{"id":260,"date":"2014-02-18T09:30:59","date_gmt":"2014-02-18T08:30:59","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/?p=260"},"modified":"2016-05-18T15:02:46","modified_gmt":"2016-05-18T19:02:46","slug":"installment2-judicial-ethics","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/2014\/02\/18\/installment2-judicial-ethics\/","title":{"rendered":"Second Installment: JUDICIAL ETHICS IN THE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS"},"content":{"rendered":"

This is the second installment in a series of posts drawn from a 24 January 2014 lecture on Judicial Ethics at the ADC-ICTY\u2019s Twelfth Defence Symposium for interns and staff at the ICTY.\u00a0 The complete document is available on my website.<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u2666\u00a0\u00a0 \u2666\u00a0\u00a0 \u2666 \u00a0 \u2666<\/span><\/p>\n

With the stage set, it was time to dissect the Harhoff matter<\/i>.\u00a0 Judge Harhoff\u2019s folly<\/i>, due to what I would later refer to as the Harhoff syndrome <\/i>is a treasure trove for a lecture on judicial ethics \u2013 the perfect point of departure for discussing the Furund\u017eija<\/i> \u201creasonable apprehension of bias\u201d test.<\/p>\n

The Harhoff Syndrome\u00a0<\/i> <\/i><\/strong><\/b><\/p>\n

\"SONY<\/a>Judge Frederik Harhoff, in a letter to fifty-six personal contacts[1]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a> that was apparently leaked to the press, expressed some of his innermost thoughts, which, even when viewed in the light most favorable to him, demonstrate his inability (or perhaps his unwillingness) to adhere to the universally recognized fair trial right to the presumption of innocence, with the burden being with the prosecution.[2]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a>\u00a0 Judge Harhoff\u2019s sentiments are quite frequently shared (though not revealed \u2013 at least not on paper or in transparent gatherings) by many human rights\/humanitarian advocates appointed as international judges, who, although possessing impressive credentials, lack necessary practical experience, and, more worrisome, are challenged when it comes to rigorously applying the most fundamental precepts of fair-trial rights: the presumption of innocence afforded to the accused and burden of proof resting on the prosecution. \u00a0Judge Harhoff assuredly understands as a theoretical construct the presumption of innocence.\u00a0 But when it came to applying it, his predilection for victim-based justice<\/i> and unwillingness to conform to the standards of justice led him to take the position that an accused (at least if a high military officer) must, ineluctably, be deemed guilty as charged, unless proved otherwise. \u00a0A classic case of inappropriate burden-shifting.\u00a0 This, in my opinion, is the Harhoff syndrome <\/i>in its purest form.\u00a0 Judges at the international tribunals who suffer from this affliction\u2014and there are a few\u2014are generally discreet, frustrating a defence counsel\u2019s ability to establish the objective prong of Furund\u017eija <\/i>when <\/i>the need to disqualify is seemingly palpable.<\/p>\n

To demonstrate the Harhoff syndrome<\/i>, <\/i>I examined some of the musings of Judge Harhoff\u2019s tortured soul in meeting his<\/i> perceived mission as an international judge; words which proved to be the tripwire for the Chamber finding him biased and thus unfit to continue with the deliberations in the \u0160e\u0161elj<\/i> case;[3]<\/a> words such as \u00a0\u201cpresuming it was right to convict leaders for the crimes committed with their knowledge,\u201d because it was a \u201cset practice,\u201d and of his \u201cprofessional and moral dilemma,\u201d in having to apply faithfully the jurisprudence as it was emerging from the ICTY which he obviously found abhorrent and contrary to his<\/i> view of what the law is or should be.\u00a0 These were the words latched onto by the \u0160e\u0161elj Defence in showing an unreasonable appearance of bias.[4]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

The Chamber convened by the Vice-President explicitly noted how Judge Harhoff\u2019s comments met the criteria for disqualification for lack of impartiality:<\/p>\n

