International Criminal Law and Atrocities in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: a Critical Analysis

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

International Criminal Law and Atrocities in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: a Critical Analysis 1 UNIVERSITEIT VAN PRETORIA UNIVERSITY OF PRETORIA YUNIBESITHI YA PRETORIA Fakulteit Regsgeleerdheid / Faculty of Law/Fakhalthi ya Malao Department Publiekreg / Department of Public law INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW AND ATROCITIES IN THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS By Ngoie Ngalingi Joseph Antoine Ngoto Submitted in Fulfilment of the Requirements for the degree Doctor Legum (LLD) June 2012 Supervisor: Professor CJ Botha 2 1 Declaration I, the undersigned, hereby declare that the work contained in this study for the degree of Doctor of Laws at the University of Pretoria is my own independent work and that I have not previously in its entirety or in part submitted it at any University for a degree. Where secondary material is used, this has been carefully acknowledged and referenced in accordance with University requirements. I am aware of University policy and implications regarding plagiarism. 6 June 2012 ------------------------------- Ngoie NgalingiJoseph Antoine Ngoto 2 Dedication Dedicated to all victims of international crimes in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, to my wife Elvine Ngoto Mikalo Bonyale and my children Joseph Roger Ngoto Ngalingi, Charlie Ngoto Yadunga, Josiane Ngoto Ngoie Tangalingi, Christiane Ngoto Mobimbi and Annick Ngoto Loda. 3 Summary Since its independence in 1960, the Democratic Republic of the Congo has undergone egregious violations of human rights and humanitarian law. This study appraises the responses to international crimes in the Democratic Republic of the Congo between 1990 and 2010. It appears from the study that mass atrocities have taken place recurrently during the above period. Millions of people have either died or forcibly fled from their homes as a result of international crimes. This study distinguishes two eras: pre-ICC and post-ICC in relation with the entry into force of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) 1 July 2002. For the pre-ICC era, it argues that criminal prosecutions (though possible) are no longer opportune, but suggests a focus on the issue of reparation for victims. It mentions that the DRC was unwilling rather than unable to prosecute international crimes prior to the ICC era. It recalls that the UN does not need to appoint an ad hoc tribunal because it has restored peace by non- coercive means. As for the post-ICC era, this study questions the ability of the DRC, the ICC and the UN to counter international crimes. The deterrent effect of national prosecution is lower than that of the ICC, but the ICC suffers from congenital weaknesses, hampering its efficacy. The study highlights the UN‘s failure to protect civilians. The study suggests a focus on the guarantee of non- repetition as genuine response to post-ICC crimes. It suggests a strengthening of traditional institutions aimed at protecting civilians (including states and the UN). Furthermore, it suggests the enhancement of judicial bodies at both domestic and international level, including by a lowering of political involvement in judicial matters. 4 Key terms: amnesty, reparation, duty to prosecute, transitional justice, transitional justice, International Criminal Court, international crimes, United Nations, responses to international crimes, the Democratic Republic of the Congo. 5 Opsomming Sedert onafhanklikheid in 1960 het die Demokratiese Republiek van die Kongo gebuk gegaan onder skendings van menseregte en humanitêre reg. Hierdie studie beoordeel die reaksie op die internasionale misdade in die Demokratiese Republiek van die Kongo tussen 1990 en 2010. Dit blyk uit die studie dat massa-gruweldade van tyd tot tyd gedurende bogenoemde tydperk plaasgevind het. Miljoene mense het gesterf, of is met geweld uit hul huise gedwing as gevolg van internasionale misdade. Hierdie studie onderskei twee tydperke, naamlik die voor-ICC en die post-ICC met verwysing na die inwerkingtreding van die Statuut van die Internasionale Strafhof op 1 Julie 2002. Vir die voor-ICC era word argumenteer dat strafregtelike vervolgings (hoewel moontlik) nie meer die gepaste respons is nie. Die studie plaas eerder die fokus op die kwessie van vergoeding vir slagoffers. Dit wys daarop dat die die DRK in die voor-ICC era nie in staat was om die internasionale misdade te vervolg nie, eerder as om onwillig te gewees het. Dit wys weer eens daarop dat dit nie vir die VN nodig was om 'n ad hoc-tribunaal in te stel nie, aangesien die VN vrede op ‗n nie-geweldadige wyse herstel het. Soos vir die post-ICC era ondersoek hierdie studie die vermoë van die DRK, die Internasionale Strafhof en die VN om internasionale misdade te voorkom. Alhoewel die die afskrikkingswaarde van plaaslike vervolgings laer is as vervolgings deur die Internasionale Strafhof, het die internasionale hof egter sekere inherente swakpunte wat die doeltreffendheid daarvan belemmer. Die studie beklemtoon die VN se versuim om die burgers te beskerm. Die studie plaas ook die fokus op waarborge om die herhaling van die misdade in die 6 post-ICC era te voorkom.Die studie ondersoek die versterking van tradisionele instellings (insluitend ander state en die VN) wat gemik is op die beskerming van burgers. Verder word die versterking van beide plaaslike en internasionale juridiese instansies bepleit, onder andere deur 'n verlaging van politieke betrokkenheid in regsaangeleenthede. Sleutelterme: amnestie, herstel, plig om te vervolg, oorgangsgeregtigheid, die Internasionale Strafhof, internasionale misdade, die Verenigde Nasies, reaksies op internasionale misdade, die Demokratiese Republiek van die Kongo. 