The document provides an analysis of the ICC arrest warrant issued for Omar al-Bashir, President of Sudan, for his alleged role in war crimes and crimes against humanity in Darfur from 2003 to 2008. It discusses the requirements for issuing an arrest warrant under the Rome Statute and analyzes whether those requirements were met. Specifically, it examines whether there were reasonable grounds to believe war crimes and crimes against humanity were committed in Darfur, whether Bashir incurred criminal liability as a co-perpetrator, and whether his arrest was necessary. It finds the evidence showed a non-international armed conflict in Darfur between Sudanese government forces and rebel groups, and that Bashir used state apparatus to direct widespread and systematic
South Africa, the Rome Statute and the International Criminal Court Implicati...paperpublications3
Abstract: The May 2015 pulsating development in South Africa’s international legal history has shown the world that for almost all African states, signing and ratifying statutes is one thing, and implementation is another. South Africa was the last state standing, all international hopes being on South Africa that the government would arrest Omar al Bashir if he sets foot in that country. Other African states that are signatories and ratifiers of the Rome Statute had flinched from arresting and surrendering Bashir to the International Criminal Court, such as Chad, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Djibouti, Malawi and Kenya. South Africa, which is regarded as a mature and stable democracy in Africa, astonishingly followed the African Union’s unity in defiance action by surreptitiously letting Omar al Bashir off the legal apocalyptic hook, violating its municipal and international legal provisions. Considering that the African Union had openly disassociated itself from the International Criminal Court, and South Africa speaking louder with actions rather than words, this paper moves that South Africa’s defiant action finally exposed Africa’s legal decadence and constituted a dreadful miscarriage of international justice. Politically, what the South African government did was commendable, but legally the government violated its municipal and international law provisions. This action has also finally led to the death of the International Criminal Court in Africa.
ELEMENTS OF INTERNATIONAL CRIMES AND MODES OF LIABILITYTakeh Sendze
This document discusses elements of international crimes and modes of liability that are relevant for prosecuting cases transferred from the ICTR to Rwanda. It defines the seven crimes within the ICTR's jurisdiction - genocide, conspiracy to commit genocide, direct and public incitement to commit genocide, attempt to commit genocide, complicity in genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. It then outlines how six of these crimes map to crimes under Rwandan law. The document also defines the elements of these six crimes and discusses three modes of liability - committing, aiding and abetting, and superior responsibility.
17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
On 20 November, the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) finally published her request to open a formal investigation into war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Afghanistan. This means that the Prosecutor agrees with the result of the preliminary examination showing that crimes meeting the ICC gravity threshold have been committed in Afghanistan since 2003 (the period for which the ICC has jurisdiction) and that the ICC considers that Afghanistan is either unwilling or unable to prosecute these crimes nationally. The Prosecutor also made an open request to the victims to send their statements to the Court by 31 January 2018. There is, then, a very important but short window of opportunity for victims to share their stories with the Court. On the occasion of the release of the Prosecutor’s request, AAN is publishing this question and answers dispatch focusing on the ICC and Afghanistan (1).
The document summarizes the key findings and observations of the Jury for the Peoples' Tribunal on Acquired Innocents organized by the Innocence Network. The Jury heard testimonies from several individuals who had been wrongly imprisoned for terrorism-related crimes for many years before being acquitted. The Jury observed that wrongful prosecutions in terrorism cases often involved willful and malicious investigations targeting Muslim youth. Anti-terrorism laws grant excessive powers to investigating agencies and make it nearly impossible for those accused to obtain bail. The Jury also noted a lack of accountability for investigators involved in torture and fabrication of evidence. The document discusses international jurisprudence around compensation for wrongful convictions and argues India should establish a similar legislative
Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine 16 May to 15 August 2015DonbassFullAccess
This is the eleventh report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) on the situation of human rights in Ukraine, based on the work of the United Nations Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine (HRMMU). It covers the period from 16 May to 15 August 2015.
Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine 15 May 2014DonbassFullAccess
The present report is based on the findings of the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine (HRMMU)1 covering the period of 2 April - 6 May 2014. It follows the first report on the human rights situation in Ukraine released by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) on 15 April 2014.
This petition requests that the ICC investigate war crimes committed in Suriname between 1980 and 1992, and from 2010 to present, during periods of military dictatorship. It argues that an amnesty bill passed in 2012 shields perpetrators and prevents prosecution. Over 155 individuals were murdered by the military regime and affiliated civilians through acts including: arbitrary arrests and detention, torture, disappearances, rape and extrajudicial killings of civilians and military personnel. Several specific cases are described in detail to support allegations of war crimes and the need for investigation, as the crimes have never been properly investigated by Surinamese authorities and impunity remains. The petition requests the ICC assess the situation proprio motu under the Rome Statute.
Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine 15 November 2014DonbassFullAccess
This is the seventh report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the situation of human rights in Ukraine, based on the work of the United Nations Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine (HRMMU). It covers the period from 17 September to 31 October 2014.
South Africa, the Rome Statute and the International Criminal Court Implicati...paperpublications3
Abstract: The May 2015 pulsating development in South Africa’s international legal history has shown the world that for almost all African states, signing and ratifying statutes is one thing, and implementation is another. South Africa was the last state standing, all international hopes being on South Africa that the government would arrest Omar al Bashir if he sets foot in that country. Other African states that are signatories and ratifiers of the Rome Statute had flinched from arresting and surrendering Bashir to the International Criminal Court, such as Chad, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Djibouti, Malawi and Kenya. South Africa, which is regarded as a mature and stable democracy in Africa, astonishingly followed the African Union’s unity in defiance action by surreptitiously letting Omar al Bashir off the legal apocalyptic hook, violating its municipal and international legal provisions. Considering that the African Union had openly disassociated itself from the International Criminal Court, and South Africa speaking louder with actions rather than words, this paper moves that South Africa’s defiant action finally exposed Africa’s legal decadence and constituted a dreadful miscarriage of international justice. Politically, what the South African government did was commendable, but legally the government violated its municipal and international law provisions. This action has also finally led to the death of the International Criminal Court in Africa.
ELEMENTS OF INTERNATIONAL CRIMES AND MODES OF LIABILITYTakeh Sendze
This document discusses elements of international crimes and modes of liability that are relevant for prosecuting cases transferred from the ICTR to Rwanda. It defines the seven crimes within the ICTR's jurisdiction - genocide, conspiracy to commit genocide, direct and public incitement to commit genocide, attempt to commit genocide, complicity in genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. It then outlines how six of these crimes map to crimes under Rwandan law. The document also defines the elements of these six crimes and discusses three modes of liability - committing, aiding and abetting, and superior responsibility.
17 USC § 107 Limitations on Exclusive Rights – FAIR USE
On 20 November, the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) finally published her request to open a formal investigation into war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Afghanistan. This means that the Prosecutor agrees with the result of the preliminary examination showing that crimes meeting the ICC gravity threshold have been committed in Afghanistan since 2003 (the period for which the ICC has jurisdiction) and that the ICC considers that Afghanistan is either unwilling or unable to prosecute these crimes nationally. The Prosecutor also made an open request to the victims to send their statements to the Court by 31 January 2018. There is, then, a very important but short window of opportunity for victims to share their stories with the Court. On the occasion of the release of the Prosecutor’s request, AAN is publishing this question and answers dispatch focusing on the ICC and Afghanistan (1).
The document summarizes the key findings and observations of the Jury for the Peoples' Tribunal on Acquired Innocents organized by the Innocence Network. The Jury heard testimonies from several individuals who had been wrongly imprisoned for terrorism-related crimes for many years before being acquitted. The Jury observed that wrongful prosecutions in terrorism cases often involved willful and malicious investigations targeting Muslim youth. Anti-terrorism laws grant excessive powers to investigating agencies and make it nearly impossible for those accused to obtain bail. The Jury also noted a lack of accountability for investigators involved in torture and fabrication of evidence. The document discusses international jurisprudence around compensation for wrongful convictions and argues India should establish a similar legislative
Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine 16 May to 15 August 2015DonbassFullAccess
This is the eleventh report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) on the situation of human rights in Ukraine, based on the work of the United Nations Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine (HRMMU). It covers the period from 16 May to 15 August 2015.
Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine 15 May 2014DonbassFullAccess
The present report is based on the findings of the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine (HRMMU)1 covering the period of 2 April - 6 May 2014. It follows the first report on the human rights situation in Ukraine released by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) on 15 April 2014.
This petition requests that the ICC investigate war crimes committed in Suriname between 1980 and 1992, and from 2010 to present, during periods of military dictatorship. It argues that an amnesty bill passed in 2012 shields perpetrators and prevents prosecution. Over 155 individuals were murdered by the military regime and affiliated civilians through acts including: arbitrary arrests and detention, torture, disappearances, rape and extrajudicial killings of civilians and military personnel. Several specific cases are described in detail to support allegations of war crimes and the need for investigation, as the crimes have never been properly investigated by Surinamese authorities and impunity remains. The petition requests the ICC assess the situation proprio motu under the Rome Statute.
Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine 15 November 2014DonbassFullAccess
This is the seventh report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the situation of human rights in Ukraine, based on the work of the United Nations Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine (HRMMU). It covers the period from 17 September to 31 October 2014.
Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine 16 August to 15 November 2015DonbassFullAccess
This is the twelfth report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) on the situation of human rights in Ukraine, based on the work of the United Nations Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine (HRMMU). It covers the period from 16 August to 15 November 2015.
Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine 16 September 2014DonbassFullAccess
This is the sixth monthly report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the situation of human rights in Ukraine, based on the work of the United Nations Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine (HRMMU). It covers the period from 18 August to 16 September 2014.
Bahr Idriss Abu Garda voluntarily appeared before the International Criminal Court, becoming the first suspect to do so. He is charged with three counts of war crimes related to an attack on African Union peacekeepers in Darfur in 2007. While Abu Garda claims he was not present, appearing in court may undermine his opponents in Darfur rebel groups. He will next appear for a confirmation of charges hearing in October.
Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine 15 June 2014DonbassFullAccess
The present report is based on findings of the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine (HRMMU) covering the period of 7 May – 7 June 2014. It follows two reports on the human rights situation in Ukraine released by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) on 15 April and 16 May 2014.
Attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure in Eastern UkraineDonbassFullAccess
This document provides a summary of attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure in eastern Ukraine between March 2014 and November 2017. It documents 134 attacks in 22 settlements that violated international humanitarian law and constitute war crimes. The attacks resulted in at least 100 civilian deaths and 162 injuries. Evidence suggests the attacks were committed by Ukrainian armed forces and Russian-backed separatist forces. The document also provides evidence of cross-border attacks and incursions by Russian armed forces into Ukraine, demonstrating the international nature of the conflict. It calls on the ICC prosecutor to open a full investigation to ensure accountability and prevent the loss of further evidence of war crimes.
The UN report documents human rights issues in Ukraine from May to August 2018. It found over 160 violations affecting 282 victims, with a 30% increase in civilian casualties from the conflict. The government of Ukraine was responsible for 53 violations, armed groups for 10, and Russia for 22 as the occupying power in Crimea. Hostilities continued disrupting civilian life and causing deaths and injuries. Increased fighting in May-June 2018 worsened human rights protections for those living near the contact line. Conflict-related detentions, torture and restrictions on freedom of movement remained problems.
This UN report summarizes the human rights situation in Ukraine from February to May 2015. It notes ongoing armed hostilities between Ukrainian forces and armed groups have negatively impacted over 5 million people. While a ceasefire was agreed to in February, attacks continued in some areas. The report also finds accountability for past human rights abuses is lacking, and conditions in Russian-occupied Crimea continue to deteriorate.
Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine 16 May to 15 August 2018DonbassFullAccess
The UN report documents human rights issues in Ukraine from May to August 2018. It found over 160 violations affecting 282 victims, with a 30% increase in civilian casualties from the conflict. The government of Ukraine was responsible for 53 violations, armed groups for 10, and Russia for 22 as the occupying power in Crimea. Increased hostilities from mid-May to June worsened protection of civilians and restricted freedom of movement and access to services for over 600,000 people living near the contact line. Serious violations including arbitrary detention and torture continued to be attributed to all parties to the conflict.
Egypt-death-penalty-report Relation Sandro Suzart SUZART GOOGLE INC U...Sandro Suzart
relationship between Sandro Suzart SUZART GOOGLE INC and United States on Demonstrations 2013 and Impeachments of 22 governments Relation, Sandro Suzart, SUZART, GOOGLE INC, United States on Demonstrations countries IMPEACHMENT GOOGLE INC
The men in uniform are required to be equipped with suitable powers to assist the civil administration in areas notified as disturbed or dangerous. The presentation attempts to highlight diverse issues about the competence of the government and constitutionality of the provisions in this regard.
The document summarizes evidence from an investigation into shelling attacks on villages in eastern Ukraine near the Russian border in summer 2014. Witness testimony and satellite images indicate the shelling originated from artillery positions located in Russia near the village of Manotskyy, 500-1000 meters from the Ukrainian border. Ukrainian military positions in a forest camp near Kolesnykivka village, as well as the villages themselves, came under regular shelling between July and September 2014, resulting in damage to civilian homes and the deaths of four Ukrainian border guards. The attacks ceased on September 5th coinciding with the first Minsk ceasefire agreement.
This document summarizes a Supreme Court of India judgment regarding an appeal challenging the dismissal of a petition seeking to quash a charge sheet and summoning order. The key details are:
1) The case involves a dispute over possession of land between the appellant and respondent, who belongs to a Scheduled Caste.
2) The respondent filed an FIR alleging the appellant abused and threatened her while preventing construction on the disputed land.
3) The appellant argued the charges did not disclose offenses under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act.
4) The Supreme Court analyzed the case and prior judgments, finding the alleged acts did not occur in public view as required by the law, and there
This 3 sentence summary provides the key details from the multi-page UN report on the human rights situation in Ukraine:
The report documents over 30,000 casualties in eastern Ukraine since April 2014 as a result of the conflict, including up to 2,000 civilians killed by indiscriminate shelling. Both sides have been responsible for human rights violations such as arbitrary detention, torture, and restrictions on fundamental freedoms. The human rights situation remains dire, especially in areas controlled by armed groups where over 2.7 million people live without protection of their basic rights.
The Effect of International Prosecutions on the Commission of Norm ViolationsPeter Grenzow
This document discusses theories of deterrence related to international criminal prosecutions and analyzes evidence regarding their effects. It finds:
1) General prosecutorial deterrence may deter some would-be norm violators if the threat of prosecution is viewed as credible, as evidenced by behaviors adjusting to avoid liability.
2) Statistical analyses found international criminal court actions reduced civilian killings by governments and rebels.
3) Specific deterrence via indicting individuals may backfire by causing leaders to entrench their power and escalate crimes to avoid liability, as some leaders' behaviors showed.
Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine 16 February to 15 May 2018DonbassFullAccess
This UN report summarizes the human rights situation in Ukraine from February to May 2018. Key points include:
1) The conflict continued to cause civilian casualties and damage infrastructure, with 81 civilian casualties recorded during the period.
2) 201 cases of human rights violations and abuses were documented, affecting 252 victims. The government of Ukraine was responsible for 68 violations.
3) Detention conditions in armed group-controlled areas could not be monitored, raising concerns about torture and ill-treatment of detainees. Access to justice continued to be hindered.
The Human Rights Council discusses questioning historical cases of genocide through international law. The document recognizes atrocities in Cambodia under the Pol Pot regime as violations of human rights law. It believes international cooperation is important to condemn the Khmer Rouge's actions but warns against misusing the term "genocide" to preserve the integrity of genocide conventions. The council reiterates the need to evaluate the Cambodia case as a crime against humanity to ensure accountability.
The CARICOM states have developed this framework in order to help European nations recognise that the African Transatlantic Slave trade was a crime against humanity.
The document compares criminal procedures in US federal courts and at the International Criminal Court (ICC). Both systems have similar stages in the criminal process including investigation, application for an arrest warrant from a judicial body, arrest, initial detention hearing, and formal charges. However, the ICC relies on state parties for arrests while the US uses law enforcement. The ICC also does not have jury trials like the US. Overall, both systems aim to protect defendants' rights during criminal proceedings.
