Search

D. ICC The ICC, in its first case, took the use of crime-definition expertise to a new level. Apparently eschewing the principle of jura novit curia, or at least suggesting [...]

ABSTRACT International criminal courts must not only decide the guilt or innocence of defendants in immensely serious cases, but also make good law in the process. To help them do [...]

I. INTRODUCTION II. THE PAST AND PROSPECTS FOR THE FUTURE A. The Past: Working with Experts B. The Pulp Mills Evidence: Voluminous, Complex, Scientific, and Technical III. THE SPECIAL MASTER [...], Although international courts increasingly must resolve transboundary conflicts over natural resources and environmental pollution, international judges have limited assistance to adequately review voluminous and complex seienti6e evidence that is often submitted with these disputes, potentially constraining their assessment of the factual record, and consequently undermining confidence in their judgments and the development of their jurisprudence. Special masters have been used successfully by the United States Supreme Court to manage the portion of its docket where it, like the international courts, acts as a trial court whose judgments are final and without appeal. This Article explains the master's role and how masters might provide a solution for international courts, particularly but not exclusively the International Court of Justice. It also draws on international experience to suggest a variation on the standard scope of a master. It concludes that special masters will be particularly useful and flexible aids when international courts and tribunals face extensive or highly specialized evidence and resolution of the dispute rests on resolving the parties' factual differences.

The legal system and the profession of psychology have differing expectations that cause psychologists who serve as expert witnesses to face fundamental conflicts. The roles of evidence demand that experts assist the trier of fact, the adversary system demands that experts serve the parties who retain them, and the ethical codes and guidelines demand that experts impartially assist the court, only in their area of competence. Psychological experts are left to sort out the competing demands, as well as their potential liability, while recognizing the importance of being persuasive. This article addresses the competing tensions expert witnesses face and offers an approach to reconciling these tensions that relies on competence, relevance, perspective, balance, and candor.