This paper aims to examine whether a different methodology has emerged to identify customary rules in the field of international criminal law. For this purpose, this paper briefly touches upon debates regarding customary law as a source and an interpretative aid of international criminal law. It then critically studies the identification methodology of customary law to seek whether a new approach deviating from the classic two-element (State practice and opinio juris) approach is emerging in academia. It also recapitulates some cases of international criminal tribunals to ascertain whether these tribunals have formed a distinct method for custom identification. Finally, it explores the unique characteristics and difficulties in identifying customary rules in international criminal law. It concludes that a different method has not been developed in academia or adopted by tribunals in practice to identify customary rules in international criminal law. The two-element approach still serves as guidance for custom-identification in general, but a flexible application of it is acceptable in specific cases. International practitioners should be cautious in the identification of customary rules in international criminal law, so as to prosecute and punish suspects of international crimes without endangering the principle of legality.

中文翻译：

---

国际刑法习惯规则的确定

本文旨在研究是否出现了另一种方法来确定国际刑法领域的习惯规则。为此，本文简要介绍了关于习惯法是国际刑法的渊源和解释性帮助的辩论。然后，它批判性地研究了习惯法的识别方法，以寻求在学术界是否正在出现一种偏离经典两要素（国家实践和法律观点）方法的新方法。它还概述了一些国际刑事法庭案件，以确定这些法庭是否已形成一种独特的习惯识别方法。最后，它探讨了在确定国际刑法中习惯规则方面的独特特征和困难。结论是，学术界尚未开发出另一种方法或法庭在实践中采用了另一种方法来确定国际刑法中的习惯规则。通常，两元素方法仍可作为自定义标识的指南，但是在特定情况下可以灵活地应用它。国际从业人员在确定国际刑法中的习惯规则时应谨慎行事，以便在不危害合法性原则的情况下起诉和惩治国际犯罪嫌疑人。