Using the International Criminal Court to Denounce Disappearances: Crimes against Humanity in Coahuila, Mexico

2021 ◽  
pp. 242-250
Author(s):  
Michael W. Chamberlin
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Sexual Violence ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Federation ◽  
The State ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Civilian Population

In 2017, the International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH), supported by 100 other organisations, submitted a communication to the ICC detailing crimes committed against the civilian population from 2009-16 in the State of Coahuila de Zaragoza, Mexico, including murder, illegal imprisonment, enforced disappearance, torture, and sexual violence. This chapter explains the procedural and substantive basis of their complaint as a model for others who may seek the ICC’s involvement in the investigation and prosecution a pattern of enforced disappearances.

Better Late than Never: Reparations for Sexual Violence in the Ntaganda case before the International Criminal Court

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-47
Author(s):  
Sunneva Gilmore
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Violence ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Child Soldiers ◽  
Trial Chamber ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Medical Background ◽  
Modest Contribution ◽  
First Time

The Prosecutor v Bosco Ntaganda case at the International Criminal Court (ICC) represents the long awaited first reparation order for sexual violence at the court. This will hopefully see the implementation of reparations for the war crimes and crimes against humanity of rape and sexual slavery among civilians and former child soldiers, after previous cases such as against Jean-Pierre Bembe and Laurent Gbagbo were acquitted of rape. This article drawing from the author's role as a reparation expert in the case, is a reflection on the challenges of designing and providing reparations at the ICC against convicted individuals, as well as amidst insecurity and the COVID-19 infectious disease pandemic. It begins by discussing how the Ntaganda reparation order expanded reparation principles for the first time since the Lubanga case, in particular for crimes of a sexual nature. This is followed by an outline of some of the harms as a result of sexual violence from the perspective of an expert with a medical background. The analysis then turns to the appropriate reparations in this case and the details contained within the chamber's reparation order. Final conclusions consider how the procedural and substantive elements of reparations in this case will be instructive to future cases that address sexual violence. Ultimately, key insights are offered on the modest contribution an appointed reparation expert can do in assisting a trial chamber in the reparation process.

International Criminal Court

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (9) ◽  
pp. 41-51
Author(s):  
Charles B.A Ubah ◽  
Osy E. Nwebo
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Justice System ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Domestic Jurisdiction ◽  
National Governments

The principle of domestic jurisdiction in international law makes national governments responsible for protecting their citizens, investigating alleged abuses of human rights in their countries and bringing the perpetrators to justice. They governments may also extradite those accused of abuse of human rights to any other states prepared to give them a fair trial. Problem arises however, when governments are unable or unwilling to perform this duty or are themselves perpetrators of these crimes. Thus, millions of people have fallen victims of genocide, crimes against humanity and serious violations of humanitarian laws. But only very few of these perpetrators have been brought to justice in national courts as many governments claim sanctuary under the principle of domestic jurisdiction. The need therefore arises for the international community to act in order to protect helpless or defenseless citizens from being victims of crimes against humanity and human rights abuses, by bringing the perpetrators of these crimes to justice. The thrust of this article therefore, is that the creation of the International Criminal Court (ICC) fills this void by fulfilling a central and pivotal goal in international jurisprudence. This article, therefore, provides insights and lessons into the history and prospects of the International Criminal Court. These are insights and lessons that are too important and too costly to ignore in the 21st century understanding of international criminal justice system.

scholarly journals ON THE COMPLEXITIES OF PROSECUTING ROBERT MUGABE AT THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (12) ◽  
Author(s):  
Everisto Benyera
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
The World ◽  
The Hague ◽  
Robert Mugabe ◽  
Do So

One of the most desired actions by human rights activists the world over is to see Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe brought to The Hague to answer to allegations of genocide and crimes against humanity committed during his more than three decades in office. This desire notwithstanding, there are both legal and practical imperatives that render his prosecution highly improbable judging by the failed attempts to do so by various organisations. This article is a contribution to the debate on the fate of heads of states accused of genocide and crimes against humanity by focusing on the complexities surrounding the various attempts at having Mugabe brought before the International Criminal Court (ICC). The conclusion reached is that, no matter how desirable, the prosecution of Mugabe at the ICC, or any other court of law, is a distant reality due to various reasons outlined in the article. 