This document discusses various megamurders (defined as murders of over 1 million people) that occurred in the 20th century, primarily caused by authoritarian leaders and regimes. It outlines the estimated number of civilians murdered in China under Mao Zedong, the Soviet Union under Stalin, Nazi Germany under Hitler, Belgium under Leopold II, Japan under Tojo, the Ottoman Empire, Cambodia under Pol Pot, North Korea under Kim Il Sung, Ethiopia under Mengistu Haile Mariam, and Nigeria under Gowon. It also discusses the persecution of Christians, female infanticide in India and China, and abortions in the 20th century.
Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine 16 August to 15 November 2015DonbassFullAccess
This is the twelfth report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) on the situation of human rights in Ukraine, based on the work of the United Nations Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine (HRMMU). It covers the period from 16 August to 15 November 2015.
Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine 16 September 2014DonbassFullAccess
This is the sixth monthly report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the situation of human rights in Ukraine, based on the work of the United Nations Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine (HRMMU). It covers the period from 18 August to 16 September 2014.
Bahr Idriss Abu Garda voluntarily appeared before the International Criminal Court, becoming the first suspect to do so. He is charged with three counts of war crimes related to an attack on African Union peacekeepers in Darfur in 2007. While Abu Garda claims he was not present, appearing in court may undermine his opponents in Darfur rebel groups. He will next appear for a confirmation of charges hearing in October.
Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine 15 June 2014DonbassFullAccess
The present report is based on findings of the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine (HRMMU) covering the period of 7 May – 7 June 2014. It follows two reports on the human rights situation in Ukraine released by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) on 15 April and 16 May 2014.
Attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure in Eastern UkraineDonbassFullAccess
This document provides a summary of attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure in eastern Ukraine between March 2014 and November 2017. It documents 134 attacks in 22 settlements that violated international humanitarian law and constitute war crimes. The attacks resulted in at least 100 civilian deaths and 162 injuries. Evidence suggests the attacks were committed by Ukrainian armed forces and Russian-backed separatist forces. The document also provides evidence of cross-border attacks and incursions by Russian armed forces into Ukraine, demonstrating the international nature of the conflict. It calls on the ICC prosecutor to open a full investigation to ensure accountability and prevent the loss of further evidence of war crimes.
The UN report documents human rights issues in Ukraine from May to August 2018. It found over 160 violations affecting 282 victims, with a 30% increase in civilian casualties from the conflict. The government of Ukraine was responsible for 53 violations, armed groups for 10, and Russia for 22 as the occupying power in Crimea. Hostilities continued disrupting civilian life and causing deaths and injuries. Increased fighting in May-June 2018 worsened human rights protections for those living near the contact line. Conflict-related detentions, torture and restrictions on freedom of movement remained problems.
This UN report summarizes the human rights situation in Ukraine from February to May 2015. It notes ongoing armed hostilities between Ukrainian forces and armed groups have negatively impacted over 5 million people. While a ceasefire was agreed to in February, attacks continued in some areas. The report also finds accountability for past human rights abuses is lacking, and conditions in Russian-occupied Crimea continue to deteriorate.
Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine 16 May to 15 August 2018DonbassFullAccess
The UN report documents human rights issues in Ukraine from May to August 2018. It found over 160 violations affecting 282 victims, with a 30% increase in civilian casualties from the conflict. The government of Ukraine was responsible for 53 violations, armed groups for 10, and Russia for 22 as the occupying power in Crimea. Increased hostilities from mid-May to June worsened protection of civilians and restricted freedom of movement and access to services for over 600,000 people living near the contact line. Serious violations including arbitrary detention and torture continued to be attributed to all parties to the conflict.
Egypt-death-penalty-report Relation Sandro Suzart SUZART GOOGLE INC U...Sandro Suzart
relationship between Sandro Suzart SUZART GOOGLE INC and United States on Demonstrations 2013 and Impeachments of 22 governments Relation, Sandro Suzart, SUZART, GOOGLE INC, United States on Demonstrations countries IMPEACHMENT GOOGLE INC
The men in uniform are required to be equipped with suitable powers to assist the civil administration in areas notified as disturbed or dangerous. The presentation attempts to highlight diverse issues about the competence of the government and constitutionality of the provisions in this regard.
The document summarizes evidence from an investigation into shelling attacks on villages in eastern Ukraine near the Russian border in summer 2014. Witness testimony and satellite images indicate the shelling originated from artillery positions located in Russia near the village of Manotskyy, 500-1000 meters from the Ukrainian border. Ukrainian military positions in a forest camp near Kolesnykivka village, as well as the villages themselves, came under regular shelling between July and September 2014, resulting in damage to civilian homes and the deaths of four Ukrainian border guards. The attacks ceased on September 5th coinciding with the first Minsk ceasefire agreement.
This document summarizes a Supreme Court of India judgment regarding an appeal challenging the dismissal of a petition seeking to quash a charge sheet and summoning order. The key details are:
1) The case involves a dispute over possession of land between the appellant and respondent, who belongs to a Scheduled Caste.
2) The respondent filed an FIR alleging the appellant abused and threatened her while preventing construction on the disputed land.
3) The appellant argued the charges did not disclose offenses under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act.
4) The Supreme Court analyzed the case and prior judgments, finding the alleged acts did not occur in public view as required by the law, and there
This 3 sentence summary provides the key details from the multi-page UN report on the human rights situation in Ukraine:
The report documents over 30,000 casualties in eastern Ukraine since April 2014 as a result of the conflict, including up to 2,000 civilians killed by indiscriminate shelling. Both sides have been responsible for human rights violations such as arbitrary detention, torture, and restrictions on fundamental freedoms. The human rights situation remains dire, especially in areas controlled by armed groups where over 2.7 million people live without protection of their basic rights.
The Effect of International Prosecutions on the Commission of Norm ViolationsPeter Grenzow
This document discusses theories of deterrence related to international criminal prosecutions and analyzes evidence regarding their effects. It finds:
1) General prosecutorial deterrence may deter some would-be norm violators if the threat of prosecution is viewed as credible, as evidenced by behaviors adjusting to avoid liability.
2) Statistical analyses found international criminal court actions reduced civilian killings by governments and rebels.
3) Specific deterrence via indicting individuals may backfire by causing leaders to entrench their power and escalate crimes to avoid liability, as some leaders' behaviors showed.
Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine 16 February to 15 May 2018DonbassFullAccess
This UN report summarizes the human rights situation in Ukraine from February to May 2018. Key points include:
1) The conflict continued to cause civilian casualties and damage infrastructure, with 81 civilian casualties recorded during the period.
2) 201 cases of human rights violations and abuses were documented, affecting 252 victims. The government of Ukraine was responsible for 68 violations.
3) Detention conditions in armed group-controlled areas could not be monitored, raising concerns about torture and ill-treatment of detainees. Access to justice continued to be hindered.
The Human Rights Council discusses questioning historical cases of genocide through international law. The document recognizes atrocities in Cambodia under the Pol Pot regime as violations of human rights law. It believes international cooperation is important to condemn the Khmer Rouge's actions but warns against misusing the term "genocide" to preserve the integrity of genocide conventions. The council reiterates the need to evaluate the Cambodia case as a crime against humanity to ensure accountability.
The CARICOM states have developed this framework in order to help European nations recognise that the African Transatlantic Slave trade was a crime against humanity.
The document compares criminal procedures in US federal courts and at the International Criminal Court (ICC). Both systems have similar stages in the criminal process including investigation, application for an arrest warrant from a judicial body, arrest, initial detention hearing, and formal charges. However, the ICC relies on state parties for arrests while the US uses law enforcement. The ICC also does not have jury trials like the US. Overall, both systems aim to protect defendants' rights during criminal proceedings.
This document discusses various megamurders (defined as murders of over 1 million people) that occurred in the 20th century, primarily caused by authoritarian leaders and regimes. It outlines the estimated number of civilians murdered in China under Mao Zedong, the Soviet Union under Stalin, Nazi Germany under Hitler, Belgium under Leopold II, Japan under Tojo, the Ottoman Empire, Cambodia under Pol Pot, North Korea under Kim Il Sung, Ethiopia under Mengistu Haile Mariam, and Nigeria under Gowon. It also discusses the persecution of Christians, female infanticide in India and China, and abortions in the 20th century.
