Resources
Sunday, July 3, 2022
  • Login
Journalists for Justice
No Result
View All Result

Browse by Topic:

  • Home
  • Communities of Justice
  • Opinion & Analysis
  • Human Rights
  • Elections
  • About US
  • Our Work
  • Careers
No Result
View All Result
Journalists for Justice
  • Home
  • Communities of Justice
  • Opinion & Analysis
  • Human Rights
  • Elections
  • About US
  • Our Work
  • Careers
No Result
View All Result
Journalists for Justice
No Result
View All Result
Home Opinion

Afghan war crime victims appeal to reverse ICC judges’ decision

Journalists For JusticebyJournalists For Justice
August 14, 2019
in Opinion
Reading Time: 4 mins read
A A
0
Race to succeed Bensouda begins as clock ticks to her exit

On 7 and 8 October 2014 at 10:00 (The Hague local time), Trial Chamber V(b) of the International Criminal Court (ICC) held two status conferences in the case The Prosecutor v. Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta at the seat of the Court in The Hague (Netherlands). The hearings were held to discuss the status of cooperation between the Prosecution and the Kenyan Government and issues raised in the Prosecution's Notice of 5 September 2014, respectively. The status conferences was held before Trial Chamber V(b) composed of Judge Kuniko Ozaki (Presiding), Judge Robert Fremr, and Judge Geoffrey A. Henderson, in the presence of the Prosecution, the Defence and the Legal Representative of Victims. A Representative of the Kenyan Government was invited to attend the first status conference and Mr Kenyatta was required to be present at the second status conference. Pictured here: Fergal Gaynor, Legal Representative of the Victims

Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Eighty-two Afghan victims have appealed a recent decision by judges of the International Criminal Court that denied the ICC Prosecutor authorisation to open an investigation into crimes committed in Afghanistan over the past 15 years. It is the first time that the ICC Prosecutor has been denied authorisation to open an investigation, and the first time that victims have asked the ICC Appeals Chamber to authorize the commencement of an investigation. For the victims, the stakes could not be higher. They argued that the decision brought their quest for justice to an end – before the investigation had even begun – and was exceptionally detrimental to their well-recognised rights to truth, justice and reparation.

The victims submitted a notice of appeal to the Appeals Chamber as well as a request for leave to appeal to Pre-Trial Chamber II of the Court. The ICC Prosecutor has also filed a request for leave to appeal to the Pre-Trial Chamber.

The 82 appellants are victims of gruesome crimes involving anti-government groups such as the Taliban, as well as Afghan government forces, and United States forces. Afghanistan has endured violent conflict for more than 35 years. The United Nations has reported that more than 32,000 civilians were killed in the conflict between 2009 and 2018 alone, and that ‘more civilians were killed in the Afghan conflict last year than at any time since records have been kept’. An ICC investigation, therefore, might at least deter these abhorrent crimes against civilians.

In 2017, the ICC Prosecutor determined that she had reached a reasonable basis to believe that war crimes and crimes against humanity had been committed against Afghanis. The crimes include murder, torture, rape and sexual violence. The Prosecutor said that “[n]ear total impunity has been the rule, not the exception”. ICC judges agreed that the relevant states were unwilling or unable to investigate and prosecute at a national level.

From the time that the Prosecutor requested permission from ICC judges to open an investigation, the court received 699 representation forms on behalf of 6,220 individuals, 1,690 families, several million victims including 26 villages, and one institution. In 680 of the 699 representations, the victims welcomed the prospect of an investigation.

RelatedStories

Selective approach to TRRC recommendations a sure recipe for defeating justice

COP26 failed to deliver, so ICC and ICJ the next stop for seekers of climate justice

Adama Barrow’s fight for political survival threatens Jammeh victims’ quest for justice

After deliberating for almost three years, ICC judges ruled in April 2019 that, even though the crimes against the victims are of appalling gravity, the situation is admissible, and the court has jurisdiction, the investigation could not begin as it was “not feasible and doomed to failure”. The judges pointed to the “scarce cooperation” obtained by the Prosecutor from various authorities during the preliminary examination and expressed doubt “that both relevant evidence and potential relevant suspects might still be available and within the reach” of the Prosecutor. The judges did not refer to specific incidents of non-cooperation.

Crimes allegedly committed by US personnel constitute a small slice of the total crimes under consideration, but attract most of the publicity. The decision not to begin an investigation in Afghanistan was issued shortly after expressions of hostility against the court by the US. The US revoked its visa issued to the ICC Prosecutor in April 2019. This followed threats by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo that ICC staff would be restricted from entering the country. “We’re prepared to take additional steps, including economic sanctions, if the ICC does not change its course,” Pompeo added.