Part 10 Enforcement: Exécution, Art.106 Supervision of enforcement of sentences and conditions of imprisonment/Contrôle de l’exécution de la peine et conditions de détention

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Schabas William A
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
The State ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
International Standards ◽  
National Treatment ◽  
Receive Treatment

This chapter comments on Article 106 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 106 strikes a balance between the general carceral system applicable in the State of enforcement that applies to the Court's prisoner, and the requirement of generally accepted international standards drawn from human rights instruments. This ‘national treatment’ clause was originally introduced to ensure that prisoners of the Court would not receive treatment that was worse than that of ordinary prisoners. The primary function of the provision is protecting the fundamental rights of the prisoner. The article also declares that Communications between a sentenced person and the Court shall be unimpeded and confidential.

In the Shadow of the International Criminal Court

2016 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin J. Appel
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Strong Support ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
Expected Payoffs

The International Criminal Court (ICC) is responsible for prosecuting crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide. Despite the potential for the ICC to deter human rights abuses, scholars and policy makers are divided on the effectiveness of it. This debate, however, is plagued by some important theoretical and empirical limitations. I address the problems in the literature and evaluate whether the ICC can prevent human rights abuses. I argue that the ICC can deter governments from committing human rights violations by imposing a variety of costs on them throughout their investigations that decrease their expected payoffs for engaging in human rights abuses. Across a variety of statistical estimators that account for standard threats to inference and several anecdotes, I find strong support for my theoretical expectations; leaders from states that have ratified the Rome Statute commit lower levels of human rights abuses than nonratifier leaders.

An Analysis of the Cooperation Regime of the International Criminal Court and its Effectiveness in the Court’s Objective in Securing Suspects in its Ongoing Investigations and Prosecutions

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 937-962 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rita Mutyaba
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
The State ◽  
State Party ◽  
Enforcement Mechanism ◽  
Enforcement Mechanisms

The International Criminal Court (ICC) has to rely on the cooperation of State Parties and non-party States in the arrest and surrender of accused persons who commit crimes within the court’s jurisdiction because it lacks an enforcement mechanism to apprehend those individuals. However, a State can refuse to cooperate with the Court based on competing requests for extradition of an accused, incompatibility of the cooperation request with international law, when the execution of the cooperation request is prohibited by national law, concern that the suspect’s human rights will be violated, the cooperation request has problems that may impede or prevent the State Party from executing the request; sovereignty claims. Notwithstanding these reasons, the cases before the Court show that the ICC has been largely successful in securing the arrest and surrender of accused persons. However, alternative enforcement mechanisms of cooperation requests should be considered as a means of apprehending suspects.

Africa, the International Criminal Court, and Human Rights

2020 ◽  
pp. 134-160
Author(s):  
Derrick M. Nault
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Justice ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Hague ◽  
Ongoing Support ◽  
Made In

Chapter Five discusses the operations of The Hague-based International Criminal Court (ICC), which aims ‘to end impunity’ by punishing perpetrators of the gravest crimes known to humankind—crimes against humanity, genocide, war crimes, and crimes of aggression. Despite its promise, the court has been criticized for its overemphasis on African situations. This chapter assesses African criticisms of the ICC and their accuracy, suggesting that, although they are not always without merit, the court exists as it does today due to African requests for assistance as well as the early and ongoing support of African member states. The chapter also considers the past, present, and possible future impact of the ICC on human rights and international justice in Africa, suggesting that notable progress is being made in both inter-related areas. Finally, it argues that, as with previous eras, Africans have exerted an important yet largely unrecognized influence on human rights in recent times, in this case vis-à-vis the ICC.

Briefly Noted

2019 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 439-441
Keyword(s):  
Cote D'ivoire ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Côte D’Ivoire ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Trial Chamber ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Reasonable Doubt ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Civilian Population ◽  
Electoral Violence

On January 15, 2019, the Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court (ICC) acquitted Laurent Gbagbo and Charles Blé Goudé of all charges of crimes against humanity allegedly committed in the context of post-electoral violence in Côte d'Ivoire in 2010 and 2011. The two were accused of four charges of crimes against humanity: murder, rape, other inhumane acts, and persecution. The majority found that the Prosecutor had not proven several elements of the crimes charged, namely a “common plan” meant to keep Gbagbo in power, including crimes against civilians “pursuant to or in furtherance of a State or organisational policy,” and patterns of violence that would have demonstrated a “policy to attack a civilian population.” The majority also found that the Prosecutor had not provided evidence proving that the defendants “knowingly or intentionally contributed to the commission of the alleged crimes or that their speeches constituted ordering, soliciting or inducing such crimes.” In dissent, Judge Herrera Carbuccia stated that she believed the majority used the wrong standard of review, that it should have been the beyond reasonable doubt standard, and “that there is evidence upon which a reasonable Trial Chamber could convict the accused.”

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document