The Majority, Judge Liu dissenting, considers that the Letter differs from other public statements in that Judge Harhoff refers to what he perceives as a \u2018set practice\u2019 of convicting military commanders and makes clear his dissatisfaction with his perceived change in the Tribunal\u2019s direction in this regard. With regard to Judge Harhoff\u2019s reference to military commanders, the Chamber notes that the accused is charged with participating in a JCE by inter alia <\/i>directing paramilitary forces including a group known as \u2018\u0160e\u0161elj\u2019s men\u2019.<\/p>\n

By referring to a \u2018set practice\u2019 of convicting accused persons without reference to an evaluation of the evidence in each individual case, the Majority, Judge Liu dissenting, considers that there are grounds for concluding that a reasonable observer, properly informed, would reasonably apprehend bias on the part of Judge Harhoff in favour of conviction. This includes for the purposes of the present case. This appearance of bias is further compounded by Judge Harhoff\u2019s statement that he is confronted by a professional and moral dilemma, which in the view of the Majority, is a clear reference to his difficulty in applying the current jurisprudence of the Tribunal.[5]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Judge Harhoff, with his \u201cdeep professional and moral dilemma,\u201d clearly believed that it was his professional duty to convict\u2014particularly Serb and Croat accused. His quasi-public accusations show his dissatisfaction with the ICTY\u2019s jurisprudence and practice, which demonstrates a reluctance to apply the law. \u00a0Judge Harhoff also engages in speculation\u2014the American and Israeli governments certainly have something to do with shielding military commanders from responsibility\u2014right? \u00a0While we may never know whether Judge Harhoff\u2019s accusations are true, he certainly did not go through the proper channels to discuss such a dilemma. \u00a0Judge Harhoff did not contact the Tribunal\u2019s President on this issue, consult the Plenary, or even write a dissenting opinion. \u00a0Additionally, as Security Council Resolution 837 created the ICTY, Judge Harhoff could have taken his complaint to the members of the Security Council (although reports submitted to the Security Council are funneled through the Presidency).[6]<\/a> \u00a0In any event, there were a number of available, more appropriate means for Judge Harhoff to discuss his \u201cprofessional and moral dilemma.\u201d \u00a0If Judge Harhoff was so tortured by the specific direction requirement (subsequently reversed by the \u0160ainovi\u0107 <\/i>Appeal Chamber),[7]<\/a> why did he not dissent to the Trial Chamber\u2019s (Judge Harhoff sitting) adoption of specific direction in the Stani\u0161i\u0107 and \u017dupljanin<\/i> judgment?[8]<\/a><\/p>\n

Judge Harhoff also made serious allegations against Judge Meron \u2013 revealingly referred to by Judge Haroff as \u201cthe American presiding judge\u201d[9]<\/a> \u2013 effectively challenging his independence by claiming that he was influenced by or doing the bidding for the governments of the US and Israel.\u00a0 Judge Harhoff queried:<\/p>\n

You would think that the military establishment in leading states (such as USA and Israel) felt that the courts in practice were getting too close to the military commanders\u2019 responsibilities. One hoped that the commanders would not be held responsible unless they had actively encouraged their subordinate forces to commit crimes. In other words: The court was heading too far in the direction of commanding officers being held responsible for every crime their subordinates committed. Thus their intention to commit crime had to be specifically proven.<\/p>\n

Now apparently the commanders must have had a direct intention to commit crimes\u2014and not just knowledge or suspicion that the crimes were or would be committed. Well, that begs the question of how this military logic pressures the international criminal justice system? Have any American or Israeli officials ever exerted pressure on the American presiding judge (the presiding judge for the court that is) to ensure a change of direction?\u00a0\u00a0 We will probably never know. But reports of the same American presiding judge\u2019s tenacious pressure on his colleagues in the Gotovina – Perisic case makes you think he was determined to achieve an acquittal – and especially that he was lucky enough to convince the elderly Turkish judge to change his mind at the last minute. Both judgements then became majority judgements 3 -2.[10]<\/a><\/p>\n