Crimes against humanity emergence of a law of humanity -mag. jur. thesis muhsina23
This document discusses the emergence of crimes against humanity as a legal concept in international law. It traces the origins and evolution of the concept from early attempts to limit cruelty in war to its codification in the Nuremberg Charter after World War II. It also examines the legacy of the Nuremberg trials and hopes for a post-Nuremberg world with stronger international institutions and universal human rights.
This document compares victims' rights in US criminal proceedings and at the International Criminal Court (ICC). In the US, the victims' rights movement has advanced victims' participation, including allowing impact statements at sentencing. However, victims generally have a limited and passive role compared to the ICC. At the ICC, victims can be recognized as participants, obtain legal representation, question defendants, and seek reparations. While both systems allow compensation, the ICC also has a Trust Fund for Victims to provide assistance. Overall, the ICC affords victims greater formal participation in criminal proceedings than the US system.
Crimes against Humanity: Religious, Economic, personal, Constitutional violat...Robert Powell
Corrective education, assist understanding of current events in political affairs--Agenda 21, Sustainability, and how the process uses well intended people to turn the United States into a 3rd world country. Understand Stewardship, not population destruction, anti-religious, unconstitutional United Nations. Millennial students this is what they did not want you to know. Slavery thorough deceit, and control by the elite.
The Rome Statute established the International Criminal Court, which prosecutes crimes of sexual violence and recognizes acts of sexual and gender violence as crimes. It aims to protect witnesses and victims of such crimes and provide support programs. The statute was a result of debates between organizations and governments. It expanded the definition of sexual violence beyond rape and the ICC has taken on cases involving crimes of sexual violence to end impunity for such crimes during conflicts.
The document discusses trials held by international courts, including the trials of Saddam Hussein, Slobodan Milosevic, and cases handled by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. It provides background on the International Court of Justice and describes some of the major cases they have heard. Specifically, it outlines the charges against Saddam Hussein for crimes against humanity, the charges against Milosevic for genocide and crimes against humanity, and precedents set by the ICTR, including the first time rape was classified as genocide.
Syria: The War within and the Challenges of International Lawinventionjournals
This document discusses the ongoing civil war in Syria and the challenges it poses to international law. It begins by providing background on the conflict and how it has evolved from public demonstrations in 2011 into an armed rebellion. It then qualifies the conflict as a non-international armed conflict under international law. The document analyzes how both sides have violated international humanitarian law and human rights law through their targeting of civilians, use of torture, and other unlawful acts. It discusses the various international law principles like distinction and proportionality that are being breached. The challenges this conflict poses to international law in addressing these violations are also examined.
The document summarizes the Goldstone report, which investigated violations of international law during the 2008-2009 Gaza War. The report found that Israel and Palestinian armed groups both committed war crimes. It called for independent investigations and possible referral to the International Criminal Court if no credible investigations were conducted. However, the author questions whether the report will have any real impact, given Israel's powerful allies and ability to veto UN Security Council decisions. While increasing international awareness of human rights issues in Gaza, the report was also politicized by factions in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
This document is a project report submitted by Rohit Bishnoi in partial fulfillment of an LLM degree in criminal law from Manipal University Jaipur. The report discusses international criminal law, including its sources in public international law and treaties. It describes crimes under international criminal law like genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. It also discusses the application of international criminal law in national jurisdictions and by international courts like the International Criminal Court.
This document provides an introduction and background on the conflict with ISIS in Iraq and Syria. It examines whether US-led airstrikes against ISIS are legal under international law. It discusses the principles of self-defense and international humanitarian law. It analyzes if ISIS's actions constitute genocide or ethnic cleansing based on their targeting of religious minority groups. It also classifies the conflict as either international or non-international based on definitions in international law.
NUREMBERG - Crimes Against Humanity/Crimes Against Peace (For TRANSLATION)VogelDenise
The document discusses the United States' potential violations of international laws and treaties related to crimes against humanity and crimes against peace as defined by the Nuremberg Principles. It provides background information on the definitions and historical development of these concepts, including their incorporation into the Rome Statute and International Criminal Court. The document calls for holding US heads of state and officials accountable for their alleged criminal acts under international law.
Human rights and international humanitarian lawOnyinye Chime
This document summarizes a scholarly paper on human rights and international humanitarian law as it relates to armed conflicts since 1945. It discusses how the atrocities of World War II led to efforts to establish universal human rights and hold violators accountable. The United Nations played a key role through the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which outlined civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights. However, the declaration is non-binding, which some see as an advantage allowing flexibility, while others view as a shortcoming due to its lack of legal force. Overall, the document examines the development of international law on human rights and its application during armed conflict.
HUMAN RIGHTS AND INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW AS IT AFFECTS ARMED CONFLICTS...Onyinye Chime
The paper argues that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights may not perfectly represent the views of all the people of the world owing to differences in culture, sex, religion, to mention but a few. Thus it is not a binding rule to all the countries of the world. Nevertheless, it has become a point of reference whenever there is violation of human rights in any part of the world despite the culture and tradition of the people concerned. The paper concludes that despite its non-binding status, the admittance of its existence by states and enshrining human rights issues in their constitutions, the universal declaration of human rights does not only exist but in practice, makes humanitarian human rights law superior to national law and even as it affects armed conflict.
The document is an article critique that analyzes the US's policies toward the International Criminal Court and how it has impacted the ICC's ability to prevent genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. The author identifies four strategies used by the US to undermine the ICC: 1) Exempting US citizens from ICC prosecution during UN operations. 2) Pressuring countries to sign treaties exempting US citizens from ICC jurisdiction. 3) Withdrawing aid from countries that join the ICC. 4) Delaying ICC referrals of crimes from the UN Security Council. The author argues these policies have made it more difficult for the ICC to achieve universal jurisdiction and enforce international law.
Ad hoc Tribunals in International Criminal Law.pptxMasoud Zamani
Exploring the Enduring Impact of ICTY and ICTR on International Criminal Law
In this SlideShare presentation, delve into a comprehensive examination of the enduring legacies left by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) in the realm of international criminal law. Gain insights into their pivotal contributions, landmark cases, and their role in shaping the future of global justice
This document provides context and definitions related to international humanitarian law and the armed conflict in Syria. It defines international and non-international armed conflicts according to international humanitarian law. It then provides details on the qualification and application of common article 3 and additional protocol II. The document concludes with background information on the social upheaval in Syria since 2011 and causes of the armed conflict between government forces and rebel groups.
Hamas attacked Israel in October 2023, firing missiles and taking hostages, which killed over 1,400 Israelis. In response, Israel launched Operation Iron Sword, extensively bombing Gaza and imposing a blockade. This caused over 4,385 Palestinian deaths, including many civilians. Both sides failed to distinguish civilians from combatants. Their actions likely constituted war crimes and crimes against humanity under the Rome Statute. International humanitarian law seeks to minimize civilian suffering during armed conflicts by requiring distinction and proportionality and facilitating humanitarian aid. Third states have obligations under treaties to prevent international crimes and protect civilians. De-escalation is crucial to prevent the conflict from worsening.
Hamas attacked Israel in October 2023, firing missiles and taking hostages, which killed over 1,400 Israelis. In response, Israel launched Operation Iron Sword, extensively bombing Gaza and imposing a blockade. This caused over 4,385 Palestinian deaths, including many civilians. Both sides failed to distinguish civilians from combatants. Their actions likely constituted war crimes and crimes against humanity under the Rome Statute. International humanitarian law seeks to minimize civilian suffering during armed conflicts by requiring distinction and proportionality and allowing humanitarian access. Third states have obligations under treaties to prevent atrocities and protect civilians. De-escalation is crucial to avoid further violations and loss of life.
The ICC confirmed 5 of 8 charges against Jean-Pierre Bemba relating to war crimes and crimes against humanity allegedly committed by his troops in the Central African Republic from 2002-2003. While leading evidence was found for murder, rape and pillaging charges, evidence was insufficient for torture and crimes against personal dignity. The prosecution argued Bemba was criminally responsible as commander by ordering the crimes, while the defense argued troops were under CAR's control and Bemba lacked intent. Victims provided testimony about the harms experienced.