7 Table of Contents Declaration .............................................................................................................................. 1 Dedication ................................................................................................................................ 2 Summary .................................................................................................................................. 3 Opsomming ............................................................................................................................. 5 Table of Contents ................................................................................................................... 7 Acknowledgements .............................................................................................................. 11 Abbreviations and Acronyms .............................................................................................. 13 Introductory Part ..................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 1: Introduction and conceptual framework .......................................................... 1 1.1.2 Thesis Statement ...................................................................................................... 3 1.1.3 Explanation of Suggested Title ............................................................................... 3 1.1.4 Research Methodology ............................................................................................ 4 1.1.5 Literature review ........................................................................................................ 4 1.1.6 Brief explanation of outline ...................................................................................... 4 Chapter 1: Introduction ...................................................................................................... 4 Chapter 3: Responses from the United Nations ................................................................ 5 Chapter 4: Review of responses from States .................................................................... 5 Part II: Analysis of responses to crimes committed after the entry into force of the Rome Statute. ......................................................................................................................... 5 Chapter 5: Background .......................................................................................................... 6 Chapter 6: Appraisal of responses provided by the Democratic Republic of Congo ... 6 Chapter 7: Analysis of the ICC‘s role in the Congolese context ..................................... 6 Chapter 8: Responses provided by the United Nations. .................................................. 6 Chapter 9: Concluding remarks ........................................................................................... 7 1.2.2.1.1 Adoption of basic principle of reparation .......................................................... 11 1.2.4.1.1. Challenges of the duty to prosecute ................................................................ 18 1.2.4.1.1.1. The large number of alleged perpetrators ................................................... 18 1.2.4.1.1.2. The immunities of foreign suspects .............................................................. 19 1.2.7.1 War crimes ............................................................................................................ 27 8 1.2.7.2 Crimes against humanity: ................................................................................... 29 1.2.7.3 Genocide ............................................................................................................... 30 1.2.9. Responses to international crimes ...................................................................... 32 Part 1: Critical appraisal of legal responses to international crimes committed
Recommended publications
  • The Pennsylvania State University the Graduate School College Of
    The Pennsylvania State University The Graduate School College of Earth and Mineral Sciences STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS FOR RESOURCE ENDOWED COUNTRIES TO AVERT THE RESOURCE CURSE PHENOMENON: WITH A CASE STUDY OF THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO A Thesis in Energy and Mineral Engineering by Joyce N. Masangu ©2018 Joyce N. Masangu Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science May 2018 The thesis of Joyce N. Masangu was reviewed and approved* by the following: Jeffery Kohler Professor and Chair of Mining Engineering George H. Jr. and Anne B. Deike Endowed Chair in Mining Engineering Thesis Advisor Shimin Liu Assistant Professor of Energy and Mineral Engineering Sekhar Bhattacharyya Associate Professor of Mining Engineering Luis F. Ayala H. William A. Fustos Family Professor Professor of Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering Associate Department Head for Graduate Education *Signatures are on file in the Graduate School ii ABSTRACT The discovery of a new valuable mineral deposit in a country does not always lead to economic growth or development in a nation. There are many examples of countries with abundant resources whose economic and social situations have not improved, and in many cases have worsened, because of their bountiful mineral resources. The “resource curse” describes the paradoxical fact that countries with an abundance of natural resources, specifically non- renewable resources like minerals and fuels, tend to have less economic growth and worse development outcomes than countries with fewer natural resources. The degree of the phenomenon’s effects varies from country to country. There are many causes and symptoms of the resource curse evident in the economics literature, but there is no clear guidance on how a country can avert its resource curse.