Upset about the acquittal of Gotovina and other accused, Judge Harfoff stated that:<\/p>\n

[T]he court\u2019s Appeal Chamber suddenly back-tracked last autumn with the three Croatian generals and ministers in the Gotovina case. They were acquitted for the Croatian army\u2019s war crimes while driving out Serbian forces and the Serbian people from major areas in Croatia\u2014the so-called Krajina area in August 1995\u2026[11]<\/a><\/p>\n

Judge Harhoff also accused Judge Orie, a Dutch judge, of taking directions from the American Government:<\/p>\n

Was Orie under pressure from the American presiding judge? It appears so! Rumour from the corridors has it that the presiding judge demanded that the judgement against the two defendants absolutely had to be delivered last Thursday\u2014without the three judges in the premium authority having had time to discuss the defence properly\u2014so that the presiding judge’s promise to the FN\u2019s security service could be met. The French judge only had 4 days to write the dissent, which was not even discussed between the three judges in the department. A rush job. I would not have believed it of Orie.<\/p>\n

Judge Harhoff, insinuated that \u201cthe Turkish Judge,\u201d Ju\u00ad\u00ad\u00addge Mehmet G\u00fcney, lacked independence since he was elderly and easily manipulated:<\/p>\n

But reports of the same American presiding judge\u2019s tenacious pressure on his colleagues in the Gotovina – Perisic case makes you think he was determined to achieve an acquittal – and especially that he was lucky enough to convince the elderly Turkish judge to change his mind at the last minute…[12]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Examining Judge Harhoff\u2019s assertions about Judge G\u00fcney\u2019s in a different context begs the question whether \u2014 at least in Judge Harhoff\u2019s mind \u2014 Judge G\u00fcney is currently fit to serve as a judge at the ICTY.\u00a0 If Judge G\u00fcney, the \u201celderly Turkish Judge,\u201d is too old and easily manipulated by his peers, does this not affect his impartiality and independence? \u00a0If he is so easily lead or mislead by other judges, applying the Furund\u017eija <\/i>standard, would a reasonable observer apprehend bias? \u00a0Perhaps so. \u00a0Curiously, Judge Harhoff was silent on this point.\u00a0 So much for his deep and abiding reverence for judicial independence and impartiality.\u00a0 But when you dissect his assertions and insinuations, it becomes rather obvious that Judge Harhoff simply lacks the basic understanding of the deliberative process: judges lobby other judges with a fair amount of horse-trading when deciding issues of the finer points of the law.[13]<\/a>\u00a0 And since much of what is applied is customary international law, the contours as elusive as they are malleable.<\/p>\n

Judge Harhoff\u2019s assertions go to the credibility of the Tribunal, arguably bringing it into disrepute. Under the ICTY Statute, the Chambers shall be composed of a maximum of sixteen permanent independent<\/i> judges.[14]<\/a> \u00a0While the ICTY Statute and Rules of Procedure and Evidence do not specifically detail what is meant by the independence of judges, the general rule has been adopted by the ECCC: judges \u201cshall be independent in the performance of their functions and shall not accept or seek instructions from any government or any other source.\u201d[15]<\/a> \u00a0Judge Harhoff asserts a level of control over Judge Meron by the American and Israeli Governments, implicitly accusing Judge Meron, the President of the ICTY, of lacking of independence.\u00a0 This is a damning accusation, which, if true (and Judge Harhoff provides no evidence other than speculative musings), sullies the reputation and legacy of the ICTY.\u00a0 Although there is no code of ethics for judges at the ICTY as there is for the judges at the ICC or ECCC[16]<\/a> (curiously strange as it seems), Judge Harhoff\u2019s behavior amounts to sanctionable offense. \u00a0Under the ICC Code of Ethics, \u201c[w]hile judges are free to participate in public debate on matters pertaining to legal subjects, the judiciary or the administration of justice, they shall not comment on pending cases and shall avoid expressing views which may undermine the standing and integrity of the Court.\u201d[17]<\/a>\u00a0 Defence counsel at the ICTY are bound by a similar rule: \u201ccounsel shall take all necessary steps to ensure that their actions do not bring proceedings before the Tribunal into disrepute.\u201d[18]<\/a> \u00a0By analogy, it would be sound to say that judges at the ICTY are equally bound.\u00a0 There is no cogent reason to argue otherwise.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u2666\u00a0\u00a0 \u2666\u00a0\u00a0 \u2666 \u00a0 \u2666<\/span><\/p>\n