This document provides definitions and perspectives on mercenaries, terrorists, and freedom fighters from legal and philosophical standpoints. It defines mercenaries as individuals recruited from abroad to fight in a conflict they have no affiliation with, for private material gain. Terrorism is defined as targeting civilians and property for political goals such as intimidation or reprisal. From a realist perspective, terrorism demonstrates power; from a liberal view, it undermines human rights and conflict resolution. The document concludes that no act of terrorism can be considered legitimate.
This document provides an introduction and overview of Tyler Mitchell's undergraduate thesis titled "Operation Judicial Review: A Comparative Analysis of the Role of the Judiciary in Domestic and Foreign Detention and Material Support Cases During the War on Terror." The introduction discusses how the judiciary has debated the applicability of constitutional protections to non-citizens and conduct outside of U.S. territory. It also discusses how the distinction between domestic and foreign circumstances has influenced how courts assess claims in material support and detention cases related to the First Amendment and Suspension Clause. The thesis will examine Supreme Court cases Boumediene v. Bush and Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project and subsequent circuit court cases applying these rulings to domestic and foreign matters
Recommendations, LongTerm of the Concerned Citizens Tribunal, Gujarat 2002sabrangsabrang
The document recommends establishing a Standing National Crimes Tribunal to deal with crimes against humanity, genocide, and mass violence cases. It recommends that the tribunal be an independent body with members appointed for 7-year terms. It also recommends expanding the definitions of crimes against humanity, rape, and sexual assault to address issues like gang rapes and mass violence against women. It suggests the state should be held responsible if it fails to protect citizens, and that victims should receive financial reparations and rehabilitation.
The document discusses recent developments and challenges in international humanitarian law. It addresses changes in the nature of armed conflicts including their increasing complexity with multiple actors. It examines issues around qualifying situations of violence as international or non-international armed conflicts. It also discusses the development and application of international humanitarian law, including treaty law and challenges around classifying mixed or internationalized armed conflicts.
The Trust Fund for Victims (TFV) assists victims of crimes addressed by the International Criminal Court. It was established in 2002 when the Rome Statute created the ICC. The TFV is governed by a 5-member board elected by States Parties and oversees programs that provide psychological support, material assistance, and rehabilitation to victims in countries like the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda. The TFV's funding comes from voluntary contributions as well as money collected from Court-ordered fines and forfeitures against convicted individuals.
The document discusses how treaties are ratified under US law and whether the Rome Statute is self-executing. It explains that for a treaty to have effect as domestic law, it must be self-executing or require no further legislation. While the Rome Statute does not explicitly require implementing legislation, the US would need to modify extradition laws to fully comply. However, complementarity under the Rome Statute does not require the US to adopt the same crimes into domestic law to claim jurisdiction. The US has incorporated some Rome Statute crimes already in military and domestic law.
The document discusses the non-renewal of the Nethercutt Amendment and its impact on the US bilateral immunity agreements (BIA) campaign. It notes that with the repeal of the Nethercutt provision and ASPA sanctions, no anti-ICC sanctions remain. However, the existing BIAs signed by the US are still valid. The BIAs were an attempt to protect Americans from ICC jurisdiction but were criticized for overreaching Article 98. Without sanctions, the US no longer has leverage to compel new BIAs or adherence to existing ones. The Obama administration has signaled greater cooperation with the ICC.
The ICC prosecutor is monitoring the situation in Kenya following the 2007 post-election violence where over 1,500 people were killed. In 2008, Kenya's main opposition party submitted communications to the ICC alleging crimes against humanity by the government. The ICC is analyzing information to determine if an investigation is warranted. Kenya has been working to establish a domestic tribunal to address the crimes.
The document discusses recommendations for establishing an independent oversight mechanism for the International Criminal Court (ICC). It proposes that the Assembly of States Parties (ASP) create such a mechanism to monitor the ICC's activities and ensure integrity, transparency, and adherence to professional standards. Previous steps toward this included appointing facilitators to consult with states and NGOs. The current recommendations are that the mechanism be independent of the ICC yet co-located with the Office of Internal Audit, and have authority to initiate investigations and receive whistleblower reports.
The document discusses child soldiering and international efforts to address it. It begins by providing context on child soldiering as a historical phenomenon and estimates that 300,000 children currently serve as soldiers worldwide. It then outlines international legal frameworks like the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Rome Statute establishing the International Criminal Court, and UN initiatives to monitor and address the issue. It discusses how child soldiers are recruited and used, countries where the problem is most prevalent, and challenges to rehabilitation. It also summarizes key international court cases prosecuting crimes of enlisting child soldiers and efforts of the ICC and Trust Fund for Victims to support victims.
The International Criminal Court's Office of the Prosecutor has been monitoring allegations of war crimes committed in Afghanistan by US nationals and others since 2008. The Prosecutor has not opened a formal investigation yet but would need to present evidence to the ICC's Pre-Trial Chamber. The ICC has jurisdiction over crimes committed in Afghanistan since May 2003 when Afghanistan became a State Party. However, bilateral agreements between the US and Afghanistan require extraditing US nationals back to the US rather than the ICC. At this time, an ICC investigation is unlikely given the Obama administration's encouragement of other investigations and the lack of statements from the Prosecutor regarding an investigation.
1. ANALYSIS OF THE ICC ARREST WARRANT FOR OMAR AL BASHIR, PRESIDENT OF SUDAN
On March 31, 2005, the United Nations Security Council referred the situation in Darfur to the Prosecutor of
the International Criminal Court (ICC). On July 14, 2008, the prosecution filed an application for an arrest
warrant for Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, president of Sudan, for his alleged criminal responsibility in the
commission of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes against members of the Fur, Masalit, and
Zaghawa groups in Darfur from 2003 to July 2008.
On March 4, 2009, Pre-Trial Chamber I issued an arrest warrant for Bashir. The Majority decided that there
was sufficient evidence to issue a warrant for two counts of war crimes and five counts of crimes against
humanity as a co-perpetrator. However, Judge Anita Ušacka, one of the three judges, dissented stating that
genocide should be included as one of the charges. In addition, she considered that Bashir could be liable as an
indirect perpetrator for all three crimes – war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide.
Warrant Requirements: Article 58(1) of the Rome Statute
A warrant is issued if there are reasonable grounds to believe that the person has committed a crime within the
jurisdiction of the Court and if the arrest of the person is necessary to: (1) ensure their presence at trial, (2)
ensure the person does not obstruct justice, or (3) to prevent the person from continuing with the commission of
that crime. The statute defines “to commit a crime” as (1) an individual, (2) in a group as an accessory, (3)
inciting others to commit crimes, or (4) as a commander.
To issue a warrant for Bashir, the Court had to answer three questions in the affirmative. First, are there
reasonable grounds to believe that at least one crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been committed?
Second, are there reasonable grounds to believe that Bashir has incurred criminal liability for such crimes under
any of the modes of liability provided for in the statute? Third, does the arrest of Bashir appear necessary to
ensure his appearance at the Court and that he will not continue to commit crimes?
Contextual and Specific Elements of the Crimes
The first requirement in order to issue an arrest warrant is the existence of reasonable grounds to believe that at
least one of the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court has been committed. The Rome Statute and the
Elements of Crimes, a separate document which assists the judges in interpreting and applying the articles of
the Statute on the crimes, provide that to establish whether there is sufficient evidence to prove the perpetration
of a crime, two sets of elements must be analyzed: the contextual elements and the specific elements. The
former are the circumstances which surround the commission of a crime. International crimes under the Rome
Statute presume a context of systematic or large scale use of force: war crimes take place in the context of an
international armed conflict or a non-international conflict, while crimes against humanity take place in the
context of a widespread or systematic attack on a civilian population. The contextual elements for genocide are
composed of intentional destructive conduct carried out according to a manifest pattern of similar conduct. As
to the specific elements, these are the different acts which are comprised within each category of crimes, such
as torture as a war crime, extermination as a crime against humanity or genocide by deliberately inflicting on
the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.
A program of the United Nations Association of the United States of America
www.amicc.org
2. War Crimes
Contextual elements
In the case of Bashir, the Court had to determine whether the alleged war crimes occurred in a non-international
conflict and were carried out by organized groups.