    [Show full text]
  • CR 2005/13 Cour Internationale International Court De Justice Of
    CR 2005/13 Cour internationale International Court de Justice of Justice LA HAYE THE HAGUE ANNÉE 2005 Audience publique tenue le lundi 25 avril 2005, à 15 heures, au Palais de la Paix, sous la présidence de M. Shi, président, en l’affaire des Activités armées sur le territoire du Congo (République démocratique du Congo c. Ouganda) ________________ COMPTE RENDU ________________ YEAR 2005 Public sitting held on Monday 25 April 2005, at 3 p.m., at the Peace Palace, President Shi presiding, in the case concerning Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda) ____________________ VERBATIM RECORD ____________________ - 2 - Présents : M. Shi, président M. Ranjeva, vice-président MM. Koroma Vereshchetin Mme Higgins MM. Parra-Aranguren Kooijmans Rezek Al-Khasawneh Buergenthal Elaraby Owada Simma Tomka Abraham, juges MM. Verhoeven, Kateka, juges ad hoc M. Couvreur, greffier ⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯ - 3 - Present: President Shi Vice-President Ranjeva Judges Koroma Vereshchetin Higgins Parra-Aranguren Kooijmans Rezek Al-Khasawneh Buergenthal Elaraby Owada Simma Tomka Abraham Judges ad hoc Verhoeven Kateka Registrar Couvreur ⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯ - 4 - Le Gouvernement de la République du Congo est représenté par : S. Exc. M. Honorius Kisimba Ngoy Ndalewe, ministre de la justice et garde des sceaux de la République démocratique du Congo, comme chef de la délégation; S. Exc. M. Jacques Masangu-a-Mwanza, ambassadeur extraordinaire et plénipotentiaire auprès du Royaume des Pays-Bas, comme agent; M. Tshibangu Kalala, avocat aux barreaux de Kinshasa et de Bruxelles, comme coagent et avocat; M. Olivier Corten, professeur de droit international à l’Université libre de Bruxelles, M. Pierre Klein, professeur de droit international, directeur du centre de droit international de l’Université libre de Bruxelles, M.
    [Show full text]
  • CR 2002/36 (Traduction)
    CRW CR 2002/36 (traduction) CR 2002/36 (translation) Jeudi 13 juin 2002 à 10 heures Thursday 13 June 2002 at 10 a.m. - 2 - The PRESIDENT: Please be seated. The sitting is open. The Court meets today under Article 74, paragraph 3, of the Rules of Court to hear the observations of the Parties on the Request for the indication of provisional measures submitted by the Democratic Republic of the Congo in the case concerning Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (New Application: 2002) (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Rwanda). Unfortunately, Judge Oda is unable, for reasons of which he has duly informed the Court, to be present on the bench today. Before recalling the principal phases of the present proceedings, it is necessary to complete the composition of the Court. Each of the Parties in the present case, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the Rwandese Republic, has availed itself of the possibility afforded it by Article 31 of the Statute of the Court to choose a judge ad hoc. The Democratic Republic of the Congo has chosen Mr. Jean-Pierre Mavungu Mvumbi-di-Ngoma and the Rwandese Republic Mr. Christopher John Robert Dugard. Article 20 of the Statute provides that “[e]very Member of the Court shall, before taking up his duties, make a solemn declaration in open court that he will exercise his powers impartially and conscientiously”. By Article 31, paragraph 6, of the Statute, that provision applies to judges ad hoc. In accordance with custom, I shall first say a few words about the career and qualifications of each of the two judges who will be making the required declaration.
