international criminal tribunals

7/27/2019 International Criminal Tribunals

1/48

InternatIonaL

Criminal

TribunalS

1993

1994

2002

2002

2005

2007

a v i s u a l o v e r v i e w

iCTr

sCsl

eCCC

sTl

iCC


2/48

1

Creative direction / design:

PAULA AIRTH

www.bepeculiar.com

This report is a project of the Leitner Center for International

Law and Justice at Fordham Law School. The views expressed

herein remain those of the author and are not reflective of

the official position of Fordham Law School or FordhamUniversity.

b y D A N I E L M C L A U G H L I NFormer Legal Officer at the ECC

and International Bar Association Fellow at the ICT

justicebydes [email protected] om

INTERNATIONALCRIMINAL

TRIBUNALSA V I S U A L O V E R V I E W
http://www.bepeculiar.com/http://www.bepeculiar.com/


3/48

3

WHY THIS PUBLICATION?

There is wide awareness, though little true understanding, of the work of th

international criminal tribunals.

International prosecutions of high-ranking civilian and military leaders, includin

former heads of state, on charges of crimes against humanity, war crimes an

genocide, represent for many the ultimate condemnation of these individuals

past actions and a measure of their fall from power. Yet, despite the tribunals

grasp on the popular imagination, they are the subject of significant misconcep

tions and confusion. Much of the media coverage dedicated to their work remain

superficial, at best, and largely muddles over key distinctions between variou

tribunals, past and present. Conversely, the more informed s cholarship is largel

confined to specialty publications that remain inaccessible to most. In truth

many lawyers and non-lawyers alike lack a clear understanding of the role andfunctioning of these increasingly-pivotal international institutions.

This publication seeks to redress this knowledge gap by providing well-researche

and accessible information for those wishing to more fully understand the inter

national criminal tribunals and the conflicts over which they have jurisdiction. A

informed public is an engaged public - and the issues that animate these tribu

nals, including delivering justice for victims of some of the worlds worst atroc

ties, are too significant to be discussed solely by a small cadre of internationa

criminal law specialists.

Notably, this publication was created in partnership with graphic and informatio

designers so as to reach a broader public. The designers' visualizations presen

information regarding the tribunals and their underlying conflicts in a direct an

accessible manner to a wide range of viewers, including those without a lega

background. Beyond this democratizing function, information visualization als

serves to reveal important data and trends that might otherwise go unnoticed i

a more conventional format. Ideally, the following information, which is curren

as of January 2013, would be integrated into a continually updated interactiv

webportal dedicated to engaging a global public on issues of international justice

In sum, this publication aims to facilitate a broader discussion of the internation

criminal tribunals notable accomplishments, as well as ongoing shortcomings.

INTRODUCTIONTABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

Introduction 4

Overview Map 5

FORMER YUGOSLAVIA 7

Overview 9

Timeline of Conflict 11

Tribunal information 13

Tribunal cases 15

ICTR

RWANDA 21

Overview 24



Tribunal cases 28

SCSL

SIERRA LEONE 33

Overview 36



Tribunal cases 41

ECCC

CAMBODIA 43

Overview 46



Tribunal cases 51

STL

LEBANON 53

Overview 56



Tribunal cases 61

ICC

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT 63

Overview 66



Tribunal cases 73

CRSS

CROSS CUTTING ISSUES 75

Costs and Funding 77

Crimes Charged / Convictions 79

Crimes Against Humanity 81

Sentencing 83

Reparations 85

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES 87

International Justice Resources 87

ANNEX 88

Acknowledgments 88

Sources 89


4/48

NTRO 5

T H E NE T H E R L AND S

IVORYCOAST

SIERRALEONE

SCSL

RWANDA

UGANDA

LIBYA

LEBANON

FORMERYUGOSLAVIA

DARFURS U D AN

CAMBODIA

KENYA

CENTRAL AFRICANREPUBLIC

DEMOCRATIC

REPUBLIC OF

THE CONGO

ECCC

ICTY International Criminal Tribunalfor the former Yugoslavia

EST. 1993

STL Special Tribunal for Lebanon

EST. 2007

ICC International Criminal Court

EST. 2002

THE HA GUE , NE THE RLA ND S

SCSL Special Court for Sierra Leone

EST. 2002

F RE E TO W N, S IE RRA LE O NE

ICTR International Criminal Tribunalfor Rwanda

EST. 1994

A RUS HA , TA NZA NIA

T ANZANI A

ECCC Extraordinary Chambers in theCourts of Cambodia

EST. 2005

PHNO M PE NH, C A MB O D IA

MALI

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNALS

AND THEIR UNDERLYING CONFLICTS


5/48

NTRO 7

BOSNIA & HERZEGOVINA

20,000DEATHS

104,732DEATHS

10,000DEATHS KOSOVO

ESTIMATED

DEATHS

CROATIA

KOSOVO

BOSNIA & HERZEGOVINA

CROATIA

ESTIMATED

DISPLACEMENTS

1,453,000DISPLACEMENTS

2,000,000DISPLACEMENTS

550,000DISPLACEMENTS

(DEATHS IN PROPORTION TO DISPLACEMENTS)

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNFOR THE FORMER YUGOSLAHe finished raping me

and said that he couldperhaps, do more but[I] was about the sameage as his daughter.

Testimony of Witness 50 in the Kunarac et al trial .


6/48

OVERVIEW OF UNDERLYING CONFLICT

LOCATED IN THE HAGUE, THE NETHERLANDS

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FORTHE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA

CTY 9

In 1993, after a UN investigation

of crimes being committed in the

then-ongoing armed conflict in

the former Yugoslavia, the UN Se-

curity Council created the ICTY un-

der Chapter VII of the UN Charter.

