New evidence, new challenges: ICC judges’ perspectives on user-generated evidence and judging in an age of artificial intelligence

Yvonne McDermott; Anne Hausknecht; Alice Liefgreen

doi:10.35295/osls.iisl.2375

Autores/as

Yvonne McDermott Swansea University https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0111-9049
Anne Hausknecht Swansea University https://orcid.org/0009-0002-8712-1886
Alice Liefgreen University College London, Department of Behavioural Science and Health https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8580-6924

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.2375

Palabras clave:

pruebas generadas por los usuarios, pruebas ciudadanas, Corte Penal Internacional, jueces, deepfakes

Resumen

Las pruebas registradas en dispositivos digitales personales, o «pruebas generadas por los usuarios» (UGE, por sus siglas en inglés), han influido profundamente en nuestra forma de conocer los crímenes internacionales. Se prevé que las UGE desempeñen un papel importante en futuros casos ante la Corte Penal Internacional (CPI), aunque hasta la fecha pocos juicios se han basado ampliamente en ellas. Esta investigación ofrece información importante sobre la forma en que los jueces de la CPI definen las UGE y perciben sus puntos fuertes y débiles, así como sobre la disposición de la Corte para adaptarse a juzgar en la era de la inteligencia artificial. Utilizando la teoría fundamentada para analizar las entrevistas con los jueces de la CPI, identificamos varios temas clave, entre ellos las preocupaciones sobre la importancia percibida y el posible sesgo de las fuentes de pruebas; los retos prácticos que plantea el empleo de la UGE; la carga que recae sobre las partes para garantizar la fiabilidad de las pruebas, para impugnar rigurosamente las pruebas de la parte contraria, y la importancia de preparar a los profesionales del derecho para hacer frente a los riesgos asociados a la desinformación y la información errónea.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Metrics

Estadísticas globales

104 Visualizaciones	26 Descargas
130 Total

Biografía del autor/a

Yvonne McDermott, Swansea University

Professor of Law.

Principal Investigator of the TRUE Project (Trust in User-generated Evidence).

Anne Hausknecht, Swansea University

PhD Candidate.

Researcher at the TRUE Project (Trust in User-generated Evidence).

Citas

Aksamitowska, K., 2021. Digital Evidence in Domestic Core International Crimes Prosecutions: Lessons Learned from Germany, Sweden, Finland and the Netherlands. Journal of International Criminal Justice [online], 19(1), 189-211. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqab035 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqab035

Alanazi, S., et al., 2025. Unmasking deepfakes: a multidisciplinary examination of social impacts and regulatory responses. Human-Intelligent Systems Integration [online], 1-23. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42454-025-00060-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42454-025-00060-4

Anosova, I., Aksamitowska, K., and Sancin, V., 2024. Positive Complementarity in Action: International Criminal Justice and the Ongoing Armed Conflict in Ukraine. International Criminal Law Review [online], 24(5-6), 657-679. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1163/15718123-bja10211 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/15718123-bja10211

Bo, M., 2025. Artificial Intelligence in the Prosecution of International Crimes. International Law Studies [online], 106. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5597734 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5597734

Braga da Silva, R., 2022. Updating the Authentication of Digital Evidence in the International Criminal Court. International Criminal Law Review [online], 22(5-6), 941-964. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1163/15718123-bja10083 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/15718123-bja10083

Bryant, A., and Charmaz, K., eds., 2007. The SAGE Handbook of Grounded Theory [online]. London: Sage. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781848607941 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781848607941

Casu, M., et al., 2024. AI Mirage: The Impostor Bias and the Deepfake Detection Challenge in the Era of Artificial Illusions. Forensic Science International: Digital Investigation [online], 50, 1-13. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsidi.2024.301795 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsidi.2024.301795

Chesney, R., and Citron, D., 2019. Deep Fakes: A Looming Challenge for Privacy, Democracy, and National Security. California Law Review [online], 107, 1753-1820. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3213954 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3213954

Chlevickaitė, G., Holá, B., and Bijleveld, C., 2020. Judicial Witness Assessments at the ICTY, ICTR and ICC: Is There ‘Standard Practice’ in International Criminal Justice? 2020. Journal of International Criminal Justice [online], 18(1), 185-210. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqaa002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqaa002

Combs, N.A., 2018. Deconstructing the Epistemic Challenges to Mass Atrocity Prosecutions. Washington and Lee Law Review [online], 75(1), 223-300.

