Introduction: the convergence debate

Within the last 30 years there has been a renewal of interest among teachers and students in comparative criminal justice as a field of study. With growing pressure on legal systems to respond to the demands of globalisation and cosmopolitanism, penal law has become one of a growing number of areas of law that is engaging with comparative legal studies. Much of the debate has centred on whether or not these demands are driving legal systems towards convergence. A combination of pressures would seem to be supporting the convergence thesis within criminal justice. National legal systems plagued by common problems of rising crime, concern for victims and the growing cost and delay in processing cases through the courts would seem to have led to a willingness to seek ‘foreign’ solutions to similar problems. In addition to these internal pressures, there have been external pressures on states to find common transnational solutions to deal with the problems of organised crime and drug trafficking.

In addition to this, international terrorism and the growing ethnic and religious conflicts around the world pose a particular challenge for international law as to whether these problems can be resolved by international legal co- operation or whether as protagonists of the ‘war on terror’ would have it they are better met through the exercise of hegemonic power with international law being reduced to accommodate the demands of the most powerful states. Those who would seek to deal with these problems through international law need to develop common legal solutions. An example of this is the effort made by the international legal community to deal with those who have committed war crimes and crimes against humanity through international criminal tribunals applying international criminal law. But if this new international regime is to work successfully, there needs to be a consensus on the appropriate rules of evidence and procedure for holding such trials.