Abstract:INTRODUCTION. In the context of the active development of information technologies and their integration into the main models of judicial proceedings, the functions and role of the court in considering a criminal case on its merits have become a highly relevant topic of modern science. On one hand, many scientists have focused on strengthening the adversarial nature of legal proceedings, ensuring a balance of power between the parties, and building mechanisms to guarantee the right to judicial protection. However, legal proceedings that do not pursue any normatively fixed goals lead to excessive formalism, as the adversarial system remains the only proven method for establishing the circumstances of a case. This approach does not fully align with the principles of justice and fairness in the final verdict. The International Criminal Court (ICC) embodies a scientific approach to solving the problem of combining various forms of legal proceedings and ensuring a balance of power between the parties, partly by assigning an active role to the court and aiming to achieve truth in the process. The ICC’s criminal process results from scientific modeling that considers identified doctrinal trends. The high degree of commonality in the approaches of leading lawyers within the Rome Statute of the ICC suggests their universality. This article explores the theoretical and practical aspects of combining process models in the ICC Trial Chamber activities. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The methodological basis of this article comprises general scientific and special methods for understanding legal phenomena and processes in the field of international criminal procedure. These include the method of system-structural analysis, the formal logical method, the method for synthesizing sociolegal phenomena, and historical description. RESULTS. This article confirms the relevance of addressing the functions and role of the court in considering a criminal case and its merits in modern criminal procedure research. Using the ICC Trial Chamber’s regulatory and organizational peculiarities, it substantiates that the adversarial model of the criminal process does not preclude assigning an active role to the court in examining the facts to be proved. It also supports setting the goal of achieving material truth, which is essential for completing a complete, comprehensive, and objective study of the case materials. Furthermore, there are three levels in the structure of the ICC Trial Chamber’s functions and powers, each of which is embodied in law enforcement practice to facilitate a special and flexible combination of the adversarial and investigative principles of legal proceedings. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION. This article proves that a court’s active role in criminal proceedings does not conflict with the adversarial nature of proceedings. An analysis of the provisions of the Rome Statute of the ICC, the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, and the jurisprudence of international tribunals highlights the advantages and disadvantages of the ICC Trial Chamber.

Pride and Prejudice or Sense and Sensibility? A Pragmatic Proposal for the Recruitment of Judges at the ICC and Other International Criminal Courts

The International Criminal Court’s Selectivity and Procedural Justice

Electing Judges and Prosecutors of the International Criminal Court: A Reappraisal of the Practice through the Lenses of Transparency and Legitimacy

The Judiciary of International Criminal Law

Towards Just, Fair and Interpretable Methods for Judicial Subset Selection.

Ascriptive Characteristics and Perceptions of Impropriety in the Rule of Law: Race, Gender, and Public Assessments of Whether Judges Can Be Impartial

Gauging Court Adjudication: Qualification And Quantification

The International Criminal Court and the Issue of Intersectionality—A Conceptual and Legal Framework for Analysis

The influence of the judge's gender competence on ensuring the equal access to justice

Theory and Practice of Mixing Procedural Models in the Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Court

Pushing the bar – elite law firms and the rise of international commercial courts in the world economy

Gender, race, bias and perspective: OR, how otherness colours your judgment

Politics and Justice at the International Criminal Court

Dealing With ‘Fake Judges’ Under EU Law: Poland as a Case Study in Light of the Court of Justice’s Ruling of 26 March 2020 in Simpson and HG

International Perspectives on Child-responsive Courts

Politics , the Judiciary , and the Arbitration of Unfair Dismissal Disputes

Evaluating an International Investment Court for International Investment Disputes Under European Union’s Proposal

Of Moral Outrage in Judicial Opinions

Humans or LLMs as the Judge? A Study on Judgement Biases

Judging the Judges: A Systematic Investigation of Position Bias in Pairwise Comparative Assessments by LLMs

Sexism in the Judiciary