The issue of transparency in International Justice

Could it be conceivable that the legal reasoning of the judges’ decisions remains secret and thus prevents public scrutiny and any possible evaluation of their legality?

For in the verdict one may read that according to the Court: the decisions of the Appeals Chamber) remain confidential until the Chamber decides otherwise. However, according to Mr. Louis Joinet the rules of International Law state that the classification of a document comes to an end when the proceedings are terminated. Which was obviously the case after Slobodan Milosevic’s death.

Moreover, answering the Defence who (…) argued that there is no valid legal basis upon which to punish disclosure of the Chamber’s legal reasoning. The Court states: Rule 77 of the Rules does not distinguish between categories of information the disclosure of which may constitute the actus reus of contempt.

In other words, the Chamber takes advantage of the silence of the Tribunal Rules to extend the confidentiality to the legal reasoning contained in the Court decisions. Thus they prevent the legal arguments adduced for a Court decision from being discussed not to say impugned.

This is why it is so important that this point of the Verdict be overruled in Appeal in order not to create a new case law that would allow International Justice to become secret and unaccountable.