Drenk, D., et al., 2024. Testifying across Cultures: Trials and Tribulations. Amsterdam Law Forum, 16, 21-44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37974/ALF.500

Evaluating Digital Open Source Imagery: A Guide for Judges and Fact-Finders [online]. 2024. Available at: https://www.trueproject.co.uk/osguide

eyeWitness, 2025. Outcome Report. Justice Captured: Authentic Evidence in a Digital Age [online]. Available at: https://www.eyewitness.global/eyewitness-2024-outcome-report

Fidler, S., and Grove, T., 2023. Smartphones Are Changing the War in Ukraine. Wall Street Journal [online], 16 February. Available at: https://www.wsj.com/articles/smartphones-are-changing-the-war-in-ukraine-adb37ba1

Freeman, L. and Vázquez Llorente, R., 2021. Finding the Signal in the Noise: International Criminal Evidence and Procedure in the Digital Age. Journal of International Criminal Justice [online], 19(1), 163-188. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqab023 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqab023

Freeman, L., 2018. Digital Evidence and War Crimes Prosecutions: The Impact of Digital Technologies on International Criminal Investigations and Trials. Fordham International Law Journal [online], 41(2), 283-336. Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ilj/vol41/iss2/1/

Gabriele, C., Matheson, K., and Vázquez Llorente, R., 2021. The Role of Mobile Technology in Documenting International Crimes: The Affaire Castro et Kizito in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Journal of International Criminal Justice [online], 19(1), 107-130. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqab026 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqab026

Gavrysh, K., 2025. Digital Evidence in the Practice of the International Criminal Court: What Future for Proceedings on War Crimes Committed in Ukraine?. In: O. Svaček and M. Faix, eds., Prosecution of War Crimes before the ICC: Global Issues [online]. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-84216-0_6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-84216-0_6

Gillett, M., 2023. Fact-Finding Without Rules: Habermas’s Communicative Rationality as a Framework for Judicial Assessments of Open-Source Information. Michigan Journal of International Law [online], 44(3), 301-348. Available at: https://doi.org/10.36642/mjil.44.3.fact DOI: https://doi.org/10.36642/mjil.44.3.fact

Gillett, M., and Fan, W., 2023. Expert Evidence and Digital Open Source Information: Bringing Online Evidence to the Courtroom. Journal of International Criminal Justice [online], 21(4), 661-693. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqad050 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqad050

Granhag, P.A., et al., 2013. I saw the man who killed Anna Lindh! An archival study of witnesses’ offender descriptions. Psychology, Crime & Law [online], 19(10), 921-931. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2012.719620 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2012.719620

Groh, M., et al., 2022. Deepfake Detection by Human Crowds, Machines, and Machine-Informed Crowds. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America [online], 119, 1-11. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2110013119 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2110013119

Hak, J., 2024. Image-Based Evidence in International Criminal Prosecutions: Charting a Path Forward [online]. Oxford University Press. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198889533.001.0001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198889533.001.0001

Hamilton, R., 2018. User-Generated Evidence. Columbia Journal of Transnational Law [online], 57, 1-61. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3124409 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3124409

Hamilton, R.J., 2019. The Hidden Danger of User-Generated Evidence for International Criminal Justice. Just Security [online], 23 January. Available at: https://www.justsecurity.org/62339/hidden-danger-user-generated-evidence-international-criminal-justice/

Hausknecht, A., 2026. The Impact of Deepfakes on Trust in User-Generated Evidence. In: R. Moosavian and T. Bennett, eds., Deepfakes and the Law: Challenges, Responses, and Critiques. Routledge, forthcoming. Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5352911 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5352911

