DOCSLIB.ORG

Icc-01/04-01/06-1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Icc-01/04-01/06-1 ICC-01/04-01/06-1-Corr-Red 17-03-2006 1/59 SL PT Pursuant to Chamber's instruction dated 03/11/2017, this document is separated from its main document ICC-01/04-01/06-8-Corr. ICC-01/04-01/06-8-US-Corr 09-03-2006 7/65 SL ICC-01/04-01/06-8-Corr 17-03-2006 Pursuant to the Decision ICC-01/04-01/06-37 this document is reclassified as public 7/65 ANNEX I Cour Pénale ,(fATA\ Internationale Ä International vi/ Criminal Court Original: English No.: ICC-01/04-01/06 Date: 10 February 2006 PRE-TRIAL CHAMBER I Before: Judge Claude Jorda, Presiding Judge Judge Akua Kuenyehia Judge Sylvia Steiner Registrar: Mr Bruno Cathala SITUATION IN THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO IN THE CASE OF THE PROSECUTOR v. THOMAS LUBANGA DYILO Under Seal Decision on the Prosecutor's Application for a warrant of arrest. Article 58 The Office of the Prosecutor: Mr Luis Moreno-Ocampo Ms Fatou Bensouda, Deputy Prosecutor Mr Ekkehard Withopf, Senior Trial Lawyer Ms Lyne Décarie, Trial Lawyer N° ICC-01-04-01/06 71(^5 10 February 2006 ICC-01/04-01/06-1-Corr-Red 17-03-2006 2/59 SL PT Pursuant to Chamber's instruction dated 03/11/2017, this document is separated from its main document ICC-01/04-01/06-8-Corr. ICC-01/04-01/06-8-US-Corr 09-03-2006 8/65 SL ICC-01/04-01/06-8-Corr 17-03-2006 Pursuant to the Decision ICC-01/04-01/06-37 this document is reclassified as public 8/65 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction 3 LI. Background 3 1.2 Preliminary Comments 3 1.3 Preliminary Observations 3 II. Analysis of the jurisdiction and admissibility in the case against Mr Thomas Lubanga Dyilo 3 II. 1 Whether the case against Mr Thomas Lubanga Dyilo falls within the jurisdiction of the Court 3 II.2 Admissibility of the case against Mr Thomas Lubanga Dyilo 3 11.2.1 Whether those States with jurisdiction over the case against Mr Thomas Lubanga Dyilo have remained inactive or are unwilling or unable to proceed in relation to such case 3 11.2.2 Whether the case against Mr Thomas Lubanga Dyilo meets the gravity threshold provided for in article 17 (1) (d) of the Statute 3 II.2.2.1 The gravity threshold under article 17 (1) (d) of the Statute 3 11.12.1 The case against Mr Thomas Lubanga Dyilo 3 III. Whether the requirements under article 58 (1) of the Statute for the issuance of a warrant of arrest for Mr Thomas Lubanga Dyilo are met 3 111.1 Are there reasonable grounds to believe that at least one crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been committed? 3 III. 1.1 Are there reasonable grounds to believe that the contextual elements of at least one crime within the jurisdiction of the Court exist? 3 III. 1.2 Are there reasonable grounds to believe that the specific elements of at least one crime within the jurisdiction of the Court exist? 3 111.2 Are there reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Thomas Lubanga Dyilo has incurred criminal liability for the above-mentioned crimes under any of the modes of liability provided for in the Statute? 3 111.3 Does the arrest of Mr Thomas Lubanga Dyilo appear necessary under article 58 (1) of the Statute? 3 IV. Should the Office of the Prosecutor be the organ of the Court responsible for making and transmitting the request for cooperation seeking arrest and surrender of Mr Thomas Lubanga Dyilo to the relevant State authorities? 3 V. Should the Prosecution be authorised to disclose information relating to the warrant of arrest for Mr Thomas Lubanga Dyilo to the competent representatives of such entities that are able and willing to assist in the arrangements necessary for arrest and surrender? 3 VI. Should measures be requested under article 57 (3) (e) of the Statute and rule 99 (1) of the Rules? 3 N° ICC-01-04-01/06 8/65 10 February 2006 ICC-01/04-01/06-1-Corr-Red 17-03-2006 3/59 SL PT Pursuant to Chamber's instruction dated 03/11/2017, this document is separated from its main document ICC-01/04-01/06-8-Corr. ICC-01/04-01/06-8-US-Corr 09-03-2006 9/65 SL ICC-01/04-01/06-8-Corr 17-03-2006 Pursuant to the Decision ICC-01/04-01/06-37 this document is reclassified as public 9/65 PRE-TRIAL CHAMBER I of the International Criminal Court ("the Chamber" and "the Court" respectively) has been seized of the Prosecutor's Application for a warrant of arrest ("the Prosecution's Application") filed on 13 January 2006 pursuant to article 58 of the Statute of the Court ("the Statute") in the context of the investigation