DOCSLIB.ORG

Updates from the International Criminal Courts Anna Katherine Drake American University Washington College of Law

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Updates from the International Criminal Courts Anna Katherine Drake American University Washington College of Law Human Rights Brief Volume 15 | Issue 2 Article 8 2008 Updates from the International Criminal Courts Anna Katherine Drake American University Washington College of Law Andrea Mateus Emily Pasternak American University Washington College of Law Rachel Katzman American University Washington College of Law Katherine Anne Cleary American University Washington College of Law See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/hrbrief Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Human Rights Law Commons, and the International Law Commons Recommended Citation Drake, Anna Katherine, Andrea Mateus, Emily Pasternak, Rachel Katzman, Katherine Anne Cleary, Solomon Shinerock, and Howard Shneider. "Updates from the International Criminal Courts." Human Rights Brief 15, no.2 (2008): 38-46. This Column is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington College of Law Journals & Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Human Rights Brief by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Authors Anna Katherine Drake, Andrea Mateus, Emily Pasternak, Rachel Katzman, Katherine Anne Cleary, Solomon Shinerock, and Howard Shneider This column is available in Human Rights Brief: http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/hrbrief/vol15/iss2/8 Drake et al.: Updates from the International Criminal Courts UPDATES FROM THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURTS Int E rn A T IO N AL CR IMI N AL mortar attacks that briefly captured the To constitute a crime against humanity, TR I B U N AL FO R T HE FO R ME R world’s attention was the shelling of the the crime of rape must be committed as a YUGOSLAVIA Markele Market by the Romanija Corps in part of a widespread or systematic attack August of 1995. Many Bosnian Serbs have against a civilian population. This ele- CASES A N D PR OCEEDI N GS maintained that the Bosnian Army shelled ment is what distinguishes crimes against its own people to stir up international sym- humanity from ordinary crimes. The tar- The trial of influential Serbian national- pathy; however, the Tribunal struck down geting of a collective group, in the form ist and politician Vojislav Šešelj restarted this theory previously. The bench was of a civilian population, rather than the on December 7, 2007. Šešelj has been particularly disturbed by the use, under individual victim, places crimes against awaiting trial at The Hague for five years Miloševic´ ’s command, of modified air humanity among the gravest of crimes. Of after voluntarily surrendering to the bombs to attack densely-packed Sarajevo the five other individuals indicted with- Tribunal. His trial was halted last year in because these bombs are “highly inac- Zelenovic´, the Tribunal convicted three response to a 28-day hunger strike he con- curate weapon[s]” with “extremely high — Dragoljub Kunarac, Radomir Kovacˇ , ducted in protest over various evidentiary explosive force.” One expert witness stated and Zoran Vukovic´ — for raping, tortur- matters, including his wish to have the that the bombs could deviate from their ing, and enslaving a number of Bosnian book he authored translated into English intended target by up to a kilometer. Muslim women and girls. The prosecu- so as to be submitted into evidence. Šešelj tion of the rapes committed against the is the leader of the nationalist Serbian The Appeals Chamber rejected the women of Fo cˇ a led to the first convictions Radical Party (SDS), which holds one third appeal of Dragan Zelenovic´ on October 31, by the ICTY for not only rape but also for of the seats in Serbia’s Parliament. He also 2007 and affirmed his 15-year sentence for enslavement as crimes against humanity. formed and led a notoriously violent mili- the torture and rape of Bosnian Muslim tia group associated with the SDS, popu- women and girls from Focˇ a in eastern The remaining two defendants on larly known as the Chetniks or Šešelj’s Bosnia. Zelenovic ´ , a Bosnian Serb soldier the Focˇ a indictment, Gojko