Revised by Elena Ricci

The book analyses the difficulties the International Criminal Court faces with the definition of those persons who are eligible for participating in the proceedings. Establishing justice for victims is one of the most important aims of the court. It therefore created a unique system of victim participation. Since its first trial the court struggles to live up to the expectancies its statute has generated. The book offers a new approach of how to define victimhood by looking at the different international crimes. It seeks to offer guidance for the right to participate in the different stages of the proceedings by looking at the practice in national jurisdictions. Lastly the book offers insights into the functioning of the reparation regime at the ICC by virtue of the Trust Fund for Victim and its different mandates. The critical analysis of the ICC-practice with regard to definition, participation and reparation aims at promoting a realistic approach, which will avoid the disappointing of expectations and thus help to enhance the acceptance of the ICC.

With the developing landscape of a European criminal justice sphere comes an increasing imperative for scholars and practitioners to gain some insight into the diversity that exists in the criminal justice systems of European Union Member States. This book explores the mutual admissibility of evidence; a facet of EU criminal justice that is proving difficult to realise. While the Lisbon Treaty places the issue of mutual admissibility of evidence squarely on the agenda, the EU instruments to date have not succeeded in achieving this goal. Andrea Ryan argues that part of the reason for this failure is that while the mutual recognition instruments have focussed on the issue of gathering evidence and safeguarding suspects’ rights, they have not addressed how evidence is to be presented and contested at trial. Drawing upon case studies from Ireland, France and Italy, and adopting a legal cultural perspective, and enriched by the author’s observations of criminal trials, the book presents a detailed analysis of the developments to date in EU criminal justice and evidence law. By examining evidence practices the book asks whether the inquisitorial and accusatorial traditions within the EU systems are too irreconcilable to achieve a system of mutual admissibility of evidence. The book will be of great interest and use to academics and practitioners with an interest in European and comparative criminal justice, criminal procedure, human rights and socio-legal studies.

In what constitutes the only English-language collection of essays ever dedicated to the analysis of Montesquieu's contributions to political science, the contributors review some of the most vexing controversies that have arisen in the interpretation of Montesquieu's thought. By paying careful attention to the historical, political, and philosophical contexts of Montesquieu's ideas, the contributors provide fresh readings of The Spirit of Laws, clarify the goals and ambitions of its author, and point out the pertinence of his thinking to the problems of our world today.

In the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, the ideas and practices of justice in Europe underwent significant change as procedures were transformed and criminal and civil caseloads grew apace. Drawing on the rich judicial records of Marseille from the years 1264 to 1423, especially records of civil litigation, this book approaches the courts of law from the perspective of the users of the courts (the consumers of justice) and explains why men and women chose to invest resources in the law. Smail shows that the courts were quickly adopted as a public stage on which litigants could take revenge on their enemies. Even as the new legal system served the interest of royal or communal authority, it also provided the consumers of justice with a way to broadcast their hatreds and social sanctions to a wider audience and negotiate their own community standing in the process. The emotions that had driven bloodfeuds and other forms of customary vengeance thus never went away, and instead were fully incorporated into the new procedures.