1. فارسی

الف) کتاب

1. نوروزی، میثم (1393). ضمانت اجرای تصمیمات دیوان کیفری بین‏المللی. چ اول، تهران: مجد.

ب) مقالات

2. بهری خیاوی، بهمن و پاک‏نژاد، علیرضا (1399). نقش سازمان‏های غیردولتی در قالب«دوست دادگاه» نزد مراجع قضایی بین‏المللی. مجلۀ بین‏المللی پژوهش ملل، 5(53)، 115-128.
3. دلخوش، علی‏رضا (1390). تعهد دولت‏ها به همکاری با دیوان کیفری بین‏المللی (مقررات عمومی). پژوهش حقوق عمومی، 32، 113-172.
4. کوشا، سهیلا؛ طهمورثی اسماعیل و سوهانیان فاطمه (1398). رویۀ قضایی دیوان کیفری بین‏المللی در گزینش پرونده‏های ارجاعی. مطالعات حقوق عمومی، 49(2)، 351- 367.
5. لعل علیزاده، محسن (1394). مطالعۀ تطبیقی مشارکت بزه‏دیدگان در محاکم کیفری بین‏المللی اختصاصی با دیوان کیفری بین‏المللی. مطالعات حقوق تطبیقی، 6(2)، 733-792.
6. موسوی فرد، سید وحید و نیکنام محمدرضا (1395). رویۀ دولت‏ها در همکاری با دیوان کیفری بین‏المللی. سومین کنفرانس بین‏المللی پژوهش‏های نوین در مدیریت، اقتصاد و علوم انسانی، باتومی - کشور گرجستان، مؤسسۀ سرآمد همایش کارین، 1395. https://www.civilica.com/Paper-ICMEH03-ICMEH03_250.html
7. میرعباسی، سید باقر و محمدی، عقیل (1395). نقش و جایگاه سازمان‏های بین‏المللی غیردولتی به‏عنوان دوست دادگاه در نظام بین‏المللی حل‏وفصل اختلافات. مطالعات حقوق عمومی، 46(4)، 753-769.
8. نوروزی، میثم (1396). مسئولیت بین‏المللی دولت‏ها ناشی از عدم اجرای تصمیمات دیوان بین‏المللی کیفری. پژوهش ملل، 2(22)، 17-31.

2. انگلیسی
3. A) BOOK
4. Mark A. Drumbl (2007). Atrocity, Punishment, and International Law, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

1. B) Articles
2. De souza dias, talita (2017). Interests of justice’: Defining the scope of Prosecutorial discretion in Article 53(1)(c) and (2)(c) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Leiden Journal of International Law, 30(3), 731-751.
3. Durvdevic, z. (2016). legal and political limitations of the ICC enforcement system: blurring the distinctive features of the criminal court. in: Bruce Ackerman, Kai Ambos, Hrvoje Sikirić (ur.), Visions of justice, Berlin: Duncker & Humbolt, 163.-198.
4. Keeffe, T. E. (2020). Trump Administration v. ICC. Rocky Mountain College of Art and Design, Dol: 10.13140/RG.2.2.12904.01289/1, 1-9.
5. Levine, E. (2011). amicus curiae in international investment arbitration: the implications of an increase in third-party participation. berkeley journal of international law, 29, 200-224.
6. Markovic, M. (2005). In the Interests of Justice: A Critique of the ICTY Trial Court's Decision to Assign Counsel to Slobodan Milosevic. Georgetown journal of legal ethics, 18, 947-958.
7. Monique, C. (2018). can the ICCexercise jurisdiction over US nationals for crimes committed in the Afghanistan Situation?. ournal of International Criminal Justice, 16(5), 1043–1062.
8. Rossetti, L. P. (2019). The Pre-Trial Chamber’s Afghanistan Decision: A Step Too Far in the Judicial Review of Prosecutorial Discretion?. Journal of International Criminal Justice, 17(3), 585–608.
9. Stahn, C., & Nerlich, V. (2008). The International Criminal Court and Co-operation:Introductory Note. Leiden Journal of International Law, 2, 429-430.
10. Webb, P. (2005). The ICC Prosecutor's Discretion Not to Proceed in the 'Interests of Justice criminal law quarterly, 50, 305-348.
11. Wenqi, Z. (2006). on co-operation by states not party to the international criminal court. international review of the red cross, 88(861), 87-110.

