• About US
  • Our Work
Friday, June 20, 2025
  • Login
Journalists For Justice (JFJ)
  • Home
  • Communities of Justice
  • Opinion & Analysis
  • Human Rights
  • Elections
  • About US
  • Our Work
  • Careers
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Communities of Justice
  • Opinion & Analysis
  • Human Rights
  • Elections
  • About US
  • Our Work
  • Careers
No Result
View All Result
Journalists For Justice (JFJ)
No Result
View All Result

United Nations Security Council must pay for ICC investigations, says lawyer

byThomas Verfuss
June 2, 2021
in ICC Cases
Reading Time: 3 mins read
27
A A
United Nations Security Council must pay for ICC investigations, says lawyer

UNSC, takes major political decisions, wants work done, but doesn't pay. Photo credit: United Nations flickr account

8
SHARES
94
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Whatsapp

By Thomas Verfuss in The Hague

The United Nations Security Council must pay for the investigations and prosecutions it asks the International Criminal Court to undertake, a defence counsel has said.

Cyril Laucci, lead defence counsel for Sudanese war crimes suspect Ali Muhammad Ali Abd-Al-Rahman, stressed this before the judges of an ICC pre-trial chamber during his client’s confirmation of charges hearing that started on Monday May 24, 2021.

This is an old debate. The 123 states parties to the Rome Statute, the founding treaty of the court, fund the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague. In exchange, they can ask the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICC to investigate and prosecute crimes under the jurisdiction of the court for free – much like in a national system, in which taxpayers and other citizens can report crimes they have been victims of or have witnessed without being required to pay anything.

RelatedPosts

Dilemma of ICC-wanted Netanyahu’s visit high on the agenda of new leadership in Germany

Impunity continues to rob Sudanese victims of peace and justice

Rodrigo Duterte arrest heralds hope for justice for Philippines’ victims of ‘war on drugs’

There is another mechanism the jurisdiction of the court can be based upon: The United Nations Security Council (UNSC), based in New York, can ask the ICC to investigate a situation it “refers” to the court. This can happen when the council notes that there is a threat to peace and security in the world. This is a political evaluation and decision under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations.

Such political decisions can also be taken by “superpowers” like the United States of America (USA), China, and Russia, which are not parties to the Rome Statute and thus don’t pay for the ICC’s work.

This stems from the first UNSC referral, when France and the United Kingdom lobbied the council to refer the situation in the Sudanese region of Darfur to the ICC. At the time, it was considered a big success for French and British diplomacy because successive US administrations had been hostile to the ICC. It was considered a great achievement because the government in Washington DC could be convinced not to use its UNSC veto to block a resolution that could strengthen the reputation of the ICC.

But there was a price to pay. The resolution contains two “foul compromises”: The UNSC does not pay for the ICC work it asked for, and only the government of Sudan and the parties to the Darfur conflict have to cooperate with the ICC on the matter – not the USA, which one day might wish to bomb Sudan again, as it did in 1998, in retaliation for the bombing of the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.

The UNSC referral of the Darfur (Sudan) situation was adopted years ago, in 2005, in a particular geopolitical and diplomatic situation. However, this decision has been perpetuated for years now, and the same “non-payment model” was adopted in 2011 when the UNSC referred a second “situation” to the ICC – Libya during the Arab Spring.

Furthermore, the ICC is always short of money. Every year, at the annual session of the Assembly of States Parties, there is prolonged debate about the court’s budget. That is why some diplomats have for years been saying that the pro bono (free) work of the ICC must end: that the UNSC must pay its dues.

Share3Tweet2Send
Previous Post

The International Criminal Court opens the confirmation of charges hearing in the Abd-Al-Rahman case

Next Post

Pre-trial hearing sets stage for next phase of Abd-Al-Rahman case

Next Post
ICC Pre-Trial Chamber II during the confirmation of charges hearing at the seat of the Court in The Hague (The Netherlands) on 24, 25 and 26 May 2021. Photo credit: ICC-CPI

Pre-trial hearing sets stage for next phase of Abd-Al-Rahman case

Please login to join discussion

Recent Posts

  • Freedom and human rights under siege in Africa amid rising repression
  • International lenders called out on ballooning debt and corruption in poor countries
  • Karim Khan’s Accusations of Misconduct: A Timeline of Key Events
  • Karim Khan’s exit deals another blow to the troubled ICC
  • Proposed war crimes court holds hope for justice and accountability in Liberia

About

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.

Twitter Facebook Instagram LinkedIn

Archives by Month:

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

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.