Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 7 - The Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia

  • from Part III - Adjudicating
  • Christoph Sperfeldt, Macquarie University, Sydney
  • Book:
    Practices of Reparations in International Criminal Justice
    Published online:
    23 June 2022
    Print publication:
    07 July 2022, pp 205-238

  • Summary

    This chapter explores the ECCC’s adjudicative practices regarding reparations. Distinct features of the ECCC are that its judges are based in the country where the crimes occurred and that they appear both as lawmakers, at least in relation to their procedural rules, and adjudicators of these laws. This chapter examines the ECCC’s adjudicative practices in Cases 001 and 002, the latter being tried in two separate sub-trials (Cases 002/01 and 002/02). After observing that their original framework did not deliver tangible reparations to civil parties in Case 001, judges amended the Internal Rules. My examination of the experience in Case 002 provides an account of how this experiment worked out in practice. ECCC judges were ultimately more socially responsive in their decision-making on reparations than their colleagues at the ICC. Yet, the practices they adopted eventually put into question the remedial nature of the reparations awards.