Next up:\u00a0 The Sow dilemma: what can and should a judge do when \u2014 rightly or wrongly \u2014 he or she is confronted with a perceived act of injustice in the making by fellow judges in a case in which he or she is sitting?<\/a><\/strong>
\n<\/em><\/p>\n


<\/p>\n
\n
\n

[1]<\/a> ICTY Judge Frederik Harhoff\u2019s Email to 56 contacts, 6 June 2013, available at <\/i>http:\/\/www.bt.dk\/sites\/default\/files-dk\/node-files\/511\/6\/6511917-letter-english.pdf.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[2]<\/a> See <\/i>International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Dec. 16, 1966, S. Treaty Doc. No. 95\u201320, 6 I.L.M. 368 (1967), 999 U.N.T.S. 171 (\u201cICCPR\u201d), Article 14; Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, as amended 7 July 2009 by Resolution 1877,\u00a0Article 21 (\u201cICTY Statute\u201d); The Law on the Establishment of the Extraordinary Chambers as amended 27 October 2004 (\u201cECCC Law\u201d), Articles 33 (new) and 35 (new); Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as corrected by the proc\u00e9s-verbaux of 16 January 2002,\u00a0Article 66; Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, adopted 8 November 1994,\u00a0Article 20; Statute of the Special Court of Sierra Leone (“SCSL Statute”), adopted 15 August 2000,\u00a0Article 17.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[3]<\/a> This of course caused other problems briefly commented on, such as how is it possible to claim that \u0160e\u0161elj received a fair trial if the judge replacing Judge Harhoff never participated in any of the courtroom proceedings. Additionally, there is the issue of all the split decisions made during the proceedings where Judge Harhoff was in the majority. It is doubtful if this sort of flexibility in the pursuit of justice would be countenanced in national courts with vibrant judicial institutions and an abiding appreciation for the strict application of the rule of law.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[4]<\/a> Prosecutor v. \u0160e\u0161elj<\/i>, IT-03-67-T, Disqualification of Judge Frederik Harhoff and Report to the Vice-President, 28 August 2013.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[5]<\/a> Id.<\/i>, <\/i>paras. 12-13.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[6]<\/a> United Nations Security Council, Resolution 827 S\/RES\/827, 25 May 1993, Statute of the ICTY,\u00a0Article 34.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[7]<\/a> Prosecutor v. \u0160ainovi\u0107<\/i> et al<\/i>., IT-05-87-A, Appeal Judgment, 23 January 2014, paras. 1649\u201350. The \u0160ainovi\u0107<\/i> Appeals Chamber criticized the Peri\u0161i\u0107<\/i> Appeals Chamber for misreading prior jurisprudence on specific intent and failing to give primary consideration to \u201cpositions expressly taken and clearly set out in the judgement concerned.\u201d Id.<\/i>, para. 1621. Judge Harhoff could have legitimately made similar criticism of the Peri\u0161i\u0107<\/i> Appeals Chamber, rather than instead assuming that the Judges involved were lacking in independence.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[8]<\/a> See Prosecutor v. Stani\u0161i\u0107 & \u017dupljanin<\/i>, IT-08-91-T, Judgement, 27 March 2013, para. 107.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[9]<\/a> ICTY Judge Frederik Harhoff\u2019s Email to 56 contacts, 6 June 2013, available at <\/i>http:\/\/www.bt.dk\/sites\/default\/files-dk\/node-files\/511\/6\/6511917-letter-english.pdf.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[10]<\/a> Id.<\/i><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[11]<\/a> Id.<\/i><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[12]<\/a> Id.<\/i><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[13]<\/a> Maybe newly appointed judges who do not come from a judicial background should be required to read The Brethren: Inside the Supreme Court by Bob Woodward and Scott Armstrong.\u00a0 For extra credit, they could also read The Nine: Inside the Secret World of the Supreme Court, a fascinating read on the intricacies of judicial deliberations.\u00a0 But then again, any good biography on any justice from the US Supreme Court, particularly on Justice Brennan, reveals how stare decisis <\/i>is adhered to, developed, and refined through a variety of means such as lobbying, negotiating, and nuancing legal positions. See<\/i> Bob Woodward & Scott Armstrong, The Brethren: Inside the Supreme Court<\/em> (1979); Jeffrey Toobin, The Nine: Inside the Secret World of the Supreme Court<\/em> (2007).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[14]<\/a> ICTY Statute,\u00a0Article 12.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[15]<\/a> Agreement between the United Nations and the Royal Government of Cambodia concerning the prosecution under Cambodian law of crimes committed during the period of Democratic Kampuchea, Phnom Penh, 6 June 2003,\u00a0Article 3.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[16]<\/a> ECCC Code of Judicial Ethics, 5 Sept. 2008, Art. 7: \u201cWhile judges are free to participate in public debate on matters pertaining to legal subjects, the judiciary or the administration of justice, they shall not comment on pending cases and\u00a0 shall avoid expressing views which may undermine the standing and integrity of the ECCC.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[17]<\/a> ICC Code of Judicial Ethics, ICC-BD-02-01-05,\u00a0Article 9.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

