The ideology of collegiality in international criminal justice practice

One of the two key issues that were put on the agenda of the third annual judicial seminar of the International Criminal Court on 23 January 2020 was the question of the expression of dissenting views by the judges of the International Criminal Court. Traditionally, scholarly discussions on the issue of expressing dissenting opinions have focused on their perceived impact on the authority of judgments and decisions of international tribunals, and even on the authority of these institutions themselves. The article considers the optimal ideological basis for decisionmaking by a panel of judges in international criminal justice bodies. In particular, it analyzes: the history of the normative reflection of the idea of collegiality in normative acts regulating the activities of international criminal justice bodies, the main doctrinal approaches to the ideas of an individual and collegial approach in decision-making, the practice of expressing dissenting opinions when considering cases by these bodies. The authors' position comes down to considering the ideology of collegiality as a basic process that determines the most effective way of forming a unanimous opinion by a panel of judges. In this regard, emphasis is placed on the link between the objectives of the International Criminal Court and the approach to expressing a dissenting opinion. Judicial collegiality implies that judges have a common interest in the correct presentation of facts and interpretation of the law, and therefore they must be willing to interact and listen to each other, mutually convincing and being convinced by their colleagues. The legal phenomenon under consideration is analyzed through an understanding of the differences in the personal composition of judges of international criminal justice bodies, which is consistent with the idea of freedom of expression, provided for in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The conclusion generalizes that the transformation should take place in the direction of strengthening the ideology of collegiality in the adoption of a judicial decision, including at the level of appeal against a judicial decision, which is due to the achievement of the common goals of international cooperation in the field of criminal justice: preserving peace, fixing historical conclusions. The aim of this work is a systematic analysis of collegiality in the practice of international criminal justice bodies, the mechanism of its application, the impact on decision-making and the specifics of normative consolidation. The identification and substantiation of such proposals provides for the novelty of the research. The materials and results of the study can be used as a theoretical basis for further scientific development of topics related to the development of legal regulation of the procedure for making decisions by a collegium of judges both at the international level and at the national level.

Keywords

Authors

References