A non-international conflict is one that takes place within the border of a state and the conflict is between the
government and armed groups or between organized armed groups. Thus, it excludes isolated riots and sporadic
acts of violence or similar conduct. Based on the evidence submitted by the prosecution, the Majority
concluded that the conflict between the Government of Sudan (GoS) and the Sudan Liberation
Movement/Army (SLM/A), the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) and other opposition groups was of a
non-international character because it took place within the Darfur region of Sudan and between domestic
organized groups. In addition, the parties to the conflict entered into but did not fully implement different peace
agreements, including: (1) the peace agreements signed between the GoS and the SLM/A and the JEM on
September 3 and 4, 2003, (2) the ceasefire April 2004, and (3) the Darfur Peace Agreement signed on May 5,
2006.
The Court determined that the organizational element was fulfilled because: (1) the SLM/A and JEM were the
two main groups opposing the GoS in Darfur, (2) these indigenous groups were organized between 2001 and
2002, and (3) these groups resorted to acts of violence within the Darfur region of Sudan between March 2003
and July 2008. Moreover, the Janjaweed militia was also an organized internal armed group because the
materials provided by the Prosecutor prove it was systematically recruited and integrated into the Sudanese
structure together with the Armed Forces in order to carry out the counter-insurgency campaign against the
rebels. It was drawn from the evidence that the GoS provided the Janjaweed with weapons, gave the orders as
where to attack and which groups to target and offered them compensation, such as land and assets seized in
conflicts.
The Prosecutor also had to show that the groups were able to carry out sustained military operations for a
prolonged period of time. The Court found that SLM/A and JEM carried out numerous military operations
against GoS forces. Moreover, when determining capability, the Court considered as important the element of
control of territory. The evidence presented showed that the SLM/A and the JEM controlled certain areas in
Darfur during the time of the attacks.
Therefore, the Majority concluded that the contextual element of war crimes was fulfilled because from March
2003 until at least July 14, 2008, a conflict not of an international character existed in Darfur between the GoS
and opposition groups and these groups were organized and able to carry out military operations for long
periods of time.
Specific elements
Attacking Civilians. The Prosecutor alleged that Bashir used the “apparatus” of the GoS to commit war crimes
of attacking civilians and pillaging from March 2003 to July 2008. The “apparatus” of the GoS included the
Sudan People’s Armed Forces, militia groups known as the Janjaweed, the Sudanese Police Forces, the
National Intelligence and Security Service (NISS), and the Humanitarian Aid Commission (HAC).
A program of the United Nations Association of the United States of America
www.amicc.org
3. Attacking civilians means that an armed conflict existed and attacks were knowingly directed at civilians not
taking part in the conflict. According to the prosecution, Bashir used the “apparatus” to direct hundreds of
attacks against the Fur, Masalit, and Zaghawa civilian population which was not directly involved in the
hostilities.
In addition to attacking the civilian population, the GoS forces allegedly destroyed water resources, housing,
crops, and livestock. Although these civilians were targeted on the suspicion that they were assisting the
opposition groups, they were not direct parties to the conflict. Thus, the Court found that the “apparatus” of the
State of Sudan planned attacks aimed at civilian populations.
Pillaging. To pillage means appropriating property with the intent to deprive the owner of the property and to
use the property for private use – in this case, in the context of a non-international conflict. The prosecution
submitted that GoS forces carried out acts of pillaging upon the seizure of towns and villages in Darfur
primarily inhabited by Fur, Masalit, and Zaghawa groups. Based on the Prosecutor’s evidence, the Court
concluded that there was sufficient evidence to issue a warrant for systematically seizing and pillaging towns
and villages by GoS forces as part of this campaign.
Based on its examination of the materials submitted by the prosecution, the Court found that since the
beginning of the counter-insurgency campaign, war crimes were committed by the GoS “apparatus”. In
reference to Bashir’s individual responsibility, the Court considered that, as president of Sudan, he was in full
control of the branches of such “apparatus”. This control was also drawn from evidence proving the existence
of a three-level structure in which reports flowed from the local units up to Bashir and other high-level officials.
The materials submitted also showed that Bashir also used his control to organize the “apparatus” to implement
the plan he had designed, to censor media coverage about the crimes committed and to use the criminal justice
system to provide impunity to the perpetrators of crimes. Therefore, Pre-Trial Chamber I issued an arrest
warrant for the alleged war crimes committed.
Crimes Against Humanity
Contextual elements
Crimes against humanity are acts committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against a
civilian population, with knowledge of the attack. The acts Bashir is accused of committing are: murder,
extermination, forcible transfer, torture, and rape as crimes against humanity. The contextual elements of
crimes against humanity include whether the attacks were widespread or systematic and if the alleged
perpetrator knew the conduct was part of or intended to be part of such attacks.
The term “widespread” refers to the large-scale nature of the attack, as well as to the number of victims. The
Court considered those conditions had been met because the attacks against the Fur, Masalit, and the Zaghawa
affected hundreds of thousands of individuals and took place across large swathes of the territory of the Darfur
region. The term “systematic” pertains to the organized nature of the acts of violence and to the improbability
of their random occurrence. Evidence suggests that towns were encircled by the GoS forces, ground attacks
were followed by air attacks, and the Janjaweed would arrive before or with members of the Sudanese Armed
Forces. As a result, the Court concluded that the attacks by the GoS were widespread and systematic.
A program of the United Nations Association of the United States of America
www.amicc.org
4. The Court also analyzed whether the violence was committed with knowledge, as required by the Statute. This
means the perpetrator knew that the conduct was part of or intended to be part of a widespread or systematic
attack against a civilian population. However, this does not mean that the Court must find that the perpetrator
had knowledge of all the characteristics of the attack or the precise details of the plan or policy of the State or
organization.
In the Bashir case, the Court decided that the knowledge requirement was met. Findings to support that
conclusion included: (1) the attack against the above-mentioned part of the civilian population of Darfur
affected at least hundreds of thousands of individuals during a period of more than five years, and (2) numerous
UN reports, several Security Council resolutions and the Report of the UN Commission of Inquiry (UNCOI) all
referred to the existence of a widespread and systematic attack by GoS forces on the Fur, Masalit, and Zaghawa
population in Darfur.
Specific elements
Murder. Murder is defined as the killing of one or more persons in a widespread or systematic attack directed
against a civilian population and the perpetrator knew or intended that the conduct was part of an overall plan.
The Court acknowledged that there were reasonable grounds to believe that thousands of civilians belonging
primarily to the Fur, Masalit and Zaghawa groups were subject to acts of murder by GoS forces as part of an
ongoing counter-insurgency campaign of the State of Sudan that started after the April 2003 attacks on the El
Fasher airport.
Extermination. Extermination is defined as the widespread or systematic killing of one or more persons,
including by inflicting conditions to bring about the destruction of a part of the population, and the
perpetrator knew that the attacks were part of the plan. It differs from the crime against humanity of murder in
that murder only includes killing while extermination can also be perpetrated by imposing conditions that result
in the death of individuals. In addition, the Elements of Crimes require that the killings constitute “a mass
killing of members of a civilian population”. Accordingly, the Prosecutor submitted evidence on the killing of
over a thousand civilians by the GoS forces in the attack on the town of Kailek around March 4, 2004.
Furthermore, the materials provided by the prosecution also tended to show that GoS forces systematically
destroyed the means of survival including: (1) food, (2) shelter, (3) crops, (4) livestock, (5) wells and water
pumps. The reports of GoS forces contaminating water sources were not considered in the allegation of crimes
against humanity because the Majority did not consider the contamination of wells a core element of the
attacks. However, Judge Ušacka dissented with the Majority considering that the destruction of shelter and
access to water in Darfur’s hostile desert could reasonably be considered a systematic attempt to ensure that
those not killed in attacks would not survive.
As a consequence, the Court found that members of the Fur, Masalit, and Zaghawa groups were subject to
extermination as part of the counter-insurgency plan of the GoS.
Forcible Transfer. Forcible transfer requires the perpetrator deported or forcibly transferred one or more
persons to another State or location with knowledge of the illegality of such actions. The prosecution
A program of the United Nations Association of the United States of America
www.amicc.org
5. submitted that from March 2003 to July 14, 2008, GoS forces forcibly transferred up to 2.7 million civilians
from the Fur, Masalit and Zaghawa groups residing throughout Darfur. In addition, evidence suggests that the
GoS encouraged others to settle in the areas seized during the attacks. Based on this, the Court concluded that
members of the Fur, Masalit, and the Zaghawa groups were subject to forcible transfer from April 2003 to July
2008 by GoS forces.