The armed conflict concerned the six

republics that made up the former

Yugoslavia (Bosnia and Herzegovina,

Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Ser-

bia [including the regions of Vojvodina

and Kosovo] and Slovenia). In June of

1991, the republics of Slovenia and Cro-

atia declared their independence from

the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugo-

slavia (FRY) and its military (JNA). This

decision was immediately challenged

militarily by Serbia, which wished to

retain the republics in the Serb-dom-

inated FRY. While Slovenia secured its

independence after just a few weeks of

fighting, the conflict in Croatia dragged

on until 1995.

The armed conflict in Bosnia and Her-

zegovina was also precipitated by its

declaration of independence from the

FRY, which further fragmented the re-

public among Muslim, Croat and Serb

ethnic lines. All three sides fought each

other, with the forces of each ethnic

group made up of government troops,

along with local and paramilitaryforces. While Serb atrocities against

Bosnian Muslims were committed

on a broader scale, all parties to the

conflict used various ethnic cleansing

techniques intended to homogenize

regions under their control. This con-

flict, the bloodiest by far of those that

gripped the region during the period,

formally came to an end following the

December 1995 signing of the Dayton

Peace Accord.

In February of 1998, intermittent con-

flict between Serb forces and the eth-

nic Albanian community in Kosovo

escalated into the last of the wars

in the FRY. Breaches of international

humanitarian law included forced de-

portations, attacks on fleeing civilians

and indiscriminate shelling of towns

and villages by Serb forces. NATO car-

ried out a 78-day-long campaign of air

strikes against targets in Kosovo and

Serbia. In response, Serb forces fur-ther intensified the persecution of the

Kosovo Albanian civilians. Ultimately,

Serbian President Slobodan Miloevi

agreed to withdraw his troops from the

province. Some 750,000 Albanian ref-

ugees came home and about 100,000

Serbs roughly half the province's Serb

population fled in fear of reprisals.

In June 1999, Serbia agreed to inter-

national administration of Kosovo

with the final status of the province

still unresolved.

I , .

78.1%CROAT

9.7%OTHER

12.2%SERB

I

. i l l i

. i ll i

I

. i l l i

. i l l i

I , .

.

.

.

7%OTHER

33%SERB

43%MUSLIM

I

17%CROAT

. i l l i

. ill i

I

. i l l i

. i l l i

I , .

.

.

.

I

8%OTHER

10%SERB

82%ALBANIANS

. i l l i

. i ll i

I

. i l li

. i l li

CROATIA

Total Population:

4.7 MILLION

BOSNIA ANDHERZEGOVINA

Total Population:

4.5 MILLION

KOSOVO

Total Population:

1.9 MILLION

MAP OF THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA

capital

location of crime scene

I

I , .

I

.

4.7 million

CROATIA

12.9 million

REST OF FORMER

YUGOSLAVIA

4.5 million

BOSNIA &

HERZEGOVINA

1.9 million

KOSOVO

FORMER YUGOSLAVIA

Total Population in 1991:

24 MILLION

All estimates to

the left as of 1991

OVERVIEW


7/48

Y 11

Y

1992

1992

1993

1993

1994

1994

1995

1995

1996

1996

1997

1997

1998

1998

1999

1999

SEPTEMBER 1991

UN Security Council imposesa weapons embargo.

JULY 199 4

UN Security Council appoints Richard Goldstone as the firstICTY prosecutor.

AUGUST 1994

NATO meets to approve command and control arrangementsfor the use of air power.

OCTOBER 1991

UN Secretary General appoints apersonal envoy to the region.

JANU ARY 199 3

UN Commission of Experts calls for aninternational criminal tribunal toprosecute atrocities. NOVEMBER 1994

The first ICTY indictment is issued.

MARCH 1995

UNPROFOR is replaced with three separatemissions in Croatia, Bosnia and Macedonia.

AUGUST - SEPTEMER 1995

NATO launches air campaign against Bosnian Serbtargets to stop attacks on UN safe areas.

NOVEMBER 1996

The first ICTY judgment isrendered.

MAY 1999

Slobodan Milosevic is indicted bythe ICTY for crimes in Kosovo. Thecharges are later expanded tocover crimes in Bosnia and Croatia.

JUNE 199 9

Following UN Security Council resolution, a NATO-ledpeacekeeping force (KFOR) enters Kosovo.

MAY 1993

UN Security Council creates the ICTY underChapter VII of the UN Charter.

INTERNATIONAL RESPONSE

UN Security Council creates apeacekeeping force (UNPROFOR),which grows to 39,000 personnel.

FEBRUARY 1992

MARCH - JUNE 1999

NATO launches air camagainst Serbia to stopcarried out in Kosovo. campaign is suspendeagreement to withdraforces from Kosovo.

JANUARY 1999

Serb forcesmove intoKosovo inlarge numbers.

OCTOBER 1997

Serb police assault a peaceful protest of 20,000 in Pristina and start to detain Kosovar Albanian opponents.

Serb incursions into Albanian territory are commonplace as indiscriminate Serbshelling and attacks on fleeing civilians are also increasingly reported.

JULY - AU GUST 199 8

Serb paramilitary groups enter Kosovo. Armed skirmishes between Serb and Kosovar Albanians increase dramatically.

JAN UARY - APR IL 1 998

APRIL 1998

Amnesty International reports that extra-judicial executions, excessive force, and disappearancesperpetrated by Serb forces are frequent and evince an established pattern.

KOSOVO

Post-referendum violence breaks out into warafter the US and EU formally recognize Bosnia.Bosnian Serbs proclaim 70% of Bosnias territoryto be a Serb republic.

MARCH 1992

Bosnia declares independencefrom the FRY following areferendum supported byCroats and Muslims, butboycotted by Serbs.

JULY 199 5

In a designated UN Safe Area, Bosnian Serbs led by RatkoMladic massacre over 7,000 men and boys in Srebrenica - thelargest war crime to take place in Europe since WWII.

BOSNIA &HERZEGOVINA

The conflict turns into a bloody three-sidedfight for territories. Bosnian Serbs, Croats andMuslims all establish detention camps, thougha majority are Serb-run.