    [Show full text]
  • International Court of Justice Year 2002 2002 14
    INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE YEAR 2002 2002 14 February General List No. 121 14 February 2002 CASE CONCERNING THE ARREST WARRANT OF 11 APRIL 2000 (DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO v. BELGIUM) Facts of the case ¾ Issue by a Belgian investigating magistrate of “an international arrest warrant in absentia” against the incumbent Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Congo, alleging grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and of the Additional Protocols thereto and crimes against humanity ¾ International circulation of arrest warrant through Interpol ¾ Person concerned subsequently ceasing to hold office as Minister for Foreign Affairs. * * First objection of Belgium ¾ Jurisdiction of the Court ¾ Statute of the Court, Article 36, paragraph 2 ¾ Existence of a “legal dispute” between the Parties at the time of filing of the Application instituting proceedings ¾ Events subsequent to the filing of the Application do not deprive the Court of jurisdiction. Second objection of Belgium ¾ Mootness ¾ Fact that the person concerned had ceased to hold office as Minister for Foreign Affairs does not put an end to the dispute between the Parties and does not deprive the Application of its object. Third objection of Belgium ¾ Admissibility ¾ Facts underlying the Application instituting proceedings not changed in a way that transformed the dispute originally brought before the Court into another which is different in character. - 2 - Fourth objection of Belgium ¾ Admissibility ¾ Congo not acting in the context of protection of one of its nationals ¾ Inapplicability of rules relating to exhaustion of local remedies. Subsidiary argument of Belgium ¾ Non ultra petita rule ¾ Claim in Application instituting proceedings that Belgium’s claim to exercise a universal jurisdiction in issuing the arrest warrant is contrary to international law ¾ Claim not made in final submissions of the Congo ¾ Court unable to rule on that question in the operative part of its Judgment but not prevented from dealing with certain aspects of the question in the reasoning of its Judgment.
    [Show full text]
  • CR 2005/7 Cour Internationale International Court De Justice Of
    CR 2005/7 Cour internationale International Court de Justice of Justice LA HAYE THE HAGUE ANNÉE 2005 Audience publique tenue le lundi 18 avril 2005, à 10 heures, au Palais de la Paix, sous la présidence de M. Shi, président, en l’affaire des Activités armées sur le territoire du Congo (République démocratique du Congo c. Ouganda) ________________ COMPTE RENDU ________________ YEAR 2005 Public sitting held on Monday 18 April 2005, at 10 a.m., at the Peace Palace, President Shi presiding, in the case concerning Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda) ____________________ VERBATIM RECORD ____________________ - 2 - Présents : M. Shi, président M. Ranjeva, vice-président MM. Koroma Vereshchetin Mme Higgins MM. Parra-Aranguren Kooijmans Rezek Al-Khasawneh Owada Simma Tomka Abraham, juges MM. Verhoeven, Kateka, juges ad hoc M. Couvreur, greffier ⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯ - 3 - Present: President Shi Vice-President Ranjeva Judges Koroma Vereshchetin Higgins Parra-Aranguren Kooijmans Rezek Al-Khasawneh Owada Simma Tomka Abraham Judges ad hoc Verhoeven Kateka Registrar Couvreur ⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯ - 4 - Le Gouvernement de la République du Congo est représenté par : S. Exc. M. Honorius Kisimba Ngoy Ndalewe, ministre de la justice et garde des sceaux de la République démocratique du Congo, comme chef de la délégation; S. Exc. M. Jacques Masangu-a-Mwanza, ambassadeur extraordinaire et plénipotentiaire auprès du Royaume des Pays-Bas, comme agent; M. Tshibangu Kalala, avocat aux barreaux de Kinshasa et de Bruxelles, comme coagent et avocat; M. Olivier Corten, professeur de droit international à l’Université libre de Bruxelles, M. Pierre Klein, professeur de droit international, directeur du centre de droit international de l’Université libre de Bruxelles, M.
