چکیده:
The principle of precedent is considered one of the traditional rules of the common law system. According to this principle, a common law judge should use previous judicial decisions in similar cases. This principle has been implicitly considered by some tribunals such as the International Criminal Court, but judging the observance of this principle before the issuance of a verdict by this authority seems somewhat difficult. Conversely, in the founding documents and rules related to the procedure of some tribunals such as the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia and Rwanda, without referring to this principle, in practice, in some cases we witness observance and adherence to judicial opinions and precedents. Observing this principle with utmost caution and foresight can serve the unity and integrity of international law. In this article, an attempt is made to examine and analyze the observance of this principle in the light of some international criminal tribunals.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Article 21 of the Statute of the International Criminal Court, entitled Applicable Laws, provides as follows: “1- The Court shall apply: a) In the first place, this Statute, the elements of crimes and the rules of procedure and evidence; b) Secondly, applicable treaties and principles and rules of international law, including principles of international humanitarian law; c) In the absence of such treaty or principle or rule, general principles of law recognized by civilized nations; d) Subject to the provisions of Article 59, judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of various nations, as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law.
The relativity of the decisions of the International Court of Justice requires refraining from applying the rule of precedent, but one of the most important reasons for referring to previous rulings is to achieve judicial continuity and safeguard the integrity of international law.
The relativity of the decisions of the International Court of Justice requires refraining from applying the rule of precedent, but one of the most important reasons for referring to previous rulings is to achieve judicial continuity and safeguard the integrity of international law.
Regarding the horizontal relationship between the trial chambers and the necessity of observing precedent and previous decisions, the trial chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, in its decision in the Kupreski case (%Kupreski), stated: “Decisions should only be regarded as auxiliary tools for determining legal rules and are worthy of being considered as declarations of customary international law” (Kupreski, 2000, para.
(
, 
, 
)