MAY 1992

JNA withdraws from Bosnia but leavesbehind Serb forces and arms.

SUMMER 1993

Ethnic cleansingcontinuesacross Bosnia.

DECEMBER 1995

Dayton Peace Accord is signed in Paris.

FEBRUARY 1994

Serb forces shell the crowdedMarkale market in Sarajevo.

NOVEMBER 1995

Peace talks are held in Dayton, Ohio.

Large-scale attacks by Serb forcescontinue in Bosnia, includingaround Sarajevo, which will remainunder siege until February 1996.

SUMMER 1992

APRIL 1992

APRIL 1992

JUNE - JULY 1991

Slovenia & Croatiadeclare independencefrom the FRY. Theconflict in Slovenia isbrief, but in Croatia itcontinues to escalate.

SUMMER 1995

Croat forces launch two majoroffensives to regain all but a pocketof territory causing a major exodusof Serbs into Bosnia and Serbia.

DECEMBER 1991

Croatian Serbs declare a third ofCroatias territory an independentSerb state. Non-Serbs are forciblyexpelled.

JAN UARY 199 2

A UN-sponsored ceasefire isagreed to.

FALL 1995

The war in Croatia effectively ends.

FEBRUARY 1992

Sporadic fightingcontinues on the grounddespite the establishmentof a UN Protection Force.

EARLY 1993

Fighting escalates again asoffensives from Croat forcesresume against Serb positions.

CROATIACROATIA

TIMELINE OF CONFLICT


8/48

Y 13

Y

AUSTRIA

6

ITALY

5

FRANCE

4

SWEDEN

2

NORWAY

5

GERMANY

4

UNITED KINGDOM

2

DENMARK

4BELGIUM

1

SPAIN

5PORTUGAL

1

Located at The Hague, in The Netherlands, the ICTY

was created in May 1993 by the UN Security Council

under Chapter VII of the UN Charter.

The ICTY has jurisdiction over crimes against hu-

manity, genocide, and war crimes in international

and non-international armed conflicts committed

in the territory of the former Yugoslavia after Janu-

ary 1, 1991.

The ICTY exercises primacy over the national tri-

bunals of the former Yugoslavia but may refer

cases to these courts, which continue to exercise

concurrent jurisdiction. The judicial chambers of the

ICTY, which consist of three Trial Chambers and one

Appeals Chamber (the latter of which is shared with

the ICTR), are comprised of international judges.

Due to delays and the capture of the last at large

indictees in 2011, all trials and appeals at the ICTY

will likely be concluded no sooner than 2016.

Zlatko AleksovskiMilan BabiHaradin BalaPredrag BanoviVidoje BlagojeviTihomir BlakiLjubomir BorovaninMiroslav BraloRadoslav BraninMario erkezRanko eiHazim DeliRasim DeliMiroslav DeronjiDamir Doen

Draen ErdemoviAnto FurundijaStanislav Gali

EnverHadihasanoviGoran JelisiDragan JokiMiodrag JokiDrago JosipoviDragan KolundijaDario KordiMilojica KosRadomir KovaMomilo KrajinikMilorad KrnojelacRadislav KrstiAmir KuburaDragoljub Kunarac

Miroslav Kvoka

Esad Lando

Milan Luki

Sredoje LukiMilan Marti

Vinko MartinoviDragomir MiloeviDarko MraMile MrkiZdravko MuciMladen NaletiliDragan NikoliMomir NikoliDragan ObrenoviBiljana PlaviDragoljub PrcaMlao RadiIvica RajiVladimir antiDuko SikiricaBlagoje SimiMilan SimiVeselin ljivananinMilomir StakiPavle StrugarDuko TadiMiroslav TadiJohan TarulovskiStevan TodoroviMitar VasiljeviZoran VukoviSimo ZariDragan ZelenoviZoran igi

TOTAL

CONTRIBUTIONS

JAPA NUSA GERMANY

MILLIONS

OF USD

ESTIMATED

0

150

100

50

$200

93 95 97 99 01 03 05 07 09 11 13 15

TOTAL ESTIMATED COST OF ICTY

$2,319,357,047

DATE OF FIRST ICTY INDICTMENT

7 NOV 1994

FIRST ICTY INDICTEE

DRAGAN NIKOLI

INDICTMENTS ISSUED

161average of 8.5 per year

ONGOING PROCEEDINGS

TWENTY NINEINDIVIDUALS

PLEADED GUILTY

TWENTY

INDICTMENTS REFERRED TONATIONAL JURISDICTIONS

THIRTEEN

INDICTEES STILL AT LARGE

ZEROThe final two indictees still at large,Goran Hadi and Ratko Mladi, werearrested on 20 July 2011 and 26 May 2011,respectively

NUMBER OF COUNTRIES WHERECONVICTED PERSONS ARE/WERESERVING THEIR SENTENCES

THIRTEENsee map for countries and numbersof convicted persons (remaining aredetained in The Hague awaiting transfer)

INDIVIDUALS WITH FINAL CONVICTIONS

SIXTY SIXICTY ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS, 1993 - 2015

TRIBUNAL INFORMATION

CREATED IN 1993 PURSUANT TO UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR THEFORMER YUGOSLAVIA



9/48

| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10

Y 15

Y

THE ICTYS STATUTE AND RULES OF PROCEDURE AND EVIDENCE

outline the procedures applicable to cases brought before the tribunal. Under

these documents, the Prosecutor has broad discretion to initiate investigations

and to indict individuals suspected of crimes that are within the parameters of

the ICTYs jurisdiction.

Formal charges against a defendant are marked by the confirmation of an

indictment by a pre-trial judge. Following their arrest or voluntary surrender,

defendants then appear before the ICTY where they enter a plea of guilty or

not guilty on each count of the indictment against them.

