Quis custodiet ipsos custodes

Mednarodno kazensko pravo se je dolgo osredotočalo predvsem na zagotavljanje kazenske odgovornosti storilcev mednarodnih hudodelstev, a mora to zagotoviti tudi v okviru poštenega kazenskega postopka. V zvezi s tem se zastavlja vprašanje, ali za zagotavljanje zakonitosti postopka potrebujemo tudi zunanji nadzor. To je postalo relevantno predvsem z ustanovitvijo stalnega Mednarodnega kazenskega sodišča. Prispevek preverja hipotezo, da Rimski statut pozna ustaljene možnosti uveljavljanja pravic obdolženca, da pa bi bil kljub temu potreben zunanji nadzor. Na začetku obravnava obstoječe možnosti uveljavljanja oziroma sankcioniranja kršitev človekovih pravic v postopku pred MKSpreko vlaganja pravnih sredstev, kazenske, civilne ali odškodninske odgovornosti ali izločitve nedopustnih dokazov. Drugi del prispevka pa vsebuje razmislek o vključitvi MKS v obstoječe univerzalne, regionalne ali nacionalne nadzorne mehanizme.International criminal law has been long focusing on providing criminal responsibility to perpetrators of international crimes and preventing their impunity, but it also has to provide fair trial at the same time. In connection to this an issue arises, whether the legality of the procedure has to be ensured by external supervision. That became especially relevant with the establishment of a permanent International Criminal Court (the ICC). This paper therefore tries to verify the hypothesis that the Rome Statute includes all the regular mechanisms for protection of the defendant´s rights, but the external supervision is still required. The paper firstly discussed the existing possibility of protection of the defendant´s rights in the ICC - means of invoking or sanctioning violations of these rights through legal remedies, criminal, civil and tort liability or inadmissibility of evidence. Second part of the paper includes thoughts on possibility of the ICC joining the existing universal, regional or national supervisory mechanisms