1. پشمی، بهرام؛ نژدی منش، هیبتالله (۱۴۰۱). انعکاس نظریههای عدالت کیفری در اساس نامه دیوان کیفری بینالمللی. نشریه آموزشهای حقوق کیفری، دوره ۱۹، شماره ۲۳، شماره پیاپی ۲۳، ۸۹-۱۲۲.
2. حدادی، مهدی (۱۳۸۹). مقایسه مفهوم و کارکرد نظم عمومی در نظام حقوق بینالملل با نظامهای حقوق ملی. مجله حقوق خصوصی، سال هفتم، شماره شانزده، ۱۳۶-۱۶۹.
3. زمانی، قاسم؛ حسینی اکبرنژاد، هاله (۱۳۹۴). جامعه بینالملل و عدالت کیفری. فصلنامه مطالعات حقوق عمومی، دوره ۴۵، شماره ۳، ۳۱۵-۳۳۹.
References
1. Bos, Adriaan (1999). The International Criminal Court: A Perspective. In: Lee, Roy S. (ed.), The International Criminal Court: The Making of the Rome Statute—Issues, Negotiations, Results. The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 468.
2. Brunkhorst, Hauke (2002). Globalising Democracy Without a State: Weak Public, Strong Public, Global Constitutionalism. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 31, 675–90.
3. Buchanan, Allen; and Keohane, Robert O. (2006). The Legitimacy of Global Governance Institutions. Ethics & International Affairs, 20, 4, 405–37.
4. Carson, Lyn; and Martin, Brian (1999). Random Selection in Politics. Westport, Conn.: Praeger.
5. Chambers, Simone (2003). Deliberative Democratic Theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 6, 307–324.
6. Crosby, Ned; and Nethercutt, Doug (2005). Citizens Juries: Creating a Trustworthy Voice of the People. In: Gastil, John; and Levine, Peter (eds.), The Deliberative Democracy Handbook. San Francisco, Calif.: Jossey-Bass, 111–19.
7. Dahl, Robert A. (1998). On Democracy. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.
8. Dryzek, John S. (2001). Legitimacy and Economy in Deliberative Democracy. Political Theory, 29, 651–69.
9. Dwyer, William L. (2002). In the Hands of the People. New York: St. Martin’s, 32.
10. Fichtelberg, Aaron (2006). Democratic Legitimacy and the International Criminal Court: A Liberal Defence. Journals of International Criminal Justice, 4, 4, 765–785.
11. Gastil, John (2008). Political Communication and Deliberation. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 8–10.
12. Gastil, John; Lingle, Colin J.; and Deess, Eugene P. (forthcoming). The Jury and Democracy: How Jury Deliberation Promotes Civic Engagement and Political Participation. New York: Oxford University Press.
13. Gastil, John; and Levine, Peter (eds.) (2005). The Deliberative Democracy Handbook. San Francisco, Calif.: Jossey-Bass.
14. Gerring, John (2007). Global Justice as an Empirical Question. PS: Political Science & Politics, 40, 1, 67–77.
15. Hans, Valerie P. (2000). Business on Trial: The Civil Jury and Corporate Responsibility. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.
16. Hans, Valerie P. (2008). Jury Systems Around the World. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 4, 275–97.
17. Hickerson, Andrea; and Gastil, John (2008). Assessing the Difference Critique of Deliberation: Gender, Emotion, and the Jury Experience. Communication Theory, 18, 281–303.
18. International Criminal Court (2009). Victims and Witnesses Protection. Available at: www.icc-cpi.int/Menus/ ICC/Structure+of_the_Court/Protection/Victims+and+Witness+Unit.htm (accessed December 16, 2009).
19. Kalven, Harry Jr.; and Zeisel, Hans (1966). The American Jury. Boston: Little, Brown.
20. K¨ochler, Hans (2003). Global Justice or Global Revenge? International Criminal Justice at the Crossroads. Vienna: Springer-Verlag, 1.
21. Lu, Catherine (2006). The ICC as an Institution of Moral Regeneration. In: Milde, Michael; Vernon, Richard; and Harrington, Joanna (eds.), Bringing Power to Justice? The Prospects of the International Criminal Court. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 195.
22. McGoldrick, Dominic (2004). The Legal and Political Significance of a Permanent International Criminal Court. In: McGoldrick, Dominic; Rowe, P. J.; and Donnelly, Eric (eds.), The Permanent International Criminal Court: Legal and Policy Issues. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 459–60.
23. Morris, Madeline (2002). The Democratic Dilemma of the International Criminal Court. Buffalo Criminal Law, 5, 600.
24. Overy, Richard (2003). The Nuremberg Trials: International Law in the Making. In: Sands, Philippe (ed.), From Nuremberg to The Hague: The Future of International Criminal Justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2.
25. Powell, Amy (2004). Three Angry Men: Juries in International Criminal Adjudication. New York University Law Review, 79, 2341–80.
26. Schiff, Benjamin N. (2008). Building the International Criminal Court. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 142.
27. Simpson, Gerry; and McGoldrick, Dominic (2004). Politics, Sovereignty, Remembrance. In: McGoldrick, Dominic; Rowe, P. J.; and Donnelly, Eric (eds.), The Permanent International Criminal Court: Legal and Policy Issues. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 48–51.
28. Struett, Michael J. (2008). The Politics of Constructing the International Criminal Court: NGOs, Discourse, and Agency. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 155, 177.
29. Struett, Michael J. (2009). The Politics of Discursive Legitimacy: Understanding the Dynamics and Implication of Prosecutorial Discretion at the International Criminal Court. In: Roach, Steven C. (ed.), Governance, Order, and the International Criminal Court. New York: Oxford University Press, 107–10.
30. Sunstein, Cass R. (2002). The Law of Group Polarization. Journal of Political Philosophy, 10, 95, 175.
31. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, art. 121, p. 85. Available at: www.icccpi. int/NR/rdonlyres/EA9AEFF7-5752-4F84-BE94-0A655EB30E16/0/ Rome Statute English.pdf.
32. Vidmar, Neil (2000). A Historical and Comparative Perspective on the Common Law Jury. In: Vidmar, Neil (ed.), World Jury Systems. New York: Oxford University Press, 1–52.
33. Vidmar, Neil; and Hans, Valerie (2007). American Juries: The Verdict. Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus.