Typically, a case will then proceed to trial, at the conclusion of which the Trial

Chamber will issue a Trial Judgment which determines the defendants guilt

or innocence (in which case they are released ). The Trial Chambers de-

terminations can be appealed to the Appeals Chamber, which, following an

appeals hearing, issues an Appeals Judgment affirming, reversing or revising

the Trial Judgment. Defendants still in custody who are acquitted on appealare released .

Defendants whose Trial Judgment convictions are affirmed or who are con-

victed on appeal are typically transferred to serve out the remainder of

their sentence to one of 17 domestic jurisdictions that have signed agreements

with the ICTY. Proceedings against these convicted defendants close once they

are released either through early release or after serving out the entirety of

their sentence.

More generally, proceedings against defendants before the ICTY may be termi-

nated if their indictment is withdrawn or if their case is referred to a competent

national jurisdiction , and where a defendant dies .

Within this generally applicable procedural framework however, cases are in-

evitably shaped by their own unique circumstances. In some instances, the

time from indictment to final conviction is completed relatively quickly, which

often reflects an arrest immediately following the indictment and the entry

of a guilty plea that allows for abbreviated hearings (see e.g., DERONJI, Miro-

slav). In other cases, defendants evade arrest for years following their indict-

ment thus significantly delaying their being brought to trial (see e.g., MLADI,

Ratko).

Individually, the graphics that follow show the unique procedural history of

each of the 161 indictments issued by the ICTY, while collectively they illustrate

the magnitude of the work carried out by the tribunal since its first i ndictmentwas issued in November 1994.

