The United Nations 'quasi-prosecutorial' investigative mechanisms: assessing a new institutional model in the international criminal justice landscape

This work aims to provide a theoretical examination of three recently created bodies of the United Nations mandated to investigate the alleged international crimes committed in Syria (IIIM), Iraq (UNITAD) and Myanmar (IIMM). Established as a compromise solution in the paralysis of international criminal jurisdictions, these essentially overlapping entities have been depicted as a ‘new generation’ of UN investigative mechanisms. While non-judicial in nature, they depart indeed from traditional commissions of inquiry in several respects due to their increased criminal or ‘quasi-prosecutorial’ character. After clarifying their legal basis and different mandating authorities, a comparative institutional analysis is thus carried out in order to ascertain whether these ‘mechanisms’ can be said to effectively represent a new institutional model. Through an in-depth assessment of their mandates, the thesis is also intended to outline both the strengths and the criticalities of these organs. Given their aim to facilitate criminal proceedings by sharing information and case files, it is suggested that more attention shall be paid to the position of the person under investigation. To this end, some proposals are made in order to enhance the mechanisms’ frameworks, especially from the angle of procedural safeguards. As a third aspect, the cooperation with judicial authorities is explored, in order to shed light on the actors involved, the relevant legal instruments and the possible obstacles, in particular from a human rights perspective. Ultimately, drawing from the detected issues, the thesis seeks to identify some lessons learned which could be taken into account in case of creation of new ad hoc investigative mechanisms or of a permanent institution of this kind.