[18]<\/a> Code of Professional Conduct for Counsel Appearing before the International Tribunal (ICTY), IT\/125 Rev. 3, as amended 22 July 2009,Article 3(V).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This is the second installment in a series of posts drawn from a 24 January 2014 lecture on Judicial Ethics at the ADC-ICTY\u2019s Twelfth Defence Symposium for interns and staff at the ICTY.\u00a0 The complete document is available on my website. \u00a0\u2666\u00a0\u00a0 \u2666\u00a0\u00a0 \u2666 \u00a0 \u2666 With the stage set, it was time to dissect … Continue reading “Second Installment: JUDICIAL ETHICS IN THE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[22,18,19,21,11,1],"tags":[13,6,4,7,3,20],"class_list":["post-260","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-eccc","category-icc","category-icty","category-international-criminal-law","category-training","category-uncategorized","tag-adc","tag-eccc","tag-icc","tag-international-criminal-law","tag-karnavas","tag-training"],"yoast_head":"\nSecond Installment: JUDICIAL ETHICS IN THE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS - michaelgkarnavas.net\/Blog<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/2014\/02\/18\/installment2-judicial-ethics\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Second Installment: JUDICIAL ETHICS IN THE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS - michaelgkarnavas.net\/Blog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"This is the second installment in a series of posts drawn from a 24 January 2014 lecture on Judicial Ethics at the ADC-ICTY\u2019s Twelfth Defence Symposium for interns and staff at the ICTY.\u00a0 The complete document is available on my website. \u00a0\u2666\u00a0\u00a0 \u2666\u00a0\u00a0 \u2666 \u00a0 \u2666 With the stage set, it was time to dissect … Continue reading "Second Installment: JUDICIAL ETHICS IN THE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS"\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/2014\/02\/18\/installment2-judicial-ethics\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"michaelgkarnavas.net\/Blog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2014-02-18T08:30:59+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-05-18T19:02:46+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"http:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/02\/writing-a-letter--300x199.jpg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Michael G. Karnavas\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@https:\/\/twitter.com\/mgkarnavas\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@mgkarnavas\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Michael G. Karnavas\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/2014\\\/02\\\/18\\\/installment2-judicial-ethics\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/2014\\\/02\\\/18\\\/installment2-judicial-ethics\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Michael G. Karnavas\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/d03dcdb5c7e0e85117fb75cfb7b98c79\"},\"headline\":\"Second Installment: JUDICIAL ETHICS IN THE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS\",\"datePublished\":\"2014-02-18T08:30:59+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-18T19:02:46+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/2014\\\/02\\\/18\\\/installment2-judicial-ethics\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":2530,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/d03dcdb5c7e0e85117fb75cfb7b98c79\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/2014\\\/02\\\/18\\\/installment2-judicial-ethics\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"http:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2014\\\/02\\\/writing-a-letter--300x199.jpg\",\"keywords\":[\"ADC\",\"ECCC\",\"ICC\",\"International Criminal Law\",\"Karnavas\",\"Training\"],\"articleSection\":[\"ECCC\",\"ICC\",\"ICTY\",\"International Criminal Law\",\"Training\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/2014\\\/02\\\/18\\\/installment2-judicial-ethics\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/2014\\\/02\\\/18\\\/installment2-judicial-ethics\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/2014\\\/02\\\/18\\\/installment2-judicial-ethics\\\/\",\"name\":\"Second Installment: JUDICIAL ETHICS IN THE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS - michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/Blog\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/2014\\\/02\\\/18\\\/installment2-judicial-ethics\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/2014\\\/02\\\/18\\\/installment2-judicial-ethics\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"http:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2014\\\/02\\\/writing-a-letter--300x199.