International criminal courts and tribunals have faced a number of challenges with respect to the assessment of evidence. For the International Criminal Court (icc) there are pressing questions regarding the best interpretation of the relevant provisions in the Rome Statute (rs). To this point, the assessment of documentary evidence conveyed by the UN Independent Investigative Mechanisms (iims) constitutes a rather unexplored area. Accordingly, the present study will reflect upon the challenges posed for the icc, in case the Court proceeds to evaluate the evidence collected by those mechanisms. Special focus will be upon the working methodology of the IIM on Syria and Myanmar. Based on the Court’s recent case-law and, in particular on the Ongwen judgment, the study will further analyze the applicability of the three-prong test of Article 69(4)rs with a view to clarifying the evidentiary standard-setting of the Court.

国际刑事法院和法庭在评估证据方面面临着许多挑战。对国际刑事法院 ( icc ) 来说，关于对《罗马规约》( rs )相关条款的最佳解释存在着紧迫的问题。就这一点而言，联合国独立调查机制 ( iim s ) 对书面证据的评估构成了一个相当未探索的领域。因此，本研究将反思国际刑院面临的挑战，以防法院着手评估这些机制收集的证据。将特别关注 IIM 在叙利亚和缅甸问题上的工作方法。根据法院最近的判例法，特别是Ongwen判决，该研究将进一步分析第 69 条第 4 款rs的三管齐下测试的适用性，以澄清法院的证据标准设定.