SYMBOL KEY

FORMAL CHARGES

INITIAL APPEARANCE

TRIAL JUDGMENT

TRIAL CONVICTION

FOUND INNOCENT AT TRIAL

APPEAL JUDGMENT

APPEAL CONVICTION

FOUND INNOCENT ON APPEAL

INDICTMENT WITHDRAWN ORREFERRED TO NATIONAL JURISDICTION

DEATH OF DEFENDANT

RELEASE FROM CUSTODY

CASE BY CASE INFORMATION

1 ADEMI, Rahim

2 ALAGI, Mehmed

3 ALEKSOVSKI, Zlatko

4 ALILOVI, Stipo

5 BABI, Milan

6 BABI, Mirko

7 BALA, Haradin

8 BALAJ, Idriz

9 BANOVI, Nenad

10 BANOVI, Predrag

11 BEARA, Ljubia

12 BLAGOJEVI, Vidoje

13 BLAKI, Tihomir

14 BOBETKO, Janko

15 BOROVANIN, Ljubomir

16 BOROVNICA, Goran

17 BOKOSKI, Ljube

18 BRAHIMAJ, Lahi

19 BRALO, Miroslav

20 BRANIN, Radoslav

21 ERKEZ, Mario

22 ERMAK, Ivan

23 EI, Ranko

24 ORI, Valentin

25 DELALI, Zejnil

26 DELI, Hazim

27 DELI, Rasim

28 DERONJI, Miroslav

29 DOKMANOVI, Slavko

30 OREVI, Vlastimir

31 DOEN, Damir

32 DRLJAA, Simo

33 UKI, orde

34 ERDEMOVI, Draen

35 FURUNDIJA, Anto

TRIBUNAL CASES


10/48


11/48

Y 19

Y | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10

| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13

1 NIKOLI, Drago

2 NIKOLI, Momir

3 NORAC, Mirko

4 OBRENOVI, Dragan

5 OJDANI, Dragoljub

6 ORI, Naser

7 PANDUREVI, Vinko

8 PAPI, Dragan

9 PASPALJ, Nedjeljko

0 PAVKOVI, Neboja

1 PAVLI, Milan

2 PERII, Momilo

3 PETKOVI, Milivoj

4 PLAVI, Biljana

5 POPOVI, Milutin

6 POPOVI, Vujadin

7 PRALJAK, Slobodan

8 PRCA, Dragoljub

9 PREDOJEVI, Draenko

0 PRLI, Jadranko

1 PUI, Berislav

2 RADI, Miroslav

3 RADI, Mlao

4 RAJI, Ivica

5 RAEVI, Mitar

6 RANATOVI, eljko

7 AINOVI, Nikola

8 ANTI, Ivan

9 ANTI, Vladimir0 APONJA, Dragomir

1 SAVI, eljko

2 EELJ, Vojislav

3 SIKIRICA, Duko

4 SIMATOVI, Franko

5 SIMI, Blagoje

136 SIMI, Milan

137 SKOPLJAK, Pero

138 LJIVANANIN, Veselin

139 STAKI, Milomir

140 STANII, Jovica

141 STANII, Mio

142 STANKOVI, Radovan

143 STOJI, Bruno

144 STOJILJKOVI, Vlajko

145 STRUGAR, Pavle

146 TADI, Duko

147 TADI, Miroslav

148 TALI, Momir

149 TARULOVSKI, Johan

150 TIMARAC, Nedjeljko

151 TODOROVI, Stevan

152 TODOVI, Savo

153 TOLIMIR, Zdravko

154 TRBI, Milorad

155 VASILJEVI, Mitar

156 VUKOVI, Zoran

157 ZARI, Simo

158 ZEC, Milan

159 ZELENOVI, Dragan

160 IGI, Zoran

161 UPLJANIN, Stojan

FORMAL CHARGES

INITIAL APPEARANCE

TRIAL JUDGMENT

TRIAL CONVICTION


APPEAL JUDGMENT

APPEAL CONVICTION


INDICTMENT WITHDRAWN O

REFERRED TO NATIONAL

JURISDICTION

DEATH OF DEFENDANT


SYMBOL KEY

TRIBUNAL CASES


12/48

R 21

R

1

2

3

4 5 6 7

89

10

1

11

213

14

1

16

17181

920

21

22

23

2

4

HOURS

TWODAYS

=

15,984DEAD

TWODAYS

=

15,984DEAD

TWODAYS

=

15,984DEAD

1

2

3

4 5 6 7

89

10

1

11

213

14

1

16

17181

920

21

22

23

2

4

HOURS

THREEDAYS=

23,976DEAD

THREEDAYS=

23,976DEAD

THREEDAYS=

23,976DEAD

1

2

3

4 5 6 7

8

16

17181

920

21

22

23

2

4

HOURS

FOURDAYS

=

31,968DEAD

FOURDAYS

=

31,968DEAD

FOURDAYS

=

31,968DEAD

1

2

3

4 5 6 7

8

16

17181

920

21

22

23

2

4

HOURS

FIVEDAYS

=

39,960DEAD

FIVEDAYS

=

39,960DEAD

FIVEDAYS

=

39,960DEAD

1

2

3

4 5 6 7

8

16

1718

1920

21

22

23

2

4

HOURS SIXDAYS

=

47,952DEAD

SIXDAYS=

47,952DEAD

SIXDAYS=

47,952DEAD

1

2

3

4

5 6 7 8

910

11

12

1

314

1

16

17

181920

21

22

23

24

HOURS

ONEDAY

=

7,992DEAD

ONEDAY

=

7,992DEAD

ONEDAY

=

7,992DEAD

333 DEAD

The Interahamwe searching the forest

then saw the Witness and the baby

she was carrying on her back. The

Interahamwe put the baby on the ground

and stripped and beat the Witness untilshe lost consciousness. [...] When the

Witness regained consciousness, she

saw her raped daughter dead, with her

mouth open and legs apart. Another

child, soaked in the blood from her raped

daughter's vagina, was screaming next to

the dead body.

- Excerpt from Judgment in Prosecutor v. Kajelijeli,

citing witness testimony

NUMBER OF DAYS:

100RWANDANS MASSACRED:

800,000NUMBER OF PAGES THESECHARTS WOULD SPAN:

16+

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNFOR RWAN

ICTR


13/48

R


CTR 23

KIGALI

GITARMA

BYUMBA

RUHENGERI

BUTARE

GIKONGORO

KIBUYE

KIBUNGO

CYANGUGU

GISENYI

RWANDARWANDA

BurundiBurundi

UgandaUganda

Democratic

Republic of

Congo

Democratic

Republic of

Congo

TanzaniaTanzania

The UN Security Council estab-

lished the ICTR under Chapter VII

of the UN Charter in response to

the genocide in Rwanda. The 1994

Rwandan genocide was fueled by

long-running ethnic and political

tensions between Hutu and Tutsi

groups, which were exacerbated

during Belgiums colonial rule and

continued after Rwanda gainedindependence in 1962.

In the years following Rwandas inde-

pendence, waves of Hutu discrimina-

tion, harassment and violence drove

many Tutsis from the country, includ-

ing to neighboring Uganda where they

formed the Rwandan Patriotic Front

(RPF) in 1990. Following a three-year

civil war waged between the RPF and

government forces, Rwandan presi-

dent Habyarimana agreed to the Aru-

sha Peace Agreement in 1993, which

called for the creation of multiparty

democracy in Rwanda. Hutu extrem-

ists denounced the Arusha Peace

Agreement and intensified their pro-

paganda campaign against Tutsis,

notably through the press and Radio-

Television Libre des Mille Collines

(RTLMC).

On April 6, 1994, a plane carryingRwanda and Burundis presidents was

shot down outside Kigali. RTLMC im-

mediately blamed president Habyari-

manas assassination on Tutsis (the

responsible parties have never been

conclusively identified) and within

hours the Rwandan army, along with

Hutu militias known as Interaha-

mwe, began setting up roadblocks,

apprehending Tutsis and massacring

them. Hundreds of thousands of ci-

vilians were enlisted or coerced into

participating in the killings, which be-

gan targeting not only Tutsis but also

moderate Hutus, as well as those who

refused to participate in the slaughter.

From April to mid-July 1994, when the

RPF gained control over the country

and effectively ended the genocide,

approximately 800,000 Rwandans

were massacred, with countless more

raped, mutilated and tortured.To its great discredit, the international

community did little to address the

ongoing slaughter in Rwanda. As a

consequence of the 1993 Arusha Peace

Agreement, the UN had established

the United Nations Assistance Mis-

sion for Rwanda (UNAMIR), headed

by Canadian General Romeo Dallaire,

to assist in Rwandas transition. In the

months preceding the genocide, the

UN largely ignored General Dallaires

warnings of an impending campaign

of extermination. Then, once the

genocide had begun, the UN reduced

its UNAMIR presence in Rwanda from

2,539 to 270 personnel, effectively re-

nouncing any armed intervention to

stop the massacre. Only after the RPF

had halted most of the killings and

forced Hutu genocidaires toward the

Congolese border in July 1994 was any

significant international assistancesent to Rwanda. It was against this

backdrop of inactivity, and the then-

recent establishment of the ICTY, that

the UN Security Council established

the ICTR in November 1994.

LOCATED IN ARUSHA, TANZANIA

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNALFOR RWANDA

1%TWA

90%

HUTU

9%

TUTSI

MAP OF RWANDA

provincial capital

national capital

RWANDA


8,373,963

OVERVIEW


14/48

R 25

R

NOV

OCT

SEP

AUG

JUL

JUN

MAY

APR

MAR

FEB

JANJAN

NOV

OCT

SEP

AUG

JUL

JUN

MAY

APR

MAR

FEB

JANJAN

JANU ARY 1 1

General Dallaire, forcecommander of the UNAssistance Mission for

Rwanda (UNAMIR),sends a telegram to UNSecretary General withkey information

regarding the risk ofgenocide in Rwanda.

FEBRUARY

General Dallaire continues to request permissionfor UNAMIR to take a more active role in Rwandain light of the growing threat of violence.

MARCH 22

UNAMIR troops reach 2,539 personnel from 24participating countries, though their mandate touse force to protect civilians remains limited.

APRIL

Following the killing of 10Belgian UNAMIRpeacekeepers, Belgian

and French UNAMIRtroops leave Rwanda.Days later UN SecurityCouncil unanimously

votes to reduce UNAMIRpresence to 270 troops.

