HOME WEB NEWS IMAGES CLASSIFIEDS YELLOW PAGESPOLLS - SURVEYS WIKI COUNTRIES PHOTOS US UK INDIA
Cities Stocks Weather Movies Coupons Travel Blogs Health Horoscope Maps ASIA EUROPE Classifieds Yellow Pages
 1
|
The International Criminal Court (ICC or ICCt)International Criminal Court is sometimes abbreviated as ICCt to distinguish it from several other organizations abbreviated as ICC. However, the more common abbreviation ICC is used in this article. was established in 2002 as a permanent tribunal to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression, although it cannot currently exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression. The Court came into being on July 1 2002 — the date its founding treaty, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, entered into force — and it can only prosecute crimes committed on or after that date.
As of February 2008, 105 states are members of the Court. A further 41 countries have signed but not ratified the Rome Statute. However, a number of states, including China, India and the United States, are critical of the Court and have not joined.
The Court can generally exercise jurisdiction only in cases where the accused is a national of a state party, the alleged crime took place on the territory of a state party, or a situation is referred to the Court by the United Nations Security Council. The Court is designed to complement existing national judicial systems: it can exercise its jurisdiction only when national courts are unwilling or unable to investigate or prosecute such crimes. Primary responsibility to investigate and punish crimes is therefore reserved to individual states.
To date, the Court has opened investigations into four situations: Northern Uganda, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Central African Republic and Darfur. The Court has issued public arrest warrants for ten people; five of them remain free, two have died, and three are in custody, awaiting trial.
The official seat of the Court is in The Hague, Netherlands, but its proceedings may take place anywhere. The ICC is sometimes referred to as a "world court"; it should not be confused with the International Court of Justice, also known as the World Court, which is the United Nations organ that settles disputes between nations.International Criminal Court. Frequently asked questions. Accessed 18 September 2007.
In 1948, following the Nuremberg and Tokyo Tribunals, the United Nations General Assembly recognised the need for a permanent international court to deal with atrocities of the kind committed during World War II. At the request of the General Assembly, the International Law Commission drafted two draft statutes by the early 1950s but these were shelved as the Cold War made the establishment of an international criminal court politically unrealistic.Gary T. Dempsey, 16 July 1998. Reasonable Doubt: The Case Against the Proposed International Criminal Court. The Cato Institute. Accessed 31 December 2006.
The idea was revived in 1989 when A. N. R. Robinson, then Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago, proposed the creation of a permanent international court to deal with the illegal drug trade.International Criminal Court, 20 June 2006. Election of Mr Arthur N.R. Robinson to the Board of Directors of the Victims Trust Fund. Accessed 3 May 2007. While work began on a draft statute, the international community established ad hoc tribunals to try war crimes in the former YugoslaviaThe International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, established in 1993. and Rwanda,The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, established in 1994. further highlighting the need for a permanent international criminal court.Coalition for the International Criminal Court. History of the ICC. Accessed 31 December 2006.
Following years of negotiations, the General Assembly convened a conference in Rome in June 1998, with the aim of finalising a treaty. On July 17 1998, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court was adopted by a vote of 120 to 7, with 21 countries abstaining. The seven countries that voted against the treaty were Iraq, Israel, Libya, the People\'s Republic of China, Qatar, the United States, and Yemen.Michael P. Scharf, August 1998. Results of the Rome Conference for an International Criminal Court. The American Society of International Law. Accessed 4 December 2006.
The Rome Statute became a binding treaty on April 11 2002, when the number of countries that had ratified it reached 60.Amnesty International, 11 April 2002. The International Criminal Court — a historic development in the fight for justice. Accessed 18 June 2007. The Statute legally came into force on July 1 2002, and the Court can only prosecute crimes committed after that date. The first bench of 18 judges was elected by an Assembly of States Parties in February 2003. They were sworn in at the inaugural session of the Court on March 11 2003.Coalition for the International Criminal Court. Judges and the Presidency. Accessed 5 December 2006. The Court issued its first arrest warrants on 8 July 2005,International Criminal Court, 14 October 2005. Warrant of Arrest unsealed against five LRA Commanders. Accessed 5 December 2006. and the first pre-trial hearings were held in 2006.International Criminal Court, 9 November 2006. Prosecutor presents evidence that could lead to first ICC trial. Accessed 5 December 2006.
