International criminal tribunals (ict s) have found, almost consistently, that unlawfully and/or secretly obtained evidence is admissible. De facto, defendants in international criminal law (icl) enjoy no privacy-related procedural safeguards under either the applicable domestic law or international human rights law (ihrl). Privacy violations are not confined to those impairing defendants’ rights; they might result in premature acquittals or in misconducts vis-à-vis the victims, too. While this is practically unescapable a compromise due to the ‘high profile’ of the accused and the complexity, length, momentousness, and ‘political charge’ of these trials, over-relaxed admissibility rules become unsustainable as far as digital evidence is concerned, in that they add to the latter’s inherently low reliability and heavy cognitive impact. Facing this issue, it is legit to wonder whether artificial intelligence (ai) might mitigate privacy violations or render them no longer necessary, thus improving the fairness record of the International Criminal Court (icc) and other ict s.

国际刑事法庭（ICT S）发现，几乎一致，即非法和/或秘密获取的证据可采性。事实上，国际刑法 ( icl ) 中的被告在适用的国内法或国际人权法 ( ihrl ) 下均不享有与隐私相关的程序保障。）。侵犯隐私的行为不仅限于损害被告权利的行为；它们也可能导致过早无罪释放或对受害者的不当行为。尽管由于被告的“高调”以及这些审判的复杂性、长度、重大性和“政治指控”，这实际上是不可避免的妥协，但就数字证据而言，过度放松的可采性规则变得不可持续，在它们增加了后者固有的低可靠性和严重的认知影响。面对这个问题，我们有理由怀疑人工智能 ( ai ) 是否可以减轻隐私侵犯或使其不再需要，从而改善国际刑事法院 ( icc ) 和其他ICT的公平记录。