This paper brings forward Justice Pal's dissenting opinion at the Tokyo Tribunal to add to Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) literature on international criminal law and the rules of evidence and procedure. It is part of a TWAIL effort to scrutinize the everyday practices of international prosecutions through procedural and evidentiary rules. By locating and situating Justice Pal's reasoning within the broader academic literature on dissents in international criminal law, it is possible to illustrate how and why Justice Pal's views were obscured as a relevant dissent. From this vantage point, this paper pursues Justice Pal's legacy as it relates to the rules of evidence and procedure in the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. It traces the evolution of the judicial power to draft and amend these rules, and examines the impact of these decisions on the everyday functions of the tribunals and how truth is determined.

本文提出了帕尔大法官在东京法庭上的反对意见，以补充第三世界国际法方法（TWAIL）关于国际刑法以及证据和程序规则的文献。这是 TWAIL 努力通过程序和证据规则审查国际起诉的日常实践的一部分。通过在更广泛的关于国际刑法异议的学术文献中定位和定位帕尔法官的推理，可以说明帕尔法官的观点是如何以及为何被掩盖为相关异议的。从这个角度出发，本文探讨了帕尔法官的遗产，因为它与前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭和卢旺达问题国际刑事法庭的证据和程序规则有关。