The International Criminal Court and the Judicial Function: a Socio-Legal Study of Judicial Perceptions and Practices (INCRICO)

Both normative and empirical analyses of what international courts and their judges do and why they do it have attracted a lot of scholarly interest in recent years. INCRICO aims to contribute to this burgeoning literature by enriching our understanding of the International Criminal Court’s practice with insights gained from in-depth, open-ended interviews with ICC judges. Contrary to existing studies of the international courts’ functions, I chose a particular angle from which I would like to study judicial practices and decision-making at the Court – that of individual judges. Indeed, the interviews with international criminal judges are crucial if one wants to better understand what drives the actual practices and rulings at the Court and how the preconceived perceptions of the judicial function by the judges affect their work. To contribute a new, in-depth analysis of the ways in which ICC judges construe the judicial function (whether more narrowly as consisting of deciding particular cases without pursuing any grand design or rather as involving more broader tasks by giving meaning to the public values of the given community), this project builds on semi-structured qualitative interviews on the understanding of the content and scope of the judicial function by key actors at the Court – the judges themselves. Specifically, the interviews seek to unravel two important and inter-related questions of the complex nature of the judicial function in the context of the Court that have remained unsolved in the pertinent literature: first, how individual ICC judges conceive the idea of judicial function within the Court’s legal system and, more generally, within the international legal order; and second, how and to what extent do such their conceptions and the resultant practices/decisions of the Court correspond with mainstream theoretical understanding of the international courts’ manifold roles and functions.

INCRICO pursues two main objectives. The first is analytical and aims at better understanding of reality at the ICC by exploring the main rationale for the actual judicial decisions and practices. Concretely, it seeks to explain nuances and differences between judicial conceptions and theoretical explanations of the ‘international judicial function’ as applicable to international criminal courts. Second, the project attempts to provide a more solid basis for interpretative choices, especially with regard to the Court’s procedural law. As such, it can present a clear and viable vision of what it is that ICC judges do and how they do it. More precisely, it tests the international judges’ actual conceptions against the theoretical background of more abstract scholarly approaches to the international courts’ functions. The project’s specific objectives are to: (1) gather, analyse and collate international legal data and sources relevant for determining the content, scope, nature and practice of the Court’s judicial function, as well as the relevant body of the Court’s case law/jurisprudence/applicable law, including dissenting and individual/separate opinions; (2) gather (through in-depth interviews with ICC judges) and analyse qualitative data on the judges’ perceptions and understanding of their judicial function, in terms of what and how the judges really think, and what they are doing and why, so as to identify the judges’ view and experience at the ICC and how this correlated to the case law of the Court; (3) integrate legal assessment of dissents/case law/jurisprudence of the ICC with the judges’ accounts to map out and critically analyse the Court’s judicial function; (4) increase awareness and knowledge of the Court’s judicial function among relevant scientific and criminal justice management/policy making communities, and the general public.

The conference "How Personal Characteristics of International Judges Affect Their Rulings: Socio-Legal Perspectives" will examine the impact of international judges’ personal characteristics on their decision-making and reasoning. The contributions will reflect on the ways that personal backgrounds of international judges: gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religious belief, and age shape their judgments. Papers will apply doctrinal, sociological, and political science perspectives on this problem. They will use empirical methods, focusing on a specific international court or comparing several international courts. The conference will be held at iCourts - The Danish National Research Foundation's Centre of Excellence for International Courts. It will bring together members of the iCourts team and top researchers from abroad. The conference is expected to lead to a symposium issue in a peer-reviewed law journal. This one-day event will be announced here and on Faculty calendar.