Henning, M., 2025. International Criminal Court to ditch Microsoft Office for European open source alternative. Euractiv [online], 30 October. Available at: https://www.euractiv.com/news/international-criminal-court-to-ditch-microsoft-office-for-european-open-source-alternative/

Hennink, M., and Kaiser, B.N., 2022. Sample sizes for saturation in qualitative research: A systematic review of empirical tests. Social Science & Medicine [online], 292, 114523. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114523 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114523

ICC, 1998. Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court [online]. Available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/2024-05/Rome-Statute-eng.pdf

Irving, E., 2017. And So It Begins… Social Media Evidence in an ICC Arrest Warrant. Opinio Juris [online], 17 August. Available at: https://opiniojuris.org/2017/08/17/and-so-it-begins-social-media-evidence-in-an-icc-arrest-warrant/

Irving, E., and Rewald, S., 2022. Using the Leiden Guidelines to Address Key Issues in Digitally Derived Evidence. Opinio Juris [online], 23 August. Available at: https://opiniojuris.org/2022/08/23/using-the-leiden-guidelines-to-address-key-issues-in-digitally-derived-evidence/

Kelley, E., 2023. Challenges in Collecting and Admitting Open-Source and User-Generated Evidence of Atrocity Crimes: Prospects for Ukraine. NYU Journal of International Law and Politics, 56, 681.

Klosterkamp, S., and Jeffrey, A., 2024. The intimate geopolitics of evidence gathering in war crime investigation in Ukraine. Political geography open research [online], 3, 100008. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpgor.2024.100008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpgor.2024.100008

Koenig, A., and Freeman, L., 2022. Cutting-Edge Evidence: Strengths and Weaknesses of New Digital Investigation Methods in Litigation. Hastings Law Journal [online], 73(5), 1233-1254. Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_law_journal/vol73/iss5/4

Mai, K.T., et al., 2023. Warning: Humans cannot reliably detect speech deepfakes. PLOS ONE [online], 18, 1-20. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0285333 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0285333

McDermott, Y., 2024. Proving International Crimes [online]. Oxford University Press. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198842972.001.0001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198842972.001.0001

McDermott, Y., and Hausknecht, A., forthcoming 2026. Judge and Juries’ Perceptions of Open Source Evidence. In: S. Dubberley, A Koenig, D. Murray and Y. McDermott, eds., Digital Witness. 2nd ed. Oxford University Press. Available at: https://www.trueproject.co.uk/relevant-publications

McDermott, Y., Koenig, A., and Murray, D., 2021. Open Source Information’s Blind Spot: Human and Machine Bias in International Criminal Investigations. Journal of International Criminal Justice [online], 19(1), 85-105. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqab006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqab006

McGonigle Leyh, B., 2017. Changing Landscapes in Documentation Efforts: Civil Society Documentation of Serious Human Rights Violations. Utrecht Journal of International and European Law [online], 33, 44-58. Available at: https://doi.org/10.5334/ujiel.365 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/ujiel.365

Minogue, D., et al., 2023. Putting Principles into Practice: Reflections on a Mock Admissibility Hearing on Open Source Evidence. In: M.L. Fremuth, A. Sauermoser and K. Stavrou, eds., International Criminal Law before Domestic Courts [online]. Vienna: MANZ. Available at: https://doi.org/10.5771/9783214258924-307 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5771/9783214258924-307

Mnookin, J.L., 1998. The Image of Truth: Photographic Evidence and the Power of Analogy. Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities, 10(1), 1-74.

Murray, D., McDermott, Y., and Koenig, A., 2022. Mapping the Use of Open Source Research in UN Human Rights Investigations. Journal of Human Rights Practice [online], 14(2), 554-581. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huab059 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huab059

Nickerson, R.S., 1998. Confirmation Bias: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon in Many Guises. Review of General Psychology [online], 2(2), 175–220. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175

Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), and the Human Rights Center at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law, 2022. Berkeley Protocol on Digital Open Source Investigations.

Parry, Z.B., 2009. Digital Manipulation and Photographic Evidence: Defrauding the Courts on Thousand Words at a Time. Journal of Law, Technology & Policy, 175-202.