Map of the world with the member-states of the ICC (as of February 2008) shown in green
As of February 2008, 105 countries have ratified or acceded to the Court, including nearly all of Europe and South America, and roughly half the countries in Africa.International Criminal Court, 2007. The States Parties to the Rome Statute. Accessed 5 November 2007.United Nations. Multilateral treaties deposited with the Secretary-General: Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Accessed 8 June 2007. However, these countries account for a minority of the world\'s population.
A further 41 states have signed but not ratified the treaty; the law of treaties obliges these states to refrain from “acts which would defeat the object and purpose” of the treaty.The 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Article 18. Accessed 23 November 2006. In 2002, two of these states, the United States and Israel, "unsigned" the Rome Statute, indicating that they no longer intend to become states parties and, as such, they have no legal obligations arising from their signature of the statute.John R Bolton, 6 May 2002. International Criminal Court: Letter to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan. US Department of State. Accessed 23 November 2006.
Article 5 of the Rome Statute grants the Court jurisdiction over four groups of crimes, which it refers to as the “most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole”: the crime of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. The statute defines each of these crimes except for aggression: it provides that the Court will not exercise its jurisdiction over the crime of aggression until such time as the states parties agree on a definition of the crime and set out the conditions under which it may be prosecuted.Article 5 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 23 November 2006.
Many states wanted to add terrorism and drug trafficking to the list of crimes covered by the Rome Statute; however, the states were unable to agree on a definition for terrorism and it was decided not to include drug trafficking as this might overwhelm the Court\'s limited resources.United Nations Department of Public Information, December 2002. The International Criminal Court. Accessed 5 December 2006. India lobbied to have the use of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction included as war crimes but this move was also defeated.Dilip Lahiri, 17 July 1998. Explanation of vote on the adoption of the Statute of the International Criminal Court. Embassy of India, Washington, D.C. Accessed 31 December 2006. India has expressed concern that “the Statute of the ICC lays down, by clear implication, that the use of weapons of mass destruction is not a war crime. This is an extraordinary message to send to the international community.”
Some commentators have argued that the Rome Statute defines crimes too broadly or too vaguely. For example, China has argued that the definition of ‘war crimes’ goes beyond that accepted under customary international law.Lu Jianping and Wang Zhixiang. “China\'s Attitude Towards the ICC” in Journal of International Criminal Justice, July 2005.
A Review Conference is due to take place in the first half of 2010.Assembly of States Parties, 14 December 2007. Resolution: Strengthening the International Criminal Court and the Assembly of States PartiesPDF (310 KiB). Accessed 1 January 2008. Among other things, the conference will review the list of crimes contained in Article 5.Article 123 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 5 December 2006. (See also Rolf Einar Fife, 21 November 2006, Review Conference: scenarios and optionsPDF (69.4 KiB). Accessed 5 December 2006.) The final resolution on adoption of the Rome Statute specifically recommended that terrorism and drug trafficking be reconsidered at this conference.Amnesty International, 2 November 2006. International Criminal Court: Concerns at the fifth session of the Assembly of States Parties. Accessed 5 December 2006.
During the negotiations that led to the Rome Statute, a large number of states argued that the Court should be allowed to exercise universal jurisdiction. However, this proposal was defeated due in large part to opposition from the United States.Elizabeth Wilmhurst, 1999. ‘Jurisdiction of the Court’, p. 136. In Roy S Lee (ed.), The International Criminal Court: The Making of the Rome Statute. The Hague: Kluwer Law International. ISBN 90-411-1212-X. A compromise was reached, allowing the Court to exercise jurisdiction only under the following limited circumstances:
The Court\'s jurisdiction does not apply retroactively: it can only prosecute crimes committed on or after 1 July 2002 (the date on which the Rome Statute entered into force). Where a state becomes party to the Rome Statute after that date, the Court can exercise jurisdiction automatically with respect to crimes committed after the statute enters into force for that state.Article 11 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 23 November 2006.
