The International Criminal Court's Ruling is a Hope for Humanity's Quest for Justice (original) (raw)
Related papers
Justice for the Victims Before the International Criminal Court.docx
The International Criminal Court (ICC) has been celebrated for its innovative victim provisions, which enables victims to participate in proceedings, benefiting from protection measures and assistance, and the ability to claim reparations. The motivation for incorporating victim provisions within the ICC came from victims’ dissatisfaction with ad hoc tribunals in providing them with more meaningful and tangible justice. Ad hoc tribunals appreciated the importance of protecting victims, but it was more of a functional role to guarantee testimony. Furthermore, the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda (ICTY/ICTR) only included victim protection measures without any provisions for victims to participate in proceedings nor to claim reparations. The exclusion of participation and reparation at the previous tribunals was also due to the adversarial model of criminal proceedings. Developments in domestic and international law, in particular human rights such as the 1985 UN Declaration on Justice for Victims and the UN Guidelines on Remedy and Reparations, and other transitional justice mechanisms, such as truth commissions and reparations bodies, have helped to expand the notion of justice for international crimes to be more attuned to victims as key stakeholders in dealing with such crimes. With numerous convictions secured at the ICC and the victim participation and reparation system continuing to form, it is worth evaluating the extent to which these innovative provisions have translated into justice for victims. The first part of this policy brief outlines what justice for victims of international crimes entails, drawing from victimology and human rights. The second part examines the extent to which the ICC has incorporated justice for victims, in procedural and substantive terms, before concluding to looking beyond the Court to how state parties can complement the ICC in achieving justice for victims. This policy brief argues that while much progress has been made to institutionalize justice for victims within the Court, there is still much more progress that is needed in order to evolve and develop justice for victims within the ICC to avoid dissatisfaction of past tribunals.
Trials as Messages of Justice: What Should Be Expected of International Criminal Courts
I n January , Fatou Bensouda, the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), announced the opening of the court's tenth and most recent country investigation, into alleged crimes perpetrated in Georgia during the brief Russo-Georgian War. The crimes to be investigated may include murder, destroying enemy property, attacks on a peacekeeping mission , deportation, and ethnic persecution. Bensouda intends to make arrests, put suspects on trial, and, if they are found guilty, have them convicted and punished. Meanwhile, even as Bensouda prepared this newest case, the ICC was still prosecuting a suspect in the court's very first investigation, from , against Dominic Ongwen, a commander of the Ugandan Lord's Resistance Army. These two cases can thus serve as bookends to the ICC's short history, illustrating the long arc between initial investigations and eventual trials, and highlighting the complexity and contingency of international criminal justice. In this article we ask what—if anything—is the point of all this effort, and what can and should we expect from international criminal courts? After more than a decade of work, the accomplishments of the International Criminal Court are highly contested. The court has been accused of bias, of spoiling peace negotiations , of hindering successful transitions to democracy, and of being disconnected from the needs of conflict-affected populations. We will not address these controversies here. Instead we focus on a more theoretical question: How can international trial and punishment constitute a suitable response to episodes of mass violence? The Statute of the ICC itself provides several indications. Its Preamble proclaims that " the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole must not go unpunished, " that it is " determined to put an end to Ethics & International Affairs, , no. (), pp. –.
Human Rights Quarterly, 2009
As a new institution, the International Criminal Court needs to gain legitimacy not just with states, but also in global civil society. This article surveys current debates in civil society about whether the interests of the victims are being served and whether justice is being done, in relation to the ICC’s current investigations. It will discuss the most salient sources of debate and controversy under four headings: perceived selectivity or even bias of the Court, whether ICC investigations are detrimental to peace-building efforts, the detachment of the Court from the lived reality of local populations and victims, and the issue of compensation to victims.
A victim’s right to truth and the International Criminal Court (ICC) Summary Project Report
2014
This project seeks to identify and explore the practical and jurisprudential difficulties that may follow from attempting to integrate the ‘right to truth’ into the procedures of the ICC. Its main research question is: what are the central problems, practical and theoretical, of giving effect to victims’ rights to truth in the context of the juristic-forensic approach to transitional justice; specifically - the investigation, trial and remedial procedures of the International Criminal Court?
A Luxury Victims Cannot Afford; Meaningful Participation at the International Criminal Court
Under Article 68(3) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court victims are able to present their views and concerns to the Court as long as this is not prejudicial to, or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial. Experience shows that justice is often not the primary concern of victims and most are plagued with more immediate concerns, such as medical care, livelihood assistance, psycho-social support, education etc. The reality is that victims cannot meaningfully participate in the ICC proceedings unless these immediate needs are met, either before the proceedings or concurrently with them.