Characteristics of the Prosecutorial Institution in Matters of Subsidiary Jurisdiction before International Criminal Justice Bodies

Introduction . The development of international criminal justice has been a prolonged journey from the formulation of doctrinal models to the establishment of active international tribunals and the institutionalization of criminal justice systems at the international level. While this process has been uneven and nonlinear, there has been a prevailing trend toward the systematic refinement of doctrines, legal instruments, and procedures aimed at enhancing judicial efficiency. A significant aspect of this evolution is the emergence of the institution of liability for crimes against the administration of international criminal justice, which pose substantial obstacles to addressing serious violations of international law and undermine trust in the judicial system. Despite the early and urgent need for this institution, its establishment has been gradual, progressive, and ongoing, resulting in the recognition of a new category of jurisdiction within international criminal justice. This new jurisdictional caegory, in turn, has necessitated the development of novel prosecutorial mechanisms within international tribunals. Materials and methods . This study is grounded in international treaties and acts establishing international judicial bodies; internal regulations of such bodies, including procedural rules, codes of conduct, activity reports, and practical guides; as well as case materials from ongoing international criminal proceedings, including judgments, court transcripts, and submissions by parties and participants. Methodologically, the research employs a complementary approach combining philosophical, general scientific methodologies with specialized legal analysis techniques. Research results . The establishment of liability for crimes against the administration of justice requires scientific classification of this emerging category of cases, for which the term “subsidiary jurisdiction” is appropriate. The appearance of this new class of cases under the purview of international criminal courts has driven the need to adapt prosecutorial insttutions accordingly. Initially, judges served as prosecutors within this subsidiary jurisdiction; however, growing caseloads and increasingly complex offenses have led to the transfer of prosecutorial functions first to the Office of the Prosecutor and subsequently to a court-appointed third party—amicus curiae, also known as the “amicus curiae prosecutor”. Discussion and conclusion . The amicus curiae prosecutor institution suffers from significant short-comings that impair its effectiveness in combating crimes against the administration of international criminal justice: the sporadic nature of prosecutions; lack of continuity and coherence in investigations; limited material and human resources; and absence of preventive capabilities. To address these issues, introducing prosecutorial specialization within international criminal courts is proposed. Such functional division aligns with practices in most national jurisdictions and is adaptable to international standards.