By Yvonne Dutton

Dutton examines the ICC and whether and how its enforcement mechanism influences state membership and the court’s ability to realize treaty goals, examining questions such as:

• Why did states decide to create the ICC and design the institution with this uniquely strong enforcement mechanism?

• Will the ICC’s enforcement mechanism be sufficient to hold states accountable to their commitment so that the ICC can realize its goal of ending impunity for genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes?

• Will states view the ICC’s enforcement mechanism as a credible threat and refuse to join unless they already have good domestic human rights practices and institutions that are independent and capable of prosecuting human rights abuses?

• If states that most need to improve their domestic legal practices as relates to protecting against human rights abuses do not join the court, is there any hope that the threat of punishment by the ICC can play a role in bettering state’s human rights practices and deterring individuals from committing mass atrocities?

This work provides a significant contribution to the field, and will be of great interest to students and scholars of international law, international relations, international organizations and human rights.

Abingdon, Oxon; New York: Routledge, 2013. 216p.

By Sarah Babaian

This book provides an analysis of whether the International Criminal Court can be regarded as an International Criminal World Court, capable of exercising its jurisdiction upon every individual despite the fact that not every State is a Party to the Rome Statute. The analysis is based on a twin-pillar system, which consists of a judicial and an enforcement pillar. The judicial pillar is based on the most disputed articles of the Rome Statute; its goal is to determine the potential scope of the Court’s strength through the application of its jurisdiction regime. The enforcement pillar provides an analysis of the cooperation and judicial assistance mechanism pursuant to the Rome Statute’s provisions and its practical implementation through States’ practices. The results of the analysis, and the lack of an effective enforcement mechanism, demonstrate that the ICC cannot in fact be considered a criminal world court. In conclusion, possible solutions are presented in order to improve the enforcement pillar of the Court so that the tremendous strength of the ICC’s judicial pillar, and with it, the exercise of worldwide jurisdiction, can be effectively implemented.

Cham: Springer, 2018. 216p.

Edited  by The United Nations  

Seventy Years of the International Law Commission: Drawing a Balance for the Future brings together voices from academia and practice to celebrate and critically evaluate the work of the United Nations International Law Commission (ILC) over the past seventy years. The edited volume draws on the events commemorating the seventieth anniversary of the Commission, which took place in New York and Geneva in May and July 2018. At a time when multilateral law-making has become increasingly challenging, the edited volume appraises the role of one the most important driving forces behind the codification of international law and discusses the ILC’s future contribution to the development of international law. Readership: The prospective readership of the edited volume will be very diverse, including academics and practitioners of international law around the world.

Leiden; Boston: Brill Nijhoff,  2021. 475p.

By Farhad Malekian

The goal of this book is to minimize the misunderstandings and conflicts between International law and Islamic law. The objective is to bring peace into justice and justice into peace for the prevention of violations of human rights law, humanitarian law, international criminal law, and impunity. Readership: This book offers a peaceful resolution into international justice for researchers, students, practicing lawyers, military personnel, governmental officials, diplomats, judges, and prosecutors. It constitutes a prized addition to university and public libraries.

Leiden; Boston: Brill Nijhoff, 2011. 476p.

By Alexandre Skander Galand

Galand critically spells out a comprehensive conception of the nature and effects of Security Council referrals that responds to the various limits to the International Criminal Court’s exercise of jurisdiction over situations that concern nationals and territories of non-party States.

Leiden; Boston: Brill Nijhoff, 2018. 279p.

By Christopher Rudolph

Human rights advocates have long pressed for international institutions to prosecute crimes against humanity. With its global reach and mandate to investigate and prosecute some of the world's most severe crimes (genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity) the creation of the International Criminal Court in 2002 was hailed as a landmark event in the evolution of truly global society. Supporters argue that the ICC and other transnational tribunals will deter the commission of atrocities and contribute to global peace and stability, and they laud its independence and its potential to check the arbitrary use of power against the powerless. To better understand how international criminal courts function and determine their broader implications for global society, this book examines the factors that led to the creation and evolution of international criminal courts, the nature of the support for and opposition to such institutions, and how they function.

Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 232p.

Edited by Daniel A. Krauss and Joel D. Lieberman

"Expertise in Court: Perspectives on Testimony" is the second of a two-volume set on the "Psychology of the Courtroom". The authors, a renowned group of psychology and legal scholars, offer definitive coverage of the use of psychological expert testimony and evidence in a variety of legal contexts. They explore the controversies that surround it, from questions of its admissibility to its effects on eventual juror decisions. A wide range of topics are covered including system and estimator variables in eyewitness identification, expert testimony on psychological syndromes, the insanity defence and sexual harassment, how child sexual abuse is used by the courts, and recent research on false confessions. They also provide a comparative analysis exploring how different types of psychological expert testimony and evidence are used by different countries' legal systems. All the chapters conclude by making specific recommendations for how psychological research and information could be better utilized by courts around the world.