MAY 30

UN Secretary General Rwandareport to UN Security Council finallyuses the word genocide, though

members of the Council still refuseto formally recognise the slaughteras such.

JULY 1 7

UN reports that over a million Rwandese have crossedover into Zaire fearing reprisals from the RPF.

NTERNATIONAL RESPONSE

JUNE 22

UN Security Council authorizes the deployment of French troops in

Rwanda, which largely serves to protect fleeing Hutu genocidairesfrom RPF reprisals.

APRIL 6

The plane carrying Rwandan President Habyarimana andthe President of Burundi is shot down outside of Kigali.

WEEK OF APRIL 11

Murambi Technical School

massacre. 2,600 to 4,000 peoplekilled.

APRIL 15-16

Massacre at Cyahinda church.

10,000 to 15,000 people killed.

WEEK OF APRIL 18

Massacre at Karama Church.Tens of thousands of peoplekilled.

MID-MAY

ICRC estimates that500,000 have died sofar in the genocide.

LATE JUNE

Rwandese government forcesweakened as RPF intensifies itsoffensives to take Kigali and othergovernment-controlled areas.

JULY - AUGUS T

Hutu government flees Rwanda, followed by a tide of refugeesfearing reprisals from the RPF.

JULY 4

RPF captures Kigali, thus effectively ending the genocide. Over

the past 100 days, an average of 333 Rwandans were killedevery hour.

DOMESTIC EVENTSDOMESTIC EVENTS

Within hours of President Habyarimanas death, the Rwandan army and Hutu militiasbegan slaughtering Tutsis and moderate Hutus. Hundreds of thousands of Hutus join in

the mass killings, which continue for the next hundred days.

APRIL - JULY

MAY 21

RPF forces capture theKigali airport.

EARLY JUNE

Massacre at Nyakizu. 20,000people killed.

Government officials in a position to take over thecountry are assassinated, including Prime Minister

Uwilingiyimana, who is killed along with the Belgian UNpersonnel guarding her.

APRIL 7

NOVEMBER 8

The UN Security Council votes to

create the ICTR under Chapter VII ofthe UN Charter.

RWANDARWANDA

1994

R



15/48

R 27

R

Sitting in Arusha, Tanzania, the ICTR was created

in November 1994 by the UN Security Council under

Chapter VII of the UN Charter.

The ICTR has jurisdiction over crimes against hu-

manity, genocide, and war crimes in non-interna-

tional armed conflicts, which were committed in

the territory of Rwanda between 1 January 1994

and 31 December 1994. The ICTR may also prosecuteRwandan citizens responsible for the commission of

these crimes in the territory of neighboring States

during the same period.

The judicial chambers of the ICTR, which consist

of three Trial Chambers and one Appeals Chamber,

are comprised of international judges. Although all

ICTR activities were to be completed by 2010, trials

and appeals are still ongoing before the tribunal,

and nine indictees remain at large. The ICTR is

now actively referring cases to Rwanda and has

established a residual mechanism as it moves to

wrap up its proceedings.

CREATED IN 1994 PURSUANT TO UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR RWANDA

ICTR ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS, 1994 - 2013

0

150

100

50

200

94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08 10 12

TOTAL

CONTRIBUTIONS

JAPA NUSA GERMANYMILLIONSOF USD

MILLIONS

OF USD

ESTIMATED

BENIN

16

MALI

20


FORTY FIVEJean Paul Akayesu

Michel Bagaragaza

Thoneste Bagosora

Jean Bosco Barayagwiza

Simon Bikindi

Paul Bisengimana

Sylvestre Gacumbitsi

Jean-Baptiste Gatete

Idelphonse Hategekimana

Samuel Imanishimwe

Juvnal Kajelijeli

Callixte Kalimanzira

Jean Kambanda

Jean de Dieu Kamuhanda

Gaspard Kanyarukiga

Franois Karera

Clment Kayishema

Mikaeli Muhimana

Yussuf Munyakazi

Alfred Musema

Tharcisse Muvunyi

Ferdinand Nahimana

Simeon Nchamihigo

Emmanuel Ndindabahizi

Hassan Ngeze

Eliezer Niyitegeka

Anatole Nsengiyumva

Aloys Ntabakuze

Elizaphan Ntakirutimana

Grard Ntakirutimana

Dominique Ntawukulilyayo

Joseph Nzabirinda

Tharcisse Renzaho

Juvnal Rugambarara

Georges Ruggiu

Emmanuel Rukundo

Georges Rutaganda

Vincent Rutaganira

Obed Ruzindana

Laurent Semanza

Athanase Seromba

Joseph Serugendo

Omar Serushago

Ephrem Setako

Aloys Simba

TOTAL ESTIMATED COST OF ICTR

$1,757,521,910

DATE OF FIRST ICTR INDICTMENT

28 NOV 1995

FIRST ICTR INDICTEES

Kayishema, Muhimana,

Ndimbati, Rutaganira,

Ruzindana, Ryandikayo and

Sikubwabo

INDICTMENTS ISSUED

90average of 5 per year

ONGOING PROCEEDINGS

SIXTEENINDIVIDUALS

PLEADED GUILTY

NINE


TEN


THREEBizimana, Kabuga and Mpiranya (the cases

of an additional six at large indictees werereferred to national jurisdictions)

NUMBER OF COUNTRIES WHERECONVICTED PERSONS ARE/WERESERVING THEIR SENTENCES

FOURsee map for countries and numbers ofconvicted persons (remaining are detainedin Arusha awaiting transfer)




16/48

R 29

R | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10

PROC EDUR ES BEFOR E T HE I CTR LARGELY MIRROR THOSE OF THE ICTY.