Jankovic´ and Men. He has been indicted for inciting and de facto military policeman, assisted Radovan Stankovic´, were transferred to crimes against humanity and war crimes. in the capture of about 70 Muslim civilians Bosnia and Herzegovina to stand trial Prosecutors claim that by using inflamma- — women, children, and elderly — from before Sarajevo’s War Crimes Chamber. tory rhetoric and propaganda, he rallied Fo cˇ a after the Bosnian Serb Army over- Jankovic´ was found guilty of torture and his several-thousand-men-strong militia took the municipality in June of 1992. The rape and sentenced to 34 years’ imprison- into committing atrocities against civilians group was held for several months in dete- ment. Stankovic´ was convicted of enslave- in Croatia and Bosnia. Observers expect riorating circumstances, subject to starva- ment and rape and sentenced to 20 years’ Šešelj’s behavior at trial to be similar to tion and assault. Zelenovic´ raped several imprisonment. Stankovic´ escaped custody predecessor defendant Slobodan Miloševic´, women, repeatedly, throughout the dura- in May 2007 and has yet to be appre- who frequently shouted obscenities and tion of their captivity. He was indicted with hended. created chaos in the courtroom. The first several other members of the Bosnian Serb day of Šešelj’s trial proved as dramatic military police and paramilitary groups in The acquittal of Sefer Halilovic´, the as expected with the accused defending April of 1992 after being on the run from former Deputy Commander and Chief of nationalist views and taking credit for the the Tribunal for several years. He pled Main Staff of the Army of the Republic idea and movement behind the creation of guilty to torture and rape as a crime against of Bosnia and Herzegovina, was affirmed a “Greater Serbia.” humanity. by the Appeals Chamber on October 16, 2007. The Prosecution appealed the Trial One of the men responsible for the Rape has long been considered a crime Chamber’s 2005 judgment that Halilovic´ lengthy and brutal siege of Sarajevo, that could amount to a crime against was not responsible under a theory of Dragomir Miloševic´, was found guilty on humanity. The ICTY has recognized that command responsibility for atrocities com- December 12, 2007 for committing crimes sexual violence may be a tool used against mitted by Bosnian troops in the villages of against humanity and violations of the civilians during war. The International Grabovica and Uzdol in Herzegovina in laws or customs of war. He was sentenced Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda has also September 1993. The Appeals Chamber to 33 years’ imprisonment. A Bosnian recognized this, finding rape as an act affirmed the acquittal stating that the Serb, General Miloševic´ commanded the of genocide in the first case before that Prosecution had failed to establish that Bosnian Serb Army’s Sarajevo Romanija Tribunal. Before the recent ICTY convic- Halilovic´ exercised the required degree of Corps in August 1994. He oversaw the ter- tion of the men involved in widespread effective control over the troops to estab- ror campaign against the besieged city for rape of women in Focˇ a , however, interna- lish superior responsibility. 15 months. Under his order the city was tional tribunals did not prosecute rape as a shelled relentlessly and its residents sub- crime against humanity. ject to sniper fire. One of the more horrific Published by Digital Commons @ American University Washington College38 of Law, 2008 1 Human Rights Brief, Vol. 15, Iss. 2 [2008], Art. 8 CO nt EM pt OF COU rt CHA R GES been “repeatedly sighted” in Serbia. She Int E rn A T IO N AL CR IMI N AL said that despite rhetorical commitment to TR I B U N AL FO R RW A N DA Two more witnesses scheduled to testify capture and hand over the four remaining MIKAELI MUHIMA N A V. for the Prosecution in the Haradinaj et al. fugitives, Serbia has “no clear roadmap, THE PR OSECU T O R , CASE NO. case were indicted for contempt of court in no clear plan in the search for fugitives, ICTR-95-1B-A November 2007. The two witnesses, Avni no serious leads, and no sign that serious efforts have been taken to arrest the fugi- Krasniqi and Sadri Selca, were supposed On May 21, 2007, the Appeals Chamber tives.” Del Ponte recognized