Self-Representation Versus Assignment of Defence Counsel Before International Criminal Tribunals

Posted: 29 Feb 2008

See all articles by Michael P. Scharf

Michael P. Scharf

Case Western Reserve University School of Law

Multiple version iconThere are 2 versions of this paper

Abstract

After examining the drafting history of Article 14 of the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which lays down a defendant's right 'to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing' - the relevant national and international case law and scholarly commentary - the author argues that the underlying purpose of the right at issue is to ensure a fair trial. This objective can best be met in cases of former leaders accused of international crimes by assigning the defendant a highly qualified attorney who is vigilantly committed to representing his client's interests. In his view, there are two main reasons why a court in international crimes trial should be able to require the defendant to work through counsel: (1) the likelihood that a defendant will act in a disruptive manner; and (2) the unique need in a complex international crimes case for an orderly trial.

Keywords: Behçet, Corticosteroids, Erythema nodosum, Genital ulcer, Therapy

Suggested Citation

Scharf, Michael P., Self-Representation Versus Assignment of Defence Counsel Before International Criminal Tribunals. Journal of International Criminal Justice, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 31-46, 2006, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=915767

Michael P. Scharf (Contact Author)

Case Western Reserve University School of Law ( email )

Case Western Reserve University, School of Law
11075 East Boulevard
Cleveland, OH 44106-7148
United States
216-368-3299 (Phone)
216-368-2086 (Fax)

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
573
PlumX Metrics