Abstract: This article is dedicated to the analysis of standards of proof applicable to the pre-trial process in the proceedings in the International Criminal Court as an example the case «The Prosecutor v. Laurent Gbagbo». The author reviews the stages of preparation of the case for the trial stage: the beginning of the investigation, issuance of the arrest warrant, confirmation of charges. He raises questions about the ambiguity of the criteria per which the fact is contested in accordance with the required on a certain stage of the process standard of proof. The analysis and comparative analysis are the main methods of research. The article thoroughly analyzes the acts of the Pre-Trial Chamber in the case "The Prosecutor v. Laurent Gbagbo." The author concludes that used in the international criminal process standards of proof are ambiguous. Such standards require a precise definition, including formalization in the rules of procedure and evidence of the international courts and tribunals, content, minimal list of components that must be established by the court, so the fact can be considered proven in compliance of a specific standard of the proof. The regulation of the types of evidence necessary at one or another stage of the process is required

Abstract: This article is dedicated to the analysis of the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard of evidence, as well as practice of its implementation by the institution of international criminal justice. The author present a historical overview of the stages of application of the aforementioned standard of evidence in international criminal courts and tribunals. The article raises a question on the ambiguity of the criteria, according to which a facts is considered proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and moreover, such ambiguity is present not only in the area of international law, but also national law of the states of Anglo-Saxon model of criminal procedure. The author examines the court rulings of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. The conclusion is made that the implementation of the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard within the international criminal procedure requires a precise determination of its content, including formalization of the procedure and evidence in the rules of international courts and tribunals, as well as minimal list of elements which must be established by the court.