that Serbia to testify for the Prosecution and were of the International Criminal Tribunal for has made efforts to cooperate with the subpoenaed, but despite assurances of wit- Rwanda (ICTR) issued its judgment in the Tribunal, such as establishing a National ness protection, the two witnesses refused. case Mikaeli Muhimana v. the Prosecutor. Security Council to serve as a link between The Prosecution felt that the witnesses The Accused had appealed from an April the Tribunal and the government, but that had been intimidated, believing there have 28, 2005 conviction for genocide and the these steps are “slow and inefficient.” She been problems with witness intimidation crimes against humanity of rape and mur- alleges that Serbia negotiated with Ratko throughout the trial. Haradinaj, a popular, der, for which he had received multiple Mladic´ regarding his transfer to The Hague well-known former Prime Minister and life sentences. A majority of the Appeals as recently as 2006, but that Serbia refused member of the Kosovo Liberation Army Chamber reversed the factual findings of to arrest and transfer him involuntarily. (KLA), is charged with participation in a the Trial Chamber regarding two acts of joint criminal enterprise aimed at obtain- rape and one act of murder, but affirmed Del Ponte repeated her oft-stated warn- ing full control over a partially KLA- the sentences of life imprisonment for each ing to the European Union (EU) not to controlled region through forcible removal of Muhimana’s convictions.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • DIGITAL FINGERPRINTS Using Electronic Evidence to Advance Prosecutions at the International Criminal Court
    DIGITAL FINGERPRINTS Using Electronic Evidence to Advance Prosecutions at the International Criminal Court DIGITAL FINGERPRINTS Using Electronic Evidence to Advance Prosecutions at the International Criminal Court FEBRUARY 2014 The 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 efforts 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 effective action. Cover photo: © Oleg Romanciuk/123rf.com CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION / 1 II. BACKGROUND / 3 Digital Evidence at the International Criminal Court / 4 History of Digital Evidence / 5 Digital Evidence in Trial Proceedings / 5 III. MAJOR ISSUES / 7 Building the Court’s Internal Capacity / 7 Fostering External Partnerships / 8 IV. RECOMMENDATIONS / 11 Investing in the Court / 11 Fostering External Partnerships / 12 Continuing Conversations / 13 APPENDIX: WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS / 15 I. INTRODUCTION THIS REPORT SUMMARIZES major points of discussion from the first Salzburg Workshop on Improving War Crimes Investigations, a convening focused on the use of digital evidence to prosecute atrocity crimes (genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes). The workshop was held in Salzburg, Austria, from 23–25 October 2013. The Human Rights Center sponsored the workshop in
    [Show full text]
  • Ceremony for the Solemn Undertaking Courtroom I, International Criminal Court
    PLEASE CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY Ceremony for the Solemn Undertaking Courtroom I, International Criminal Court 17 January 2008 Statement by H.E. Mr. Bruno Stagno President of the Assembly of States Parties PLEASE CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY Excellencies Ladies and Gentlemen, We meet today to witness the solemn undertaking of the oath of office of three newly-elected judges of the International Criminal Court, at a time when the world continues to be scarred by the ravages of the most serious crimes known to man, crimes which show man’s inhumanity to man, crimes which continue to shock the conscience of mankind. In the midst of this darkness that continues to mar our world, the International Criminal Court stands as a permanent beacon of light, and of hope for the numerous victims of the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court---genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. The Court also stands as a reminder to perpetrators of these heinous crimes that the international community will not tolerate impunity for such crimes. Since the entry into force of the Rome Statute on 2 July 2002, and the establishment of the Court, we can be justly proud of its accomplishments. It is important to once more recall that the Court stands alongside the Governments of the world in the international struggle for justice and peace, and is a Court of last resort. The Statute requires that States investigate and prosecute the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court; the Court will act only in the specific circumstances spelt out in the Statute. I wish to highlight here the importance of the international community providing the necessary cooperation to the Court to enable it to carry out its mandate under the Rome Statute.