International Criminal Court (ICC): Dominic Ongwen

Author(s):  
Anne-Marie de Brouwer ◽  
Eefje de Volder

On 4 February 2021, the ICC's Trial Chamber IX found Lord Resistance Army's Commander Dominic Ongwen guilty for a total of 61 crimes comprising crimes against humanity and war crimes, including many conflict-related sexual and gender-based violence crimes, committed in Northern Uganda between 1 July 2002 and 31 December 2005. On 6 May 2021, Dominic Ongwen was sentenced to 25 years imprisonment for these crimes.<br/> In this Q&A we discuss this case with three renowned experts, namely Victoria Nyanjura (Survivor, Founder Women in Action for Women Uganda), Joseph Manoba (lawyer and Legal Representative for victims in the Ongwen case) and Lorraine Smith van Lin (independent victim's rights expert). By answering 11 questions, they provide insight in the complexity of this case, including how it is perceived by LRA victims and survivors in Uganda.

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.


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.


AJIL Unbound ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 112 ◽  
pp. 177-181
Author(s):  
Gabrielle Louise McIntyre

When it was adopted in 1998, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) represented a significant breakthrough regarding sexual and gender-based crimes—crimes that, for centuries, had proliferated in armed conflicts but had been disregarded, mischaracterized, or misunderstood as the inevitable by-products of war or a legitimate part of its spoils. Not only did the Rome Statute explicitly treat a broad range of sexual acts as crimes against humanity and war crimes, but it also recognized gender-based violence as a crime and incorporated a number of provisions aimed at ensuring greater institutional attention to sexual and gender-based crimes. However, abstract possibilities do not always translate into concrete results, and the ICC has been slow to effectuate its innovative statutory provisions. This essay will explore some of the obstacles encountered and opportunities missed by the Court over the last twenty years, as well as highlighting welcome strides made in recent years to fulfill, at least in part, the promise of Rome.


2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 765-790
Author(s):  
Daley J Birkett

Abstract On 8 June 2018, more than 10 years after his arrest, the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) reversed Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo’s conviction by the Trial Chamber for crimes against humanity and war crimes, acquitting him of all charges. Soon after the start of his time in detention in The Hague, assets belonging to Bemba were frozen by states across a number of jurisdictions at the request of the ICC. Many of these assets remain frozen, more than 18 months after his acquittal. This article examines the consequences of prolonged asset freezes by the ICC through the lens of the Bemba case, demonstrating the existence of gaps in the legal framework applicable to the management of frozen assets under the ICC Statute system and suggesting possible responses thereto at the domestic and international levels.


2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-122
Author(s):  
Evelyn W. Kamau

AbstractThe increased domestication of international core crimes like genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes has placed national prosecutors and judges on unfamiliar ground. Specifically, though very welcome, the recognition of acts of sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) as constituting core international crimes poses a further challenge. The circumstances surrounding the commission of SGBV as international core crimes, coupled with their unique elements and manner of proof, makes their domestic prosecution seem that much more difficult. An understanding of how acts of SGBV constitute international core crimes, their constituent elements and the manner of proving them, coupled with how to treat victims and witnesses of SGBV, goes a long way in easing the perceived challenge of domestically prosecuting them. This article is geared towards achieving that and is directed at people who are involved in or are considering carrying out domestic prosecutions and adjudications of SGBV as international core 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.


2013 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 197-209
Author(s):  
Suzanne Bullock

Prosecutor v Omar Hassan Ahmad Al BashirIn this decision the Pre-Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) condemned Malawi, as a member state of the ICC, for the failure to comply with the request to arrest and surrender the President of Sudan, Omar Al Bashir. Significantly, the Chamber determined that the traditionally sacrosanct concept of immunity of Heads of State no longer applied before an international court or tribunal. Whilst the intention to create universal jurisdiction over perpetrators of war crimes and crimes against humanity is extremely laudable, the legal reasoning by the Chamber is regrettably unsound. If the decision remains unchallenged, the implication is that no Head of State, whether or not they are a signatory to the ICC, is immune from prosecution on the mere basis of the ICC’s status as an international court.


2013 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 417-439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Frolich

On May 30, 2012, the Appeals Chamber (Chamber) of the International Criminal Court (ICC) voted unanimously to dismiss the appeal of the Prosecution against the decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber not to confirm the charges against the alleged Congolese warlord Callixte Mbarushimana. The Prosecution had alleged Mbarushimana was criminally responsible under Article 25(3)(d) of the Rome Statute (Statute) for crimes against humanity and war crimes committed by members of the Forces Démocratiques de Libération du Rwanda (FDLR) in the Kivu provinces of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The Prosecution had appealed the Pre-Trial Chamber’s decision on three separate issues, all of which were rejected.


2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 207-241
Author(s):  
Susana SáCouto ◽  
Leila Nadya Sadat ◽  
Patricia Viseur Sellers

AbstractInternational criminal tribunals have developed a number of legal theories designed to hold individuals responsible for their role in collective criminal conduct. These doctrines of criminal participation, known as modes of liability, are the subject of significant scholarly commentary. Yet missing from much of this debate, particularly as regards the International Criminal Court, has been an analysis of how current doctrine on modes of liability responds to the need to hold collective perpetrators criminally responsible for crimes of sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV). Indeed, many writings in this area of the law address perceived shortcomings in the theoretical underpinnings of modes of liability doctrine in the abstract but ignore the application of this doctrine in concreto. As a result, facially neutral writings on modes of liability may in fact be gendered in application, either because they fail to account for the specific characteristics of sexual and gender-based violence or because they are applied in a manner that requires higher thresholds for finding culpability for the commission of SGBV crimes. This article fills the gap between theory and practice, examining past and present doctrine, and suggesting ways in which the treatment of modes of liability by international criminal courts and tribunals can both properly respond to the need for personal culpability and the dangers of collective criminal activity, particularly as regards SGBV crimes.


2005 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 871-885 ◽  
Author(s):  
WILLIAM A. SCHABAS

The report of the International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur, set up pursuant to a UN Security Council resolution, is an important contribution to the evolving law of genocide. The Commission concluded that genocide had not been committed, but that the case should be referred to the International Criminal Court for prosecution as crimes against humanity and war crimes. The Commission did not find significant evidence of genocidal intent. It looked essentially for a plan or policy of the Sudanese state and, in its absence, concluded that genocide was not being committed. The Commission endorsed the ‘stable and permanent groups’ approach taken by one trial chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR). On this point, it exaggerated the acceptance of this interpretation, which has been ignored by other trial chambers of the international tribunals. However, the Commission found that the better approach to determination of the groups covered by the Convention is subjective, and that the targeted tribes in Darfur meet this criterion.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document