February 2020

February 2020 - Domestic Prosecution of International Crimes

By: RAGHAVI VISWANATH & EREZ ROMAN, JUNIOR RESEARCH ASSOCIATES, PILPG-NL

This month saw the initiation of criminal proceedings for core crimes in jurisdictions such as the United Kingdom, Uruguay, and the United States of America. This post compiles some of these developments relating to universal jurisdiction. The post canvasses both national and international news sources.

EUROPE

United Kingdom | UK, US, and Turkey urged to arrest UAE officials for alleged war crimes in Yemen

The United Kingdom, Turkey and the United States have been asked to open police investigations into alleged war crimes committed by the United Arab Emirates and its mercenaries in Yemen in 2015 and 2019, and arrest Emirati officials under the principle of universal jurisdiction. Yemeni complainants filed charges through a UK law firm asserting that UAE officials hired mercenaries to attack and kill civilians. (Feb. 13, 2020)

Germany | Germany Indicts Iraqi Man Over Death of Yazidi Slave Girl

A girl who was a slave of an Iraqi man and his wife was allegedly left to die of thirst in the heat in Iraq. The Iraqi man has been indicted on charges of murder, membership of a foreign terrorist organization, genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and human trafficking (Feb. 21, 2020)

Croatia | Croatian court upholds Serb paramilitary fighter’s war crimes sentence

Croatia’s Supreme Court upheld a verdict sentencing former Serb paramilitary fighter Pero Jekic to eight years in prison in absentia for raping one woman and trying to rape another near Petrinja in Croatia in 1991. (Feb. 13, 2020)

Croatia | Croatian court convicts former Serb paramilitary fighter for war crimes

The Zagreb County Court convicted Dragan Birac of committing war crimes in Hrvatska Kostajnica in central Croatia in September 1991 after he was tried in absentia. (Feb. 10, 2020)

SOUTH AMERICA

Uruguay | Uruguay's prosecutor opens new files against humanity

Uruguay's Special Prosecutor for Crimes against Humanity Ricardo Perciballe opened four new cases against former military officers from the dictatorship that had remained outside the reach of justice. The subjects are accused of 'a continued crime of abuse of authority against political detainees in 1972, in formal competition with a continued crime of serious injuries and these in concurrence aside from reiterating a continued crime of deprivation of liberty,' states the judgment.  (Feb. 29, 2020)

NORTH AMERICA

United States of America | Libyan commander sued for alleged war crimes in Libya

Six Libyan families sued Libyan eastern-based renegade commander Khalifa Haftar and the United Arab Emirates government in a federal U.S. court for their alleged roles in committing war crimes in Libya. In the lawsuit filed in the Federal District Court of the District of Columbia, the families, whose relatives were murdered, injured or faced attempted killings, are seeking $1 billion in damages. (Feb.11, 2020)

February 2020

February 2020 - Domestic Prosecution of International Crimes Updates

By: Rachel Grand, Junior Research Associate, PILPG-NL

February began with ICC visits to Uganda, the DRC, and Bangladesh.  The Sudanese government offered to hand over Al Bashir and Venezuela referred themselves to the Court.  The Appeals Chamber also ruled on the admissibility and gravity of the A Hassan case.

AFRICA

Uganda and DRC | ICC registrar completes first visit to Uganda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo

The ICC Registrar, Peter Lewis, met with government officials and UN representatives in Uganda and the DRC.  The spoke about the Court's continued appreciation for both countries’ cooperation over the years. [February 7, 2020] 

Sudan | Omar al-Bashir: Sudan agrees ex-president must face ICC

During peace talks in Sudan the government agreed to hand Al-Bashir and three others over to the ICC.  However, there is no guarantee when and if this will happen. [February 11, 2020]

Mali | Al Hassan Case: ICC Appeals Chamber confirms the Pre-Trial Chamber’s decision on the admissibility and the sufficient gravity of the case

The Appeals Chamber unanimously rejected the Defence’s appeal of Pre-Trial Chamber I’s decision on the gravity of Al Hassan’s case.  The trial begins on July 14, 2020. [February 19, 2020]

ASIA

Bangladesh | Statement of the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court as delivered at the press conference in Dhaka, Bangladesh

The Director of Jurisdiction, Complementary and Cooperation Division of the ICC Office of the Prosecutor, Phakiso Mochochoko, spoke in Bangladesh on the progress of the Prosecutor’s investigation into the alleged international crimes committed against the Rohingya people. [February 4, 2020]

SOUTH AMERICA

Venezuela | Statement of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Mrs Fatou Bensouda, on the referral by Venezuela regarding the situation in its own territory

Venezuela, a state party to the Rome Statute, referred the alleged crimes against humanity committed on their territory to the ICC.  This is the second referral of the situation in Venezuela, both of which have overlap geographically and temporally. [February 17, 2020]

February 2020

February 2020 - Southern Cameroon Updates

By: Kelly van Eeten & Francisca de Castro, Junior Research Associates, PILPG-NL

THIS POST COLLECTS UPDATES FROM THE PAST MONTH CONCERNING RELEVANT DEVELOPMENTS IN SOUTHERN CAMEROON. THE INFORMATION IS DRAWN FROM LOCAL AND INTERNATIONAL ONLINE SOURCES.