The Court is intended as a court of last resort, investigating and prosecuting only where national courts have failed. Article 17 of the Statute provides that a case is inadmissible if:
Insert the text of the quote here, without quotation marks.
Article 20, paragraph 3, specifies that, if a person has already been tried by another court, the ICC cannot try them again for the same conduct unless the proceedings in the other court:
Insert the text of the quote here, without quotation marks.
The Court is governed by an Assembly of States Parties.International Criminal Court. Assembly of States Parties. Accessed 2 January 2008. The Court consists of four organs: the Presidency, the Judicial Divisions, the Office of the Prosecutor, and the Registry.International Criminal Court. Structure of the Court. Accessed 23 November 2006.
The Court\'s management oversight and legislative body, the Assembly of States Parties, consists of one representative from each state party.Article 112 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 2 January 2008. Each state party has one vote and every effort has to be made to reach decisions by consensus. If consensus cannot be reached, decisions are made by vote.
The Assembly meets in full session once a year in New York or The Hague, and may also hold special sessions where circumstances require. Sessions are open to observer states and non-governmental organisations.Amnesty International, 11 November 2007. Assembly of States Parties of the International Criminal Court. Accessed 2 January 2008.
The Assembly elects the judges and prosecutors, decides the Court\'s budget, adopts important texts (such as the Rules of Procedure and Evidence), and provides management oversight to the other organs of the Court. Article 46 of the Rome Statute allows the Assembly to remove from office a judge or prosecutor who "is found to have committed serious misconduct or a serious breach of his or her duties" or "is unable to exercise the functions required by this Statute".Article 46 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 2 January 2008.
The states parties cannot interfere with the judicial functions of the Court.Coalition for the International Criminal Court. Assembly of States Parties. Accessed 2 January 2008. Disputes concerning individual cases are settled by the Judicial Divisions.
Philippe Kirsch, President of the Court
The Presidency is responsible for the proper administration of the Court (apart from the Office of the Prosecutor).International Criminal Court. The Presidency. Accessed 21 July 2007. It comprises the President and the First and Second Vice-Presidents — three judges of the Court who are elected to the Presidency by their fellow judges for a maximum of two three-year terms.Article 38 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 21 July 2007. As of February 2008, the President is Philippe Kirsch, who was elected to a second term on 11 March 2006.
The Judicial Divisions consist of the 18 judges of the Court, organized into three divisions — the Pre-Trial Division, Trial Division and Appeals Division — which carry out the judicial functions of the Court.International Criminal Court. Chambers. Accessed 21 July 2007. The Pre-Trial Division (which comprises the First Vice President and six other judges) confirms indictments and issues international arrest warrants. The Trial Division (the Second Vice President and five other judges) presides over trials. Decisions of the Pre-Trial and Trial Divisions may be appealed to the Appeals Division (the President and four other judges). Judges are assigned to divisions according to their qualifications and experience.
Judges are elected to the Court by the Assembly of States Parties. They serve nine-year terms and are not generally eligible for re-election. All judges must be nationals of states parties to the Rome Statute, and no two judges may be nationals of the same state.Article 36 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 23 November 2006. They must be “persons of high moral character, impartiality and integrity who possess the qualifications required in their respective States for appointment to the highest judicial offices”.
The Prosecutor or any person being investigated or prosecuted may request the disqualification of a judge from "any case in which his or her impartiality might reasonably be doubted on any ground".Article 41 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 2 January 2008. Any request for the disqualification of a judge from a particular case is decided by an absolute majority of the other judges. A judge may be removed from office if he or she "is found to have committed serious misconduct or a serious breach of his or her duties" or is unable to exercise his or her functions. The removal of a judge requires both a two-thirds majority of the other judges and a two-thirds majority of the states parties.