Thus, the ICTRs Statute and its Rules of Procedure and Evidence outline the

procedures applicable to cases brought before the tribunal. Under these do cu-

ments, the Prosecutor has broad discretion to initiate investigations and to

indict individuals suspected of crimes that are within the parameters of the

ICTRs jurisdiction.



defendants then appear before the ICTR where they enter a plea of guilty or




or innocence (in which case they are released ). The Trial Chambers de-

terminations can be appealed to the Appeals Chamber, which, following an

appeals hearing, issues an Appeals Judgment affirming, reversing or revisingthe Trial Judgment. Defendants still in custody who are acquitted on appeal

are released .

Defendants whose Trial Judgment convictions are affirmed and/or who are

convicted on appeal are typically transferred to serve out the remainder

of their sentence to one of the domestic jurisdictions that have signed agree-

ments with the ICTR. Proceedings against these convicted defendants close

once they are released either through early release or after serving out the

entirety of their sentence.

More generally, proceedings against defendants before the ICTR may be termi-

nated if their indictment is withdrawn or if their case is referred to a competent

national jurisdiction , and where a defendant dies .

As is evident from the graphics that follow, the ICTR has indicted a little more

than half as many individuals as the ICTY. Proceedings before the ICTR have

also proceeded at a slo wer pace than those before the ICTY. Moreover, a num-

ber of ICTR indictees remain at large, though their cases are increasingly be-

ing referred to Rwandas domestic tribunals as the ICTR moves to wind up its

operations.

CASE BY CASE INFORMATIONCASE BY CASE INFORMATION

SYMBOL KEY

FORMAL CHARGES

INITIAL APPEARANCE

TRIAL JUDGMENT

TRIAL CONVICTION


APPEAL JUDGMENT

APPEAL CONVICTION



DEATH OF DEFENDANT


1 AKAYESU, Jean Paul

2 BAGAMBIKI, Emmanuel

3 BAGARAGAZA, Michel

4 BAGILISHEMA, Ignace

5 BAGOSORA, Thoneste

6 BARAYAGWIZA, Jean Bosco

7 BICAMUMPAKA, Jrme

8 BIKINDI, Simon

9 BISENGIMANA, Paul

10 BIZIMANA, Augustin

11 BIZIMUNGU, Augustin

12 BIZIMUNGU, Casimir13 BUCYIBARUTA, Laurent

14 GACUMBITSI, Sylvestre

15 GATETE, Jean Baptiste

16 HATEGEKIMANA, Idelphonse

17 IMANISHIMWE, Samuel

18 KABILIGI, Gratien

19 KABUGA, Flicien

20 KAJELIJELI, Juvnal

21 KALIMANZIRA, Callixte

22 KAMBANDA, Jean

23 KAMUHANDA, Jean de Dieu

24 KANYABASHI, Joseph

25 KANYARUKIGA, Gaspard

26 KAREMERA, Edouard

27 KARERA, Franois

28 KAYISHEMA, Clment

29 KAYISHEMA, Fulgence30 MPAMBARA, Jean

31 MPIRANYA, Protais

32 MUGENZI, Justin

33 MUGIRANEZA, Prosper

34 MUHIMANA, Mikaeli

35 MUNYAGISHARI, Bernard

TRIBUNAL CASES


17/48

R 31

R | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10

| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13

71 RENZAHO, Tharcisse

72 RUGAMBARARA, Juvnal

73 RUGGIU, Georges

74 RUKUNDO, Emmanuel

75 RUSATIRA, Lonidas

76 RUTAGANDA, Georges

77 RUTAGANIRA, Vincent

78 RUZINDANA, Obed

79 RWAMAKUBA, Andr

80 RYANDIKAYO, Charles

81 SAGAHUTU, Innocent

82 SEMANZA, Laurent83 SEROMBA, Athanase

84 SERUGENDO, Joseph

85 SERUSHAGO, Omar

86 SETAKO, Ephrem

87 SIKUBWABO, Charles

88 SIMBA, Aloys

89 UWINKINDI, Jean Bosco

90 ZIGIRANYIRAZO, Protais

6 MUNYAKAZI, Yussuf

7 MUNYARUGARAMA, Pheneas (under seal)

8 MUNYESHYAKA, Wenceslas

9 MUSABYIMANA, Samuel

0 MUSEMA, Alfred

1 MUVUNYI, Tharcisse

2 NAHIMANA, Ferdinand

3 NCHAMIHIGO, Simeon

4 NDAHIMANA, Gregoire

5 NDAYAMBAJE, Elie

6 NDIMBATI, Aloys

7 NDINDABAHIZI, Emmanuel8 NDINDILIYIMANA, Augustine

9 NGEZE, Hassan

0 NGIRABATWARE, Augustin

1 NGIRUMPATSE, Mathieu

2 NIYITEGEKA, Eliezer

3 NIZEYIMANA, Idelphonse

4 NSABIMANA, Sylvain

5 NSENGIMANA, Hormisdas

6 NSENGIYUMVA, Anatole

7 NTABAKUZE, Aloys

8 NTAGANZWA, Ladislas

9 NTAGERURA, Andr

0 NTAHOBALI, Arsne Shalom

1 NTAKIRUTIMANA, Elizaphan

2 NTAKIRUTIMANA, Gerard

3 NTAWUKULILYAYO, Dominique

4 NTEZIRYAYO, Alphonse5 NTUYAHAGA, Bernard

6 NYIRAMASUHUKO, Pauline

7 NZABIRINDA, Joseph

8 NZABONIMANA, Callixte

9 NZIRORERA, Joseph

0 NZUWONEMEYE, Franois-Xavier

FORMAL CHARGES

INITIAL APPEARANCE

TRIAL JUDGMENT

TRIAL CONVICTION


APPEAL JUDGMENT

APPEAL CONVICTION


INDICTMENT WITHDRAWN O

REFERRED TO NATIONAL

JURISDICTION

DEATH OF DEFENDANT


SYMBOL KEY

TRIBUNAL CASES


18/48

L 33

SL

10

3 , 50 0 7 ,0 0 0 1 0 , 5 00 1 4 ,0 0 0 17,500 2 1 ,0 0 0 2 4 ,5 0 0 2 8 ,0 0 0 3 1, 5 00 3 5, 0 00 3 8 ,5 0 0 4 2 ,0 0 0 4 5, 5 00 4 9 ,0 0 0

50,000

When I was young,a long time ago Iused to write. Now Ican't write becauseI do not have hands.Testimony of Witness TF1-072 in the Brima et al trial.

