page 324 note 1 The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia was established May 25,1993 with its seat in The Hague, Netherlands. The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda was established November 8, 1994 with its seat in Arusha, Tanzania. Both tribunals were established by Security Council Chapter VII decisions, which obligate compliance and create funding mechanisms.

page 324 note 2 Agreement between the United Nations and the Government of Sierra Leone on the establishment of a Special Court for Sierra Leone (with statute), Jan. 16, 2002 2178 U.N.T.S. 137 available at <http://www.sc-sl.org/Documents/scsl-agreement.htmlx> The Special Court is based in Freetown, Sierra Leone. The Special Panel for Serious Crimes in East Timor is based in Dili, East Timor and its final documents are available at <http://socrates.berkeley.edu/∼warcrime/ET-specialpanels-docs.htm> (last visited June 2,2008). The’ ‘Regulation 64” Panels in the Courts of Kosovo are different from the tribunals in Sierra Leone and East Timor because the United Nations inserted international judges and prosecutors into the Kosovo domestic criminal justice system to work alongside existing local judicial professionals instead of creating an international tribunal. These international judges and prosecutors had broad domestic subject matter jurisdiction and could take on any case of any crime, including cases already assigned to Kosovar jurists. The Iraqi Special Tribunal is a court established under Iraqi domestic law to try Iraqi nationals accused of international crimes. The court was not created via an international agreement.

page 324 note 3 See Law on the Establishment of Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia for the Prosecution of Crimes Committed during the Period of Democratic Kampuchea, NA/ RKM/1004/006, available at <http://www.cambodia.gov.kh/krt/pdfs/KR%20Law%20as%20amended%2027%20Oct%202004%20Eng.pdf(last> visited June 2, 2008).

page 324 note 4 Pre-Trial Decision, Para. 13.

page 324 note 5 Pre-Trial Decision, Para. 58.

page 324 note 6 Neil J. Kritz, Transitional Justice: How Emerging Democracies Reckon with Former Regimes (U.S. Inst. for Peace 1995).

page 324 note 7 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), art. 9, Mar. 23, 1976, 999 U.N.T.S. 171.

page 324 note 8 Magna Carta, 1297, 25 Edw., para. 29 (Eng.) available at <http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/featured_documents/magna_carta/translation.html>. “No freeman is to be taken or imprisoned or disseised of his free tenement or of his liberties or free customs, or outlawed or exiled or in any way ruined, nor will we go against such a man or send against him save by lawful judgement of his peers or by the law of the land. To no-one will we sell or deny of delay right or justice.”

page 324 note 9 In addition to the ICCPR, see, e.g. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights art. 9, G. A. Res. 217 A (III), (Dec. 10, 1948); The European Convention on Human Rights art. 5, ETS No. 005 (1950); The American Convention on Human Rights art. 7, July 18, 1978, O.A.S. Treaty Series No. 36, 1144 U.N.T.S. 123; and The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights art. 6, June 27, 1981, OAU Doc. CAB/LEG/ 67/3 rev. 5, 21 I.L.M. 58 (1982).

page 324 note 10 Human Rights Committee, CCPR General Comment 8, 16th Sess. (1982), para. 3.

page 324 note 11 Official Records of the General Assembly, Forty-fifth Sess., Supplement No. 40 (A/45/40), vol. I, para. 47 (case of Democratic Yemen).

page 324 note 12 Center for Human Rights&Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Branch, Human Rights and Pre-Trial Detention at para. 90, U.N. Doc. HR/P/PT/3, U.N. Sales No. E.94.XTV.6 (1994).

page 324 note 13 The Secretary-General transmitted the letter from the two prime ministers to the presidents of the General Assembly and Security Council on June 24, 1997. See UN Document A/51/930-S/1997/488.

page 324 note 14 G.A. Res. 57/228, U.N. Doc. A/RES/57/228/B (Dec. 18, 2002).

page 324 note 15 To see the history of the establishment of the tribunal, see Documentation Center of Cambodia, Chronology of the Khmer Rouge Tribunal, available at <http://www.dccam.org/Archives/Chronology/Chronology.htm> (last visited June 2, 2008).

page 324 note 16 The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugosla via was established by Security Council Resolution 827 on May 25, 1993 after a year of negotiations and resolutions. The court began its first trial in early 1995. The Dayton Accords ending the conflict were not signed until November, 1995. The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda was established by Security Council Resolution 955 on November 8,1994 and covered crimes occurring between January 1 and December 31, 1994. The first trial began in January, 1997. The Special Court for Sierra Leone was established on January 16, 2002 with an agreement between the UN and the Government of Sierra Leone after negotiations began June 12, 2000. The court first trials were held during summer, 2004. The conflict in Sierra Leone was officially over on January 18, 2002.

page 324 note 17 Pre-Trial Decision, Para. 24.

page 324 note 18 Pre-Trial Decision, Para. 15.

page 324 note 19 Pre-Trial Decision, Para. 22.

page 324 note 20 Pre-Trial Decision, Para. 19.

page 324 note 21 Pre-Trial Decision, Para. 25. “The release from provisional detention to the mere fact of the length of such detention should only be considered when it would clearly exceed any likely sentence that may be given.”

page 324 note 22 Pre-Trial Decision, Para. 36, 48, 56, 59.

page 324 note 23 Jean-Bosco Barayagwiza v. The Prosecutor, Case No. ICTR- 97-19-AR72 (Appeals Chamber) (decided Nov. 2. 1999).

