Theory and practice of mixing procedural models in the Pre-trial Chamber of the International Criminal Court mechanism of functioning

Available in Russian

Price 100 rub.

Author: Denis Pechegin

DOI: 10.21128/2226-2059-2020-4-100-111

Keywords: controversy; jurisprudence; procedural model; the adversarial core; the investigation core; the Pre-trial Chamber of the International Criminal Court; truth


The increasing interpenetration of the main models of the process and the approval of international standards for the production of criminal cases raise the question of the development and improvement of the form of legal proceedings in the category of the most relevant in modern science. On the one hand, the attention of many scientists is focused on strengthening the competitive core of the process and ensuring, as far as possible, a balance of power between the parties. On the other hand, it is stated that legal proceedings that do not pursue the goal of achieving material truth, especially due to the absolute nature of the principle of competition, lead to excessive formalism that has nothing to do with fair trial. The solution to the problem of combining trial models (the balance of adversarial and investigative cores) is seen in the International Criminal Court. The procedure of criminal proceedings in the International Criminal Court is the result of special scientific modeling taking into account the indicated doctrinal trends, and the degree of generalization of approaches of leading legal families in the structure of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court is so high that it allows us to speak about the universality of this procedural system. If the predecessors of the International Criminal Court preference were really given only one started (so, the ICTY was based on the example of the Anglo-Saxon adversarial procedure model with the “American accent”), the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court reflected the trend to the initial formation of a balanced trial procedures designed to overcome the deviations in the balance of power by introducing an adversarial process with “inquisitorial” elements: for example, the Pre-trial Chamber, duties of the Prosecutor fully and objectively investigate the circumstances of the case, the duties of the court of first instance to establish the truth in the case. However, this does not mean any disregard for the adversarial core at the pre-trial stage. The article is devoted to theoretical and practical aspects of the combination of adversarial and investigative cores in the activities of the pre-trial Chamber of the International criminal court and reflects the results of a study led by professor Anita Ušacka, honorary doctor of law, in the preparation of a Commentary to the Rome Statute in Russian.

About the author: Denis Pechegin – Candidate of Sciences (Ph.D.) in Law, Center of Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure and Judicial Practice of the Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia.

Citation: Pechegin D. (2020) Teoriya i praktika sochetaniya modeley protsessa v deyatel'nosti Palaty pred­varitel'nogo proizvodstva Mezhdunarodnogo ugolovnogo suda [Theory and practice of mixing procedural models in the Pre-trial Chamber of the International Criminal Court mechanism of functioning]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie, vol.10, no.4, pp.100–111. (In Russian).


Cassese A., Acquaviva G., Fan M., Whiting A. (2011) International Criminal Law: Cases and Commentary, Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.

Dimitrakos D. (2014) The Principle of Universal Jurisdiction & the International Criminal Court. Available at: (accessed: 13.11.2020).

Fischer H., Ipsen K., Wolf J. (2001) International and National Prosecution of Crimes under International Law, Berlin: Berlin Verlag.

Golovko L.V. (2009) Materialy k postroeniyu sravnitel'nogo ugolovno-protsessual'nogo prava: istoch­niki, dokazatel'stva, predvaritel'noe proizvodstvo [Materials for the construction of comparative criminal procedure law: sources, evidence, pre-trial proceedings]. In: Trudy yuridicheskogo fakul'teta MGU imeni M.V.Lomonosova. Kniga 11 [Proceedings of the Faculty of Law of Moscow State University. Book 11], Moscow: Pravovedenie, pp.229–362. (In Russian).

Guariglia F., Harris K., Hochmayr G. (2008) Article 57. In: Triffterer O. (ed.) Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: Observers' Notes, Baden-Baden: Nomos, pp.1123–1125.

Hassan A. (2017) Context at the International Criminal Court. Pace Law Review, vol.29, no.1, pp.132–201.

Kashepov V.P. (ed.) (2012) Mezhdunarodno-pravovye standarty v ugolovnoy yustitsii Rossiyskoy Federatsii: nauchno-prakticheskoe posobie [International legal standards in criminal justice of the Russian Federation: a scientific and practical guide], Moscow: Institut zakonodatel'stva i sravnitel'nogo pravovedeniya pri Pravitel'stve Rossiyskoy Federatsii; Ankil. (In Russian).

Khan K., Buisman C., Gosnell C. (2010) Principles of Evidence in International Criminal Justice, Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.

Lebedev V.M., Khabrieva T.Y. (eds.) (2019) Justice in the Modern World: monograph, 2nd ed., Moscow: The Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of the Russian Federation.

Lebedev V.M., Khabrieva T.Y. (eds.) (2012) Pravosudie v sovremennom mire: monographia [Justice in the modern world: monograph], Moscow: Norma: INFRA-M. (In Russian).

Pechegin D.A. (2014) Sootnoshenie rozysknogo i sostyazatel'nogo nachal v mezhdunarodnykh dokumentakh, reguliruyushchikh ugolovnoe sudoproizvodstvo [Inquisitorial and adversarial elements of a criminal procedure in the international acts]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 11. Pravo, no.6, pp.50–59. (In Russian).

Pechegin D.A. (2015) Problema sochetaniya sostyazatel'nykh i sledstvennykh nachal pri proizvodstve po ugolovnomu delu: poisk resheniya na primere Mezhdunarodnogo ugolovnogo suda [Combination of adversarial and investigative aspects in criminal procedure: International Criminal Court practice]. Zakonodatel'stvo, no.2, pp.69–77. (In Russian).

Pechegin D.A. (2017) Sostyazatel'naya i rozysknaya modeli sudoproizvodstva v Mezhduna­rodnom ugolovnom sude [Adversarial and investigative proceeding models in the International Сriminal Сourt], Moscow: Yurlitinform. (In Russian).

Pikis G.M. (2010) The Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court: Analysis of the Statute, the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, the Regulations of the Court and Supplementary Instruments, Boston, MA: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

Rabtsevich O.I. (2016) Kategoriya “mezhdunarodnoe soobshchestvo” i mezhdunarodnoe pravo [The category of “international community” and international law]. Sovremennoe pravo, no.9, pp.125–135. (In Russian).

Sadat L.N. (2002) The International Criminal Court and the Transformation of International Law: Justice for the New Millennium, New York: Transnational Publishers.

Stegmiller I. (2011) The Pre-Investigation Stage of the ICC: Criteria for Situation Selection, Berlin: Duncker & Humbold.

Trikoz E.N. (2011) Kampal'skaya konferentsiya po mezhdunarodnomu ugolovnomu pravosudiyu [Review conference in Kampala]. Mezhdunarodnoe ugolovnoe pravo i mezhdunarodnaya yustitsiya, no.1, pp.20–24. (In Russian).

Volevodz A.G. (2014) Mezhdunarodnoe sotrudnichestvo v sfere ugolovnogo sudoproizvodstva – uroki istorii i nekotorye perspektivy reformirovaniya [International cooperation in the field of criminal procedure – lessons of history and some reforming issues]. Biblioteka kriminalista: Nauchnyy zhurnal, vol.17, no.6, pp.281–288. (In Russian).