Abstract:
"This paper deals with the prosecution of a crime of crimes, genocide, at international and national levels. The international community has shown interest in penalizing perpetrators of gross human rights violations since the Nuremberg trial, and then the adoption of the 1948 UN Genocide Convention. After these times, significant numbers of international tribunals, although at an ad hoc level, have been established to punish gross violations of human rights including the crime of genocide. Along with these tribunals, quite a number of national courts have engaged in the prosecution of genocide. Nevertheless, due to legal and practical problems, the two legal systems are adopting different approaches to handle the matter, although the crime is one and the same. Therefore, the objective of this paper is to assess critically where the difference lies, the cause and impact of the disparity on the rights of the accused to fair trial. Moreover, the study will posit some recommendations that might assist to ameliorate this intermittent situation." -- Synopsis.
"This work consists of five chapters. Chapter one is addressing the general introduction of the work, and it has already been discussed. Chapter two deals with the crime of genocide and its criminal responsibility as indicated under different national and international laws. The third chapter is devoted to focus on the right to fair trial and the prosecution of genocide, and specifically addresses the issues of the right to legal assistance, speedy trial, obtain and examine evidence, and sentencing. In chapter four the role of the Rome Statue in protecting the rights of the accused, its impact on on national laws, the complementarities of the International Criminal Court and national courts will be discussed. Finally, the work will come to an end by giving concluding remarks and recommendations under the fifth chapter." -- Introduction.