    [Show full text]
  • CR 2005/6 Cour Internationale International Court De Justice Of
    CR 2005/6 Cour internationale International Court de Justice of Justice LA HAYE THE HAGUE ANNÉE 2005 Audience publique tenue le vendredi 15 avril 2005, à 10 heures, au Palais de la Paix, sous la présidence de M. Shi, président, en l’affaire des Activités armées sur le territoire du Congo (République démocratique du Congo c. Ouganda) ________________ COMPTE RENDU ________________ YEAR 2005 Public sitting held on Friday 15 April 2005, at 10 a.m., at the Peace Palace, President Shi presiding, in the case concerning Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda) ____________________ VERBATIM RECORD ____________________ - 2 - Présents : M. Shi, président M. Ranjeva, vice-président MM. Koroma Vereshchetin Mme Higgins MM. Parra-Aranguren Kooijmans Rezek Al-Khasawneh Buergenthal Elaraby Owada Simma Tomka Abraham, juges MM. Verhoeven, Kateka, juges ad hoc M. Couvreur, greffier ⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯ - 3 - Present: President Shi Vice-President Ranjeva Judges Koroma Vereshchetin Higgins Parra-Aranguren Kooijmans Rezek Al-Khasawneh Buergenthal Elaraby Owada Simma Tomka Abraham Judges ad hoc Verhoeven Kateka Registrar Couvreur ⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯ - 4 - Le Gouvernement de la République du Congo est représenté par : S. Exc. M. Honorius Kisimba Ngoy Ndalewe, ministre de la justice et garde des sceaux de la République démocratique du Congo, comme chef de la délégation; S. Exc. M. Jacques Masangu-a-Mwanza, ambassadeur extraordinaire et plénipotentiaire auprès du Royaume des Pays-Bas, comme agent; M. Tshibangu Kalala, avocat aux barreaux de Kinshasa et de Bruxelles, comme coagent et avocat; M. Olivier Corten, professeur de droit international à l’Université libre de Bruxelles, M. Pierre Klein, professeur de droit international, directeur du centre de droit international de l’Université libre de Bruxelles, M.
    [Show full text]
  • CR 2002/39 Cour Internationale International Court De Justice Of
    CR 2002/39 Cour internationale International Court de Justice of Justice LA HAYE THE HAGUE ANNÉE 2002 Audience publique tenue le vendredi 14 juin 2002, à 12 heures, au Palais de la Paix, sous la présidence de M. Guillaume, président, en l'affaire des Activités armées sur le territoire du Congo (nouvelle requête : 2002) (République démocratique du Congo c. Rwanda) Demande en indication de mesures conservatoires ____________ COMPTE RENDU ____________ YEAR 2002 Public sitting held on Friday 14 June 2002, at 12 noon, at the Peace Palace, President Guillaume presiding, in the case concerning Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (New Application: 2002) (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Rwanda) Request for the indication of provisional measures _______________ VERBATIM RECORD _______________ - 2 - Présents : M. Guillaume, président MM. Ranjeva Herczegh Fleischhauer Koroma Vereshchetin Mme Higgins MM. Parra-Aranguren Kooijmans Rezek Al-Khasawneh Buergenthal, juges MM. Dugard Mavungu Mvumbi-di-Ngoma, juges ad hoc M. Couvreur, greffier ¾¾¾¾¾¾ - 3 - Present: President Guillaume Judges Ranjeva Herczegh Fleischhauer Koroma Vereshchetin Higgins Parra-Aranguren Kooijmans Rezek Al-Khasawneh Buergenthal Judges ad hoc Dugard Mavungu Mvumbi-di-Ngoma Registrar Couvreur ¾¾¾¾¾¾ - 4 - Le Gouvernement de la République démocratique du Congo est representé par : S. Exc. M. Jacques Masangu-a-Mwanza, ambassadeur extraordinaire et plénipotentiaire de la République démocratique du Congo auprès du Royaume des Pays-Bas, comme agent; S. Exc. M. Alphonse Ntumba Luaba Lumu, ministre des droits humains, comme coagent; M. Lwamba Katansi, professeur à l’Université de Kinshasa, M. Pierre Akele Adau, doyen de la faculté de droit de l’Université de Kinshasa et haut magistrat, comme conseils; M.