1. C) Website
2. Volqvartz, Josefine (2005). ICC under Fire over Uganda Probe. Global Policy Forum, available at: https://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/164/28501.html

1. D) Thesis
2. Rashid, Farid Mohammed (2016). "the role of the prosecutor in the international criminal court: discretion, legitimacy, and the politics of justice", the degree of doctor of philosophy, royal docks school of business and law east london university.

1. E) Other
2. Cambodia, uneted nations, Agreement Between The United Nations and The Royal Government of Cambodia Concerning the Prosecution Under Cambodian Law of Crimes Committed during the period of Democratic Kampuchea, june 6, 2003, available at: https://treaties.un.org/pages/showDetails.aspx?objid=080000028007c9d0
3. EUR 45/040/1999, Pinochet Case, UK: Chile’s request to release Pinochet on health grounds: a medical and judicial matter, 19 oct 1999, available at: https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/eur45/040/1999/en/
4. Human Rights Watch, The Meaning of ‘The Interests of Justice’ in Article 53 of the Rome Statute, 1 June 2005, available at https://www.hrw.org/news/2005/06/01/meaning-interests-justice-article-53-rome-statute.
5. ICC, Press Release, ICC judges reject opening of an investigation regarding Afghanistan situation, ICC-CPI-20190412-PR1448, 12 Apr 2019, https://www.icc-cpi.int//Pages/item.aspx?name=pr1448
6. ICTR, Prosecutor v. Akayesu, case No. ICTR-96-4-T, 2 Sep 1998, available at: https://unictr.irmct.org/sites/unictr.org/files/case-documents/ictr-96-4/trial-judgements/en/980902.pdf
7. ICC-02/17-7-Red, Pre-Trial Chamber III, Public redacted version of “Request for authorisation of an investigation pursuant to article 15”, 20 Nov 2017, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/CourtRecords/CR2017_06891.PDF
8. ICC, OTP, Report on Preliminary Examination Activities, 14 Nov 2016, Available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/otp/161114-otp-rep-pe_eng.pdf
9. ICC, OTP, Paper on Some Policy Issues before the Office of the Prosecutor, 2003, Available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/nr/rdonlyres/1fa7c4c6-de5f-42b7-8b25-60aa962ed8b6/143594/030905_policy_paper.pdf
10. ICC, Rules of Procedure and Evidence, 2002. Available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/Publications/Rules-of-Procedure-and-Evidence.pdf
11. ICJ Reports, Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. the United States of America), Merits, Judgment, 1986.
12. OTP, Policy Paper on the Interests of Justice, 2007, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/nr/rdonlyres/772c95c9-f54d-4321-bf09-73422bb23528/143640/iccotpinterestsofjustice.pdf
13. ICC, Resolution ICC-ASP/18/Res.1, 2019, Availbale at: https://asp.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/asp_docs/ASP18/ICC-ASP-18-Res1-ENG.pdf
14. Regulations of the Office of the Prosecutor, ICC-BD/05-01-09, entered into Force on 23 Apr 2009.
15. U.N. General assembly, A/70/600, Second performance reports for the biennium 2014-2015 and proposed budgets for the biennium 2016-2017 of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Residual Mechanism (IRM) for Criminal Tribunals, 2015, Available at: https://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/70/600
16. Statute of the Special Court for Sierra Leone, Appendix II, Attachment, U.N. Doc. S/2002/246.
17. Statute of international criminal court. 1998.
18. The geneva conventions of 12 august 1949.
19. UNAMA, Treatment of Conflict­Related Detainees in Afghan Custody, 2011. Available at: https://unama.unmissions.org/sites/default/files/october10_2011_unama_detention _full-report_eng.pdf
20. UNAMA, annual report 2015, protection of civilians in armed conflict, 2016. Available at: https://unama.unmissions.org/sites/default/files/protection_of_civilians_in_armed _conflict_annual_report_8feb_2016.pdf
21. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969.

3. کرواتی

- Članak

1. Skaric, marissabdll (2007). "Posebnosti ovlasti tužitelja međunarodnog kaznenog suda da u interesu pravde odustane od istrage i kaznenog progona (»l. 53. rimskog statuta)", Zbornik Pravnog fakulteta u Zagrebu, broj 3, pp. 577-601.