with the Pinochet indictment in the United Kingdom, which catalysed domestic criminal actions against Augusto Pinochet in Chile).84 •H  ybrid tribunals. If at all possible, a tribunal should be developed in the country where the crimes occurred, as it will have more impact and may assist to develop domestic capacity. Hybrid tribunals have taken different forms. In cases where domestic capacity was lacking, such as in Timor-Leste and Kosovo, the United Nations administration placed an internationalized criminal capacity within the domestic legal system (e.g., the international judges’ and prosecutors’ programme in Kosovo, and the Serious Crimes Unit and Special Panels in Timor-Leste). In Sierra Leone and Cambodia, the United Nations concluded an agreement with each respective Government.85 These were situations in which there was a measure of political will and some domestic capacity, but where each needed to be augmented. In Sierra Leone this resulted in the establishment of the Special Court, which sits outside of the domestic legal system and is governed by its own Statute and Rules of Procedure and Evidence. In Cambodia this resulted in a proposal for “Extraordinary Chambers,” which likewise will be governed by their own law and procedures. These Chambers had not yet become operational at the time of writing. A recent model is the War Crimes Chamber in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which became operational in 2005. This Chamber was established through a combination of international agreements and domestic legislation, and the international component is due to be phased out over a number of years.86 • International assistance to purely domestic trials. International assistance need not be channelled through the United Nations but may take the form of direct assistance to a domestic process. These are some of the issues that may govern the choice of the international community to get involved with domestic proceedings: —D  ivision of labour. In some situations the international community and domestic authorities may cooperate in bringing to trial different defendants by sharing the burden. This scenario may be envisaged particularly when the International Criminal Court is involved. — Fairness. If a domestic initiative or system is deemed to fall significantly short of international standards of fairness, this may limit the role that particular States are able to play. The choices will be between critical engagement, to try to increase the fairness of the process, or disengagement. For instance, direct support for trials where the death penalty is applied may contravene international obligations, such as those imposed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. This is currently one of the issues regarding the Iraqi Special 84 E /CN.4/2004/88, paras. 49–55. 85 T he Special Court Agreement was signed in 2002 and the Agreement on the Extraordinary Chambers was concluded in 2003. 86 S ee the Project Plan for the Registry of Section I of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Special Department of the Office of the Prosecutor of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Office of the High Representative, 20 October 2004. 30