THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ROME STATUTE OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT IN UGANDA AND SOUTH AFRICA; A CRITICAL ANALYSIS A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy By Saidat Nakitto Brunel Law School, Brunel University London September 2017 i Abstract The thesis examines the extent to which the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Rome Statute) has been implemented by Uganda and South Africa. State parties to the Rome Statute are expected to perform their obligations under the Statute in good faith. This entails conducting investigations and prosecutions for ICC crimes by virtue of the principle of complementarity, as well as fully cooperating with the ICC in its investigations and prosecutions where the state is unwilling or unable to do so. However, the Rome Statute does not provide clear guidance on what measures need to be undertaken by states to implement its provisions. This leaves states with the discretion to determine how best to give effect to the provisions of the Rome Statute. Drawing from the practices of various states, the thesis gives an overview of the ways through which the Rome Statute has been implemented and makes a detailed analysis of the case studies of Uganda and South Africa. The focus is on the national implementing legislation, institutions that enforce the legislation and resultant court decisions. The emerging challenges faced by institutions in implementing the Rome Statute are discussed and using examples of other states, solutions are suggested to eliminate these problems. The thesis argues that effective implementation of the Rome Statute at the national level requires not only enacting legislation to domesticate the Rome Statute but also actual enforcement of the legislation to ensure adherence with the law. ii Declaration No portion of the work referred to in the thesis has been submitted in any form for another degree or qualification at any university or other institute or tertiary education. Information derived from published or unpublished work of others has been acknowledged in the text and a list of references is given. iii Acknowledgement This PhD has been completed with the assistance of many colleagues, friends and family. I wish to thank my two supervisors, Professor Manisuli Ssenyonjo and Dr. Mohamed Elewa Badar. Most of all, I am grateful to Professor Manisuli for his guidance and support throughout my studies. I feel privileged to have been supervised by Professor Manisuli who introduced me to academic writing and publishing in reputable international law journals. My gratitude extends to the Commonwealth Scholarship Commission in the United Kingdom which funded me throughout the three years. Many thanks for the generous financial support without which, I would not have undertaken PhD studies. I am truly indebted to the Commonwealth Scholarship Commission and happy to be a beneficiary of the prestigious Commonwealth Scholarship. I would also like to thank my employers at the Islamic University in Uganda particularly, Dr. Ahmad Sengendo and Dr. Mouhammad Mpezamihigo for their support and encouragement. Many thanks for nominating me for the Commonwealth Scholarship and for having faith in me. Special thanks to Professor Tindifa Samuel and Dr. Serwanga Jamil for their moral support and encouragement right from the early stages of my studies. Thank you to all my colleagues at Brunel Law School for your guidance and support throughout the PhD journey. I owe greatest thanks to my father, mother and sisters who took on the parenting role of my four children. I appreciate your love and support in ensuring that I concentrate on my studies without worrying about my children. Last but not least, my heartfelt thanks to my husband, Dr. Kasozi Ediriisa Sinaani, for his unwavering love and support and to my children, Munirah, Muniir, Hannah and Lateefah for your patience. Many thanks to the Almighty God for enabling my successful completion of PhD studies. iv Table of Contents Title Page …………………………………………………………………………………….i Abstract ……………………………………………………………………………………....ii Declaration ………………………………………………………………………………......iii Acknowledgement…………………………………………………………………………… iv Table of Contents …………………………………………………………………………… v List of Abbreviations ………………………………………………………………………...xi Chapter One Introduction 1. Background and Context …………………………………………………………………1 2. Statement of the Problem …………………………………………………………………6 3. Objectives of the Study …………………………………………………………………...7 4. Research Questions ………………………………………………………………………..7 5. Methodology ………………………………………………………………………………8 6. Justifications for the Implementation Measures and Case Studies Selected ………………9 6.1. Selection of Measures for Implementing the Rome Statute ………………………....10 6.2. Selection of Case Studies ……………………………………………………………12 7. Significance of the Study ………………………………………………………………....15 8. Literature Review …………………………………………………………………………16 9. Limitations of the Study ………………………………………………………………….19 10. Structure of the Study ………………………………………………………. ………….19 Chapter Two The Domestic Implementation of the Rome Statute: A General Overview 1. Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………….21 Part One: The Duty to Implement and Methods of Implementing the Rome Statute 2. Do State Parties Have the Duty Implement the Rome Statute?…………………………...22 3. Implementing the Rome Statute in the Practice of ICC State Parties ……………….……25 3.1. Using Existing Legislation ………………………………………….………………..27 3.2. Complete Incorporation ………………………………………………………………28 3.2.1. Incorporation by Reference ……….………..…………………………………29 3.2.2. Incorporation by Copying ……….……..……………………………………...30 3.3. Modified Incorporation ………………………………………………………………31 3.4. Using Combinations of Methods ……………………………………………………..32 v Part Two 4. What Needs to be Implemented? …………………………………………………………34 4.1. Legislative Measures …………………………………………………………………34 4.1.1. Substantive Crimes under the Rome Statute ………………………………….35 A. Genocide ………………..………………………………………………….35 B. Crimes Against Humanity ………………..………………………………..36 C. War Crimes ………………………………………………………………...38 4.1.2. Penalties for ICC Crimes ………………..…………………………………….41 4.1.3. Individual Criminal Responsibility and Defences …………………………….43 A. Individual Criminal Responsibility ……………………………………..…43 B. Responsibility of Commanders and Other Superiors ………………...……47 C. Defences ……………………………..…………………………………….49 D. A Summary of State Practice on Individual Criminal Responsibility and Defences……….…………………………………………………………...50 4.1.4. Jurisdiction ……………………………………………………………………51 4.1.5. Cooperation …………………………………………………………………...56 4.2. Non-Legislative Measures ………………………..………………………………….60 Part Three: 5.Obstacles to Domestic Implementation of the Rome Statute………………………………64 5.1. Legislative Obstacles …………………….……………………………………………64 5.1.1.Immunity …………...…..……………………………………………………….64 5.1.2. Applicability of Statutes of Limitations …………………..……………………69 5.1.3. Non-Retroactive Application of Legislation ………………..………………….70 5.1.4. Amnesty ……..…………………………………………………………………73 5.2. Non-Legislative Obstacles ……………………………..……………………………..76 6. Conclusion ………………………………………………………………………………...78 Chapter Three Measures Undertaken by Uganda to Implement the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court 1. Introduction ……………………………………….……………………………………....81 2. Institutions Dealing with ICC Crimes in Uganda …………………….…………………..83 2.1. Special Units for Investigating and Prosecuting ICC Crimes ………………………..84 2.2. The International Crimes Division (ICD) ……………………………........................88 3. The Law Implementing the Rome Statute in Uganda …………….……………………...92 vi 3.1. Jurisdiction over ICC Crimes ………………... ……………………………………..93 3.2. Definitions of ICC Crimes …………………………………………………………...96 3.3. Penalties for ICC Crimes …………..…………………………………………………98 3.4. Individual Criminal Responsibility and Defences …………………………………..101 3.4.1. Individual Criminal Responsibility …………...………………………………102 3.4.2. Defences …...………….………………………………………………………105 4. Legislative Obstacles to the Implementation of the Rome Statute …………………...…107 4.1. Non-Retroactivity of Uganda’s ICC Act ……………………………………………108 4.2. Amnesty ………………………………………….…………………………………111 4.2.1. The Amnesty Act (2000) …………………..…………………………………112 4.2.2. The Legality of the Amnesty Act (2000) …………………………………….114 4.2.3. Analysing the Thomas Kwoyelo Case ……………………………………… 116 5. Cooperation ……………………………………………………………………………...119 5.1. Provisions Concerning Arrest and Surrender ……………………………...……….120 5.2. Restrictions and Competing Requests for Arrest and Surrender …………………..123 5.3. Provisions Concerning Other Forms of Assistance ………………..………………124 5.4. Provisions Concerning Assistance to Uganda …………..…………………………126 6. Eliminating Legislative Obstacles ……………………………………………………...127 6.1. Amending Uganda’s ICC Act to Permit Retroactive Application …………………127 6.2. Amending the Amnesty Act (2000) ………………………………………………..129 7. Conclusion ………………………………………………………………………………132 Chapter Four Measures Undertaken by South Africa to Implement the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court 1. Introduction …………………………………………..…………………………………134 2. Institutions Dealing with ICC Crimes in South Africa …………………………………135 3. The Law Implementing the Rome Statute in South Africa …………………..…………139 3.1. Jurisdiction over ICC Crimes ……….………………………………………………140 3.1.1. Analysing Court Decisions on Jurisdiction ………………………..………….142 A. Analysing the Madagascar Case …………..……………………………….143 B. Analysing the Zimbabwe Torture Case ……………………………………145 I. Decisions of Courts in South Africa Concerning the Presence Requirement ……………………………………………………………146 II.