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Publications II. Books and Special Issues of Journals
    List of Publications Claus Kreß (as of January 2019) I. Books and Smaller Monographs (Author) 1. Gewaltverbot und Selbstverteidigungsrecht nach der Satzung der Vereinten Nationen in Fällen staatlicher Verwicklung in Gewaltakte Privater, 1995, 388 pp. (The Prohibition of the Use of Force and the Right to Self-Defence in Cases of State Involvement in Acts of Force by Private Persons; English summary). 2. Vom Nutzen eines deutschen Völkerstrafgesetzbuchs, 2000, 40 pp. (Why to enact a German Code of Crimes Under International Law). 3. Friedensmissionen unter einem Mandat der Vereinten Nationen und Menschenrechte (UN Peace-Operations and Human Rights), Cologne Occasional Papers on International Peace and Security Law, Number 1 (March 2013), 35 pp. 4. Towards a Truly Universal Invisible College of International Criminal Lawyers, FICHL Occasional Paper Series No. 4 (2014), 37 pp. 5. Estudios sobre la Parte Especial del Derecho internacional penal. Collection of Essays Translated into Spanish, ed. by Nathalia Bautista Pizzaro, Universidad Externado de Colombia, 2018. II. Books and Special Issues of Journals (Editor) 1. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and Domestic Legal Orders, vol. 1, General Aspects and Constitutional Issues, Ripa Fagnano Alto/Baden-Baden 2000, 251 pp. (co-editor Flavia Lattanzi). 2. International and National Prosecution of Crimes Under International Law: Recent Developments, 2nd ed. 2004, 873 pp. (co-editors Horst Fischer and Sascha Rolf Lüder). 3. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and Domestic Legal Orders, vol. 2, Constitutional Issues, Cooperation and Enforcement, 2005, 543 pp. (co- editors Flavia Lattanzi, Bruce Broomhall and Valeria Santori). 4. Grützner/Pötz/Kreß/Gazeas.
    [Show full text]
  • Dispensing Global Justice
    tor krever DISPENSING GLOBAL JUSTICE he international criminal court is the newest would- be global institution to have been established by the big powers since 1945.* Its Statute, agreed at a conference in Rome in 1998, was ratified by the minimum necessary sixty states in T2002; the Court opened its doors in The Hague the following summer. The icc raises both political questions—its relation to the major pow- ers, above all the United States, and its function in world conflicts—and juridical ones. The history of international criminal law tends to be told as a teleological story of irreversible progress, in which the violence of cold state calculi gives way to a supra-political justice. Milestones along the way include the pre-1914 attempts to sanitize war between the European powers, when Swiss lawyers floated the idea of an interna- tional tribunal to back up the first Geneva and Hague Conventions, and the Versailles Treaty’s arraignment of the Kaiser for offences against ‘international morality and the sanctity of treaties’, never followed through. More salient have been the 1945–46 Nuremberg and Tokyo trials of selected German and Japanese officials; the ad hoc International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia, set up in 1993 by the un Security Council to try individual Serbian leaders, and a much smaller number of Croatians and Bosniaks, for ‘crimes against humanity’; and the less cel- ebrated International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, set up by the unsc in 1995. At the end of this narrative stands the icc, ‘the most dramatic marker yet in the long human struggle for accountability’.1 The actual story is a less romantic affair, marked throughout by power politics.