    [Show full text]
  • International Court of Justice
    INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE Peace Palace, Carnegieplein 2, 2517 KJ The Hague, Netherlands Tel.: +31 (0)70 302 2323 Fax: +31 (0)70 364 9928 Website: www.icj-cij.org Press Release Unofficial No. 2006/41 1 December 2006 Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Republic of Guinea v. Democratic Republic of the Congo) Preliminary Objections Conclusion of the public hearings on the merits; Court ready to begin its deliberation THE HAGUE, 1 December 2006. The public hearings on the preliminary objections raised by the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) in the case concerning Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Republic of Guinea v. Democratic Republic of the Congo) were concluded today. The Court will now start its deliberation. On 3 October 2002, within the time-limit fixed for the filing of its Counter-Memorial, the Democratic Republic of the Congo raised certain preliminary objections to the admissibility of the Application. Consequently, proceedings on the merits were suspended. At the hearings, which opened on Monday 27 November 2006 at the Peace Palace, seat of the Court, the delegation of the DRC was led by H.E. Mr. Pierre Ilunga M’Bundu wa Biloba, Minister of Justice and Keeper of the Seals, and H.E. Mr. Jacques Masangu-a-Mwanza, Ambassador of the Democratic Republic of the Congo to the Netherlands, as Agent. The delegation of Guinea was led by Mr. Mohamed Camara, Chargé d’affaires a.i. at the Embassy of the Republic of Guinea in Brussels, as Agent. The Court’s judgment on the preliminary objections will be delivered at a public sitting, the date of which will be announced in due course.
    [Show full text]
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo V Belgium
    INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE YEAR 2002 2002 14 February General List No. 121 14 February 2002 CASE CONCERNING THE ARREST WARRANT OF 11 APRIL 2000 (DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO v. BELGIUM) Facts of the case ¾ Issue by a Belgian investigating magistrate of “an international arrest warrant in absentia” against the incumbent Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Congo, alleging grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and of the Additional Protocols thereto and crimes against humanity ¾ International circulation of arrest warrant through Interpol ¾ Person concerned subsequently ceasing to hold office as Minister for Foreign Affairs. * * First objection of Belgium ¾ Jurisdiction of the Court ¾ Statute of the Court, Article 36, paragraph 2 ¾ Existence of a “legal dispute” between the Parties at the time of filing of the Application instituting proceedings ¾ Events subsequent to the filing of the Application do not deprive the Court of jurisdiction. Second objection of Belgium ¾ Mootness ¾ Fact that the person concerned had ceased to hold office as Minister for Foreign Affairs does not put an end to the dispute between the Parties and does not deprive the Application of its object. Third objection of Belgium ¾ Admissibility ¾ Facts underlying the Application instituting proceedings not changed in a way that transformed the dispute originally brought before the Court into another which is different in character. - 2 - Fourth objection of Belgium ¾ Admissibility ¾ Congo not acting in the context of protection of one of its nationals ¾ Inapplicability of rules relating to exhaustion of local remedies. Subsidiary argument of Belgium ¾ Non ultra petita rule ¾ Claim in Application instituting proceedings that Belgium’s claim to exercise a universal jurisdiction in issuing the arrest warrant is contrary to international law ¾ Claim not made in final submissions of the Congo ¾ Court unable to rule on that question in the operative part of its Judgment but not prevented from dealing with certain aspects of the question in the reasoning of its Judgment.