At least 21 civilians killed in attack in separatist area

According to Human Rights Watch, Cameroon's government forces and armed ethnic Fulani have killed at least 21 civilians, including 13 children and 1 pregnant woman on February 14, 2020. The attack took place in Cameroon’s Ngarbuh village.  The killing took place along with the beating of civilians and the burning of their homes. Some of the victims of the attack were found dead in their burned homes. The Cameroonian government denies that their troops have been deliberately committing these acts. 

Human Rights Watch interviewed 25 people, including witnesses and relatives of the victims. One witness said that he witnessed the killing of his entire family, including seven children, while his family members tried to escape. 

Human Rights Watch also said that on February 16, a joint team of the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees wished to carry out a humanitarian needs assessment in Ngarbuh.  However, the Rapid Intervention Battalion (Cameroons special government forces) blocked them from going there. Furthermore, witnesses said that the soldiers photographed witnesses that were interviewed by the UN and prevented the UN from doing its work. 

The Cameroonian Minister of Defense has announced that they opened an investigation and that findings would be published.  Later, he announced that the findings would be published at an ‘appropriate time’. On the 18th of February the Cameroonian Minister of Communications published an announcement stating that their Defense and Security Forces had been subject to false allegations, stating that: ‘The alleged killing of twenty-two villagers including fourteen children, by Cameroonian Defense and Security Forces in Ngarbuh is fake’.  Furthermore, he stated that armed gangs had set up their base in Ngarbuh, while perpetrating abuses on the road leading to Ntumbaw. According to the Minister of Communication the Defense and Security Forces were alerted by the population and while they fought these armed groups an explosion took place in a fortified shelter of the rebels.  This incident had led to five deaths, one woman and four children. 

Days after the massacre at Ngarbuh village, a Cameroonian soldier was arrested for not having respected the rules of engagement during an incident which resulted in one casualty.  During a police pursuit, a suspect in a vehicle was killed by a soldier who opened fire at the car. The driver of the car was killed and the passenger was injured.  The soldier in question was arrested, and the minister of Defense made a statement commending the arrest of the soldier for breaking the rules of engagement. 

Presidents Paul Biya’s Party wins the elections during election chaos and a lockdown

BBC claim,reports indicate that there was a poor turnout in Cameroon’s parliamentary and local elections last Sunday.  The polls closed at 18:00 local time and results are expected within two weeks. Earlier in the week, separatist fighters in the Anglophone heartlands ordered a lockdown and some residents fled their homes  out of fear of possible confrontation between the militants and security forces. Clashes between the military and the separatists were reported in the town of Muyuka and gunfire was heard in Buea and Kuma.

Claiming massive fraud, Cameroonian opposition political parties are calling for the results of the February 9 local elections that gave the ruling People's Democratic Movement of long-serving President Paul Biya a landslide victory to be discarded.

Uprise in human rights abuses in the months leading towards the elections in Cameroon

Cameroonian government forces and rival anglophone separatists have stepped up arrests, abductions, and deadly attacks in the two months leading up to Sunday’s parliamentary and municipal elections, causing a devastating fallout for civilians that looks set to worsen.  Amnesty International’s analysis of remote sensing data confirms that more than 50 houses in Babubock and neighbouring villages were burned to the ground during a military operation around 14 January 2020.  Furthermore, the military attacked the village of Ndoh shooting indiscriminately at a village market. Amnesty International found that at least 16 people died and at least five were hurt by gunfire, including two children. Besides this, a humanitarian aid worker has been abducted by the Rapid Intervention Battalion on 24 December and found death with evidence of torture on January 2th.

Ilaria Allegrozzi, senior researcher at Human Rights Watch says that she has never seen so many incidents, attacks and violence reports in the conflict until now.  Previously, the crisis had been marked by periodic peaks in violence coinciding with key dates such as presidential elections and court proceedings for arrested separatist leaders.  “This has now been taken to another level,” Allegrozzi said.