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2014-02-18T08:30:59+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-18T19:02:46+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/2014\\\/02\\\/18\\\/installment2-judicial-ethics\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/2014\\\/02\\\/18\\\/installment2-judicial-ethics\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/2014\\\/02\\\/18\\\/installment2-judicial-ethics\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"http:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2014\\\/02\\\/writing-a-letter--300x199.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"http:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2014\\\/02\\\/writing-a-letter--300x199.jpg\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/2014\\\/02\\\/18\\\/installment2-judicial-ethics\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Second Installment: JUDICIAL ETHICS IN THE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"Michael G. Karnavas Blog\",\"description\":\"International Criminal Law Blog\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/d03dcdb5c7e0e85117fb75cfb7b98c79\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":[\"Person\",\"Organization\"],\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/d03dcdb5c7e0e85117fb75cfb7b98c79\",\"name\":\"Michael G. Karnavas\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/02\\\/MGKarnavasCt.jpg?fit=365%2C365&ssl=1\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/02\\\/MGKarnavasCt.jpg?fit=365%2C365&ssl=1\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/02\\\/MGKarnavasCt.jpg?fit=365%2C365&ssl=1\",\"width\":365,\"height\":365,\"caption\":\"Michael G. Karnavas\"},\"logo\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/02\\\/MGKarnavasCt.jpg?fit=365%2C365&ssl=1\"},\"description\":\"Michael G. Karnavas is an American trained lawyer. He is licensed in Alaska and Massachusetts and is qualified to appear before the various International tribunals, including the International Criminal Court (ICC). Residing and practicing primarily in The Hague, he is recognized as an expert in international criminal defence, including pre-trial, trial, and appellate advocacy.\",\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.linkedin.com\\\/in\\\/michael-g-karnavas-97494a75\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/https:\\\/\\\/twitter.com\\\/mgkarnavas\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/michaelgkarnavas.net\\\/blog\\\/author\\\/michael-g-karnavas\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Second Installment: JUDICIAL ETHICS IN THE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS - michaelgkarnavas.net\/Blog","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/2014\/02\/18\/installment2-judicial-ethics\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Second Installment: JUDICIAL ETHICS IN THE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS - michaelgkarnavas.net\/Blog","og_description":"This is the second installment in a series of posts drawn from a 24 January 2014 lecture on Judicial Ethics at the ADC-ICTY\u2019s Twelfth Defence Symposium for interns and staff at the ICTY.\u00a0 The complete document is available on my website. \u00a0\u2666\u00a0\u00a0 \u2666\u00a0\u00a0 \u2666 \u00a0 \u2666 With the stage set, it was time to dissect … Continue reading \"Second Installment: JUDICIAL ETHICS IN THE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS\"","og_url":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/2014\/02\/18\/installment2-judicial-ethics\/","og_site_name":"michaelgkarnavas.net\/Blog","article_published_time":"2014-02-18T08:30:59+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-05-18T19:02:46+00:00","og_image":[{"url":"http:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/02\/writing-a-letter--300x199.jpg","type":"","width":"","height":""}],"author":"Michael G. Karnavas","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@https:\/\/twitter.com\/mgkarnavas","twitter_site":"@mgkarnavas","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Michael G. Karnavas","Est. reading time":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/2014\/02\/18\/installment2-judicial-ethics\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/2014\/02\/18\/installment2-judicial-ethics\/"},"author":{"name":"Michael