20,183 research outputs found

    Forensic science expertise for international criminal proceedings: an old problem, a new context and a pragmatic resolution

    Get PDF
    Expert witness testimony provides an important source of information for international criminal proceedings, and forensic science expertise from mass graves is no exception: findings from exhumations and examinations have featured in the ad hoc tribunals’ trials and judgments. Whilst the issues surrounding the law-science relationship have been explored within the realm of national legal systems, the mixed system adopted by these tribunals presents an established discussion with a new context. Using forensic archaeology as an example, this article explores some theoretical underpinnings and practical realities surrounding the use of forensic science during international criminal investigations into mass graves before looking at how Trial Chambers aim to establish the relevance and credibility of forensic science evidence. As little guidance regarding admissibility of expert evidence is provided, it is through the case-specific legal process of cross-examination and presentation of counter-expertise that methodological issues are resolved. This, together with reliance on normative principles, is the pragmatic approach adopted to discern reliability of expert opinion

    Trends in Admissibility of Hearsay Evidence in War Crime Trials: Is Fairness Really Preserved?

    Get PDF
    In the course of war, who determines what is just and fair? Fairness and justice are and should be universal constants; however, the paths to fairness and justice must be malleable and adapt to different circumstances. The Nuremberg trials were marked by a conscious effort to avoid “victor’s justice” and provide a fair trial to the defendants who committed acts of atrocity. This paper examines whether this goal was achieved in the Nuremberg, Tokyo, and International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia trials, as well as briefly touching upon the Guantanamo military commission trials, by looking particularly at the use of hearsay evidence. By placing greater weight on evidentiary criteria such as “relevance,” “probative value,” “reliability,” and “credibility” and developing a more uniform application of these terms rather than promoting a black and white dichotomy of the admissibility of hearsay evidence, judges can better perform the delicate balancing act of justice that takes place amidst the chaos and hostility of war. War is not a normal circumstance and war crimes are not normal crimes as contemplated by national laws. The path to justice requires flexibility and attention to the precarious circumstances surrounding a world emerging from complete upheaval. The general admissibility of hearsay evidence, in itself, does not provide a great threat to the rights of the accused in the course of war crimes trials. Examination of these war crimes trials indicate that, contrary to common law perceptions, it is possible to allow typically inadmissible evidence and still preserve fairness

    Grafting Hypersequents onto Nested Sequents

    Full text link
    We introduce a new Gentzen-style framework of grafted hypersequents that combines the formalism of nested sequents with that of hypersequents. To illustrate the potential of the framework, we present novel calculi for the modal logics K5\mathsf{K5} and KD5\mathsf{KD5}, as well as for extensions of the modal logics K\mathsf{K} and KD\mathsf{KD} with the axiom for shift reflexivity. The latter of these extensions is also known as SDL+\mathsf{SDL}^+ in the context of deontic logic. All our calculi enjoy syntactic cut elimination and can be used in backwards proof search procedures of optimal complexity. The tableaufication of the calculi for K5\mathsf{K5} and KD5\mathsf{KD5} yields simplified prefixed tableau calculi for these logic reminiscent of the simplified tableau system for S5\mathsf{S5}, which might be of independent interest

    Structural completeness in propositional logics of dependence

    Full text link
    In this paper we prove that three of the main propositional logics of dependence (including propositional dependence logic and inquisitive logic), none of which is structural, are structurally complete with respect to a class of substitutions under which the logics are closed. We obtain an analogues result with respect to stable substitutions, for the negative variants of some well-known intermediate logics, which are intermediate theories that are closely related to inquisitive logic

    The exclusion of improperly obtained evidence in Greece: Putting constitutional rights first

    Get PDF
    Copyright @ 2007 Vathek PublishingIn contrast with England and Wales, where there is a discretion to exclude improperly obtained evidence, exclusion in Greece is automatic. Article 177 para. 2 of the Code of Penal Procedure mandates that evidence obtained by the commission of criminal offences is not taken into consideration. In addition, article 19 para. 3 of the Constitution prohibits the use of evidence obtained in violation of the right to privacy. Inspired by the rigidity of these exclusionary rules, the rights-centred approach that they reflect and the context of a constitutional criminal procedure within which they apply, this article sheds light on the protection of constitutional rights as a rationale for the exclusion of improperly obtained evidence. It does so against the background of the reliability-centred exclusionary doctrine in England
    corecore