With the acceptance of international criminal procedure as a self-sustaining discipline and as the tribunals established to try the most serious crimes in the former Yugoslavia, Sierra Leone, and Rwanda have completed or are beginning to wind up their activities, the time is ripe for a critical evaluation of these international criminal tribunals and their legacy. By examining the due process standards embraced by the five contemporary international criminaltribunals, the author draws conclusions about how the right to a fair trial should be interpreted in international criminal law.This volume addresses key conceptual questions on fairness, including: should international criminal tribunals set the highest standards of fairness, or is it sufficient for their practice to be 'just fair enough'? To whom does the right to a fair trial attach, and can actors such as the prosecution and victims be accurately said to benefit from that right? Does fairness require the full realization of a number of guarantees owed to the accused under the statutory frameworks of internationalcriminal tribunals, or should we instead be concerned with the fairness of the trial 'as a whole'? What is the interplay between domestic and international courts on questions of procedural fairness? What are the elements of fairness in international criminal proceedings? And what remedies areavailable for breaches of fair trial rights?Through an in-depth exploration of the right to a fair trial, the author concludes that international criminal tribunals have a role in setting the highest standards of due process protection in their procedures, and that in so doing, they can have a positive impact on domestic justice systems.

1 Introduction; 2 Interpreting Fairness in International Criminal Trials; 3 The Right to a Fair Trial in Practice in International Criminal Trials; 4 Procedural Actors and the Right to a Fair Trial; 5 Setting the Highest Standards of Fairness, or 'Just Fair Enough'?; 6 The Interplay between Domestic and International Jurisdictions on Fair Trial Matters; 7 Conclusion