ABSTRACT
This chapter analyses how traumatised witnesses who have been selected to give testimonial evidence are prepared for testifying about international crimes. This chapter argues that while trauma is generally taken into account to approve certain preparatory practices, the potential of these practices to lead to retraumatisation is largely overlooked. This chapter lays bare that precisely the reasons given in case law to prepare witnesses to a certain extent, such as focused and efficient testimony, may not be achieved as a result of allowing certain preparatory conduct. This chapter examines the preparatory practices of ‘witness proofing’ at the ICTY and ‘witness preparation’ at the ICC, as well as the ICC’s practice of ‘witness familiarisation’ and the less regulated Dutch framework for preparing witnesses. Taken together, these approaches demonstrate that further regulation of preparatory practices is particularly relevant to prevent improper influence, which should also prevent adversely affecting the well-being of witnesses. Given the varying degrees to which witnesses are prepared for testifying about international crimes, ensuring the well-being of traumatised witnesses should be more rigorously taken into account to ensure the process does not cause harm before they testify.
