The Great Recession hit the Icelandic economy hard in late 2008. It was quickly established through a high-profile investigation by a truth commission that fraudulent bankers and incompetent politicians were to blame for how vulnerable the economy was to the onset of a worldwide credit crisis. Subsequently, the law enforcement system began prosecuting the culprits, the bankers through the normal criminal procedure, and the politicians through an obscure impeachment procedure. Now almost a decade later, most of the cases have been concluded before Icelandic courts, but few of the big ones are still pending before the European Court of Human Rights on the basis of alleged breaches to the right to a fair trial. This research intends to take stock on how the Icelandic criminal procedures have stood up to the difficult challenge of prosecuting political and business elites. The potential weaknesses in the procedures will be identified in four cases pending in Strasburg and those weaknesses will be assessed against an analytical framework that assumes procedural fairness to be a balance between procedural accuracy and procedural cost efficiency. By analysing the Icelandic Great Recession experience, the hope is to extract lessons about fair procedural design for prosecuting elites that are universal in character, while at the same time telling the important story of how Iceland dealt with the Icelandic culprits of the Great Recession.