Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Status of Victims Under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Victims of International Crimes: An Interdisciplinary Discourse

Abstract

This chapter analysis the three traditional foci of victim status under international criminal law: participation, protection, and reparation. Whereas, both the ICTY and ICTR statutes largely ignored victim issues, the Rome Statute of the ICC specifically addresses the interests of victims in cases against their persecutors. However, as a new body with little experience to draw upon, the process of bringing victims into the proceedings in a meaningful way is still under development. As a threshold matter, a person must meet the definition of “victim” under Rule 85 RPE ICC before they can qualify to participate. The author explores the parameters of “victimhood” by placing the definition in a variety of contexts—especially with respect to other rights and obligations victims may have under the Rome Statute. Victim safety is also addressed as well as the new Victim and Witness Unit within the ICC bureaucracy. With respect to reparations for victims, the author considers the options of restitution, compensation, and rehabilitation. To date the Trust Fund for Victims has not resolved key operational questions on reparations concerning the seizure and management of defendant assets, investment, return upon acquittal, and disbursement to qualified victims upon conviction.

“Vic/tim” 2(a)(1) : One that is injured, destroyed, or sacrificed…. (2): one that is subjected to oppression, hardship, or mistreatment… (Merrium Webster Dictionary (2012), Encyclopædia Brittanica.)

The author is Professor of Law and Associate Dean for Faculty Research & International Programs, Creighton University School of Law. B.A., J.D., Indiana University; LL.M., Georgetown University. The author wishes to thank his research assistant, Kathleen Pitts, for her diligent efforts in the research, preparation and initial drafting of this article.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Kaoutzanis 2010, p. 116.

  2. 2.

    Trumbull IV 2008, p. 788.

  3. 3.

    Id.

  4. 4.

    Id. at p. 791.

  5. 5.

    SaCouto and Cleary 2008, p. 83.

  6. 6.

    Rule 85(a); Rule 85(b).

  7. 7.

    Kaoutzanis 2010, p. 119.

  8. 8.

    Id.

  9. 9.

    Id.

  10. 10.

    Id. at p. 120.

  11. 11.

    Id. at p. 121.

  12. 12.

    Id.

  13. 13.

    Id.

  14. 14.

    Id., ICC Prosecutor v Muthaura et al., PTC, ICC-01/09-02/11-267, 26 August 2011, Decision on Victims’ Participation at the Confirmation of Charges Hearing and in the Related Proceedings, para 64.

  15. 15.

    Kaoutzanis, supra note 5; ICC Prosecutor v Muthaura et al., PTC, ICC-01/09-02/11-267, 26 August 2011, Decision on Victims’ Participation at the Confirmation of Charges Hearing and in the Related Proceedings, para 60; ICC Prosecutor v Lubanga, AC, ICC-01/04-01/06-1432 OA 9 OA 10, 11 July 2008, Judgment on the appeals of The Prosecutor and The Defence against Trial Chamber I’s Decision on Victims’ Participation of 18 January 2008, para 62.

  16. 16.

    Kaoutzanis, supra note 5, at p. 122; ICC Situation in Uganda, PTC, ICC-02/04-101, 10 August 2007, Decision on victims’ applications for participation a/0010/06, a/0064/06 to a/0070/06, a/0081/06 to a/0104/06 and a/0111/06 to a/0127/06, paras 13, 14; Bemba, ICC-01/05-01/08-320, PTC III, para 75; Kony et al. ICC-02/04-01/05-252, para 14.

  17. 17.

    Rule 89; ICC Prosecutor v Bemba, PTC, ICC-01/05-01/08-320, 12 December 2008, Fourth Decision on Victims’ Participation, paras 31, 75.

  18. 18.

    Kaoutzanis 2010, p. 128.

  19. 19.

    ICC Prosecutor v Bemba, TC, ICC-01/05-01/08-1590-Corr, 21 July 2011, Decision on 47 applications by victims to participate in the proceedings.

  20. 20.

    Id. at pp. 131–133.

  21. 21.

    Id. at pp. 133, 134.

  22. 22.

    Id. at p. 135.

  23. 23.

    ICC Prosecutor v Bemba, PTC, ICC-01/05-01/08-320, 12 December 2008, Fourth Decision on Victims’ Participation, para 53; ICC Prosecutor v Lubanga, TC, ICC-01/04-01/06-1119, 18 January 2008, Decision on victims’ participation, para 89.

  24. 24.

    Rule 90(1).

  25. 25.

    Rule 90(2).

  26. 26.

    Rule 90(4).

  27. 27.

    Rule 91(2).