The Office of the Prosecutor is responsible for conducting investigations and prosecutions.International Criminal Court. Office of the Prosecutor. Accessed 21 July 2007. It is headed by the Prosecutor, who is assisted by two Deputy Prosecutors. The Rome Statute provides that the Office of the Prosecutor shall act independently;Article 42 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 2 January 2008. as such, no member of the Office may seek or act on instructions from any external source, such as states, international organisations, non-governmental organisations or individuals.
The Prosecutor may open an investigation under three circumstances:
Any person being investigated or prosecuted may request the disqualification of a prosecutor from any case "in which their impartiality might reasonably be doubted on any ground". Requests for the disqualification of prosecutors are decided by the Appeals Division. A prosecutor may be removed from office by an absolute majority of the states parties if he or she "is found to have committed serious misconduct or a serious breach of his or her duties" or is unable to exercise his or her functions. However, critics of the Court argue that there are “insufficient checks and balances on the authority of the ICC prosecutor and judges” and “insufficient protection against politicized prosecutions or other abuses”.US Department of State, 30 July 2003. Frequently Asked Questions About the U.S. Government\'s Policy Regarding the International Criminal Court (ICC). Accessed 31 December 2006. Henry Kissinger says the checks and balances are so weak that the prosecutor “has virtually unlimited discretion in practice”.Henry A. Kissinger. “The Pitfalls of Universal Jurisdiction”. Foreign Affairs, July/August 2001, p. 95. Accessed 31 December 2006.
As of February 2008, the Prosecutor is Luis Moreno-Ocampo of Argentina, who was elected by the Assembly of States Parties on 21 April 2003International Criminal Court, 24 April 2003. Election of the Prosecutor. Accessed 21 July 2007. for a term of nine years.
The Registry is responsible for the non-judicial aspects of the administration and servicing of the Court.International Criminal Court. The Registry. Accessed 21 July 2007. This includes, among other things, “the administration of legal aid matters, court management, victims and witnesses matters, defence counsel, detention unit, and the traditional services provided by administrations in international organisations, such as finance, translation, building management, procurement and personnel”. The Registry is headed by the Registrar, who is elected by the judges to a five-year term.
The Rome Statute provides that all persons are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt,Article 66 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 3 May 2007. and establishes certain rights of the accused and persons during investigations.The rights of persons during an investigation are provided in Article 55. Rights of the accused are provided in Part 6, especially Article 67. See also Amnesty International, 1 August 2000. “The International Criminal Court: Fact sheet 9 — Fair trial guarantees”. Accessed 3 May 2007. These include the right to be fully informed of the charges against him or her; the right to have a lawyer appointed, free of charge; the right to a speedy trial; and the right to examine the witnesses against him or her and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his or her behalf.
Some argue that the protections offered by the ICC are insufficient. According to the Heritage Foundation, “Americans who appear before the court would be denied such basic constitutional rights as trial by a jury of one\'s peers, protection from double jeopardy, and the right to confront one\'s accusers.”Brett D. Schaefer, 9 January 2001. Overturning Clinton\'s Midnight Action on the International Criminal Court. The Heritage Foundation. Accessed 23 November 2006. However, Human Rights Watch argues that “the ICC has one of the most extensive lists of due process guarantees ever written”, including “presumption of innocence; right to counsel; right to present evidence and to confront witnesses; right to remain silent; right to be present at trial; right to have charges proved beyond a reasonable doubt; and protection against double jeopardy”.Human Rights Watch. Myths and Facts About the International Criminal Court. Accessed 31 December 2006. According to David Scheffer, who led the US delegation to the Rome Conference (and who voted against adoption of the treaty), “when we were negotiating the Rome treaty, we always kept very close tabs on, ‘Does this meet U.S. constitutional tests, the formation of this court and the due process rights that are accorded defendants?’ And we were very confident at the end of Rome that those due process rights, in fact, are protected, and that this treaty does meet a constitutional test.”CNN, 2 January 2000. Burden of Proof transcript. Accessed 31 December 2006.
