Fact Finding Without Facts

Fact-Finding Without Facts explores international criminal fact-finding - empirically, conceptually, and normatively. After reviewing thousands of pages of transcripts from various international criminal tribunals, the author reveals that international criminal trials are beset by numerous and severe fact-finding impediments that substantially impair the tribunals' ability to determine who did what to whom. These fact-finding impediments have heretofore received virtually no publicity, let alone scholarly treatment, and they are deeply troubling not only because they raise grave concerns about the accuracy of the judgments currently being issued but because they can be expected to similarly impair the next generation of international trials that will be held at the International Criminal Court. After setting forth her empirical findings, the author considers their conceptual and normative implications. The author concludes that international criminal tribunals purport a fact-finding competence that they do not possess and, as a consequence, base their judgments on a less precise, more amorphous method of fact-finding than they publicly acknowledge.

This work offers a multidisciplinary approach to the study of fact-finding, including rigorous and critical analysis of the field of practice, as well as providing a range of accounts of what actually happens. It deepens the study and practice of human rights investigations, and fosters fact-finding as a discretely studied topic, while mapping crucial transformations in the field.

Fact-Finding before the International Court of Justice examines a number of significant recent criticisms of the way in which the ICJ deals with facts. The book takes the position that such criticisms are warranted and that the ICJ's current approach to fact-finding falls short of adequacy, both in cases involving abundant, particularly complex or technical facts, and in those involving a scarcity of facts. The author skilfully examines how other courts such as the WTO and inter-State arbitrations conduct fact-finding and makes a number of select proposals for reform, enabling the ICJ to address some of the current weaknesses in its approach. The proposals include, but are not limited to, the development of a power to compel the disclosure of information, greater use of provisional measures, and a clear strategy for the use of expert evidence.

This book examines how a World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute settlement panel formulates its conclusions with respect to the facts of a dispute brought before it. It does so by discussing the legal concepts which shape the process of fact-finding, analysing the approach taken by panels thus far and offering suggestions for improvement.

This book presents an in-depth discussion on two concepts from the field of philosophy and law, in order to improve our understanding of the relation between “fact” and “evidence” in judicial process. Since fact-finding is a difficult task for judges, proof by evidence has been devised to help them access the truth. However, in the process of judicial fact-finding, there is always a gap between fact and truth. This book covers a wide range of topics, from reflections on the concept of “fact,” “evidence” and “fact-finding” in the field of philosophy and law to individual case studies. As such it is a useful reference resource on the continuing research on the judicial proof process for students and scholars.

This book discusses how fact-finding mechanisms for alleged violations of international human rights, humanitarian and criminal law can be improved. There has been a significant increase in the use of international(ised) and domestic fact-finding mechanisms since 1992, including by the United Nations human rights system, international commissions of inquiry, truth and reconciliation commissions, and NGO fact-finding. They are analysed and assessed in detail by 22 authors under the common theme 'Quality Control in Fact-Finding'. The authors include Richard J. Goldstone, Martin Scheinin, LIU Daqun, Charles Garraway, David Re, Simon De Smet, FAN Yuwen, Isabelle Lassée, WU Xiaodan, Dan Saxon, Christopher B. Mahony, Dov Jacobs, Catherine Harwood, Lyal S. Sunga, Wolfgang Kaleck, Carolijn Terwindt, Ilia Utmelidze and Marina Aksenova. This Second Edition includes new chapters by Geoffrey Robertson QC, Emma Irving and William H. Wiley, as well as a new foreword by Mads Andenæs. The book considers how the quality of every functional aspect of fact-finding can be improved, including work processes to identify, locate, obtain, verify, analyse, corroborate, summarise, synthesise, structure, organise, present and disseminate facts. Emphasis is placed on the nourishment of an individual mindset and institutional culture of quality control. This book concerns fact-work outside criminal justice systems. It is supplemented by Quality Control in Preliminary Examination: Volumes 1 and 2 and Quality Control in Criminal Investigation in the same Series.

In civil cases, the facts of the case are often decisive. This book provides a comparative analysis of the process of fact-finding in the litigation process. It offers theoretical insights on the distinctive features of the fact-finding arrangements in civil cases in Austria, the Netherlands, and the United States. It also examines the empirical data that sheds light on the operation of procedural rules in legal practice. The book studies specific fact-finding regulations as components of an entire system and places them in a broader context. It analyzes the history of fact-finding arrangements to elucidate the legal tradition that has shaped the mindset of practitioners and legislators. In addition, the relationship between procedural rules and the prevailing constitutional and political theory is discussed. Rules are commonly designed and adopted to promote procedural values, such as efficiency, legitimacy, accuracy, and fairness. Fact-Finding in Civil Litigation discusses the values