  28. 28.

    Rule 91(3); Rule 91(4).

  29. 29.

    Rule 92(2); ICC Prosecutor v Muthaura et al., PTC, ICC-01/09-02/11-23, 30 March 2011, First Decision on Victims’ Participation in the Case, para 23; ICC Prosecutor v Lubanga, TC, ICC-01/04-01/06-1211, 6 March 2008, paras 30–41; ICC Prosecutor v Banda and Jerbo, TC, ICC-02/05-03/09-231-Corr, 3 January 2012, Request for extension of time to submit complete applications, para 28.

  30. 30.

    Rule 93.

  31. 31.

    Reg. of the Court, 81.

  32. 32.

    International Criminal Court 2010, pp. 4–6.

  33. 33.

    ICC Prosecutor v Muthaura et al., PTC, ICC-01/09-02/11-23, 30 March 2011, First Decision on Victims’ Participation in the Case, para 23; see also as to the role of the Office, ICC Prosecutor v Lubanga, TC, ICC-01/04-01/06-1211, 6 March 2008, paras 30–41; ICC Prosecutor v Banda and Jerbo, TC, ICC-02/05-03/09-231-Corr, 3 January 2012, Request for extension of time to submit complete applications, para 28.

  34. 34.

    Trumbull 2008, pp. 793, 794.

  35. 35.

    Pena 2010, p. 504.

  36. 36.

    Trumbull 2008, p. 794.

  37. 37.

    Id.

  38. 38.

    Early court decision, see ICC Prosecutor v Lubanga, ICC-01/04-01/06-925 OA 8, 13 June 2007, Decision of the Appeals Chamber on the Joint Application of Victims a/0001/06 to a/0003/06 and a/0105/06 concerning the “Directions and Decision of the Appeals Chamber” of 2 February 2007¸ICC Prosecutor v Lubanga, ICC-01/04-01/06-925 OA 8, 13 June 2007, Decision of the Appeals Chamber on the Joint Application of Victims a/0001/06 to a/0003/06 and a/0105/06 concerning the “Directions and Decision of the Appeals Chamber” of 2 February 2007, Judge Song’s separate opinion, p. 28, para 18; ICC Prosecutor v Katanga and Chui, PTC, ICC-01/04-01/07-474, 13 May 2008, Decision on the Set of Procedural Rights attached to Procedural Status of Victim at the Pre-Trial Stage of the Case, paras 37–44.

  39. 39.

    Trumbull, supra note 36, at pp. 797, 798; ICC Prosecutor v Katanga and Chui, TC, ICC-01/04-01/07-1788, 22 January 2010, Decision on the Modalities of Victim Participation at Trial.

  40. 40.

    Trumbull, supra note 36.

  41. 41.

    Id., pp. 794, 795.

  42. 42.

    SaCouto and Cleary 2008, p. 100.

  43. 43.

    Id. at pp. 101, 102.

  44. 44.

    See footnotes 41 and 42.

  45. 45.

    Trumbull 2008, pp. 795, 796. ICC Prosecutor v Lubanga, PTC, ICC-01/04-01/06-678, Decision on the schedule and conduct of the confirmation hearing.

  46. 46.

    Rule 91(2).

  47. 47.

    Trumbull 2008, pp. 795, 796, ICC Prosecutor v Lubanga, PTC, ICC-01/04-01/06-678, Decision on the schedule and conduct of the confirmation hearing.

  48. 48.

    Trumbull, supra note 47, at p. 797.

  49. 49.

    Pena 2010, p. 504; ICC Prosecutor v Lubanga, TC, ICC-01/04-01/06-1119, 18 January 2008, Decision on victims’ participation, paras 106, 107; ICC Prosecutor v Lubanga, PTC, ICC-01/04-01/06-462, 22 September 2006, Decision on the Arrangements for Participation of Victims a/0001/06, a/0002/06 and a/0003/06 at the Confirmation Hearing.

  50. 50.

    Pena, supra note 49, at pp. 504, 505; ICC Prosecutor v Katanga and Chui, PTC, ICC-01/04-01/07-537, 30 May 2008, Decision on Limitations of Set of Procedural Rights for Non-Anonymous Victims, paras 25, 26; ICC Prosecutor v Katanga and Chui, TC, ICC-01/04-01/07-1788, 22 January 2010, Decision on the Modalities of Victim Participation at Trial, paras 122, 123; ICC Prosecutor v Abu Grada, PTC, ICC-02/05-02/09-136, 06 October 2010, Decision on victims’ modalities of participation at the Pre-Trial Stage of the Case, para 20.