In order to ensure “equality of arms” between defence and prosecution teams, the ICC has established an independent Office of Public Counsel for the Defence (OPCD) to provide logistical support, advice and information to defendants and their counsel.Katy Glassborow, 21 August 2006. Defending the Defenders. Global Policy Forum. Accessed 3 May 2007.International Criminal Court. Rights of the Defence. Accessed 3 May 2007. The OPCD also helps to safeguard the rights of the accused during the initial stages of an investigation.International Criminal Court, 2005. Report of the International Criminal Court for 2004. Accessed 3 May 2007. However, Thomas Lubanga\'s defence team say they have been given a smaller budget than the Prosecutor and that evidence and witness statements have been slow to arrive.Stephanie Hanson, 17 November 2006. Africa and the International Criminal Court. Council on Foreign Relations. Accessed 23 November 2006.
The Rome Statute provides for victim participation in the Court\'s proceedings.International Criminal Court. Victims and witnesses. Accessed 22 June 2007.Ilaria Bottigliero, April 2003. "The International Criminal Court — Hope for the Victims", 32 SGI Quarterly, pp. 13-15. Accessed 24 July 2007. Article 43(6) establishes a Victims and Witnesses Unit to provide "protective measures and security arrangements, counseling and other appropriate assistance for witnesses, victims who appear before the Court, and others who are at risk on account of testimony given by such witnesses."Article 43(6) of the Rome Statute. Accessed 23 November 2006. Article 68 sets out procedures for the "Protection of the victims and witnesses and their participation in the proceedings."Article 68 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 23 November 2006. The Court has also established an Office of Public Counsel for Victims, to provide support and assistance to victims and their legal representatives.International Criminal Court, 17 October 2006. Report on the activities of the CourtPDF (151 KiB). Accessed 18 June 2007. Article 78 of the Rome Statute establishes a Trust Fund to make financial reparations to victims and their families.International Criminal Court. Trust Fund for Victims. Accessed 22 June 2007.
The United Nations Security Council may refer situations to the ICC
Unlike the International Court of Justice, the ICC is legally and functionally independent from the United Nations. Nonetheless, the Rome Statute recognizes the clear role of the United Nations in relation to the Court. The Security Council may refer to the Court situations that would not otherwise fall under the Court\'s jurisdiction (as it did in relation to the situation in Darfur, which the Court could not otherwise have prosecuted as Sudan is not a state party). Article 16 of the Rome Statute also allows the Security Council to require the Court to defer from investigating a case for a period of 12 months.Article 16 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 23 November 2006. Such a deferral may be renewed indefinitely by the Security Council.
The Court cooperates with the UN in many different areas, including the exchange of information and logistical support.International Criminal Court, 1 February 2007. UN Secretary-General visits ICC. Accessed 1 February 2007. The Court reports to the UN each year on its activities,International Criminal Court, August 2006. Report of the International Criminal Court for 2005-2006PDF (68.5 KiB). Accessed 14 May 2007. and some meetings of the Assembly of States Parties are held at UN facilities. The relationship between the Court and the UN is governed by a “Relationship Agreement between the International Criminal Court and the United Nations”.Negotiated Relationship Agreement between the International Criminal Court and the United NationsPDF (130 KiB). Accessed 23 November 2006.Coalition for the International Criminal Court, 12 November 2004. Q&A: The Relationship Agreement between the ICC and the UNPDF (64.8 KiB). Accessed 23 November 2006.
It is unclear to what extent the Court is compatible with reconciliation processes that grant amnesty to human rights abusers as part of agreements to end conflict.Anthony Dworkin, December 2003. "Introduction" in The International Criminal Court: An End to Impunity? Crimes of War Project. Accessed 18 September 2007. Article 16 of the Rome Statute allows the Security Council to prevent the Court from investigating or prosecuting a case, and Article 53 allows the Prosecutor the discretion not to initiate an investigation if he or she believes that “an investigation would not serve the interests of justice”.Article 53 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 31 December 2006. The President of the ICC, Philippe Kirsch, has said that "some limited amnesties may be compatible" with a country\'s obligations genuinely to investigate or prosecute under the statute.