of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Having examined the written and oral submissions of the Prosecution, the Chamber RENDERS THIS DECISION. N° ICC-01-04-01/06 9/65 10 February 2006 ICC-01/04-01/06-1-Corr-Red 17-03-2006 4/59 SL PT Pursuant to Chamber's instruction dated 03/11/2017, this document is separated from its main document ICC-01/04-01/06-8-Corr. ICC-01/04-01/06-8-US-Corr 09-03-2006 10/65 SL ICC-01/04-01/06-8-Corr 17-03-2006 Pursuant to the Decision ICC-01/04-01/06-37 this document is reclassified as public 10/65 I. Introduction I.l. Background 1. The Prosecutor's application for a warrant of arrest pursuant to article 58 ("Prosecution's Application") filed by the Prosecution on 13 January 2006, requested the issuance of a warrant of arrest for Mr Thomas Lubanga Dyilo. 2. The decision concerning supporting materials in connection with the Prosecution's Application ("Decision concerning Supporting Materials"), filed by the Chamber on 20 January 2006, invited the Prosecution to submit supporting materials and convened a hearing on the said Application to be held on 2 February 2006. 3. The Prosecution's Submission of Further Information and Materials ("Prosecution's Submission") was filed by the Prosecution on 25 January 2006. 4. The Prosecution's Submission of Further Information and Materials ("Prosecution's Further Submission") was filed by the Prosecution on 27 January 2006. 5. The Decision concerning the hearing on 2 February 2006, filed by the Chamber on 31 January 2006, informed the Prosecution of the agenda of the hearing. N° ICC-01-04-01/06 10/65 10 February 2006 ICC-01/04-01/06-1-Corr-Red 17-03-2006 5/59 SL PT Pursuant to Chamber's instruction dated 03/11/2017, this document is separated from its main document ICC-01/04-01/06-8-Corr. ICC-01/04-01/06-8-US-Corr 09-03-2006 11/65 SL ICC-01/04-01/06-8-Corr 17-03-2006 Pursuant to the Decision ICC-01/04-01/06-37 this document is reclassified as public \ 1/65 6. On 2 February 2006 a hearing was held ex parte with the Prosecution and in closed session to deal with matters arising from the Prosecution's Application. 1.2 Preliminary Comments On 20 January 2006, the Chamber filed its Decision concerning Supporting Materials, in which the Chamber invited the Prosecution to provide supporting materials relating to the Prosecution's Application. The Chamber notes that in the Prosecution's Further Submission the Prosecution made the following statements: In no case, however, are the respective addressees of such ''invitations" required to act upon them. Accordingly, the Prosecution interprets the "invitation'' by the Pre- Trial Chamber by its literal meaning.^ In addition, in support of the Prosecution's terminological interpretation of the notion of "summary of evidence and any other information", article 58 of the Rome Statute does not provide for submission of "supporting materials" or any materials in addition to the summary. Whilst the notion of "supporting materials", "supporting documentation", or "supporting documents" is known as a concept in both the Rome Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, it is not used in the context of the procedures following [an application by the Prosecution for arrest warrant]. The silence of the law allows for the only conclusion that the legislator has deliberately chosen, at the stage of the arrest warrant application, to require the Pre-Trial Chambers to trust the Prosecution's summary.^ The analysis confirms the Prosecutor's submission that it falls entirely within the discretion of the Prosecutor to decide what he believes necessary to be submitted to the Pre-Trial Chamber. Accordingly, the Prosecutor has a choice in what to present to the Pre-Trial Chamber.^ The Chamber notes that according to article 58 (1) of the Statute the Chamber must decide whether to grant or reject the Prosecution's Application for the issuance of a warrant of arrest on the basis of (i) "the Application" and (ii) "the evidence or other information submitted by the 1 Prosecution's Further Submission, para. 13. 2 Ibid., para. 19. 3 Ibid., para. 23. N° ICC-01-04-01/06 11/65 10 February 2006 ICC-01/04-01/06-1-Corr-Red 17-03-2006 6/59 SL PT Pursuant to Chamber's instruction dated 03/11/2017, this document is separated from its main document ICC-01/04-01/06-8-Corr. ICC-01/04-01/06-8-US-Corr 09-03-2006 12/65 SL ICC-01/04-01/06-8-Corr 17-03-2006 Pursuant to the Decision ICC-01/04-01/06-37 this document is recla.ssified as public 12/65 Prosecutor".