    [Show full text]
  • DIGITAL FINGERPRINTS Using Electronic Evidence to Advance Prosecutions at the International Criminal Court
    DIGITAL FINGERPRINTS Using Electronic Evidence to Advance Prosecutions at the International Criminal Court DIGITAL FINGERPRINTS Using Electronic Evidence to Advance Prosecutions at the International Criminal Court FEBRUARY 2014 ALEXA KOENIG STEPHEN CODY ERIC STOVER CAMILLE CRITTENDEN The 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 efforts 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 effective action. Cover photo: © Oleg Romanciuk/123rf.com CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION / 1 II. BACKGROUND / 3 Digital Evidence at the International Criminal Court / 4 History of Digital Evidence / 5 Digital Evidence in Trial Proceedings / 5 III. MAJOR ISSUES / 7 Building the Court’s Internal Capacity / 7 Fostering External Partnerships / 8 IV. RECOMMENDATIONS / 11 Investing in the Court / 11 Fostering External Partnerships / 12 Continuing Conversations / 13 APPENDIX: WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS / 15 I. INTRODUCTION THIS REPORT SUMMARIZES major points of discussion from the first Salzburg Workshop on Improving War Crimes Investigations, a convening focused on the use of digital evidence to prosecute atrocity crimes (genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes). The workshop was held in Salzburg, Austria, from 23–25 October
    [Show full text]
  • L'adaptation Du Droit Pénal Français Au Statut De La Cour Pénale Internationale
    L’ADAPTATION DU DROIT PENAL FRANÇAIS AU STATUT DE LA COUR PENALE INTERNATIONALE : ETAT DES LIEUX Spyridon AKTYPIS* Docteur en droit, Université Panthéon-Assas Paris II La France s’est engagée très tôt en faveur de la création de la Cour pénale internationale (CPI), notamment en 1998 lors de la Conférence diplomatique de plénipotentiaires des Nations Unies sur la création d’une cour criminelle internationale, dite Conférence de Rome. Cet engagement ferme de la France se reflète dans la signature du Statut de la CPI dès le 18 juillet 1998 et dans la ratification intervenue le 9 juin 2000 après la saisine du Conseil constitutionnel et la révision subséquente de la Constitution. La France est ainsi devenue le 12ème Etat - et le 2ème membre de l’Union européenne - à y adhérer. Après la ratification, deux étapes supplémentaires ont été franchies. La première avec l’adoption de la loi n° 2002-268 du 26 février 2002 relative à la coopération avec la CPI, qui n’est pas issue d’un projet de loi mais d’une proposition de loi présentée par Robert Badinter au Sénat. La deuxième avec la loi n° 2003-1367 du 31 décembre 2003 qui autorise l’approbation de l’accord sur les privilèges et immunités de la CPI. Cependant, un troisième volet et non des moindres restait en suspens, celui de l’adaptation du droit pénal substantiel au Statut de Rome. C’est cette adaptation qui est l’objet du projet de loi n° 308 (2006-2007) adopté en première lecture par le Sénat le 10 juin 20081.
    [Show full text]
  • COALITION CAMPAIGN on ICC ELECTIONS Civil Society Committed to Ensuring Fair and Transparent Elections
    The ISSUE NO. 42: MAY TO MONITOR OCTOBER 2011 Journal of the COALITION FOR THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT COALITION CAMPAIGN ON ICC ELECTIONS Civil Society Committed to Ensuring Fair and Transparent Elections 2011 AND 2012 will be marked by a significant change in the leadership of the International Criminal Court (ICC). On 12-21 December 2011, the Assembly of States Parties (ASP)—the Court’s governing body—will elect six new judges and a new prosecutor. Elections will also be held for a new ASP president, two vice presidents, 21 members of the Bureau (the ASP’s executive committee) and six mem- bers of the Committee on Budget and Finance. The Court will in turn hold elections for the positions of ICC presi- dent and vice presidents in early 2012. These are the most important elections in the Court’s histo- ry since the inaugural elections in 2003, and they will have an important impact on the work, credibility and legacy of The first bench of ICC judges was elected in February 2003 and sworn in at a the Court and the Rome Statute (RS) system for the next ceremony hosted by the government of the Netherlands in The Hague on 11 March decade. “The direction and success of the Court is deter- 2003. Six new judges and a new prosecutor will be elected in December 2011 by mined not only by the cooperation it receives or the finan- the Assembly of States Parties. Credit: ICC-CPI cial resources allocated to it, but by the prosecutor that carries out its investigations and the judges that adjudicate urges all non-party states to ratify the RS immediately so its cases,” said William R.
