Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T05:05:48.018Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

To Testify or Not To Testify – Privilege from Testimony at the Ad Hoc Tribunals: The Randal Decision

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 October 2003

STEVEN POWLES
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article considers the Randal Decision, in which the ICTY Appeals Chamber established a qualified privilege from testimony for war correspondents before the ad hoc tribunals. It sets out the various arguments advanced by Jonathan Randal in support of such privilege and the privilege as formulated by the Appeals Chamber. Finally, it analyzes the possible impact of the Decision and its possible application by the ad hoc tribunals, other international courts, such as the ICC, and domestic courts.

Keywords

evidencehearsayprivilege from testimonysubpoenawar correspondents
Type
ARTICLES
Information
Leiden Journal of International Law , Volume 16 , Issue 3 , September 2003 , pp. 511 - 524
Copyright
© 2003 Foundation of the Leiden Journal of International Law

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Prosecutor v. Brdjanin and Talić, Decision on Interlocutory Appeal, 11 Dec. 2002 (IT–99–36-AR73.9).