Load more

Recommended publications
  • NEWS OTP Activities
    OTP Briefing Issue #144 1-15 July 2013 NEWS Pre-Trial Chamber II requests Nigeria to arrest Omar Al Bashir 15 July - Pre-Trial Chamber II requested the Federal Republic of Nigeria to immediately arrest Sudanese President Omar Al Bashir, on visit to Abuja (Nigeria) for an African Union summit on HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, and to surrender him to the ICC. The Sudanese President’s visit to Nigeria has raised a lot of criticism among rights groups. Human Rights Watch (HRW) called for Nigeria to prevent Bashir to attend the Abuja summit or to stop it if it went there, while the president of the Nigeria Coalition on the International Criminal Court, Chino Obiagwu, said that the Nigerian government “has violated its obligations under international law”. The Chamber recalled that, as signatories to the ICC, Nigeria and several other African countries are expected, under their treaty obligations, to actually arrest the Sudanese President if he sets foot on their soil. The Nigeria presidential spokesman Reuben Abati said "The Sudanese president came for an AU event and the AU has taken a position on the ICC arrest order, so Nigeria has not taken action different from the AU stand". Nevertheless, Nigeria’s Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, Prof. Viola Onwuliri, had briefed the Nigerian press that over 30 African Heads of State would be participating at the conference, stating that she was not reported to have specifically listed the names of the heads of state and presidents expected at the meeting, nor was she reported to have specifically mentioned the name of the controversial Sudanese president.
    [Show full text]
  • MONITORING ATROCITY CRIMES TRIALS a GUIDE Copyright © 2020 Open Society Foundations
    MONITORING ATROCITY CRIMES TRIALS A GUIDE Copyright © 2020 Open Society Foundations. This publication is available as a pdf on the Open Society Foundations website under a Creative Commons license that allows copying and distributing the publication, only in its entirety, as long as it is attributed to the Open Society Foundations and used for noncommercial educational or public policy purposes. Photographs may not be used separately from the publication. Published by: Open Society Foundations 224 West 57th Street New York, New York 10019 USA www.OpenSocietyFoundations.org For more information contact: Taegin Reisman Open Society Justice Initiative [email protected] Cover photo: © Jerry Redfern/Getty A journalist watches the trial of a Khmer Rouge leader on video monitor in a room adjoining the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia. 2 A GUIDE TO MONITORING ATROCITY CRIMES TRIALS CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................................................................................... 2 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 3 ESTABLISHING A TRIAL MONITORING PROGRAM .............................................. 5 1 1.1 Goals and Objectives 1.2 Measuring Impact 1.3 Thinking about Audiences 1.4 Setting up a Team 1.5 Managing a Team 1.6 Publication Decisions 1.7 Content 1.8 Publication 1.9 Your Role, Your Rights, Your Responsibility Checklist HOW TO MONITOR ATROCITY CRIMES TRIALS ................................................