G. Karnavas","@id":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/d03dcdb5c7e0e85117fb75cfb7b98c79"},"headline":"Second Installment: JUDICIAL ETHICS IN THE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS","datePublished":"2014-02-18T08:30:59+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-18T19:02:46+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/2014\/02\/18\/installment2-judicial-ethics\/"},"wordCount":2530,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/d03dcdb5c7e0e85117fb75cfb7b98c79"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/2014\/02\/18\/installment2-judicial-ethics\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"http:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/02\/writing-a-letter--300x199.jpg","keywords":["ADC","ECCC","ICC","International Criminal Law","Karnavas","Training"],"articleSection":["ECCC","ICC","ICTY","International Criminal Law","Training"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/2014\/02\/18\/installment2-judicial-ethics\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/2014\/02\/18\/installment2-judicial-ethics\/","url":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/2014\/02\/18\/installment2-judicial-ethics\/","name":"Second Installment: JUDICIAL ETHICS IN THE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS - michaelgkarnavas.net\/Blog","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/2014\/02\/18\/installment2-judicial-ethics\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/2014\/02\/18\/installment2-judicial-ethics\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"http:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/02\/writing-a-letter--300x199.jpg","datePublished":"2014-02-18T08:30:59+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-18T19:02:46+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/2014\/02\/18\/installment2-judicial-ethics\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/2014\/02\/18\/installment2-judicial-ethics\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/2014\/02\/18\/installment2-judicial-ethics\/#primaryimage","url":"http:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/02\/writing-a-letter--300x199.jpg","contentUrl":"http:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/02\/writing-a-letter--300x199.jpg"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/2014\/02\/18\/installment2-judicial-ethics\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Second Installment: JUDICIAL ETHICS IN THE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/","name":"Michael G. Karnavas Blog","description":"International Criminal Law Blog","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/d03dcdb5c7e0e85117fb75cfb7b98c79"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":["Person","Organization"],"@id":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/d03dcdb5c7e0e85117fb75cfb7b98c79","name":"Michael G. Karnavas","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MGKarnavasCt.jpg?fit=365%2C365&ssl=1","url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MGKarnavasCt.jpg?fit=365%2C365&ssl=1","contentUrl":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MGKarnavasCt.jpg?fit=365%2C365&ssl=1","width":365,"height":365,"caption":"Michael G. Karnavas"},"logo":{"@id":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MGKarnavasCt.jpg?fit=365%2C365&ssl=1"},"description":"Michael G. Karnavas is an American trained lawyer. He is licensed in Alaska and Massachusetts and is qualified to appear before the various International tribunals, including the International Criminal Court (ICC). Residing and practicing primarily in The Hague, he is recognized as an expert in international criminal defence, including pre-trial, trial, and appellate advocacy.","sameAs":["http:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/in\/michael-g-karnavas-97494a75\/","https:\/\/x.com\/https:\/\/twitter.com\/mgkarnavas"],"url":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/author\/michael-g-karnavas\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/260","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=260"}],"version-history":[{"count":16,"href":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/260\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1202,"href":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/260\/revisions\/1202"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=260"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=260"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/michaelgkarnavas.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=260"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}