• 검색어에 아래의 연산자를 사용하시면 더 정확한 검색결과를 얻을 수 있습니다.
  • 검색연산자
검색연산자 기능 검색시 예
() 우선순위가 가장 높은 연산자 예1) (나노 (기계 | machine))
공백 두 개의 검색어(식)을 모두 포함하고 있는 문서 검색 예1) (나노 기계)
예2) 나노 장영실
| 두 개의 검색어(식) 중 하나 이상 포함하고 있는 문서 검색 예1) (줄기세포 | 면역)
예2) 줄기세포 | 장영실
! NOT 이후에 있는 검색어가 포함된 문서는 제외 예1) (황금 !백금)
예2) !image
* 검색어의 *란에 0개 이상의 임의의 문자가 포함된 문서 검색 예) semi*
"" 따옴표 내의 구문과 완전히 일치하는 문서만 검색 예) "Transform and Quantization"
쳇봇 이모티콘
ScienceON 챗봇입니다.
궁금한 것은 저에게 물어봐주세요.

논문 상세정보

국제인권기준과 국제형사재판에 있어서의 궐석재판의 허용과 한계

International Human Rights and Trials in absentia in International Criminal Proceedings: its scope and limitation

법학논총 v.23 , 2010년, pp.403 - 427  

In the present, several international and internationalized international criminal tribunals and courts are working in the international community to punish the perpetrators who committed international crimes: war crimes, crimes against humanity, and crime of genocide. Due to such current practices, it may be said that the contemporary international community is in “the renaissance of international criminal law and justice”. However, it is comparably difficult for international criminal tribunals and courts to bring perpetrators to a court room, because there is no world police, world government or any kinds of supra-national public power to enforce an indictment or a summon issued by an international criminal tribunal. This feature is quite different with that in national criminal justice systems. Furthermore, some of the accused intentionally resist attending international criminal proceedings to deny the legitimacy of international criminal justice.In principle, a majority of law scholars and experts on international criminal law agree the principle that trial in absentia should not be allowed during international criminal proceedings to protect and assure the rights of the accused. At the same time, due to the different situations in international criminal justice as referred to above, some of scholars argue that trial in absentia should be allowed in exceptional situations. However, concerning its scope and limitation of trial in absentia in international criminal proceedings, the opinions and attitudes of law scholars and international criminal tribunals are diverse.In this context, this article dealt with international human rights law standards on trial in absentia in criminal justice with regarding the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and the Human Rights Committee of the United Nations, and reviewed the jurisprudence of main international criminal tribunals and courts in the international community: the International Criminal Court (the ICC), the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (the ICTY), the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (the ICTR) and the Special Tribunal for Lebanon.By dealing with the jurisprudence of such international criminal tribunals and international human rights institutions in a comparative manner, this article tried to give the answers to the following questions. “What is international human rights law standard on trial in absentia in criminal justice?”, “What are the attitudes of international criminal tribunals and courts on trial in absentia, and its scope and limitation?”, “Is it possible to draw out common trends or practices in various international criminal tribunals and courts in international community, and if possible, what is it?” And “What are the good things and the bad things of trial inabsentiaininternationalcriminaljustice?”.

참고문헌 (0)

  1. 이 논문의 참고문헌 없음

이 논문을 인용한 문헌 (0)

  1. 이 논문을 인용한 문헌 없음


원문 PDF 다운로드

  • KCI :

원문 URL 링크

  • 원문 URL 링크 정보가 존재하지 않습니다.
상세조회 0건 원문조회 0건

DOI 인용 스타일