It is sometimes argued that amnesties are necessary to allow the peaceful transfer of power from abusive regimes. By denying states the right to offer amnesty to human rights abusers, the International Criminal Court may make it more difficult to negotiate an end to conflict and a transition to democracy. For example, the outstanding arrest warrants for four leaders of the Lord\'s Resistance Army are regarded by some as an obstacle to ending the insurgency in Uganda.Tim Cocks, 30 May 2007. “Uganda urges traditional justice for rebel crimes”. Reuters. Accessed 31 May 2007.Alasdair Palmer, 14 January 2007. “When victims want peace, not justice”. The Sunday Telegraph. Accessed 15 January 2007. Czech politician Marek Benda argues that “the ICC as a deterrent will in our view only mean the worst dictators will try to retain power at all costs”.Alena Skodova, “Czech parliament against ratifying International Criminal Court”. Radio Prague, 12 April 2002. Accessed 11 January 2007. However, the United NationsSee, for example, Kofi Annan, 4 October 2000. Report of the Secretary-General on the establishment of a Special Court for Sierra Leone, para. 22. Accessed 31 December 2006. and the International Committee of the Red CrossJean-Marie Henckaerts & Louise Doswald-Beck, 2005. Customary International Humanitarian Law, Volume I: Rules, pp. 613-614. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521005280 maintain that granting amnesty to those accused of war crimes and other serious crimes is a violation of international law.
The ICC\'s interim premises in The Hague
As of 9 October 2007, the ICC’s staff consisted of 485 persons from 80 states.International Criminal Court, 18 October 2007. Report on the activities of the CourtPDF (91.8 KiB). Accessed 25 November 2007. The official seat of the Court is in The Hague, Netherlands, but its proceedings may take place anywhere.Article 3 of the Rome Statute. Accessed 3 May 2007.The legal relationship between the ICC and the host state will be governed by a headquarters agreement. See International Criminal Court, 9 November 2006: Report on the draft headquarters agreement between the International Criminal Court and the host StatePDF (263 KiB). Accessed 18 June 2007.The Court is currently housed in interim premises on the eastern edge of The Hague.Coalition for the International Criminal Court, 2006. Building — ICC Premises. Accessed 18 June 2007. The Court intends to construct permanent premises in Alexanderkazerne, on the north of The Hague.Assembly of States Parties, 14 December 2007. Resolution: Permanent premisesPDF (310 KiB). Accessed 1 January 2008.
The ICC currently has twelve detention cells in a Dutch prison in Scheveningen, The Hague.Emma Thomasson, 28 February 2006. ICC says cells ready for Uganda war crimes suspects. Reuters. Accessed 18 June 2007. Suspects held by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia are held in the same prison and share some facilities, like the fitness room, but have no contact with suspects held by the ICC. The detention unit is close to the ICC\'s future headquarters in Alexanderkazerne.International Criminal Court, 18 October 2005. Report on the future permanent premises of the International Criminal Court: Project PresentationPDF (537 KiB), p. 23. Accessed 18 June 2007.
As of February 2008, the ICC\'s detention unit houses four suspects: Thomas Lubanga, Germain Katanga, Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui and former Liberian President Charles Taylor. Taylor is being tried under the mandate and auspices of the Special Court for Sierra Leone, but his trial is being held at the ICC\'s facilities in The Hague because of political and security concerns about holding the trial in Freetown.BBC News, 20 June 2006. Q&A: Trying Charles Taylor. Accessed 11 January 2007.Alexandra Hudson, 31 May 2007. "Warlord Taylor\'s home is lonely Dutch prison". Reuters. Accessed 27 July 2007.