    [Show full text]
  • ICC-02/04-01/05 Date
    ICC-02/04-01/15-83 16-02-2015 1/13 RH PT ICC-02/04-01/05-132 08-12-2006 1/13 SL PT Pursuant to Decision ICC-02/04-01/05-424, dated 06-02-2015, this document is copied and transferred in the case ICC-02/04-01/15: The Prosecutor vs. Dominic Ongwen Original : English No.: ICC‐02/04‐01/05 Date: 8 December 2006 PRE‐TRIAL CHAMBER II Before: Judge Mauro Politi, Presiding Judge Judge Fatoumata Dembele Diarra Judge Ekaterina Trendafilova Registrar: Mr Bruno Cathala SITUATION IN UGANDA IN THE CASE OF THE PROSECUTOR vs. JOSEPH KONY, VINCENT OTTI, RASKA LUKWIYA, OKOT ODHIAMBO and DOMINIC ONGWEN Public Document SUBMISSION OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THE STATUS OF THE EXECUTION OF THE WARRANTS OF ARREST IN THE SITUATION IN UGANDA The Office of the Prosecutor Mr Luis Moreno‐Ocampo, Prosecutor Ms Fatou Bensouda, Deputy Prosecutor Ms Christine Chung, Senior Trial Lawyer No. : ICC‐02/04‐01/05 1 8 December 2006 ICC-02/04-01/15-83 16-02-2015 2/13 RH PT ICC-02/04-01/05-132 08-12-2006 2/13 SL PT Pursuant to Decision ICC-02/04-01/05-424, dated 06-02-2015, this document is copied and transferred in the case ICC-02/04-01/15: The Prosecutor vs. Dominic Ongwen Preliminary Statement The Office of the Prosecutor (“OTP”) respectfully submits additional information on the status of the execution of the warrants of arrest in the situation in Uganda, in response to an Order of this Chamber dated 30 November 2006.
    [Show full text]
  • The Court Today, February 2010
    ICC Courtroom ©ICC-CPI/Marco Okhuizen ICC-PIDS-TCT-01- 001/10_Eng ICC-PIDS-TCT-01- Quick Facts Established: By the Rome Statute that entered been conducting investigations in four situations: into force on 1 July, 2002. Uganda, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Central African Republic and Darfur, Sudan. The Court Today States Parties: 110 countries. In addition, on 26 November, 2009, the Prosecutor sought authorisation from Pre-Trial Crimes within the Court's jurisdiction: The Chamber II to open an investigation in the most serious crimes of concern to the situation in Kenya. The judges' decision is international community, namely genocide, pending. crimes against humanity and war crimes committed after 1 July, 2002. Preliminary analysis: The Office of the Prosecutor is conducting examinations in Judges: 18 judges elected for nine years by the Afghanistan, Colombia, Cote d'Ivoire, Georgia, Assembly of States Parties. Palestine and Guinea. President: Judge Sang-Hyun Song. Arrest warrants: 13 have been issued with one having been withdrawn following the death of Prosecutor: Mr Luis Moreno-Ocampo. one suspect. In addition, one summons to appear was issued for Bahar Idriss Abu Garda. Registrar: Ms Silvana Arbia. In custody: Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, Germain Staff: Over 800 from approximately 90 States. Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui in the context of the situation in the DRC; Jean-Pierre Official languages: English, French, Arabic, Bemba Gombo in the context of the situation in Chinese, Russian and Spanish. the CAR. Working languages: English and French. At large: Eight suspects. Headquarters: The Hague, the Netherlands. Cases: Eight cases. Field offices: Kinshasa and Bunia (DRC); Trials: Two trials pertaining to the situation in Kampala (Uganda); Bangui (CAR); N'Djamena the Democratic Republic of the Congo: The and Abeche (Chad).
