ICC Prosecutor presents first two indictments for crimes committed in Darfur

By Jernej Letnar

Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court Luis Moreno-Ocampo has today released the ICC's first two indictments arising out of its investigation of war crimes in the Darfur region of Sudan. That evidence is showing that Ahmad Muhammad Harun, former Minister of State for the Interior of the Government of the Sudan, and Ali Kushayb, a leader of the Militia/Janjaweed, jointly committed crimes against the civilian population in Darfur. Indictments allege that Harun and Kushayb bear criminal responsibility in relation to 51 counts of alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes and it also suggests shows they acted together, and with others, with the common purpose of carrying out attacks against the civilian population. You may read press release here.

Comments

Ole Windahl Pedersen said…
Without question the two indictments represent an important first step for the ICC. However, given the Court's complementary jurisdiction and the unimpressive "promise" of the Sudanese government to trial alleged perpetrators itself will most likely limit the immediate impact of the indictments. This is unfortunate, but should not in any way deter the Chief Prosecutor and his team from bringing cases against the rest of the persons on Professor Cassese's list of alleged war criminals.
28 February 2007 at 12:14
Unknown said…
Please correct me if I am wrong, but it does not appear as if Moreno-Ocampo indicted the two. Rather it appears like he made some allegations of serious crimes. This is much different than an indictment is it not?

What will happen if Sudan refuses to hand over the defendants? The ICC has a difficult time on it's hands just securing the custody of the defendants, let alone conducting a prosecution. It seems like indictments weren't handed down so as to allow the UN to put some Peace-Keeping troops in Darfur. From a pragmatic standpoint, I think it would make more sense to end the bloodshed and atrocities first, and then focus on potential prosecutions. I suppose the two could work hand in hand though.
1 March 2007 at 13:27
Jernej Letnar said…
Most of answers to your points can be found in the Statute of the International Criminal Court. The complementary jurisdiction does not play any role in this case, since situation in Darfur has been referred to the ICC Prosecutor by the Security Council acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations under Article 13 (b) of ICC Statute.

The Pre-Trial Chamber of the ICC will now review the evidence. If the judges determine that there are reasonable grounds to believe that two named individuals committed the alleged crimes, they will decide on the best manner to ensure their appearance in court.

Maybe it would make sense to end the bloodshed and atrocities first, but international community, including United States, does not care enough to stop the massacre. Politicians and majority of people are more concerned with who will win Premiership or qualify for NBA playoffs.
1 March 2007 at 19:48
Anonymous said…
Dear all, with all respect, but one of the recent Society meetings with "Hotel Rwanda" movie shows, that we are not actually much more better than those who care more about NHL, NBA, NFL, MBL and whatever else league's winner in the US. My opinion then and now is that the Society should have made a real discussion about the current situation in Darfur that time rather than to watch some Hollywood movie. That is my little critique towards Legal Research society :) As a conclusion - maybe an article in the recent Economist's issue (online version - Middle East & Africa block) would be of interest for you.
1 March 2007 at 22:08
Jernej Letnar said…
Martins,

you can freely speak for yourself but
try to get objective picture before you make any comments or even critique. We had a fruitful discussion about international criminal justice after the movie the other week which however some people omitted.
1 March 2007 at 22:30
Unknown said…
Martins I can see your point about showing the movie, and perhaps it might have been better to just have a substantive discussion. I was not able to attend, so I don't know how the discussion went, but I think if my learned colleague Jernej was there, it must have been worthwile. I don't think you can label "Hotel Rwanda" hollywood fluff either, as the story was about a real individual.

To have a more detailed discussion, we need somebody to do the research and come up with a program. If you would like to lead a discussion on this, or any other topic, I think we would all really enjoy it.

What about the indictment question I raised though? I read in the LA Times that these aren't indictments, but merely allegations. There's a common saying, "a prosecutor could indict a ham sandwich if he wanted". I'm just wondering how high the bar is for an indictment.

I think the ICC has a big job on its hands, especially without the support of the US. Could the ICC be risking a big hit to its credibility if it does not succeed here with such an obvious case of atrocities?
2 March 2007 at 09:11
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Constitutional Right to Female Sexual Pleasure?

By
Although a right to “sexual pleasure” usually does not fare among traditional rights enshrined in constitutions, such a right was nevertheless proposed by a female member of the Ecuadorian parliament when debating a forthcoming new constitution. Reuters report that the idea behind the proposal was to facilitate gender equality and to avoid sexual violence. Ultimately, however, and in spite of this noble cause, the proposal failed.
Read more

Movie: HOT FUZZ

By
Image
On Wed, 7 th October at 7pm in Taylor A19 the Legal Research Society will present its first movie night of this academic year with a screening of the film HOT FUZZ, a British action comedy with a huge portion of irony and black humour about the bigotry, hypocrisy and intrigues set in an (superficially) idyllic small town in Britain… Synopsis Sgt Nicholas Angel (Simon Pegg) is a fiercely motivated and successful London copper who finds himself transferred to the sleepy town of Sandford . Almost everyone in this manicured little community seems to know and love each other. But if Sandford is a sleepy market town, it is home to some very real nightmares. Not that local coppers like loveable oaf Danny Butterman (Nick Frost) see anything suspicious about Sandford's absurd number of 'accidents'. Angel is no ordinary constable and launches an investigation, much to the amusement of his bumbling boss and his colleagues. Critics “Refreshingly British come
Read more

Head of State: Legal Debat About The UK's Election. Legal Research Society. 22 April 2010

By
Image
Head of State: Legal Discussion About The UK Election. Legal Research Society. 22 April 2010 There is a general feeling that the recent debate in Britain between the main party leaders was rather staid compared to the more theatrical style of the U.S Presidential debate on which it was modelled. Perhaps the British electorate would prefer the plain-spoken, tell-it-like-it-is politics of Chris Rock's prescient spoof of the U.S Presidential election. "Head of State" starts Chris Rock as an unlikely democratic for the presidency of the United State, who goes on to win over the electorate by shunning the political point-scoring and spin employed by other candidates and speaking forthrightly about issues that really concern people. Could such a tactic work for the political underdog in Britain. The screening of this sassy political satire was followed by a discussion of the recent and the forthcoming political debate in Britain, as well as the General Election that w
Read more