Abingtdon, Oxon; New York: Routledge, 2009. 204p.

Edited by Joel D. Lieberman and Daniel A. Krauss

This is the first volume of an important new two-volume work on the Psychology of the Courtroom. Taken together, the two volumes offer a definitive account of the problems created by or influencing courtroom procedure and trial outcome from a psychological perspective. Each volume is also designed to be consulted separately. In "Jury Psychology: Social Aspects of the Trial Processes" a highly respected group of scholars explore the influence of trial procedures on juror decision-making. A wide range of topics are covered including pretrial publicity and inadmissible evidence, jury selection, jury instruction, and death penalty cases, as well as decision-making in civil trials. In addition, a number of global issues are discussed, including procedural justice issues and theoretical models of juror decision-making. A consideration of methodological issues relevant to the study of juror behavior is provided. All of these topics are discussed from a psychological perspective. Throughout the volume the authors make recommendations for improving trial procedures where jurors are involved, and they discuss how the problems and potential solutions are relevant to courts around the world.

Abingdon, Oxon; New York: Routledge. 2009. 240p.

Edited by Bruce A. Arrigo

A critical look at the relationship between law and psychology.

Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2004. 250p.

Edited by Sabine Gless and Thomas Richter.

This open access publication discusses exclusionary rules in different criminal justice systems. It is based on the findings of a research project in comparative law with a focus on the question of whether or not a fair trial can be secured through evidence exclusion. Part I explains the legal framework in which exclusionary rules function in six legal systems: Germany, Switzerland, People’s Republic of China, Taiwan, Singapore, and the United States. Part II is dedicated to selected issues identified as crucial for the assessment of exclusionary rules. These chapters highlight the delicate balance of interests required in the exclusion of potentially relevant information from a criminal trial and discusses possible approaches to alleviate the legal hurdles involved.

NY. Cham: Springer, 2019. 387p.

Edited by Laura Ervo, Pia Letto-Vanamo, Anna Nylund

This open access book examines whether a distinctly Nordic procedural or court culture exists and what the hallmarks of that culture are. Do Nordic courts and court proceedings share a distinct set of ideas and values that in combination constitute the core of a regional legal culture? How do Europeanisation, privatisation, diversification and digitisation influence courts and court proceedings in the Nordic countries? The book traces the genesis and formation of Nordic courts and justice systems to provide a richer comprehension of contemporary Nordic legal culture, and an understanding of the relationship between legal cultural stability and change. In answering these questions, the book provides models for conceptualising procedural culture. Nordic procedural culture has partly developed organically and is partly also the product of deliberate efforts to maintain a certain level of alignment between the Nordic countries. Studying Nordic cooperation enables us to gain a deeper understanding of current regional, European and global harmonisation processes within procedural law. The influx of supranational European law, increased use of alternative dispute resolution and growth in regulation density that produces a conflict between specialisation and coherence, have tangible impact on the role of courts in a democratic society, the form of court proceedings and court structures. This book examines whether and why some trends exert more tangible, or perhaps simply more perceptible, influence on procedural culture than others.

Cham: Springer, 2021. 304p.

By David E. Spencer, Herard von Santos, and Juan Carlos Morales

Gangs have existed for many decades in El Salvador. They did not receive a lot of attention until the 1990s. The gangs prior to the 1990s were more like the stereotypical gangs that people usually think of: misguided youth, mostly involved in petty crime and solicitation. They were not considered a very serious threat to personal or national security at that time. These gangs called themselves by a variety of names, but by the 1980s people were calling them “maras” as a general term for all gangs. The word “mara” is a Salvadoran slang word which means group of friends or gang in the sense that it refers to a tight knit group of buddies that frequently socialize together. If you are out socializing with your friends and your wife calls you to ask where you are, the answer is that I am here with “la mara” meaning I am here with my group of pals, the guys that one plays poker with or drinks a few beers or any other similar typical male social activity. The word is still used in this way, even though it has developed an increasingly negative connotation due to its association with the extremely violent criminal gangs. This is important because there has been a lot of speculation about the meaning of the word that in the authors’ opinion is improbable and counterproductive.

Washington, DC: William J. Perry Center for Hemispheric Defense Studies, 2009. 120p.