Whereas during the conflict’s first year, violence against civilians and human rights abuses were perpetrated largely by government security forces, HRW’s Allegrozzi said such actions have since been “coming from both sides”.  Abuses are being committed "equally by both armed separatists and the security forces,” she explained. Human Rights Watch documented at least 25 cases of kidnapping of candidates to the elections since mid-November 2019, and heard reliable reports of over 100 people kidnapped by the separatists over the same period.  Separatist groups have also used intimidation and violence to keep children and teachers out of schools. Aid workers are being targeted as well. On January 30th four members of COMINSUD were kidnapped, three of them were being tortured. On the same day, three members of the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial Foundation were kidnapped as well, but later released without ransom.

Uprise in displacement of civilians in Cameroon

The UN refugee agency says about 8,000 persons fled from Cameroon into Nigeria in the past two weeks because of an upsurge in violence.  The refugees had to go through savannahs and forests, some arrived with gunshot wounds. Furthermore, new Boko Haram attacks have displaced more than 3,000 people along Cameroon’s northern border with Nigeria in the past three months.  Authorities say the Boko Haram militants torched houses, abducted, raped and looted, creating fear among villagers.  The governor of Cameroon’s far north region said that the wave of attacks is a consequence of a porous border and the dry season, during which it is easier for militants to move around than it is during the wet season.  Furthermore, he denied the attacks were made worse by the military withdrawing from several border posts to fight rebels in the English-speaking northwest.

Cameroonian mothers iron their daughters breasts to prevent them from being sexually harassed

Although many of the families Al Jazeera spoke to mentioned the vulnerability of young girls growing up as refugees as one of the reasons for their decision to iron their daughters' breasts, the practice has been happening in Cameroon for decades.  A quarter of women in Cameroon have undergone breast ironing. In nearly 60 percent of the cases, the procedure is carried out by mothers.  The United Nations has described breast ironing as one of the most under-reported crimes associated with gender-based violence.  It is thought to affect 3.8 million women globally.

Many Cameroonians fled to Nigeria after fights broke out between government forces and English-speaking separatists. The conflict has forced some 500,000 people away from their homes and created a humanitarian crisis.  The refugee families' fears for their daughters are not unfounded. Female refugees and displaced people in Nigeria are at high risk of sexual harassment and exploitation. Many Cameroonian families may fear that living as refugees adds an element of danger for their daughters.  But for others, breast ironing is a matter of societal expectation. Girls who have their breasts ironed have a higher risk of getting breast cancer, cysts and inability to breastfeed.

Worrying situation of political prisoners held captive in Cameroon

Amnesty started a campaign for political activist Serge Branco Nana, member of the Cameroon Renaissance Movement (MRC) who is serving a two-year prison sentence being accused of inciting a riot.  He is at risk of further torture and requires urgent medical care.

Furthermore, the French President Emmanuel Macron stated during the Salon de l’Agriculture that he would call President Paul Biya to pressure him to let go political prisoner Maurice Kamto.  This was in response to an activist from the Brigade Anti-Sardinards (BAS), a group of activists from the diaspora who oppose the Yaounde regime.

Legal Action Against Climate Change: A Dutch Landmark Case

BY: LEONORE TEN HULSEN, JUNIOR RESEARCH ASSOCIATE, PILPG-NL

In 2015, Urgenda - a Dutch NGO focused on a sustainable future - sued the Dutch government together with 886 other stakeholders, and won, giving the court case international exposure. Urgenda argued that the Dutch government was not fulfilling its duty to reduce the necessary amounts of greenhouse gas emission (GHG) against climate change. The Dutch government appealed, and on October 9th, 2018, the Dutch Court of Appeal confirmed its previous judgment. On December 20th, 2019, the request for cassation was dismissed. This case is the first climate case worldwide where a government was sued to failing to live up to its duty to reduce GHG. The Court’s verdict obliges the Dutch government to diminish its GHG emissions by at least 25% in 2020, in comparison to the 1990 level of GHG emissions. This court case has raised many questions on the government’s duty of care towards its citizens,  trias politica, and the role that human rights can play in the protection of people against climate change. This blogpost will zoom in on just one of these aspects: the role of courts in trias politica. 