    [Show full text]
  • 16 May 2012 PRE TRIAL CHAMBER I
    ICC-01/11-01/11-148 16-05-2012 1/12 RH PT Original : Anglais N° : ICC-01/11-01/11 Date :16 May 2012 PRE TRIAL CHAMBER I Before: Judge Silvia Fernandez de Gurmendi, Presiding Judge Judge Hans-Peter Kaul Judge Christine Van den Wyngaert SITUATION IN LIBYA IN THE CASE OF THE PROSECUTOR v. SAIF AL-ISLAM GADDAFI and ABDULLAH AL-SENUSSI Public APPLICATION BY LAWYERS FOR JUSTICE IN LIBYA and the REDRESS TRUST FOR LEAVE TO SUBMIT OBSERVATIONS PURSUANT TO RULE 103 OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE AND EVIDENCE Origin : Lawyers for Justice in Libya, 4th Floor, 21-22 Great Sutton Street, London EC1V 0DY The Redress Trust, 87 Vauxhall Walk, London, SE11 5HJ ICC-01/11-01/11 1/12 ICC-01/11-01/11-148 16-05-2012 2/12 RH PT Document to be notified in accordance with regulation 31 of the Regulations of the Court to : The Office of the Prosecutor Counsel for the Defence M. Luis Moreno Ocampo Ms. Fatou Bensouda Legal Representatives of Victims Legal Representatives of Applicants Unrepresented Victims Unrepresented Applicants for Participation/Reparation The Office of Public Counsel for The Office of Public Counsel for the Victims Defence Me Paolina Massidda Mr. Xavier-Jean Keita, Principal Counsel Ms. Melinda Taylor, Counsel States Representatives Amicus Curiae Professor Philippe Sands QC Professor Payam Akhavan Ms Michelle Butler REGISTRY Registrar Counsel Support Section Ms. Silvana Arbia Deputy Registrar Detention Section Mr. Didier Preira Victims and Witnesses Unit Victims Participation and Reparations Other Section ICC-01/11-01/11 2/12 ICC-01/11-01/11-148 16-05-2012 3/12 RH PT 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The International Criminal Court
    2007–2008 FACT SHEET ONE “The establishment of the Court is still a gift of hope to future generations, and a giant step forward in the march towards universal human rights and the rule of law.” – Kofi Annan, Former U.N. Secretary-General at the signing of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court The International Criminal Court The International Criminal Court is groundbreaking because: For more than half a century since the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials, states have largely failed to bring to justice those responsible for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. With the creation of the International Criminal Court (ICC), the world has begun to fulfill the post-World War II promise of “never again.” The ICC is the world’s first permanent, international judicial body capable of bringing perpetrators to justice and providing redress it will serve as a permanent deterrent to victims when states are unable or unwilling to do so. This represents a major stride for to people considering these crimes. international justice. In most cases in the last 50 years, international mechanisms to prosecute On July 17, 1998, at a diplomatic conference in Rome, the international community people accused of these crimes have adopted the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The treaty has been hailed been set up only after the crimes were by governments, legal experts and civil society as the most significant development in committed; international law since the adoption of the United Nations Charter. The treaty entered into force on July 1, 2002. The Court made its first arrest in March 2006 and is scheduled to it will have a much wider jurisdiction begin its first trial in September 2007.
    [Show full text]
  • Dominic Ongwen's Domino Effect
    DOMINIC ONGWEN’S DOMINO EFFECT HOW THE FALLOUT FROM A FORMER CHILD SOLDIER’S DEFECTION IS UNDERMINING JOSEPH KONY’S CONTROL OVER THE LRA JANUARY 2017 DOMINIC ONGWEN’S DOMINO EFFECT TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary 1 Map: Dominic Ongwen’s domino effect on the LRA I. Kony’s grip begins to loosen 4 Map: LRA combatants killed, 2012–2016 II. The fallout from the Ongwen saga 7 Photo: Achaye Doctor and Kidega Alala III. Achaye’s splinter group regroups and recruits in DRC 9 Photo: Children abducted by Achaye’s splinter group IV. A fractured LRA targets eastern CAR 11 Graph: Abductions by LRA factions in eastern CAR, 2016 Map: Attacks by LRA factions in eastern CAR, 2016 V. Encouraging defections from a fractured LRA 15 Graph: The decline of the LRA’s combatant force, 1999–2016 Conclusion 19 About The LRA Crisis Tracker & Contributors 20 LRA CRISIS TRACKER LRA CRISIS TRACKER EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Since founding the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) in northern Uganda in the late 1980s, Joseph Kony’s control over the group’s command structure has been remarkably durable. Despite having no formal military training, he has motivated and ruled LRA members with a mixture of harsh discipline, incentives, and clever manipulation. When necessary, he has demoted or executed dozens of commanders that he perceived as threats to his power. Though Kony still commands the LRA, the weakening of his grip over the group’s command structure has been exposed by a dramatic series of events involving former LRA commander Dominic Ongwen. In late 2014, a group of Ugandan LRA officers, including Ongwen, began plotting to defect from the LRA.
