(In)Compatible Visions of Justice? Personal Culpability and Gender Justice at the ICC

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-33
Author(s):  
Liana Georgieva Minkova

Abstract Although the International Criminal Court (ICC) has been heralded as a success story for gender justice, in practice prosecutions of sexual and gender-based crimes (SGBC) have often ended with acquittal at the court. Gender studies in international relations explain the lack of successful SGBC prosecutions by looking to the influence of older gender biases in international law, which preclude the successful implementation of the novel Rome Statute provisions criminalizing SGBC. This article suggests that “forgetting” the gender justice norm insufficiently explains the outcome of the ICC's SGBC prosecutions. The article argues that ICC judges “remembered” another norm of criminal justice, long forgotten in international trials – strict compliance with the personal culpability principle – which has resulted in tension between different visions of justice in the court's practice: delivering substantive justice for SGBC victims v. safeguarding the defendant's rights by upholding criminal law principles.

Author(s):  
Amrita Kapur

This chapter explores the opportunities present in the Rome Statute to promote justice for victims of sexual and gender-based violence in the International Criminal Court (ICC). It focuses on the concept of complementarity to show the ICC’s potential for reform and to catalyze the prosecution of international crimes (genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes). It then describes the ICC’s broader approach to sexual violence and gender, as well as the domestic impact of this jurisprudence. The chapter concludes by suggesting that the Rome Statute’s standards should be introduced into national law. This could create broader benefits for women and victims of sexual and gender-based violence beyond the prosecution of criminal perpetrators.


Author(s):  
Jonneke Koomen

The International Criminal Court began its work in 2003. The Court’s founding treaty, the Rome Statute (1998), offers an unprecedented legal framework dedicated to ending impunity for sexual and gender-based violence in armed conflict. This chapter examines how the Rome Statute contributes to the Women, Peace, and Security agenda, paying particular attention to the Statute’s definitions of crimes, gender-sensitive rules, commitment to gender expertise, provisions for victim participation and reparations, and its framework for national implementation. Next, the chapter examines the difficulties faced by the Court in institutionalizing the Statute’s gender justice commitments during the first decade of its work, including challenges surrounding the prosecutor’s investigations, charging decisions, and the ICC’s first trials. The chapter points to efforts to strengthen the Court’s gender justice framework and notes the key role of advocates and NGOs in monitoring the Court’s gender justice commitments. The chapter’s concludes by considering ways that WPS advocates can support the Court’s work in challenging international political circumstances.


2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 529-541 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurie Green

AbstractWhile sexual and gender-based violence crimes are now prosecutable as war crimes, crimes against humanity, and acts of genocide, the Pre-Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Court recently declined to confirm cumulative charges for sexual and gender-based violence in Prosecutor v. Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo. Born out of the historical tendency of international criminal tribunals to treat rape and sexual violence as secondary crimes, this paper argues that the International Criminal Court is far from achieving true gender justice, or from serving as a deterrent against sexual and gender-based violence crimes. This paper also argues that the ICC's failure in this regard risks undermining the very legitimacy of the Court.


2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. 894-913
Author(s):  
Silke Studzinsky ◽  
Alexandra Lily Kather

AbstractThis Article is based on the professional experiences of the authors working as lawyers and activists towards accountability for sexualized and gender-based crimes under international law. It provides a critical evaluation of universal jurisdiction cases in Germany addressing conflict-related sexualized violence. In particular, the article looks deeper into the Office of the German Federal Prosecutor General of the Federal Court of Justice’s (GBA) approach to gender while taking note of the barriers in the way of investigating and adjudicating crimes under international law. Both authors have been following universal jurisdiction developments in Germany closely, particularly in relation to the investigation and prosecution of sexual and gender-based crimes. With regard to the proceedings against two high-rank representatives of the armed rebel group Forces Démocratiques de liberation du Rwanda (FDLR), the findings in this article are informed by trial monitoring reports organized and conducted by a group of organisations and institutions, namely Medica Mondiale, the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR), and the Hamburger Institut für Sozialforschung. In light of the fact that German trial records are absent of publicly accessible records of what was said in the court room, the consortium of groups co-monitored the FLDR trial.


Author(s):  
Gloria Atiba-Davies

This chapter catalogs the list of crimes against and affecting children during conflict and situations of war over which the International Criminal Court (ICC) has jurisdiction. It provides information on the mandate of the International Criminal Tribunals of Yugoslavia and Rwanda as well as the Special Court of Sierra Leone and how they addressed issues relating to crimes against children. The chapter describes the structure and functioning of the ICC. In addition, significant information is presented about the work of the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) of the ICC relating to investigations and cases including crimes against children. Lastly, it gives an overview of the Sexual and Gender-based Crimes Policy and the Policy on Children of the OTP, which were launched in 2014 and 2016, respectively. Both policies provide the framework within which the OTP will conduct the preliminary examinations, investigations, and prosecutions of those crimes.


Author(s):  
Ana Martin

Sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) is often intertwined with and nested within other violations of international criminal law (ICL) as part of a broader attack against a group. However, ICL is not giving enough visibility to this nexus of crimes rooted in the intersection of identities and discrimination that underpins SGBV during conflict. Intersectionality is a concept originated in feminism and progressively recognized by international human rights law (IHRL). It posits that SGBV is caused by gender 'inextricably linked' with other identities and factors that result in compounded discrimination and unique aggravated harms. Based on case studies, this paper argues that ICL should integrate an intersectional approach based on identity and discrimination to address the nexus between SGBV and broader international crimes. Intersectionality enables a better understanding of the causes, harms, and gravity of SGBV, and it provides consistency with an IHRL interpretation. The article begins setting out the foundations of intersectionality in feminism and IHRL, and its applicability to ICL. It then applies intersectionality to two case studies that demonstrate the interlink of SGBV with broader violations of ICL: The Revolutionary United Front Case (RUF) trial judgment of the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL) concerning SGBV and the war crime committing acts of terrorism, and Al Hassan, prosecuted at the International Criminal Court (ICC), concerning SGBV and the crime against humanity of persecution. It concludes with final remarks on why and how ICL would benefit from integrating an intersectional approach to SGBV.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document