Reparation to Victims of Sexual Violence: Possibilities at the International Criminal Court and at the Trust Fund for Victims and Their Families

2007 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 207-237 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANNE-MARIE DE BROUWER

In this contribution the reparation possibilities for victims of sexual violence at the Inter-national Criminal Court and at the Trust Fund for Victims and their families are explored. This is done by explaining first of all why victims of sexual violence – and especially women – are in urgent need of reparation during and after conflict, with a special focus on the situation of female survivors of sexual violence in Rwanda. The reparation possibilities for victims of sexual violence at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda are subsequently discussed, followed by a similar discussion with regard to the ICC. Questions such as the nature of the best forms of reparation for victims of sexual violence and at what point they are made are also dealt with. Although the ICC reparations regime offers in theory a good means of providing restorative justice to victims of sexual violence, it is important that the special concerns and needs of such victims are not easily overlooked by the Court and that swift action is taken by the Trust Fund for Victims and their families to address their plight.


2007 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 165-166
Author(s):  
CARSTEN STAHN

In this issue the section on the International Criminal Court (ICC) contains two articles with a special focus on problems related to implementing legislation and co-operation with the Court (Zsuzsanna Deen-Racsmány's ‘Lessons of the European Arrest Warrant for Domestic Implementation of the Obligation to Surrender Nationals to the International Criminal Court’ and Héctor Olásolo's ‘The Lack of Attention to the Distinction between Situations and Cases in National Laws on Co-operation with the International Criminal Court with Particular Reference to the Spanish Case’) as well as a general article by Anne-Marie de Brouwer, ‘Reparation to Victims of Sexual Violence: Possibilities at the International Criminal Court and at the Trust Fund for Victims and Their Families’.



2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 46-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inger Skjelsbæk

This article examines the ways in which principal perpetrators of sexual violence crimes are situated in an international criminal court. It is based on a narrative psychological analysis of the sentencing judgments of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). Specifically, the article argues that at least three narratives can be distinguished within the relevant legal texts: those of the chivalrous, the opportunistic and the remorseful perpetrator, each with a distinct plot structure: that of being a normal person responding adequately to a situation that is seen as normal; an abnormal person responding to what is seen as an abnormal (or extreme) situation; and a normal person responding inadequately to what is seen as an abnormal (or extreme) situation. The ways in which these plots come out depend on how the various voices in the courtroom position the perpetrator within the stories. Ultimately, these narratives represent different stories of how militarism and masculinity intersect to create different understandings of the soldier and military behavior. The mere analysis of this material, i.e. how sexual violence crimes are discussed in theatre in an international criminal court, is a scholarly contribution to the understanding of how sexual violence perpetrators can be situated in a war setting, and after. The findings suggest new perspectives on military perpetrators and changes in what is considered normal and abnormal behavior in military settings.



2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Goy

For more than 15 years the two ad hoc Tribunals, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), have interpreted the requirements of different forms of individual criminal responsibility. It is thus helpful to look at whether and to what extent the jurisprudence of the ICTY/ICTR may provide guidance to the International Criminal Court (ICC). To this end, this article compares the requirements of individual criminal responsibility at the ICTY/ICTR and the ICC. The article concludes that, applied with caution, the jurisprudence of the ICTY/ICTR – as an expression of international law – can assist in interpreting the modes of liability under the ICC Statute. ICTY/ICTR case law seems to be most helpful with regard to accessorial forms of liability, in particular their objective elements. Moreover, it may assist in interpreting the subjective requirements set out in Article 30 ICC Statute.



2008 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 255-372 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amna Guellali ◽  
Enrique Carnero Rojo

AbstractThe International Criminal Courts Round-Up reports on the most interesting judgements and decisions rendered by international(ized) criminal courts and tribunals during the reporting period. In addition, important developments within the various organs of the courts are highlighted, such as the appointment of new judges and significant amendments to the procedural rules of the courts. The Round-Up presently covers issues concerning the International Criminal Court, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and the Special Court for Sierra Leone.



2015 ◽  
Vol 79 (4) ◽  
pp. 270-279
Author(s):  
Christopher Cowley

Joint Criminal Enterprise (JCE) is a mode of liability designed to capture the individual’s relationship to a crime committed by a group, including—in its ‘extended form’, also known as JCE III—crimes committed by other individuals in that group that were foreseen as possible, even if not likely. Although the ICTY made no mention of JCE in its statutes, the court introduced JCE and extended JCE in the Tadić case (1999). This article examines the use of the concepts and defends them against complaints by various critics. It concludes by supporting their use in the International Criminal Court.



2003 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 345-367 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sam Garkawe

AbstractThe Statute of the permanent International Criminal Court (the "ICC") agreed to in Rome in 1998 contains many provisions that deal with the specific concerns and rights of victims and survivors of the international crimes that the ICC will have jurisdiction over. It consolidates the work of the two ad hoc international criminal Tribunals (the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda) in this area, but also further enhances the role and rights of victims in a number of innovative ways. These three international criminal Tribunals thus collectively represent an important step forward in the recognition of the suffering and the position of victims and survivors of international crimes. This article will examine three main issues in relation to victims and the ICC. First, after identifying the protective measures for victims allowed at the discretion of the international criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, it will focus on the most controversial measure (which the ICC can also order) - the non-disclosure to the defence of the identity of witnesses. Does this protective measure violate a defendant's right to a fair trial? The Statute of the ICC also allows, for the first time in international criminal justice, for the right of victims to obtain their own legal representation, subject to the discretion of the ICC. The second issue is how is this going to work in practice in light of the fact that international crimes normally involve hundreds, if not thousands or even tens of thousands, of victims? And finally, while the ICC Statute provides for the possibility of reparations to victims, where will the money come from, and thus what are the chances of victims actually being able to receive compensation?



1998 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 35-68
Author(s):  
Ivo Josipović

The establishment of the International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia Since 1991 (ICTY) and the adoption of its Statute heralded a new page in the history of international, particularly international criminal, law. For the first time since World War II, an international criminal court was established. The Tribunal was created in order to achieve important legal and political goals: to punish perpetrators of serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in the former Yugoslavia since 1991; to prevent further crimes; to facilitate the peace process; and to serve as a test for a future permanent international criminal court.



2018 ◽  
Vol 112 ◽  
pp. 23-26
Author(s):  
Diane Orentlicher

Assurances of victim participation in proceedings before the International Criminal Court and Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia have been seen as a welcome corrective to the flawed model of earlier tribunals. The first such tribunal created since the postwar period, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), was established by the UN Security Council in May 1993 without even consulting those who survived the atrocities that gave rise to its creation, the majority of which took place in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Nor were victims formally incorporated into the ICTY's work except for those who provided testimony and other evidence. (The same holds true for the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, established by the UN Security Council in 1994; in the interests of brevity, my remarks will focus on the ICTY.)



Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document