    [Show full text]
  • Dominic Ongwen ICC-02/04-01/15
    Case Information Sheet Situation in Uganda ICC-PIDS-CIS-UGA-02-021/21_Eng Updated: July 2021 The Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen ICC-02/04-01/15 Dominic Ongwen Place of birth: Coorom, Kilak County, Amuru district, Northern Uganda Nationality: Ugandan Position: Alleged Former Brigade Commander of the Sinia Brigade of the LRA Warrant of arrest: Issued under seal on 8 July 2005 | Unsealed on 13 October 2005 Transfer to ICC Detention Centre: 21 January 2015 Initial appearance hearing: 26 January 2015 Confirmation of charges hearing: 21 -27 January 2016 Decision on the confirmation of charges: 26 March 2016 Opening of the trial: 6 December 2016 Closure of Submission of Evidence: 12 December 2019 Closing statements: 10-12 March 2020 Verdict: 4 February 2020 Sentence: 6 May 2021 Alleged crimes On 4 February 2021, Trial Chamber IX of the International Criminal Court (ICC) declared Dominic Ongwen guilty, beyond any reasonable doubt, of the following 61 crimes characterized as war crimes and crimes against humanity, committed in Uganda between 1 July 2002 and 31 December 2005: (i) attacks against the civilian population as such, murder, attempted murder, torture, enslavement, outrages upon personal dignity, pillaging, destruction of property and persecution; committed in the context of the four specified attacks on the Internally Displaced Persons camps (“IDP camps”) Pajule (10 October 2003), Odek (29 April 2004), Lukodi (on or about 19 May 2004) and Abok (8 June 2004); (ii) sexual and gender based crimes, namely, forced marriage, torture, rape, sexual
    [Show full text]
  • ICC-02/04-01/15 a Original
    ICC-02/04-01/15-1825 18-05-2021 1/7 EK A Original: English No. ICC-02/04-01/15 A Date: 18 May 2021 THE APPEALS CHAMBER Before: Judge Luz del Carmen Ibáñez Carranza, Presiding Judge Piotr Hofmański Judge Solomy Balungi Bossa Judge Reine Alapini-Gansou Judge Gocha Lordkipanidze SITUATION IN UGANDA IN THE CASE OF THE PROSECUTOR v. DOMINIC ONGWEN Public document Decision on ‘Defence request for a page limit extension for its notice of appeal’ No: ICC-02/04-01/15 A 1/7 ICC-02/04-01/15-1825 18-05-2021 2/7 EK A Decision to be notified in accordance with regulation 31 of the Regulations of the Court to: The Office of the Prosecutor Counsel for the Defence Ms Fatou Bensouda Mr Krispus Ayena Odongo Ms Helen Brady Legal Representatives of Victims Mr Joseph Akwenyu Manoba Mr Francisco Cox Ms Paolina Massidda REGISTRY Registrar Mr Peter Lewis No: ICC-02/04-01/15 A 2/7 ICC-02/04-01/15-1825 18-05-2021 3/7 EK A The Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court, Having before it the ‘Defence request for a page limit extension for its notice of appeal’ of 10 May 2021 (ICC-02/04-01/15-1821), Pursuant to regulations 37(2) and 57 of the Regulations of the Court, Renders the following DECISION The page limit for Mr Ongwen’s notice of appeal is extended by 10 pages. REASONS I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY 1. On 4 February 2021, Trial Chamber IX (the ‘Trial Chamber’) convicted Mr Dominic Ongwen (‘Mr Ongwen’) of crimes against humanity and war crimes (the ‘Conviction Decision’).1 2.