Torture. Torture means the intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental,
upon a person in the custody or under the control of the accused. The prosecution’s evidence established that
from March 2003 to July 14, 2008, GoS forces tortured numerous civilians from the targeted groups in the
Darfur region. These acts of torture allegedly occurred directly after or during the attacks on the towns
conducted by the GoS. As a result, the Court found that the GoS forces tortured members of the Fur, Masalit
and Zaghawa tribes. However, the Majority did not conclude that mistreatment and torture took place in
established detention camps.
Rape. Rape includes sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, or any
other forms of sexual violence of comparable gravity. According to evidence provided by the Prosecutor, from
March 2003 to July 14, 2008, GoS forces raped thousands of women from the Fur, Masalit, and Zaghawa tribes
throughout the Darfur region. The UNCOI and other UN bodies and numerous NGOs, interviewed by the
prosecution, reported that from March 2003 thousands of women and girls were targeted by the GoS forces.
Gang rape was also a distinctive feature of sexual violence committed in Darfur. The Prosecutor asserted that
rape was used as a weapon and was a critical element in the attacks. Consequently, the Court found that women
of the Fur, Masalit, and Zaghawa groups were subject to rape from April 2003 to July 2008 as a result of the
conflict between the GoS and opposition groups in Darfur.
The Court concluded that GoS forces including the Sudanese Armed Forces, the Janjaweed, the Sudanese
Police Force, the NISS and the HAC committed crimes against humanity of murder, extermination, forcible
transfer, torture and rape throughout the Darfur region. The judges considered that Bashir, as head of state, was
in control of all branches of the “apparatus” of the GoS and used this control to secure the implementation of
the common plan. Therefore, it is reasonable that Bashir knew of acts committed by the “apparatus” and that he
may have ordered the commission of the acts himself. As a result, the Court included five counts of crimes
against humanity in the arrest warrant decision.
Genocide
In the arrest warrant application, the Prosecutor included three counts of genocide: genocide by killing,
genocide by causing serious bodily or mental harm, and genocide by deliberately inflicting conditions of life to
cause the destruction of a group. The Majority decision considered that genocidal intent, an important
requirement for proving the crime, was not the only reasonable conclusion to be drawn from the evidence
submitted. Thus, they concluded that the Prosecutor did not present sufficient evidence to prove the existence
of reasonable grounds to believe that the crime of genocide had been committed. However, one of the three
judges, Anita Ušacka, dissented because she believed that the prosecution had met the burden of the proof for
genocide required for this stage of the proceedings. She wrote that only at the trial phase it is necessary to
present evidence that allows the Court to reach a conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt. To obtain an arrest
A program of the United Nations Association of the United States of America
www.amicc.org
6. warrant, in her interpretation, all that is required is to establish sufficient grounds to believe than an allegation
is true.
Contextual elements
The contextual elements of genocide are the existence of a manifest pattern of similar conduct directed against
a specific national, ethnic, racial or religious group, in whole or in part. This means that there must be a
concrete and real threat to the existence of the whole group or part of it.
The Majority recognized there was a controversy in international law as to whether genocide requires
contextual elements. For this purpose, it concluded that the Elements of Crimes document supplementing the
Rome Statute settle the question by providing that this context can be shown by a manifest pattern of conduct to
destroy a specific group or part of it.
Judge Ušacka considered that the existence of a manifest pattern of behavior need not be determined by the
Chamber at this stage. However, were it to be determined, the Vienna Convention on the Law of the Treaties
provides that the plain meaning of this element refers to a systematic, clear pattern that the judge believed had
been proven by the evidence submitted.
Specific elements
The specific elements of the crime of genocide are the “intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national,
ethnical, racial or religious group, as such.” In order to analyze this aspect of genocide, three factors must be
distinguished: firstly, whether the victims belong to a particular national, ethnic, racial or religious group;
secondly, if Bashir acted with intent to destroy such a group in whole or in part; and finally if the group meets
these qualifications.
The Majority considered that the Fur, Masalit and Zaghawa tribes are all differentiated ethnic groups because
they have their own language, tribal customs and traditional links. Therefore the first factor of the specific
element is met. However, the judges suggested that the Prosecutor should have claimed three counts of
genocide, one for each ethnic group, rather than one for all three. Judge Ušacka, in her separate and dissenting
opinion, pointed out that these tribes where perceived and targeted as one entity, the “African tribes”, distinct
from the “Arabs” and thus they constitute a protected group.
The key element of genocide is intent, but it is also the most difficult to prove because it often requires proof
by inference. Indeed, the prosecution acknowledged that it did not have direct evidence and that the allegations
were exclusively based on inferences from facts. The prosecution submitted various sets of evidence from
which intent could be deduced, such as public documents and official statements. Nevertheless, the Majority
found that there could be other possible reasons for the adoption of certain measures by the government,
considering that there was an ongoing armed conflict. Thus, the Chamber found that there was nothing
unlawful in a government coordinating its different levels of government, the military, the police, the
intelligence services and the civil administration as a counter-insurgency campaign. The Court found the
attacks were unlawful because they were carried out against civilian population. Furthermore, the claims of the
GoS that the attacks on the civilian population were justified because they were in close support of the rebels
were not legitimate.
A program of the United Nations Association of the United States of America
www.amicc.org
7. Moreover, the Majority considered it necessary to differentiate between the intent of the GoS and the intent of
President Bashir because there was a shared control of the “apparatus” of the GoS. As to the Government’s
intent, the Majority ruled that there were reasonable grounds to believe that a core component of the
counterinsurgency campaign was the unlawful, widespread and systematic attack on part of the civilian
population. These acts of violence indicate that crimes against humanity and war crimes may have been
committed but they do not automatically lead to intent to destroy a specific group. In addition, the Chamber
concluded that genocidal intent was not the only reasonable conclusion that could be drawn from the evidence
and, thus, that the materials provided by the prosecution failed to provide reasonable grounds to establish the
specific intent. However, Judge Ušacka disagreed with the Majority because she considered that the conclusion
beyond reasonable doubt must only be required at the trial phase and not at the issuance of the warrant stage.
Moreover, she asserted that such intent could be concluded from the fact that, although the Sudanese
government had allegedly denied and hindered the delivery of medical and humanitarian assistance which were
necessary to survive in the camps by claiming the danger of armed conflict so required, the government in fact
obstructed NGO access even in safe areas, including by enforcement of a 2006 law limiting NGO activities.
In reference to Bashir’s individual criminal responsibility, the Majority found that the mental element required
for genocidal intent was not fulfilled. While Article 30 of the Rome Statute requires that the crimes under the
Court’s jurisdiction are committed with intent and knowledge, the Elements of Crimes go further to require that
genocidal intent be decided by the Court on a case-by-case basis.
In her dissenting opinion, Judge Ušacka disagreed with the Majority when considering that Bashir’s awareness
of the commission of the crimes amounted to crimes against humanity but not genocide. She highlighted that
the specific intent for genocide is distinct from the specific intent of the crime against humanity of persecution.
According to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), when persecution escalates to the form of willful and
deliberate acts designed to destroy a group or part of it, it can amount to genocide. Moreover, this difference
becomes relevant to distinguish between genocide and ethnic cleansing. The ICJ pointed out that the
displacement of a group, even by force, is not necessarily equivalent to the destruction of that group. Therefore,
ethnic cleansing may result in genocide only if there was a specific intent to destroy the group rather than to
only displace it.
In addition, Judge Ušacka pointed out that forcible transfer alone could constitute genocidal intent when the
transfer is conducted in such a way that the group can no longer reconstitute itself. She added that genocidal
intent does not require the physical destruction of the group. Therefore, she concluded that although the large
majority of inhabitants were neither killed nor injured, a vast majority of the civilians were forced to flee and
subject to dreadful conditions which risked their survival. Moreover, her dissenting opinion determined that
there can be various means employed in the course of implementing genocide. Finally, she emphasized that at
the arrest warrant stage, the burden of proof should be lower and thus it is for a future trial chamber to consider
whether forcible transfer falls within those acts which constitute genocide.