  51. 51.

    Pena, supra note 49, at p. 505.

  52. 52.

    Pena, supra note 49, at p. 506; ICC Prosecutor v Lubanga, AC, ICC-01/04-01/06-1432, 11 July 2008, Judgment on the appeals of The Prosecutor and The Defence against Trial Chamber I’s Decision on Victims’ Participation of 18 January 2008, paras 97–104; this was a majority judgment, Judges Kirsch and Pikis dissented; see also ICC Prosecutor v Katanga and Chui, AC, ICC-01/04-01/07-2288, 16 July 2010, Judgment on the Appeal of Mr Katanga Against the Decision of Trial Chamber II of 22 January 2010 Entitled “Decision on the Modalities of Victim Participation at Trial”, paras 37–48; 110–114.

  53. 53.

    Pena, supra note 49, at p. 506; ICC Prosecutor v Lubanga, TC, ICC-01/04-01/06-1119, 18 January 2008, Decision on victims’ participation, para 107; ICC Prosecutor v Lubanga, TC, ICC-01/04-01/06-2127, 16 September 2009, Decision on the Manner of Questioning Witnesses Representatives of Victims by the Legal, para 27; ICC Prosecutor v Katanga and Chui, TC, ICC-01/04-01/07-1788, 22 January 2010, Decision on the Modalities of Victim Participation at Trial, para 75.

  54. 54.

    Greco 2007, p. 546; Rome Statute, Article 68.

  55. 55.

    Rome Statute, Article 43.

  56. 56.

    Rome Statute, Article 17; International Criminal Court (2012) Victims and Witnesses Unit.

    http://www.icc-cpi.int/Menus/ICC/Structure+of+the+Court/Protection/Victims+and+Witness+Unit.htm

  57. 57.

    Rome Statute, Article 68(1).

  58. 58.

    Id.

  59. 59.

    Id; see also ICC Prosecutor v Katanga and Chui, AC, ICC-01/04-01/07-2288, 16 July 2010, Judgment on the Appeal of Mr Katanga Against the Decision of Trial Chamber II of 22 January 2010 Entitled “Decision on the Modalities of Victim Participation at Trial”, para 114; the appealed decision is ICC Prosecutor v Katanga and Chui, TC, ICC-01/04-01/07-1788, 22 January 2010, Decision on the Modalities of Victim Participation at Trial.

  60. 60.

    Id.

  61. 61.

    Rome Statute, Article 68(2).

  62. 62.

    Id.

  63. 63.

    Id.

  64. 64.

    Rome Statute, Article 68(5).

  65. 65.

    Id.

  66. 66.

    Rome Statute, Article 43(5).

  67. 67.

    Id.

  68. 68.

    Key decision: Prosecutor v Lubanga, TC, ICC-01/04-01/06-1379, 5 June 2008, Decision on certain practicalities regarding individuals who have the dual status of witness and victim.

  69. 69.

    Rule 17.

  70. 70.

    Id.

  71. 71.

    Id.

  72. 72.

    Rule 87(1).

  73. 73.

    Id.; Greco 2007, p. 545.

  74. 74.

    Keller 2007.

  75. 75.

    Id.; Rome Statute, Article 75; Rome Statute, Article 79.

  76. 76.

    Rome Statute, Article 75(1).

  77. 77.

    Rome Statute, Article 75(2); Keller 2007, pp. 195, 196.

  78. 78.

    Rome Statute, Article 75(1).

  79. 79.

    Rome Statute, Article 75; Article 91.

  80. 80.

    Rule 94(1).

  81. 81.

    Rule 94(1)(a).

  82. 82.

    Rule 94(2).

  83. 83.

    Rule 95.

  84. 84.

    Id.

  85. 85.

    Rule 96.

  86. 86.

    Rule 97(1).

  87. 87.

    Rule 99.

  88. 88.

    Megret 2010, p. 11; Keller 2007, pp. 196, 197.

  89. 89.

    Id.; Id.

  90. 90.

    Megret 2010, p. 11.

  91. 91.

    Id.; Keller 2007, p. 197.

  92. 92.

    Megret 2010, p. 15.

  93. 93.

    Id. at p. 16; Keller 2007, p. 194.

  94. 94.

    Keller 2007, p. 195.

  95. 95.

    Id.

  96. 96.

    The Trust Fund for Victims (2012) What We Do. http://www.trustfundforvictims.org/what-we-do.

  97. 97.

    Rome Statute, Article 79(1).

  98. 98.

    Rome Statute, Article 79(2).

  99. 99.