By Michael Rempel, Krystal Rodriguez, Tyler Nims, Joanna Weill, Zachary Katznelson and Madison Volpe

New York City has embarked on a far-reaching effort to shutter its notorious Rikers Island jail complex. The effort hinges on safely reducing the number of people in city jails—an achievable goal that demands policy changes at a number of levels. This report lays out a roadmap for safely limiting the use of jail in the years ahead, as a new set of elected policymakers will be tasked with bringing to fruition the end of Rikers. The good news is that New York City will be building on decades of successful reforms that have already driven down both crime and incarceration. Yet challenges lie ahead. The COVID-19 pandemic has been accompanied by a tragic increase in shootings in our city and nationwide. Nationwide protests prompted by the killings of Black Americans by police have highlighted vast racial disparities in who is arrested and incarcerated. Perennial problems at Rikers are growing worse, including intolerable conditions and unacceptably high levels of violence. New Yorkers demand, and deserve, to live in safe communities. Efforts to reduce incarceration must be accompanied by meaningful efforts to prevent crime. But importantly, the available data contradict the notion that justice reforms are linked to the recent rise in shootings.

• More.....

  As the trends of the past three decades indicate, more jail does not equal more safety. To the contrary, an emerging body of research indicates that the overuse of jail, while temporarily incapacitating people, can actually lead to more criminal activity and risks undermining the health of individuals, families, and entire neighborhoods. Those who go into jail with challenges— substance use, mental health concerns, joblessness, unstable housing, etc.—tend to come out with those challenges worsened. Jail also comes at tremendous financial cost: incarcerating one person on Rikers for a year costs a staggering $447,000.2 The strategies for reducing incarceration in this report draw on existing and original research and interviews with more than 60 criminal justice officials, practitioners, service providers, and advocates. We estimate that, once implemented, the strategies proposed here could safely reduce the jail population to between 2,700 and 3,150 people. Delivering on the promise of these strategies, and achieving the projected reductions in jail, will depend on political will, robust implementation, and ongoing monitoring to track progress.

New York: Independent Commission on NYC Criminal Justice and Incarceration Reform and Center for Court Innovation, 2021. 91p.

By Independent Commission on NYC Criminal Justice and Incarceration Reform

In April 2017, our Commission called for deep changes to the criminal justice system in New York City, including the permanent closure of the dysfunctional jail complex on Rikers Island. Today, we are closer than ever to that goal. A HISTORIC OPPORTUNITY TO CLOSE RIKERS The administration’s current plan parallels, in important respects, the blueprint that our Commission put forward two-and-a-half years ago. It would reduce New York City’s eleven operating jails to four, cut the number of jail beds from 14,000 to fewer than 4,000, and reduce the number of people in jail to 3,300 or fewer. Rebuilding existing jails in Brooklyn, Manhattan, and Queens, and establishing a new jail in the Bronx to replace the current jail boat docked off of Hunts Point, will improve safety and conditions for incarcerated people and correction officers. This smaller, borough-based system would mean that people in jail would be closer to their families, services, lawyers, and courts. This will speed cases, boost chances for re-entry, and reduce recidivism. Final designs must include robust input from all stakeholders, including nearby residents, formerly incarcerated people, and advocates.

New York: Independent Commission on NYC Criminal Justice and Incarceration Reform: 2019. 16p.

By Elizabeth Glazer and Michael Jacobson

In our first special report, public safety veterans Elizabeth Glazer and Michael Jacobson provide a detailed, data-grounded roadmap to close Rikers Island that would simultaneously:

Increase safety inside and outside the city’s jails;

Cut operating costs and invest more in communities;

Shrink the jail population to approximately 2,200; and

Limit the criminal justice system’s footprint.

In the face of the humanitarian crises on Rikers, now in public view everyday, we show how paying attention and reducing the population can provide both immediate relief and a long-term solution.

New York: The City, 2022.

By Lucija Sokanović

New forms of criminal fraud are constantly emerging and their incidence is increasing. This book provides in-depth analyses of whether, and how exactly, criminal law perceives and adapts to these developments. The main focus of the study are the relevant normative and criminological questions regarding fraud, fraud in economic transactions, subsidy fraud, computer and electoral fraud, and some other forms of fraudulent behaviour. From a comparative perspective, it becomes apparent that a specific group of statutory offences is scattered throughout the criminal codes of Croatia, Germany, Austria and Switzerland and also the neighbouring countries in the Balkan region, all of which fit the same pattern and reveal the same core features of fraud. Criminal law addresses them in the same manner, hence a fraud-related criminal law can be identified. This should be of help for developing and applying adequate measures for effective detection and prosecution of this type of offences. Standardization of legal protection against fraud is reflected upon as an instrument that represents the dynamics of the transition and integration of European countries and the globalization of the economy, with their growing intensity of economic cross-border transactions.

Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 2020. 298p.

