Chapter I. Introduction
7. Originality of the Present Study and Aimed Contributions
The present study aims to contribute to the field of victims’ status at international and hybrid criminal courts basically in three manners, each of them of academic and practical nature as well as effects.
First, the originality of this thesis mainly lies on that it is arguably the first study which seeks to comprehensively and truly draw the ‘full picture’ of victims’ status at the six considered international and hybrid criminal courts. Although a seminal study by Mikaela Heikkilä first examined the three dimensions of the victims’ status as presented in this thesis, it is limited to the ICTY, the ICTR, and the ICC and under the legal sources existent in the early 2000s.25 Similar remarks can be said as for an important study by Anne-Marie de
Brouwer.26 In turn, a recent and comprehensive book chapter by Anne-Marie de
Brouwer and Mikaela Heikkilä, which covers the six international and hybrid criminal courts considered in this thesis (plus the Special Panels for Serious Crimes in East Timor), focuses mainly on victim participation and, more concisely, on reparations for victims but only tangentially deals with protection of victims.27 Concerning victims’ status as witnesses, that study is complemented
to an important extent by a comprehensive book chapter section by Guido Acquaviva and Mikaela Heikkilä in the same recent and outstanding collective work.28
Accordingly, taking into the account the existent literature, which has been inspirational, this thesis contribution is expected to be achieved by examining the victims’ status as witnesses, victim participants/civil parties and reparations claimants at international and hybrid criminal courts in order to reach, as much as possible, accurate and complete answers to the research questions formulated. Moreover, the holistic and integrated study of victims’ status as witnesses, victim participants/civil parties and reparations claimants in
25 Mikaela Heikkilä, International Criminal Tribunals and Victims of Crime (Åbo Akademi University Press 2004).
26 Brouwer (2005).
27 Anne-Marie de Brouwer and Mikaela Heikkilä, ‘Victim Issues: Participation, Protection, Reparation, and Assistance’ in Sluiter et al. (2013) 1299.
28 Guido Acquaviva and Mikaela Heikkilä, ‘Protective and Special Measures for Witnesses’ in Goran Sluiter et al. (2013) 818.
16
six international and hybrid criminal courts distinguishes this study from previous theses/studies, which have mainly focused on one specific dimension of the victims’ status, for example, an important study by Brianne McGonigle Leyh,29 and/or which have only examined one court in particular, for example,
an important study by Eva Dwertmann.30 Thus, unlike the vast majority of
publications in the field which explore one or other dimension of the victims’ status at international and hybrid criminal courts and/or topics related to those dimensions,31 this thesis presents an original (and arguably necessary) integrated
study of those dimensions. At the same time, this thesis seeks to update and largely expand previous works that, to a large or short extent, considered victims’ status as witnesses, victim participants/civil parties and/or reparations claimants.32 With regard to this second group of studies, the originality of the
present study consists in: i) the analysis of the three dimensions constitutive of the victims’ status in an integrated and exhaustive manner, across six international and hybrid criminal courts and under the most up-to-date legal sources; and/or ii) the continuous and analytical use of legal sources from legal areas other than international criminal law, mainly, comparative criminal procedural law and international human rights law.
Second, it is aimed that the analysis made and the conclusions arrived in this thesis be taken into consideration by other researchers, practitioners and policy makers who are in one or another manner involved in victim-related issues at international and hybrid criminal courts. Moreover, due to some general presentation of three national systems in this thesis, some of the analysis made can also be of relevance for individuals and organizations working and/or researching on victim-related issues in criminal proceedings at the national level. This feature also distinguishes the present thesis from other theses/studies that examined issues on victims’ status at international and hybrid criminal courts like in a ‘bubble’ without paying (further) attention to national criminal systems. Furthermore, this thesis can arguably be considered as the first study which, to
29 McGonigle Leyh (2011) (focusing mainly on victims’ status as victim participants/civil parties at the ICC and the ECCC although with some general references to victims’ status as witnesses and reparations claimants). As for aspects relevant to the victims’ status as reparations claimants, see, e.g., Eva Dwertmann, The Reparation System of the International Criminal Court. Its Implementation, Possibilities and Limitations (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 2010).
30 Dwertmann (2010) (examining the ICC as for reparations). In turn, the study by McGonigle Leyh is focused on the ECCC and the ICC although with some general presentation of victims’ status at other international and hybrid criminal courts. See McGonigle Leyh (2011).
31 For detailed references to legal literature, see both the thesis bibliography and the footnotes. 32 See, e.g., Heikkilä (2004); Brouwer (2005) 227-313, 383-424; Brouwer and Heikkilä (2013).
17
some level of detail, tries to set up a bridge and open a dialogue between the victims’ status at international and hybrid criminal courts and victims’ status at national criminal courts.33 This has been to a large extent ignored in previous
theses and studies examining the victims’ status at international and hybrid criminal courts. This effort aims at hopefully encouraging future academic production to deepen such dialogue much further.
Third, this thesis constitutes to date, arguably, the most complete and exhaustive study on victims’ status at international and hybrid criminal courts. It is expected that this feature can be measured not only quantitatively through the length of the thesis but also, and more importantly, qualitatively via the depth of the analysis and argumentation aimed to be presented in each and every of the chapters and sections of this thesis.
33
In a much lower level of detail, some general comparative criminal procedure analysis is present in Brouwer and Heikkilä (2013) 1341-1344 and 1367-1370, and Acquaviva and Heikkilä (2013) 854-855.
18