    [Show full text]
  • The Case of Thomas Lubanga Dyilo: the Implementation of a Fair and Public Trial at the Investigation Stage of International Criminal Court Proceedings
    81 the cASe Of thOmAS lubAngA dyilO The Case of Thomas Lubanga Dyilo: The Implementation of a Fair and Public Trial at the Investigation Stage of International Criminal Court Proceedings ■ by Yusuf Aksar * INTRODUCTION hen the Statute of the International Criminal Court (the ICC Wor the Court) was adopted by the international community on 17 July 1998, it was regarded as “a gift of hope to future generations, and a giant step forward in the march towards universal human rights and the rule of law.”1 Having reached the 60th ratification of the Stat- ute in a short period of time, the Court came into being on 1 July 2002. As of March 2009, there were four cases which were brought before the ICC. Three of them were self-referred by the Democratic Republic of the Congo,2 the Republic of Uganda3 and the Central Republic of Africa4 to the Court.5 The fourth one relates to the Sudan’s troubled * Associate Professor of International Law, Karadeniz Technical University, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences. Email: [email protected] or [email protected]. Author would like to thank to the Turkish Academy of Sciences for its financial and moral supports without which such a work could not have been possible. Statement by the United Nations Secretary- General Kofi Annan at the Ceremony Held at Campidoglio Celebrating the Adoption of the Statute of the International Criminal Court (July 18, 1998); UN Press Release, Secretary-General Says Establishment of International Criminal Court is Major Step in March Towards Universal Human Rights, Rule of Law, UN Doc.
    [Show full text]
  • The Victims' Court?
    2015 THE VICTIMS’ COURT? A Study of 622 Victim Participants at the International Criminal Court UGANDA DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO KENYA CÔTE D’IVOIRE THE VICTIMS’ COURT? A Study of 622 Victim Participants at the International Criminal Court UGANDA DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO KENYA CÔTE D’IVOIRE 2015 e Human Rights Center at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law conducts research on war crimes and other serious violations of international humanitarian law and human rights. Using evidence- based methods and innovative technologies, we support eorts to hold perpetrators accountable and to protect vulnerable populations. We also train students and advocates to document human rights violations and turn this information into eective action. HUMAN RIGHTS CENTER University of California, Berkeley, School of Law Telegraph Avenue, Ste. , Berkeley, CA – Telephone: .. | Email: [email protected] Web: hrc.berkeley.edu | @HRCBerkeley Cover art: Stephen Smith Cody Design and graphics: Nicole Hayward CONTENTS ACRONYMS / v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY / 1 INTRODUCTION / 7 THE STUDY / 9 VICTIM PARTICIPATION AND PROCEDURAL JUSTICE / 12 VICTIM PARTICIPATION IN CRIMINAL TRIALS / 16 VICTIM PARTICIPATION AT THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT / 18 THE VICTIM PARTICIPATION PROCESS / 20 MODELS OF VICTIM PARTICIPATION / 26 UGANDA / 29 DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO / 38 KENYA / 47 CÔTE D’IVOIRE / 60 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS / 71 APPENDIX 1: AUTHORS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS / 75 APPENDIX 2: VICTIM PARTICIPANT QUESTIONNAIRE / 76 ACRONYMS ASP Assembly of States
    [Show full text]
  • A Diplomatic Surge for Northern Uganda
    www.enoughproject.org A DIPLOMATIC SURGE FOR NORTHERN UGANDA By John Prendergast and Adam O’Brien Strategy Briefing #9 December 2007 I. INTRODUCTION U.S. engagement, a necessary but largely neglected Dissension, disarray, deaths, and defections within key to success, has become more visible and the rebel Lord’s Resistance Army leadership provide concerted in recent months. The United States is a major opportunity for negotiators to pursue—par- providing financial support for the consultation allel to an expeditious conclusion of the formal process and a special advisor for conflict resolution negotiations process in Juba—the conclusion of has been named to support peace efforts over the a swift deal with LRA leader Joseph Kony himself. objections of key State Department officials.2 These Such a deal would seek to find an acceptable set are overdue steps in the right direction, but much of security and livelihood arrangements for the LRA more can be done. leadership—particularly those indicted by the Inter- national Criminal Court—and its rank and file. This To keep the peace process focused and moving moment of weakness at the top of the LRA must forward, several steps are necessary from the be seized upon immediately. If diplomats don’t, the Juba negotiators, the U.N. Special Envoy, and the LRA’s long-time patron, the government of Sudan, United States: will eventually come to Kony’s rescue as it has in the past, and new life will be breathed into the • Deal directly with Kony on the core issues: Ad- organization in the form of weapons and supplies.
    [Show full text]