By Mary T. Phillips

A decade-long research project examining the bail system in New York City has recently been completed by the New York City Criminal Justice Agency, Inc. (CJA). The research was conceived in the context of CJA’s mission of reducing unnecessary pretrial detention, and it continued in the midst of a national debate about the role of bail and the commercial bail bond industry in the criminal justice system. With the publication in 2011 of the last of a series of reports from this research, it is now time to take stock of what we have learned, and to consider how the findings might inform the ongoing public discussion. This final report of the bail project synthesizes the major findings, with the dual objective of making the research results more accessible by gathering them together in one place, while also introducing a level of clarity that is difficult to achieve when disparate findings are viewed only as separate pieces. The bail research began in 2002 with a pilot project to determine the feasibility of collecting data from courtroom observations that would be of use in examining the factors that enter into judges’ decisions to release or set bail for defendants at arraignment. The first published report from that study appeared in 2004. Findings from each phase of the research raised further questions, leading us to expand the study to investigate the part played by the prosecutor in the judge’s bail decision, the role of commercial bonds in bail release, the association between release type and failure to appear (FTA), and the effects of pretrial detention on case outcomes. All together, eight full reports and seven Research Briefs were published between 2004 and 2011 presenting the results of the bail project. They are listed together in a separate section at the beginning of the References, and all are available on CJA’s website at www.nycja.org/research/research.htm.

New York; New York City Criminal Justice Agency, 2012. 171p.

By Krystal Rodriguez and Michael Rempel

On April 1, 2019, New York State passed a series of reforms intended to promote fairness and due process throughout the criminal justice system. A new bail reform law eliminates money bail and pretrial detention for nearly all misdemeanor and nonviolent felony defendants. Described in a separate publication, 1 this law requires drastic changes in bail practices, sharply curtailing the overreliance on money bail and pretrial detention that has disproportionately impacted lower-income communities and communities of color. The Center for Court Innovation estimates that bail reform will result in a minimum 43 percent reduction in New York City’s pretrial jail population. In response to the victim advocacy community and in consideration of the unique social and legal issues involved in cases of domestic violence, the new law contains several specific provisions intended to protect domestic violence victims. This document focuses on these components of bail reform and includes hard data indicating how cases involving domestic violence allegations might be affected in New York City.

New York: Center for Court Innovation, 2019. 9p.

By Michael Rempel and Krystal Rodriguez

On April 1, 2019, New York State passed sweeping criminal justice reform legislation that eliminates money bail and pretrial detention for nearly all misdemeanor and nonviolent felony defendants; requires prosecutors to disclose their evidence to the defense earlier in case proceedings; promotes speedy trial rights; and reduces the maximum length of a jail sentence for people convicted of a misdemeanor from one year to 364 days (avoiding deportation exposure for many immigrants convicted of minor crimes). This document reviews the major components of the first of these changes, bail reform, and includes data indicating the scope of its potential impact in New York City. On any given day in early 2019, more than 22,000 New Yorkers were incarcerated in a local jail—about 8,000 in New York City and 14,000 in the rest of the state. As is the case in local jails across the country, more than six in ten of these individuals were held pretrial, prior to a conviction, usually stemming from an inability to afford money bail. The stakes for how bail reform impacts this pretrial population are especially high in New York City, given the city’s efforts to close the jail complex on Rikers Island. Bail reform, along with the other reform measures, is scheduled to go into effect on January 1, 2020.

New York: Center for Court Innovation, 2020. 13p.

By Michael Rempel and Krystal Rodriguez

On April 1, 2019, New York State passed sweeping restrictions to the use of money bail and pretrial detention, ruling out their use for nearly all misdemeanor and nonviolent felony charges. The reforms also established a new presumption of release for all cases—with conditions when deemed necessary. Even when bail and pretrial detention remain legally permissible, the reforms limited their use to cases when a judge finds them to be the least restrictive condition necessary to assure court attendance. Bail reform went into effect January 1, 2020, and, with close to nine out of 10 cases made ineligible for bail,1 contributed to a 40 percent decline in New York City’s pretrial jail population. Elsewhere in the state, the impacts were even slightly larger. The reforms were then amended April 3, 2020, with an effective date at the outset of July for the modified statute. The 2020 amendments include: (1) an expanded list of charges and situations, especially involving nonviolent felonies, in which judges may again set money bail or remand people to pretrial detention; (2) more options for ordering non-monetary release conditions (including mandated treatment, maintaining employment or educational involvement, and conditions related to the protection of domestic violence victims); and (3) new public reporting requirements to document pretrial decision-making and outcomes on an ongoing basis across the state. Our analysis suggests that, when compared to the original reforms passed in 2019, the amendments will produce a 16 percent relative increase in the use of money bail and pretrial detention among New York City criminal cases and a 16 percent increase in the pretrial jail population. Similar effects are likely across the rest of the state.

New York: Center for Court Innovation, 2020. 224p.