This article takes a closer look at the individual opinions of judges at the International Criminal Court (icc). The issuance of separate opinions is one of the most effective ways to investigate individual judicial behaviour, because a judge will only issue opinions if in her/his estimation the benefits outweigh the costs. The number of opinions a judge issues is an important measurement as is their timing. Building on an original dataset, the article identifies patterns by uncovering the predominant issuers, the cases and trial phases where individual opinions are most frequently issued, the dominant topics, and developments over time. Using a probabilistic topic modelling approach, this article suggests that opinions are a common way for several icc judges to engage in judicial politics about several topics with limited judicial restraint and finds that a small group of judges is most avid in using opinions as a judicial tool.

本文仔细研究了国际刑事法院（icc）法官的个人观点。发表单独意见是调查个人司法行为最有效的方式之一，因为法官只有在其认为收益大于成本的情况下才会发表意见。法官提出意见的数量和发表意见的时机都是一个重要的衡量标准。本文以原始数据集为基础，通过揭示主要发行人、最常发表个人意见的案件和审判阶段、主要主题以及随时间的发展来识别模式。本文使用概率主题建模方法，提出意见是多个icc的常用方式法官在司法约束有限的情况下就几个话题参与司法政治，并发现一小部分法官最热衷于将意见作为司法工具。