    Rome Statute, Article 79(3).

  100. 100.

    Rule 98(1).

  101. 101.

    Id.

  102. 102.

    Rule 98(3).

  103. 103.

    Rule 98(4).

  104. 104.

    Rule 98(5).

  105. 105.

    Trust Fund for Victims (2012) Legal Basis. http://www.trustfundforvictims.org/legal-basis.

  106. 106.

    Dwertmann 2010, pp. 286–297.

  107. 107.

    Id. at p. 287.

  108. 108.

    Reg. of Trust Fund for Victims, 21.

  109. 109.

    Reg. of Trust Fund for Victims, 22, 23.

  110. 110.

    Reg. of Trust Fund for Victims, 30(a), 30 (b).

  111. 111.

    Reg. of Trust Fund for Victims, 30(d).

  112. 112.

    Reg. of Trust Fund for Victims, 27.

  113. 113.

    Dwertmann 2010, p. 287.

  114. 114.

    Id.

  115. 115.

    Id.

  116. 116.

    The Trust Fund for Victims (2012) Projects. http://www.trustfundforvictims.org/projects.

  117. 117.

    Id.

  118. 118.

    Id.

  119. 119.

    Id.

  120. 120.

    International Criminal Court (2011) Trust Fund for Victims Launches Programmme in the Central African Republic. http://www.icc-cpi.int/menus/icc/press%20and%20media/press%20releases/pr685.

  121. 121.

    Dannenbaum 2010, pp. 242, 243.

  122. 122.

    Id.

  123. 123.

    Id. at p. 247; ICC Situation in the Democratic Republic of Congo, PTC, ICC-01/04-492, 11 April 2008, Decision on the Notification of the Board of Directors of the Trust Fund for Victims in accordance with Regulation 50 of the Regulations of the Trust Fund.

  124. 124.

    Id. at pp. 248, 249, 255, 256.

  125. 125.

    Id. at pp. 285, 286.

  126. 126.

    Dwertmann 2010, p. 293.

  127. 127.

    Id.

References

  • Dannenbaum T (2010) The International Criminal Court, Article 79, and transitional justice: the case for an independent Trust Fund for Victims. WILJ 28:234–298

    Google Scholar 

  • Dwertmann E (2010) The reparation system of the International Criminal Court: its implementation, possibilities and limitations. Brill, Leiden

    Google Scholar 

  • Greco G (2007) Victims’ Rights Overview under the ICC Legal Framework: a jurisprudential analysis. ICLR 7:531–547

    Google Scholar 

  • International Criminal Court (2010) Helping victims make their voices heard—The Office of Public Counsel for Victims. http://www.icc-cpi.int/NR/rdonlyres/01A26724-F32B-4BE4-8B02-A65D6151E4AD/282846/LRBookletEng.pdf.Accessed11April2013.

  • Kaoutzanis C (2010) Two birds with one stone: how the use of the class action device for victim participation in the International Criminal Court can improve both the fight against impunity and victim participation. UC Davis JILP 17:111–150

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller L (2007) Proceedings of the scholarly conference taking reparations seriously: seeking justice at the International Criminal Court: victims’ reparations. TJLR 29:189–218

    Google Scholar 

  • Megret F (2010) Article of shrines, memorials and museums: using the International Criminal Court’s victim reparation and assistance regime to promote transitional justice. BHRLR 16:1–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Pena M (2010) Victim participation in the International Criminal Court: Victim participation at the International Criminal Court: achievements made and challenges lying ahead. ILSAJICL 16:497–516

    Google Scholar 

  • SaCouto S, Cleary K (2008) The war crimes symposium: Victims’ participation in the investigations of the International Criminal Court. TCLP 17:73–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Trumbull IV C (2008) The victims of victim participation in International Criminal Proceedings. MJIL 29:777–826

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Creighton University School of Law, Creighton, Omaha, NE, 68102, USA

    Michael J. Kelly

Authors
  1. Michael J. Kelly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael J. Kelly .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institut fur Soziologie, Philips Universitat, Ketzerbach 11, Marburg, 35032, Germany

    Thorsten Bonacker

  2. , Institut für Kriminalwissenschaften, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Universitätstraße 6, Marburg, 35032, Germany

    Christoph Safferling

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 T.M.C. ASSER PRESS, The Hague, The Netherlands, and the authors

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kelly, M.J. (2013). The Status of Victims Under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. In: Bonacker, T., Safferling, C. (eds) Victims of International Crimes: An Interdisciplinary Discourse. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague, The Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-6704-912-2_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Societies and partnerships

Search

Navigation