This article illustrates how the ECCC is struggling to combine successfully two distinct institutional responses to crimes, by being both a criminal tribunal, with its formal rules of procedure and focus on retributive justice, and a quasi-truth and reconciliation commission, with its more flexible approach to participatory rights for victims and focus on reconciliation. The article highlights the advantages and challenges of adopting a ‘two for the price of one’ model within the Cambodian context and uses the experiences of the ECCC to underscore important lessons for future ad hoc and hybrid courts.
* MA, JD, Ph.D. candidate in international criminal law and procedure at Utrecht University's Netherlands Institute of Human Rights, and co-director of the Netherlands office of the Public International Law & Policy Group. The author sincerely thanks Marieke de Hoon and Theo Leyh for their insightful comments on earlier drafts. Any mistakes or misconceptions are the author's own.