An appeal gives the ICC Appeals Chamber an opportunity to reverse the decision and grant the Prosecutor permission to open an investigation. At the investigation and prosecution stages, states that are party to the ICC Statute, including European states involved in rendition cases connected to the Afghanistan conflict, have a duty to cooperate with the court. The court deals exclusively with crimes of the utmost seriousness — genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and aggression — that inevitably take place in great turmoil. Post-conflict environments are typically unconducive to investigation. But international justice has a long memory, and detailed investigations carried out over years lead to results before international and hybrid (partly international) courts. The convictions of former Bosnian Serb President Radovan Karadzic, former Liberian president Charles Taylor, and former Khmer Rouge leaders Nuon Chea and Khieu Samphan, many years after their crimes, remind us that it is possible and worthwhile to pursue war criminals long after the pursuit might be deemed unfeasible and doomed to failure.

*The writers are the legal representatives of the 82 victims at the International Criminal Court

Previous Post

Victims’ attempt to ‘save’ Afghan investigation leads to conundrum

Next Post

Bill Pace, lion of ICC civil society coalition, leaves convenor post

Journalists For Justice

Journalists For Justice

Related Posts

Gambian Justice Minister Dawda Jallow released the Government White Paper on the Report of the Truth, Justice and Reparations Commision on May 25, 2022. Photo credit: Facebook

Selective approach to TRRC recommendations a sure recipe for defeating justice

June 2, 2022
Empty seats in one of the two big plenary halls (accessible only via limited badges and special tickets for NGO observers) on Day 2. (Credit: Shirleen Chin)

COP26 failed to deliver, so ICC and ICJ the next stop for seekers of climate justice

December 2, 2021
Gambia's president, Adama Barrow. Photo: Twitter @BarrowPresident

Adama Barrow’s fight for political survival threatens Jammeh victims’ quest for justice

September 24, 2021
As new ICC Prosecutor prepares to take office, it’s time to reform the selection process

As new ICC Prosecutor prepares to take office, it’s time to reform the selection process

May 17, 2021
Kenyan activist Edwin Mutemi wa Kiama at the Milimani Law Courts in Nairobi on Wednesday, April 7, 2021. Kiama had been arrested for publishing infographics alleged to be ridiculing President Uhuru Kenyatta and joining the #IMFStopLoaningKenya conversation on Twitter. Photo credit: Edwin Mutemi wa Kiama

Kenyan government using repressive cybercrime law to stifle dissent

April 19, 2021
The International Criminal Court (ICC) states parties convene at the World Forum Convention Center in The Hague from December 5-12, 2018, for the 17th session of the Assembly of state parties Credit: The ASP Flickr account

States must take the time to choose the right ICC Prosecutor

February 11, 2021
Next Post
Bill Pace, lion of ICC civil society coalition, leaves convenor post

Bill Pace, lion of ICC civil society coalition, leaves convenor post

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Login
Notify of
Please login to comment
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
No Result
View All Result

Recent Posts

  • 20 years of the ICC: The hopes, the disappointments, the future
  • Judge to decide Gicheru’s fate after parties conclude case
  • From Kyiv to Kabul and Darfur: Challenges of reporting justice and human rights
  • Gicheru to attend court session remotely
  • After euphoria of state white paper, victims now demand action on Jammeh

Recent Comments

  • JFJ - Journalists for Justice on Kenyan lawyer denies bribery charges at the ICC
  • JFJ - Journalists for Justice on You did me wrong, Bemba tells ICC as he demands 70 million euros
  • JFJ - Journalists for Justice on Two victims’ lawyers in Kenyatta case in line to become next ICC prosecutor
  • JFJ - Journalists for Justice on Profiles of the four people shortlisted for the job of ICC Prosecutor
  • Write My Essay on Afghanistan case fails to take off at the ICC — pragmatism’ or surrender to the powerful?

Archives

Categories

JFJ – Journalists for Justice

We call out impunity wherever it occurs; we advocate justice for all victims of atrocity crimes; and we work with people of goodwill everywhere who share our values.

Browse by Topics:

Archives by Month:

Never Again
INTAHE
BarometreVerite
The Victims' Bantaba
No Result
View All Result
  • Confronting Impunity
  • Communities of Justice
  • Opinion
  • About US
  • Our Work
  • Login

Copyright © 2019. Journalists for Justice has asserted its right to be recognized as creators and owners of the content here. Reproduction in part or in whole is permitted on condition that JFJ is acknowledged and notified.

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In
wpDiscuz