Peake, J., 2024. Challenges of Using Digital Evidence for War Crimes Prosecutions: Availability, Reliability, Admissibility. American Journal of International Law: Unbound [online], 118, 57-61. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/aju.2024.5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/aju.2024.5

Pfefferkorn, R., 2020. ‘Deepfakes’ in the Courtroom. Public Interest Law Journal, 29, 245-276.

Pfefferkorn, R., 2021.The Threat Posed by Deepfakes to Marginalized Communities. Brookings [online], 21 April. Available at: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-threat-posed-by-deepfakes-to-marginalized-communities/

Rini, R., 2020. Deepfakes and the Epistemic Backstop. Philosophers’ Imprint, 20(24), 1-16.

Robinson, O.C., 2014. Sampling in interview-based qualitative research: A theoretical and practical guide. Qualitative research in psychology [online], 11(1), 25-41. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2013.801543 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2013.801543

Sandoval, M.P., et al., 2024. Threat of deepfakes to the criminal justice system: a systematic review. Crime Science [online], 13, 41. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40163-024-00239-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40163-024-00239-1

Sherwin, R.K., Feigenson, N. and Spiesel, C., 2006. Law in the Digital Age: How Visual Communication Technologies Are Transforming the Practice, Theory, and Teaching of Law. Boston University Journal of Science & Technology Law [online], 12, 227-270. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.804424 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.804424

Smith, E., 2020. Victim Testimony at the ICC: Trauma, Memory and Witness Credibility. In: R. Jasini and G. Townsend, eds., Advancing the Impact of Victim Participation at the ICC: Bridging the Gap between Research and Practice [online]. Available at: https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/migrated/iccba_-_oxford_publication_30_november_2020_.pdf

Stavrou, K., 2022. User-Generated Evidence: A Helping Hand for the ICC Investigation into the Situation in Ukraine? Opinio Juris [online], 14 March. Available at: http://opiniojuris.org/2022/03/14/user-generated-evidence-a-helping-hand-for-the-icc-investigation-into-the-situation-in-ukraine/

Sundar, S.S., Molina, M.D., and Cho, E., 2021. Seeing is Believing: Is Video Modality More Powerful in Spreading Fake News via Online Messaging Apps? Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication [online], 26, 301-319. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmab010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmab010

Terry, G., et al., 2017. Thematic analysis. In: C. Willig and C.S. Rogers, eds., The SAGE handbook of qualitative research in psychology [online]. London: Sage, 2(17-37), 25. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526405555.n2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526405555.n2

Tversky, A., and Kahneman, D., 1973. Availability: A Heuristic for Judging Frequency and Probability. Cognitive Psychology [online], 5(2), 207–232. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9

Tversky, A., and Kahneman, D., 1974. Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science [online], 185(4157), 1124–1131. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124

Twomey, J., et al., 2025. What Is So Deep About Deepfakes? A Multi-Disciplinary Thematic Analysis of Academic Narratives About Deepfake Technology. IEEE Transactions on Technology and Society [online], 6(1), 64-79. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1109/TTS.2024.3493465 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TTS.2024.3493465

Vecellio Segate, R., 2023. Channeled Beneath International Law: Mapping Infrastructure and Regulatory Capture as Israeli-American Hegemonic Reinforcers in Palestine. Communication Law and Policy [online], 28, 332-366. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/10811680.2024.2334081 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10811680.2024.2334081

Vukušić, I., 2018. Nineteen Minutes of Horror: Insights from the Scorpions Execution Video. Images and Collective Violence: Function, Use and Memory [online], 12(2), 35-53. Available at: https://doi.org/10.5038/1911-9933.12.2.1527 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5038/1911-9933.12.2.1527

White, E., 2024. Closing Cases with Open-Source: Facilitating the Use of User-Generated Open-Source Evidence in International Criminal Investigations Through the Creation of a Standing Investigative Mechanism. Leiden Journal of International Law [online], 37(1), 228-250. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156523000444 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156523000444