| Situation | Referral (date) | Investigation opened | Public arrest warrants issued | Surrendered to the ICC | Trial commenced | Outcome |
 Northern Uganda
| Government of Uganda (December 2003) | July 2004 | Joseph Kony | |||
| Vincent Otti | Died in 2007 | |||||
| Raska Lukwiya | Died on 12 August 2006 | |||||
| Okot Odhiambo | ||||||
| Dominic Ongwen | ||||||
 Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC)
| Government of the DRC (March 2004) | June 2004 | Thomas Lubanga | 17 March 2006 | ||
| Germain Katanga | 17 October 2007 | |||||
| Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui | 6 February 2008 | |||||
 Central African Republic (CAR)
| Government of the CAR (December 2004) | May 2007 | ||||
 Darfur, Sudan
| UN Security Council (March 2005) | June 2005 | Ahmed Haroun | |||
| Ali Kushayb |
As of 4 October 2007, the Office of the Prosecutor had received 2889 communications about alleged crimes in at least 139 countries.International Criminal Court, 10 February 2006. Update on communications received by the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICCPDF (236 KiB). Accessed 22 June 2007. After initial review, however, the vast majority of these communications were dismissed as “manifestly outside the jurisdiction of the Court”. The Prosecutor has so far opened investigations into just four situations: Uganda, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Central African Republic and Darfur.International Criminal Court, 2007. Situations and Cases. Accessed 31 May 2007.
In December 2003, the government of Uganda, a state party, referred to the Prosecutor the situation concerning the Lord’s Resistance Army in Northern Uganda.International Criminal Court, 29 January 2004. President of Uganda refers situation concerning the Lord\'s Resistance Army (LRA) to the ICC. Accessed 11 January 2007. On 8 July 2005, the Court issued its first arrest warrants for the Lord\'s Resistance Army leader Joseph Kony, his deputy Vincent Otti, and LRA commanders Raska Lukwiya, Okot Odiambo, and Dominic Ongwen. Lukwiya was killed in battle on 12 August 2006,International Criminal Court, 11 July 2007. Decision to Terminate the Proceedings against Raska LukwiyaPDF (2.74 MiB). Accessed 24 January 2008. and Otti was killed in 2007, apparently by Kony.BBC News, 23 January 2008. Uganda\'s LRA confirm Otti death. Accessed 24 January 2008. The LRA\'s leaders have repeatedly demanded immunity from ICC prosecution in return for an end to the insurgency.Associated Press, 30 May 2007. Human Rights Watch: Ugandan rebels must face justice, even if not before international court. Accessed 24 January 2008. The government of Uganda says it is considering establishing a national criminal tribunal that meets international standards, thereby allowing the ICC warrants to be set aside.Agence France-Presse, 23 January 2008. Uganda\'s mato oput ritual: forgiveness for brutal 20-year war. Accessed 24 January 2008.
In March 2004, the government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, a state party, referred to the Prosecutor “the situation of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court allegedly committed anywhere in the territory of the DRC since the entry into force of the Rome Statute, on 1 July 2002.”International Criminal Court, 19 April 2004. Prosecutor receives referral of the situation in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Accessed 11 January 2007.International Criminal Court, 23 June 2004. The Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court opens its first investigation. Accessed 11 January 2007.
On 17 March 2006, Thomas Lubanga, former leader of the Union of Congolese Patriots militia in Ituri, became the first person to be arrested under a warrant issued by the Court, for allegedly “conscripting and enlisting children under the age of fifteen years and using them to participate actively in hostilities”.International Criminal Court, 17 March 2006. First arrest for the International Criminal Court. Accessed 11 January 2007. His trial is due to begin on 31 March 2008.International Criminal Court, 12 November 2007. The trial in the case of Mr Thomas Lubanga Dyilo will commence on 31 March 2008. Accessed 13 November 2007.
