Tagged: ICTR

UN Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals

As mentioned in our earlier posts the ad hoc international criminal tribunals have been preparing to transition their responsibilities to the Mechanism after completing their mandate and marking 20 years of existence in 2014. The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) closed on Dec. 31, 2015 and the Mechanism assumed it work as part of its mission to preserve and promote the legacy of the tribunal.

The Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals (the MICT) 

was established by the United Nations Security Council on 22 December 2010 (S/RES/1966 (2010)) [acting under Chapter VII of the UN Charter] to carry out a number of essential functions of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), after the completion of their respective mandates.

The SC Res. 1966 in its Annex I includes the Statute of the Residual Mechanism articulating the Machanism’s competence, functions, structure, and organization, the election of judges, rules of procedure and evidence, the role of the Prosecutor and Registry, investigation, trial, right of the accused, protection of victims and witnesses, judgments and penalties, appellate procedures, enforcement of sentencing, pardons, and management of the archives. The Mechanism has two branches; one covering the remaining functions of the ICTR and the other of the ICTY. According to the Mechanism’s website, it is tasked with “continuing the jurisdiction, rights and obligations and essential functions of the ICTR” and “maintaining the legacy of both institutions.”

The President of the ICTY, Theodor Meron in its address to the UN Security Council on June 7, 2012 stated:

By establishing the Mechanism, the Council has helped to guarantee that the closure of the two pioneering ad hoc tribunals does not open the way for impunity to reign once more.

The Mechanism commenced action on July 1, 2013 temporarily overlapping with the ICTR and ICTY as both tribunals complete their outstanding mandates. The Security Council expects the Mechanism to function until it is decided otherwise with periodic reviews of its progress every 2 years. The first progress report (S/2015/883) was compiled and submitted in November 2015 for the Security Council review in 2016. In paragraphs 52-59 of the status report, President Meron describes the purpose and function of the Archives and Records stating that the Mechanism has the responsibility to manage, maintain, preserve and provide access to archives of the Mechanism and the two tribunals, as required under art. 27 of the Mechanism’s statute.

It is the Mechanism’s website ensuring access to information and documents related to the tribunals as well as the documents related to the Mechanism’s work, including basic documents (statute, rules of procedure and evidence, regulations and policies, reports and publication and budget), as well as links to the ICTR and ICTY archives (including basic documents, cases, news, reports, etc.), and links to review reports submitted to the Security Council on the progress of the Mechanism, news, and documents related to cases handled by the Mechanism.

After 20 Years of Existence, ICTY and ICTR Begin Preparations to Close

On June 5, 2014, Judge Theodor Meron, President of the ICTY, and Judge Vagn Joensen, President of the ICTR, addressed the 15 member Security Council on the work each tribunal has accomplished over the past twenty years of existence. The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) was established after the 1994 genocide where 800,000 men, women, and children – “overwhelmingly Tutsi, moderate Hutu and Twa” – were systematically killed over the course of 100 days, and the tribunal marked 20 years of existence in April 2014. The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) was established to deal with war crimes that took place during the conflicts in the Balkans during the 1990’s and will mark 20 years in existence on November 8, 2014.

Judge Theodor Meron, President of the ICTY, stated

Since its establishment by this council the ICTY has been the subject of diverse and ambitious expectations. For some observers the tribunals were the means by which victims and witnesses of horrific crimes have had and continue to have an opportunity to be heard and an opportunity to obtain a sense of justice.

Judge Vagn Joensen, President of the ICTR, stated

Rwanda’s achievements over past 20 years are quite impressive, including the creation of stable and functioning government whose commitment to national reconciliation and strengthening of the rule of law can be seen through one example of its vigorous effort to rebuild its justice system. 8 November 2014 will mark 20 years since this esteem Council saw it fit at the initial request of Rwanda to create this international tribunal. We hope that the international community will use this occasion as an opportunity to mark Rwanda’s achievements, as well as to further study the lessons learned from what was only an experiment in the international justice in 1994.

The representatives of both tribunals further called on the need for Member States to cooperate to support the efforts accomplished so far and to complete what remains to be done, after the tribunals close, including apprehension of the remaining fugitives. Judge Meron further noted that international tribunals alone  cannot solve “long-running historical conflicts;” they must be part of a “panoply of transitional justice measures.”

Currently, the tribunals are working closely with the Mechanism to transition the remaining responsibilities, including services to vulnerable victims and witnesses, supervising the enforcement of sentences across two continents, and addressing requests for assistance from national jurisdictions. The Mechanism’s archives section works closely with ICTY and ICTR on the preparation and transfer of records to the custody of the Mechanism.

Related Readings:

The International Criminal Court Convicts Katanga for War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity

POST WRITTEN BY: Prof. Peter Widulski, Assistant Director of the First Year Legal Skills Program and the Coach of International Criminal Moot Court Team at Pace Law School

On March 7, 2014, a Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) rendered a guilty verdict against Germain Katanga, relating to an investigation commenced in June 2004 by the ICC Prosecutor into the Situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). This is the second conviction achieved by an ICC Prosecutor since the entry into force of the ICC’s Rome Statute on July 1, 2002.

The ICC’s first conviction was rendered in 2012 against Thomas Lubanga Dyilo. The Lubanga Case also arose out of the Prosecutors’ investigation of the DRC situation. Lubanga, the leader of an armed group opposed to the DRC government, was convicted pursuant to Article 8 of the Rome Statute of the war crime of conscripting children into his military forces.

Germain Katanga, who also led an armed force opposed to the DRC, was also convicted of Article 8 war crimes. Notably, however, he was also found guilty on one count of a crime against humanity, pursuant to Article 7(1)(a) of the Rome Statute. This represents the first conviction the ICC Prosecutor has obtained on a charge of crimes against humanity.

Pursuing a charge of crimes against humanity requires the ICC Prosecutor, under Article 7(1) of the Rome Statute, to prove that the underlying criminal acts were committed “as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population ….”

During the 1990s prior to the entry into force of the Rome Statute, the United Nations Security Council, pursuant to its authority under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter, enacted the Statutes of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the International Tribunal for Rwanda. These statutes contain similar requirements for prosecution of crimes against humanity.

In accordance with these statutory requirements, the ICTY and the ICTR have obtained convictions against many defendants on charges of crimes against humanity. While these cases are not binding on ICC Court, when in September 2008 the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber confirmed the crimes against humanity charge against Katanga, it explicitly referenced and found guidance from the ICTY and ICTR cases regarding their interpretation of the elements required to sustain a crimes against humanity charge.

The Trial Chamber found Katanga not guilty of some of the war crimes charged and one of the crimes against humanity charged. Both the Defense and the Prosecutor have 30 days within which to appeal the judgment. The Trial Chamber will soon conduct proceedings with respect to the sentence and reparations for the victims.