page 324 note 24 Jean-Bosco Barayagwiza v. The Prosecutor, Case No. ICTR- 97-19-AR72 (Appeals Chamber), paras. 5-9.

page 324 note 25 Jean-Bosco Barayagwiza v. The Prosecutor, Case No. ICTR- 97-19-AR72 (Appeals Chamber), para. 72.

page 324 note 26 Pre-Trial Decision, Para. 22.

page 324 note 27 Pre-Trial Decision, Para. 63. “The jurisdiction of the Pre-Trial Chamber and other organs of the ECCC is expressly. limited to the subject matter of the ECCC law. There is no provision for interaction between the ECCC and any other judicial bodies within the Cambodian court structure.”

page 324 note 28 Pre-Trial Decision, Para. 25.

page 334 note 1 This code was in the drafting process when the Internal Rules were adopted. It was signed by the King on 10 August 2007 and entered into force in Cambodia on 20 August 2007. It is currently available only in Khmer and French.

page 334 note 2 This Internal Rule is in accordance with Article 35(new) of the ECCC Law.

page 334 note 3 See: Situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo in the case of the Prosecutor v Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, ICC-01/04-01/06-512, “Decision on the Defence Challenge to the Jurisdiction of the Court pursuant to Article 19(2)(a) of the Statute”, Pre-Trial Chamber I, 3 October 2006, at page 10;Situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo in the Case of the Prosecutor v Thomas Lubanga Dyilo,ICC-01/04-01/06-772,“Judgement of the Appeal of Mr Thomas Lubanga Dyilo against the Decision on the Defence Challenge to the Jurisdiction of the Court pursuant to Article 19 (2) (a) of the Statute of 3 October 2006”, Appeals Chamber, 14 December 2006; Prosecutor v Dragan Nikolic, IT-94-2-PT, “Decision on Defence Motion Challenging the Exercise of Jurisdiction of the Tribunal,” Trial Chamber II, 9 October 2002, paragraphs 114-5; Barayagwiza v The Prosecutor, ICTR-97-19-AR72, “Decision,” Appeals Chamber, 3 November 1999, paragraphs 73-77.

page 335 note 4 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 16 December 1966, 999 Units 171 (1967) Note also that Article 14(3) of the ICCPR is substantively reproduced in Article 35(new) of the ECCC Law.

page 335 note 5 Article 10(new), ECCC Law.

page 335 note 6 Prosecutor v Charles Ghankay Taylor, SCSL-2003-01-1, “Decision on Immunity from Jurisdiction, Appeals Chamber, 31 May 2004, Paragraphs 38-39.

page 335 note 7 See Barayagwiza, ‘ ‘Decision'', at paragraph 61 and Lubanga, “Judgement on Appeal against Decision on Defence Chal lenge,” at paragraph 42, as above in note 3.

page 335 note 8 Dunlop, Nic, The Lost Executioner: A Story of the Khmer Rouge, (Bloomsbury, 2005) page 274 Google Scholar (“The Last Executioner”).

page 335 note 9 Meng-Try, EA and Sorya, SIM, Victims and Perpetrators — Testimony of Young Khmer Rouge Comrades, (Phnom Penh: Documentation Centre of Cambodia, 2001) page 35.Google Scholar

page 335 note 10 Jansen, Geerteke, Voices of Takeo: A Pilot Fear Assessment with Respect to Possible Witnesses of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (Phnom Penh: Documentation Centre of Cambodia, 2006).Google Scholar

page 335 note 11 Interviews of Chek Sim conducted by Ysa Osman, 12 July 2002, Kampong Chhnang.

page 335 note 12 Set Mydans, “Khmer Rouge Torturer Converts, Feels His Life is Like That of St Paul”, The Seattle Times, 2 May 1999; The Lost Executioner, pages 252-253,270-279; John D. Ciorciari and Kok-Thay ENG, “Duch's Mother: Family Fears for the Tuol Sleng (S-21) Prison Chief, Searching for the Truth, July 2003, page 36 (“Duch's Mother”).

page 335 note 13 The Lost Executioner, pages 252-253; Duch's Mother, pages 36-37.

page 335 note 14 The Lost Executioner, page 252.

page 335 note 15 Duch's Mother, page 36.

page 335 note 16 The Lost Executioner, pages 270-278.

page 335 note 17 The Lost Executioner, page 278.

page 335 note 18 Nate Thayer, Far Eastern Economic Review 13 May 1999, “Death in Detail” (ERN: 00087513-00087514) (“Death in Detail”).

page 335 note 19 Nate Thayer, Far Eastern Economic Review 13 May 1999, “I am In Danger” (ERN: 00087513-00087514) (“/am In Danger”), p. 1. See also: The Lost Executioner, pages 270-278.

page 335 note 20 Death in detail, pages 3—4.

page 335 note 21 Amnesty International's Urgent Action 93/99 “Fear for Safety” 29 April 1999 AI Index ASA 23/08/99, page 1.

page 335 note 22 Rob Savage, “Post Traumatic Stress Disorder: A Legacy of Pain and Violence”, Monthly South Eastern Globe, July 2007, pages 24-27.

page 335 note 23 Preamble, Resolution adopted by the General Assembly —Khmer Rouge Trials, GA Res A/RES/57/228, 27 February 2003.

page 335 note 24 Appeal Brief, paragraph 127.