Two more suspects, Germain Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui, were subsequently surrendered to the Court by the Congolese authorities.International Criminal Court, 18 October 2007. Second arrest: Germain Katanga transferred into the custody of the ICC. Accessed 18 October 2007.International Criminal Court, 7 February 2008. Third detainee for the International Criminal Court: Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui. Retrieved on 7 February 2008. Both men are charged with six counts of war crimes and three counts of crimes against humanity, relating to an attack on the village of Bogoro on 24 February 2003, in which at least 200 civilians were killed, survivors were imprisoned in a room filled with corpses, and women and girls were sexually enslaved.International Criminal Court, 2 July 2007. Warrant of arrest for Germain KatangaPDF (202 KiB). Accessed 18 October 2007.International Criminal Court (6 July 2007). Warrant of arrest for Mathieu Ngudjolo ChuiPDF. Retrieved on 7 February 2008. The charges against both men include murder, sexual slavery and using children under the age of fifteen to participate actively in hostilities.
In December 2004, the government of the Central African Republic, a state party, referred to the Prosecutor “the situation of crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court committed anywhere on the territory of the Central African Republic since 1 July 2002, the date of entry into force of the Rome Statute.”International Criminal Court, 15 December 2006. Prosecution\'s Report Pursuant to Pre-Trial Chamber Ill\'s 30 November 2006 Decision Requesting Information on the Status of the Preliminary Examination of the Situation in the Central African RepublicPDF (359 KiB). Accessed 11 January 2007. On 22 May 2007, the Prosecutor announced his decision to open an investigation,International Criminal Court, 22 May 2007. Prosecutor opens investigation in the Central African Republic. Accessed 31 May 2007.International Criminal Court, 22 May 2007. Background: Situation in the Central African RepublicPDF (141 KiB). Accessed 31 May 2007. focusing on allegations of killing and rape in 2002 and 2003, a period of intense fighting between government and rebel forces.Nora Boustany, 23 May 2007. “Court Examines Alleged Abuses in Central African Republic”, The Washington Post, p. A16. Accessed 31 May 2007.
On 31 March 2005, the United Nations Security Council passed Resolution 1593, referring “the situation prevailing in Darfur since 1 July 2002” to the Prosecutor.United Nations Security Council, 31 March 2006. Security Council Refers Situation in Darfur, Sudan, To Prosecutor of International Criminal Court. Accessed 11 January 2007. In February 2007 the Prosecutor announced that two men — Sudanese humanitarian affairs minister Ahmad Muhammad Harun and Janjaweed militia leader Ali Kushayb — had been identified as key suspects, accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity.Sonja Pace, 27 February 2007. "International Court Names Top Suspects in Darfur War Crimes". Voice of America. Accessed 27 February 2007. On 2 May 2007, the Court issued arrest warrants for the two men.Alexandra Hudson, 2 May 2007. ICC judges issue arrest warrants for Darfur suspects. Reuters. Accessed 3 May 2007. However, Sudan says the Court has no jurisdiction over this matter, and refuses to hand over the suspects.
On 10 February 2006, the Prosecutor published a letter responding to complaints he had received concerning the 2003 invasion of Iraq.Luis Moreno-Ocampo, 9 February 2006. Letter concerning the situation in IraqPDF (158 KiB). Accessed 23 November 2006. He noted that "the International Criminal Court has a mandate to examine the conduct during the conflict, but not whether the decision to engage in armed conflict was legal", and that the Court\'s jurisdiction is limited to the actions of nationals of states parties. He concluded that there was a reasonable basis to believe that a limited number of war crimes had been committed in Iraq, but that the crimes allegedly committed by nationals of states parties did not appear to meet the required gravity threshold for an ICC investigation.
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Official websites
Non-governmental organisations
| International Criminal Court (ICC) | |
|---|---|
| Main topics | Rome Statute · States Parties · Judges · Cases |
| Crimes | Genocide · War crime · Crime against humanity · Crime of aggression |
| Indicted persons | Uganda: Joseph Kony · Raska Lukwiya · Okot Odhiambo · Dominic Ongwen · Vincent Otti DRC: Germain Katanga · Thomas Lubanga · Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui Darfur: Ahmed Haroun · Ali Kushayb |
| Miscellaneous | United States and the ICC · American Service-Members\' Protection Act · The ICC and the 2003 invasion of Iraq |
