Legal research, jurisdiction analysis, and precedent mining
AI-driven extraction and classification of war crimes-relevant case law, statutes, and tribunal rulings from ICC, ICJ, EU courts, and national jurisdictions.
AI harmonizes definitions of war crimes elements (actus reus, mens rea, command structure), threshold criteria, procedural rights, and digital-evidence admissibility across the Rome Statute, Geneva Conventions, EU/national statute books, and evolving domestic frameworks.
Aggregates, audits, and risk-scores all open arrest warrants from ICC, INTERPOL Red Notices, and national courts. Evaluates enforcement barriers including suspect immunity, jurisdictional limits, and extradition refusals using diplomatic treaty analysis and compliance overlays.
AI generates multi-layered exposure reports on state, corporate, and individual liability across global legal frameworks. Leverages graph analytics to map entity-event connections with overlays for universal jurisdiction, aiding/abetting, and sanctions exposure.
Constructs real-time, interactive graphs mapping the influence, citation patterns, and jurisprudential relationships of legal authorities among rulings, statutes, and resolutions in the war crimes accountability domain.
Auto-generates concise, contextually nuanced summaries of relevant case law, highlighting issue statements, majority/minority holdings, and rationale directly related to the facts/themes of an ongoing prosecution or investigation.
Live-tracks and audits the real-time status, legal basis, expiry, and violation risk of sanctions, arms embargoes, travel bans, and asset freezes relevant to war crimes proceedings. Automatically integrates ARCS overlays for notification and legal record-keeping.
Identifies and annotates divergent legal terms/definitions across jurisdictions and languages, especially where contested terms risk undermining legal arguments or admissibility of evidence.
Automated validator for admissibility of all evidence modalities (digital, physical, testimony) for any chosen court (ICC, ICJ, national). Scans court rules, comparator cases, and ARCF overlays to produce a flagged risk matrix.
Scans and annotates legal briefs, case theories, and procedural records to flag contradictions, conflicts, or gaps in cross-jurisdictional filings, referencing ARCS/ARCF overlays for procedural completeness.
Map which national courts can exercise universal jurisdiction over specific war crimes based on current legislation and case law.
Analyze state obligations under international humanitarian law treaties and identify compliance gaps.
Assess whether national proceedings meet ICC complementarity requirements or if ICC jurisdiction should be triggered.
Analyze immunity claims and potential waivers for state officials and diplomats in war crimes proceedings.
Analyze extradition feasibility based on bilateral treaties, political considerations, and legal obstacles.
Analyze victim participation rights across different forums and proceedings stages.
Analyze reparations frameworks and precedents across international and national mechanisms.
Analyze command responsibility elements for military and civilian superiors under international criminal law.
Analyzes state immunity issues in war crimes prosecutions, including exceptions for international crimes and civil claims.
Analyzes immunity issues for current and former heads of state and senior officials in war crimes prosecutions.