    [Show full text]
  • Programme & Abstract Book
    Fourth Edition Young Researchers Overseas Day 15 December 2020 Programme CONTENTS Programme �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 1 Session I ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 7 Poster session A ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 10 Poster session B �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 15 Session II ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 20 Poster session C ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 25 Poster session D ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 35 Session III ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 46 Poster session E �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 51 Poster session F �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 57 Session IV �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
    [Show full text]
  • CR 2005/5 Cour Internationale International Court De Justice Of
    CR 2005/5 Cour internationale International Court de Justice of Justice LA HAYE THE HAGUE ANNÉE 2005 Audience publique tenue le mercredi 13 avril 2005, à 15 heures, au Palais de la Paix, sous la présidence de M. Shi, président, en l’affaire des Activités armées sur le territoire du Congo (République démocratique du Congo c. Ouganda) ________________ COMPTE RENDU ________________ YEAR 2005 Public sitting held on Wednesday 13 April 2005, at 3 p.m., at the Peace Palace, President Shi presiding, in the case concerning Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda) ____________________ VERBATIM RECORD ____________________ - 2 - Présents : M. Shi, président M. Ranjeva, vice-président MM. Koroma Vereshchetin Mme Higgins MM. Parra-Aranguren Kooijmans Rezek Al-Khasawneh Buergenthal Elaraby Owada Simma Tomka Abraham, juges MM. Verhoeven, Kateka, juges ad hoc M. Couvreur, greffier ⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯ - 3 - Present: President Shi Vice-President Ranjeva Judges Koroma Vereshchetin Higgins Parra-Aranguren Kooijmans Rezek Al-Khasawneh Buergenthal Elaraby Owada Simma Tomka Abraham Judges ad hoc Verhoeven Kateka Registrar Couvreur ⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯ - 4 - Le Gouvernement de la République du Congo est représenté par : S. Exc. M. Honorius Kisimba Ngoy Ndalewe, ministre de la justice et garde des sceaux de la République démocratique du Congo, comme chef de la délégation; S. Exc. M. Jacques Masangu-a-Mwanza, ambassadeur extraordinaire et plénipotentiaire auprès du Royaume des Pays-Bas, comme agent; M. Tshibangu Kalala, avocat aux barreaux de Kinshasa et de Bruxelles, comme coagent et avocat; M. Olivier Corten, professeur de droit international à l’Université libre de Bruxelles, M. Pierre Klein, professeur de droit international, directeur du centre de droit international de l’Université libre de Bruxelles, M.
    [Show full text]
  • Konrad Volume 13 - English.Indd 1 4/11/2013 10:05:58 AM Konrad Adenauer Stiftung
    KONRAD ADENAUER STIFTUNG AFRICAN LAW STUDY LIBRARY Volume 13 Edited by Hartmut Hamann, Kalala Ilunga-Matthiesen and Adalbert Sango Mukalay Hartmut Hamann is a lawyer specialized in providing legal support for international projects between states and private companies, and in international arbitration proceedings. He is a professor at the Freie Universität Berlin, and at the Chemnitz University of Technology, where he teaches public international law and conflict resolution. His legal and academic activities often take him to Africa. Kalala Ilunga-Matthiesen is professor at the law faculty of the University of Lubumbashi, responsible for the Commission for Extension of Human Rights and Development (Commission de vulgarisation des droits de l’homme et du développement) in DRC; co-tutor for seminars on the status of laws in Sub-Saharan Africa, organized at the law faculty of the University of Lubumbashi in partnership with the KONRAD ADENAUER Foundation. Adalbert Sango Mukalay is professor of law at the University of Lubumbashi (DRC), whose research deals with the topic “Law and Society” with special interest in the relationship between the State and respect for human rights. For a number of years he has been contributing to the organization of seminars on the rule of law in Africa, sponsored by the Konrad Adenauer Foundation. Konrad Published By: Adenauer Stiftung Rule of Law Program for Sub-Saharan Africa AFRICAN LAW STUDY LIBRARY Vol 13 A Konrad Volume 13 - English.indd 1 4/11/2013 10:05:58 AM Konrad Adenauer Stiftung Office : Mbaruk Road, Hse, No. 27 P.O. Box 66471-00800 Westlands, Nairobi, Kenya Tel: 254 20 272 59 57, 261 0021, 261 0022 Fax: 254 20 261 0023 Email: [email protected] Head Office : Klingelhöferstr.
    [Show full text]