Amicus Curiae Observations by Public International Law & Policy Group in the case of The Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen
The Ongwen Case
Dominic Ongwen was Brigade Commander of the Sinia Brigade of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA), at time of warrant. He is charged with 61 counts of crimes against humanity and war crimes allegedly committed after July 1, 2002 in northern Uganda. Ongwen is the first LRA commander to face trial before the ICC. Ongwen, who is now in his 40s, was kidnapped when he was around 10 years old by the LRA.
The trial began on December 6, 2016. On February 4, 2021, the International Criminal Court’s Trial Chamber IX found Dominic Ongwen guilty for a total of 61 crimes comprising crimes against humanity and war crimes, committed in Northern Uganda between July 1, 2002 and December 31, 2005. On May 6, 2021, Trial Chamber IX sentenced Dominic Ongwen to 25 years of imprisonment.
On May 21, 2021, the Defence Counsel of Dominic Ongwen submitted the Defence Notification of its Intent to Appeal the Trial Judgment.
For more information on the case, visit the ICC’s website here.
PILPG Expert Roundtable - Dominic Ongwen: Sentencing a Former Child Soldier
PILPG and the Utrecht University Centre for Global Challenges (UGlobe) hosted an expert roundtable on the Ongwen Case before the International Criminal Court.
Our panelists—Sarah Kihika Kasande, Dr. Kjell Anderson, Grace Acan, and moderators Professor Milena Sterio and Dr. Julie Fraser—provided insight into the case, the issue of mitigation of punishment, and several other key themes reflected in the judgment and proceedings.
Amicus Curiae observations by the Public International Law & Policy Group
PILPG was invited by the International Criminal Court Appeals Chamber to submit our written observations as amici curiae in the Ongwen case. PILPG submitted observations on the allocation of the burden of proof and the appropriate standard of proof in relation to the applicability of the grounds excluding criminal responsibility enshrined in art. 31(1)(a) and (d) of the Rome Statute.
On February 14, PILPG Co-Founder Dean Michael Scharf, delivered remarks before the International Criminal Court Appeals Chamber regarding PILPG’s Amicus argument. In a 10 minute statement, Michael Scharf argued that the provisions of the ICC’s statute, read in the context of the statute’s negotiating history, should be interpreted as requiring the defense to produce evidence supporting the insanity defense but thereafter requiring the prosecution to prove that the evidence adduced regarding mental disease or defect does not raise a reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the accused.
On February 15, PILPG Managing Director Professor Milena Sterio and Senior Legal Advisor Jonathan Worboys represented PILPG at The Hague in the Chamber's question and answer session, addressing the key legal question of who has the burden of proof for the insanity defense—the prosecutor or defendant—in cases before the ICC?