    [Show full text]
  • Courtroom 1 Presiding Judge Bruno
    ICC-01/04-01/07-T-80-ENG ET WT 24-11-2009 1/73 NB T 1 International Criminal Court 2 Trial Chamber II - Courtroom 1 3 Presiding Judge Bruno Cotte, Judge Fatoumata Dembele Diarra and Judge 4 Christine Van den Wyngaert 5 Situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - ICC-01/04-01/07 6 In the case of The Prosecutor v. Germain Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui 7 Trial Hearing 8 Tuesday, 24 November 2009 9 (The hearing starts at 9.32 a.m.) 10 (Open session) 11 THE COURT USHER: All rise. The International Criminal Court is now in 12 session. 13 PRESIDING JUDGE COTTE: (Interpretation) The Court is now in session. 14 Please be seated. 15 Photographer, if you would like to take some photographs of the participants 16 at this hearing, you have a minute in which to do so. 17 (Pause in proceedings) 18 So the taking of these photographs does contribute to the publicity that 19 there is in the public nature of this hearing. Thank you for that, particularly 20 for the discretion with which you have carried out this taking of photographs. 21 So the Court notes that the two accused, Germain Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo 22 Chui, are in attendance. Madam Court Officer, you can therefore call the case 23 which is the subject of our hearing today. 24 THE COURT OFFICER: Thank you, President. The situation in the Democratic 25 Republic of the Congo, case of the Prosecutor versus Germain Katanga and Mathieu 1 ICC-01/04-01/07-T-80-ENG ET WT 24-11-2009 2/73 NB T 1 Ngudjolo Chui, ICC-01/04-01/07.
    [Show full text]
  • Interview with Judge Bruno Cotte1 and Judge Olivier Leurent2 by Sandra Delval3 October 2014 Adapted from French by Corey E
    SIDEWAYS GLANCES: THE TRIALS OF GERMAIN KATANGA AND PASCAL SIMBIKANGWA Interview with Judge Bruno Cotte1 and Judge Olivier Leurent2 by Sandra Delval3 October 2014 Adapted from French by Corey E. Walker In 2014, two important verdicts were announced in cases involving violations of international law. Both decisions were handled by French judges at the International Criminal Court (hereinafter "ICC") based in The Hague, and the Criminal Court of Paris. On March 7, 2014, Germain Katanga was convicted by the Trial Chamber II of the ICC ( fr: “la Chambre de première instance II de la CPI”). Katanga was sentenced on May 23, 2014, to 12 years of prison4 for crimes committed during the attack against Bogoro, a village in the Ituri district in the Democratic Republic of Congo's (hereinafter “DRC”) on February 24, 2003. Notably, Mr. Katanga's conviction including his substantial contribution to coordinating the attack and providing logistical support. Pursuant to Article 74 of the Rome Statute (hereinafter "the Statute"), Katanga was convicted as an accomplice to murder within the meaning of Article 25 (3) (d) of the Statute, as well as for attacks against civilian populations as such, or against individual civilians who were not involved in hostilities, destruction of enemy property and pillaging, as war crimes. Germain Katanga waived his 1 Judge Bruno Cotte served at the ICC from 2008 to 2014. Beginning in 2000, Judge Cotte presided over France’s highest court for criminal matters, la Chambre criminelle de la Cour de cassation française. From 1995 to 2000, he was Attorney General at the Cour de Cassation and from 1990 to 1995 he served as the Public Prosecutor, or Procureur de la République, at the Civil Court of Paris.
