Facing Facts in International Criminal Law: A Casuistic Model of Judicial Reasoning

International criminal courts (ICCs) have made a decisive contribution to the clarification of international criminal law. By interpreting generally formulated rules, the courts have elucidated the meaning of international crimes and modes of liability. However, in applying the law to individual cases, they have not always explained the interplay between general rules and case-specific facts sufficiently. In particular, the courts have often not made clear on which facts their findings are based and have not linked these facts to the applicable legal standards in a systematic way, thus creating uncertainty about the law's precise meaning and scope. This article shows how a casuistic model of judicial reasoning can help to dispel this uncertainty. In particular, it demonstrates how ICCs can use casuistic reasoning techniques to clarify the interplay between law and facts and to explain their decisions in a more transparent and structured way.