Some have argued that the Urgenda case has caused a disruption of the trias politica. The trias politica refers to the division of powers in a democratic society. There are the legislative, executive, and judicial powers. Normally, these powers are balanced by a system of checks-and-balances. However, in the Urgenda case, some argue that this division seems to have been put aside as the Dutch courts have used their power to impose an obligation on the executive authority. This has even been called a ‘seize of power’ by the judicial authority.  Others counter this argument by pointing out the positive obligations of the Dutch government to protect its civilians, mainly derived from international conventions that the Dutch government bound itself to.  Moreover, as Max van der Veer points out, the actual execution of the verdict, meaning the way in which the government will actually diminish the GHG emissions, is left to the executive powers of the Dutch government.  This way, the Dutch government will still be in charge of the execution of its obligation to reduce GHG emissions. 

In the end, the outcome of the Urgenda case is simply the start of reaching the goal of Urgenda: taking action against climate change. In order to reduce the impact of climate change on our planet and livelihood, significant changes have to be made to the organization of our modern-day world, including the reorganization of industries and governance models at the national and international levels. The next critical point will be to see if the Dutch government will be able to fulfill its obligation and how the courts will respond if it does not. 

Admitting evidence of fact-finding missions: To be continued?

By: Raghavi Viswanath, Junior Research Associate, PILPG-NL

The provisional measures hearing in the case between the Gambia and Myanmar at the International Court of Justice (‘ICJ’) concluded on December 12, 2019.  The Gambia, both in its written application as well as oral arguments at the Court, extensively relied on reports prepared by fact-finding missions.

A majority of evidence was derived from the August 2018 and September 2019 of the Fact-Finding Mission set up by the UN Human Rights Council in 2017 (‘FFM’), to investigate the circumstances that culminated in the alleged human rights violations by the military in Myanmar. It was created with a view of  “ensuring full accountability for perpetrators and justice for victims”. The FFM was later replaced with an Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar (‘IIMM’). Compared to the FFM, the IIMM has a more explicit mandate to prepare files for criminal prosecution.

Myanmar, in its oral arguments, criticized the methodology of the fact-finding mission. Myanmar also called out the credibility of the report on the basis that the Special Rapporteur was “not an international author”.  This is suggestive of deeper concerns about the credibility of evidence prepared by fact-finding missions. Although the UN Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights (‘OHCHR’) has collated best practices and made recommendations for fact-finding missions, judicial literature on this point is still unsettled.

The jurisprudence of the ICJ reveals that the Court has been more deferential towards findings of adversarial bodies. By way of illustration, in the Armed Activities case, the ICJ gave special attention to the evidence collated by the Porter Commission, a judicial inquiry instituted by the government of Uganda. Similarly, in Bosnia-Herzegovina v. Serbia-Montenegro and Croatia v. Serbia, the Court accepted the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia’s findings of genocidal intent [Bosnia v. Serbia, para.238; Croatia v. Serbia, para.136]. In Armed Activities, the Court went so far as to note that such findings were admissible because they were obtained by “examination of persons directly involved, and who were subsequently cross-examined by judges” [para.61]. 

This is not to say that other types of third-party findings of fact or law are not admissible at all.  The Court has, on multiple instances, also accepted evidence analyzed by the UN Secretary-General and special rapporteurs. Notably, the Court assigned probative value to the 1999 Fall of Srebrenica report by the UN Secretary-General [Bosnia v. Serbia, para.230]. A closer examination of the case-law reveals that the Court has attempted to articulate guiding principles to determine the probative value of third-party reports. It has explained that the value of evidence depends on the source of the evidence (is it partisan or not?), on the kind of information conveyed (is it incriminating?), and the process using which it was collected (was it obtained through careful cross-examination?) [Bosnia v. Serbia, para.227]. 

The Court’s reliance on third-party findings has come under scrutiny. Firstly, some commentators have called it a ‘delegation of fact-finding responsibilities.’  Secondly, on a more granular level, the Court’s guidance on the markers of credibility appear to be insufficient.  For one, the case law does not discuss issues of duplicity, the difference between documentary and oral evidence, or delineate what sort of expertise is relevant for authors and investigators. Thirdly, in its assessment of independence, the Court usually assumes independence and neutrality when the mission is commissioned by the UN.  However, this is arguably a problematic trend because it overlooks how Special Rapporteurs often have to maintain contacts with the media, and sometimes even derive data from the media [Cumaraswamy Advisory Opinion, para.53].  Therefore, their impartiality is not always defensible.

The question of credibility will come into question again in the impending International Criminal Court (‘ICC’) proceedings, concerning alleged crimes against humanity against the Rohingyas.  Considering that the ICC is a criminal tribunal, it adheres to a higher threshold of standard of proof of authenticity, and methodology than even the ICJ.  If the Court’s articulation of a higher evidentiary burden of the Prosecution in Gbagbo and Blé Goudé is any indication, it is possible that the jurisprudence on this issue is about to witness significant developments.