    [Show full text]
  • ICC-ASP/19/11 Assembly of States Parties
    International Criminal Court ICC-ASP/19/11 Distr.: General Assembly of States Parties 30 September 2020 ENGLISH Original: English Nineteenth session New York, 7-17 December 2020 Report of the Advisory Committee on Nominations of Judges on the work of its seventh session Contents Page I. Introduction ............................................................................................................... 2 A. Opening of the session ................................................................................... 2 B. Adoption of the agenda .................................................................................. 2 C. Scope of the mandate ..................................................................................... 2 D. Organization of work ..................................................................................... 3 E. Work of the Advisory Committee on 2020 .................................................... 4 II. Consideration of the nominations submitted to elect six judges at the nineteenth session of the Assembly ............................................................................................ 6 III. Other matters ............................................................................................................. 7 A. Material submitted with the nominations ....................................................... 7 B. Assessment of the language capability of candidates ..................................... 7 Annexes ...............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Case Information Sheet
    Case Information Sheet Situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo ICC-PIDS-CIS-DRC2-06-006/15_Eng Updated: 27 February 2015 The Prosecutor v. Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui ICC-01/04-02/12 Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui Acquitted on 18 December 2012 of three counts of crimes against humanity and seven counts of war crimes. Released from ICC custody on 21 December 2012. Acquittal confirmed by Appeals Chamber on 27 February 2015. Date of birth: 8 October 1970 Place of birth: Bunia in Ituri District, eastern province of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) Nationality: Congolese Ethnicity: Lendu Current situation: Acquitted and released from ICC custody Warrant of arrest: Issued under seal on 6 July 2007 | Unsealed on 7 February 2008 Transfer to The Hague: 7 February 2008 Joinder of the cases against Germain Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui: 10 March 2008 Confirmation of charges hearing: From 27 June to 16 July 2008 Decision on confirmation of charges 26 September 2008 Opening of the trial: 24 November 2009 Closing Statements: 15 to 23 May 2012 Severing of the charges against Germain Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui: 21 November 2012 Verdict of acquittal: 18 December 2012 Release from ICC custody: 21 December 2012 Appeal of the Prosecutor: 20 December 2012 Appeals Judgment: 27 February 2015 Charges Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui was accused of committing, through other persons, within the meaning of article 25(3)(a) of the Rome Statute: Thre crimes against humanity: Murder under article 7(1)(a) of the Statute; sexual slavery and rape under article 7(1)(g) of the Statute.
    [Show full text]
  • Whose Court Is It? Judicial Handbook on Victims' Rights at the International Criminal Court
    Whose Court is it? Judicial handbook on victims’ rights at the International Criminal Court April 2021 / N° 771a Whose Court is it? Judicial handbook on victims’ rights at the International Criminal Court • April 2021 1 Cover photo: A relative of an alleged extrajudicial killing wears a veil as he takes part in a protest versus the drug war killings outside the military and police headquarters on 17 July 2019 in Manila, Philippines. © Ezra Acayan / Getty Images via AFP This publication had been produced with the generous support from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of FIDH and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands. 2 FIDH Whose Court is it? Judicial handbook on victims’ rights at the International Criminal Court April 2021 Whose Court is it? Judicial handbook on victims’ rights at the International Criminal Court • April 2021 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive summary …………………………………………………………………… 06 List of acronyms and abbreviations ………………………………………………… 10 Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………… 11 1. Whose Court is it? …………………………………………………………………………… 12 2. Victims are essential to the Court’s mandate ……………………………………………… 13 3. Clarifying misconceptions …………………………………………………………………… 13 4. Objectives and methodology ………………………………………………………………… 14 Chapter 1: Decision-making on victims’ rights …………………………………… 16 1. Qualities required of judges ………………………………………………………………… 17 2. Making informed decisions …………………………………………………………………… 17 3. Human rights standards as a source of law ………………………………………………… 18 4. The need for legal certainty ………………………………………………………………… 19 5. Individual contributions through dissenting opinions ……………………………………… 20 Recommendations ……………………………………………………………………………… 21 Chapter 2: Fulfilment of victims’ rights through legal representation ……… 22 1. Victims’ right to choose their legal representative ………………………………………… 23 2.
    [Show full text]