assembly of States Parties, Amendments to the Rules of Procedure and Evidence on 27 November 2013 at the 12th, ICC-ASP/12/Res.7.

Trial Chamber V(a)/Decision, Decision on ‘Prosecution’s Application for Leave to Appeal the Decision on Excusal from Presence at trial Under Rule 134quater,’ ICC-01/09-01/11-1246 (2 April 2014).

Trial Chamber V(a)/Decision, Decision on Mr Ruto’s Request for Excusal from Continuous Presence at Trial, ICC-01/09-01/11-777 (18 June 2013).

Trial Chamber V(a)/Decision, Reasons for the Decision on Excusal from Presence at Trial under Rule134quater, ICC-01/09-01/11-1186 (18 February 2014).

Trial Chamber V(b)/Decision, Decision on Defence Request for Conditional Excusal from Continuous Presence at Trial, ICC-01/09-02/11-830 (18 October 2013).