The Majority decision also highlighted that there was a considerable difference between the Prosecutor’s
Application and the materials submitted to support it. Nevertheless, Judge Ušacka argued that the conditions
since 2005 had changed. She considered that it was irrelevant that the Prosecutor had not included the existence
A program of the United Nations Association of the United States of America
www.amicc.org
8. of detention camps in the Application or that he had not alleged genocide in the case against Ahmad Harun,
former Minister of State for the Interior of the GoS and current Minister of State for Humanitarian Affairs.
The last component of the specific elements of genocide is the consideration of the group “as such”. This
means that the perpetrated acts put at risk the viability of the targeted group. However, it does not only rely on
the number of persons affected. The jurisprudence of the ad hoc tribunals for Rwanda and the former
Yugoslavia has established that other factors must be considered, such as the proportion and the prominence of
the targeted group in relation to the protected group as a whole, as well as the area under the control of the
perpetrator. Judge Ušacka pointed out that 97% of the Fur tribes and 85% Masalit people that lived within
Bashir’s area of control were attacked.
The Majority concluded that the evidence submitted by the prosecution amounted to war crimes and crimes
against humanity, but there were insufficient reasonable grounds to believe that genocide had been committed.
However, if the prosecution was to submit additional evidence, it could seek to include genocide. In her
dissenting opinion, Judge Ušacka considered that the standard of proof established with respect to the inference
of intent for the issuance of a warrant of arrest should be lower that the one required for trial and, thus, that
genocide should be included within the charges against Bashir.
Prosecution’s application for leave to appeal the inclusion of genocide in the arrest warrant
On March 10, 2009, further to the Majority’s decision, the prosecution submitted an application for permission
to ask the Appeals Chamber to establish whether the charge of genocide should be included or not. On June 24,
2009, Pre-Trial Chamber I issued a decision on the application, allowing the Prosecutor to appeal one of three
issues to the Appeals Chamber. This is whether the Pre-Trial Chamber used the correct standard of proof in
examining the prosecution’s evidence on genocide.
The prosecution argued in its application that article 58 of the Rome Statute does not require that genocidal
intent be the only reasonable inference drawn from the evidence, as interpreted by the Court. Thus, by
increasing the standard of proof at this stage of the proceedings, different factors were put at risk. Firstly, if the
Prosecutor is to provide more evidence, this would require longer investigations that would prolong the
proceedings unnecessarily. Furthermore, if the new evidence was evaluated under the same standard it would
probably not reach the threshold imposed by the Chamber to determine genocide was committed. Moreover,
Pre-Trial Chambers would also have to invest more time to analyze all of the evidence. In addition, if the
burden of proof required at the arrest warrant phase is the same one that the trial phase one, then the
defendant’s rights would be violated. Whereas at trial the defendant is given the opportunity to be heard, to test
the evidence presented by the prosecution, and to present his own evidence in rebuttal, such an opportunity is
not given at the warrant stage. Thus, the principle of fair trial would not be observed. Furthermore, the higher
standard of proof could set a precedent and establish a restriction for future cases. Finally, the Prosecutor also
argued that his authority to conduct investigations was damaged by the Court’s decision. He considered that if
the evidence submitted was analyzed separately and correctly by the Majority, the Chamber would find that the
requirements for the proof by inference of Article 58 of the Rome Statute had been met.
A program of the United Nations Association of the United States of America
www.amicc.org
9. Explanation of Pre-Trial Chamber I’s decision on the Prosecutor’s application for leave to appeal
Article 58 of the Rome Statute states that to issue an arrest warrant the Prosecutor must submit evidence
sufficient to make it reasonable to believe that a crime was committed within the jurisdiction of the Court and
that the person named committed the crime. The “reasonableness standard” is not unique to the ICC. Indeed, it
is used by US courts as well. An application for an arrest warrant both at the ICC and in the US is not a request
to determine guilt or innocence. Instead, it is a presentation of evidence to determine whether it is reasonable to
believe that the suspect committed the crime alleged. There is no determination of guilt or innocence at the pre-
trial phase; at trial, a defendant is presumed innocent and the Prosecutor must prove his or her guilt beyond a
reasonable doubt.
Here, the Pre-Trial Chamber found insufficient evidence because, according to the Prosecutor, it wanted
enough evidence to make the Prosecutor’s allegations the only reasonable outcome, the correct standard of
proof at trial. Since at the pre-trial phase the Prosecutor is not arguing the merits of the case, the Appeals
Chamber will now have to determine whether the standard of proof used by Pre-Trial Chamber to examine the
Prosecutor’s evidence on genocide was correct instead.
The Pre-Trial Chamber dismissed for appeal two other issues raised in the Prosecutor’s application because in
its view the Appeals Chamber only resolves questions of law. Under Article 82 of the Rome Statute, a party
may appeal an issue only when its resolution significantly affects the fair and speedy conduct of the
proceedings or the outcome of the trial. In addition, the Chamber permitting the appeal must agree that the
immediate resolution of this issue by the Appeals Chamber may advance the proceedings. The Majority’s
assessment of the Prosecutor’s evidence on genocide is, according to the Pre-Trial Chamber, a simple
disagreement between the Prosecutor and the judges. However, if the Chamber used a standard of proof which
is incorrect for this phase of the proceedings, then the law was applied wrongly and the Appeals Chamber
would correct the error in order to ensure the fairness of the proceedings and the legitimacy of the Court.
This ruling should not be viewed as ineffectiveness of the ICC or the failure of the Prosecutor to comply with
his mandate. The appeal of pre-trial rulings is a common practice at the ICC and in US domestic courts. There
are many steps between arrest and trial that are equally important. This decision shows that the ICC is
functioning effectively and as intended under its rules of procedure and evidence.
The next step is for the Appeals Chamber to determine whether the Pre-Trial Chamber used the correct standard
of proof to at the arrest warrant stage and, thus, if this charge should be included in the arrest warrant.
Mode of Liability
The Chamber decided that there was sufficient evidence to issue an arrest warrant for Bashir based on two
counts of war crimes and five counts of crimes against humanity. The Majority considered he should be held
accountable as a co-perpetrator because he shared control with other members of the Government of Sudan in
carrying out an unlawful counter-insurgency campaign that resulted in the killing of civilians. However, Judge
Ušacka concluded that it is unclear if President Bashir shared power with others and thus he should be held
accountable as an indirect perpetrator.
A program of the United Nations Association of the United States of America
www.amicc.org
10. Execution of the Warrant
The Pre-Trial Chamber is the competent organ to issue and amend the arrest warrant and to make and transmit
the cooperation requests for arrest and surrender of Bashir to the Sudanese authorities and to all the State
Parties. Moreover, the Pre-Trial Chamber is also responsible for following up of the execution of cooperation
requests.
Although Sudan is not party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, according to Pre-Trial
Chamber it has an obligation to fully cooperate and provide any necessary assistance pursuant to Security
Council Resolution 1593 by which the case was referred to the Court. In addition, under articles 24(1) and 25 of
the UN Charter, all UN Member States agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council.
Even if there were a conflict between the Rome Statute or any other international agreement and the UN
Charter, the latter would prevail. Therefore, if Sudan continues to fail to comply with its cooperation obligation,
the Security Council may order the interruption of Sudan’s economic and diplomatic relations and their means
of communication and other sanctions.
Finally, the prosecution was also requested inform to the Court about any potential risks that the transmission
of the cooperation requests for the arrest and surrender may cause to victims and witnesses, as well as to give
the Court all the information that may facilitate the speedy execution of the arrest warrant by the Sudanese
authorities.
Conclusion
The Court considered that the requirements to issue an arrest warrant were met because there are sufficient
grounds to believe that Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, President of Sudan, is individually responsible for
crimes against humanity and war crimes. Additionally, his arrest is necessary to ensure that he does not
endanger or obstruct the proceedings nor he continues to commit crimes. This is the first time that the ICC has
issued a warrant of arrest for a sitting head of state. In issuing the warrant, the Court is functioning as a judicial
institution in accordance with the Rome Statute. At this time Bashir is still at large and the Court has called on
all State Parties and on the authorities of Sudan to cooperate in the execution of the warrant.
Researched and drafted by Lucia DiCicco and Ana Gómez Rojo
Updated July 1, 2009
A program of the United Nations Association of the United States of America
www.amicc.org