NUMBER OF UN PEACEKEEPERS INSIERRA LEONE IN 2000:

17,500ESTIMATED NUMBER OF DEATHSDUE TO CONFLICT:

50,000

SPECIAL COURT FSIERRA LEO

SCSL


19/48

LOCATED IN FREETOWN, SIERRA LEONE

SPECIAL COURT FOR SIERRA LEONE

SL

SCSL 35


The SCSL was created in 2002

through an agreement between

Sierra Leone and the UN, in re-

sponse to the atrocities com-

mitted during the civil war that

ravaged the country throughout

the 1990s.

The protracted conflict in Sierra Le-

one opposed pro-government forces,

namely the Civil Defence Forces (CDF)to two rebel groups (the Revolution-

ary United Front (RUF) and the Armed

Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC)),

as well as each factions respective in-

ternational allies.

By the early 1990s, unemployment in

Sierra Leone was widespread and the

educational system had collapsed.

Leaders of the RUF, aided by Liberian

President Charles Taylor, emerged out

of this discontent with the objective of

overthrowing the ruling government

and taking control of the countrys

diamond mines. In 1997, a rebel faction

of the Sierra Leone Army, the AFRC,

carried out a coup dtat against the

democratically-elected government.

The AFRC then aligned itself with the

RUF in an uneasy power-sharing agree-

ment, which opposed them to the

pro-government CDF. In 1998, backed

by foreign troops from the EconomicCommunity of West African States

Monitoring Group (ECOMOG), the CDF

managed to regain control of key dis-

tricts in Sierra Leone and retake control

of Freetown. Additional international

personnel from the UN Mission in Sier-

ra Leone (UNAMSIL), whose presence

grew to 17,500, deployed to Sierra Le-

one to try to maintain peace between

the warring factions and protect the

civilian population. After the signing

and subsequent collapse of numerous

peace agreements between the gov-

ernment and rebel forces, the civil war

officially ended in January of 2002.

Throughout, the conflict in Sierra Le-

one was marked by exceptional bru-

tality, including the widespread con-

scription of children as soldiers and

sexual slaves, and the calculated physi-

cal mutilation of civilians. The RUF, inparticular, became infamous for its

amputation of civilians limbs as a ter-

ror tactic. An estimated 50,000 people

were killed during the Sierra Leonean

conflict, while countless others were

forced to flee their homes.

1%CREOLE, EUROPEAN,LEBANESE & ASIAN

30%

MENDE

30%TEMNE

39%OTHER

SIERRA LEONE


4,793,121

FREETOWN

MAKENI

Kenema

Bo

SIERRA LEONESIERRA LEONE

GuineaGuinea

LiberiLiberi

MAP OF SIERRA LEONE

provincial capital

national capital

OVERVIEW


20/48

L 37

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

SUMMER 1997

International outcry over AFRC coup in Sierra

Leone. ECOMOG troops are mandated with

addressing the civil conflict in Sierra Leone.

JULY 1 998

UN Security Council

establishes a monitoring

group for Sierra Leone.

MAY 2000

British Royal Marines help the

government battle RUF forces.

INTERNATIONAL RESPONSE

OCTOBER 1997

UN Security Council imposes sanctions on Sierra

Leone, including arms and petroleum bans.

MARCH 2001

UN increases UNAMSIL

forces to 17,500 personnel.

JAN UARY 2002

UN and Sierra Leone sign an

agreeement to establish the

SCSL in Freetown.

OCTOBER 1999

UNAMSIL created to

implement Lom Peace

Agreement.

NOVEMBER 2000

New ceasefire signed betweengovernment and RUF in Abuja.MARCH 1996

President Kabbah takes office after elections

amidst ongoing civil conflict between

government and the RUF.

NOVEMBER 1996

President Kabbah signs

Abidjan Peace Accord with

RUF, granting their forces

broad amnesty. Hostilities

quickly resume, however.

MAY 1997

Faction of Sierra Leone Army overthrows the

government of President Kabbah and forms the

AFRC, which enters into uneasy power sharing

agreement with the RUF.

OCTOBER 1997

Conakry Peace Plan signed in Guinea to

restore Constitutional governance to

Sierra Leone. AFRC nevertheless

continues to cling to power.

FEBRUARY 1998

Nigerian-led forces from ECOMOG remove

AFRC from Freetown and reinstate

President Kabbah.

SPRING 1998

ECOMOG andpro-government CDFretake several districts inSierra Leone.

JULY 1 999

Government and RUF sign

Lom Peace Agreement.AFRC not represented. RUF

hostilies still continue.

JUNE 2000

President Kabbah asks the

UN to create a tribunal to

prosecute human rights

abuse perpetrators.

JANU ARY 2 002

Civil war is formally declared ov

President Kabbah and weapons

symbolically burned. .


EARLY 1999

AFRC forces invade

Freetown before being

forced to retreat, which

results in massive

civilian casualties.

SIERRA LEONESIERRA LEONE

SL



21/48

L 39

SL

Sitting in Freetown, Sierra Leone, the SCSL was

created through an agreement between Sierra

Leone and the UN. It has jurisdiction over both

international crimes, namely crimes against hu-

manity and war crimes, as well as crimes under

Sierra Leonean law committed in Sierra Leone

since 30 Nov. 1996. The SCSL exercises primacy

over the national courts of Sierra Leone, which

have concurrent jurisdiction. From 2002 to 2004,

the SCSL also operated alongside a national Truth

and Reconciliation Commission.

The judicial chambers of the SCSL, which consist of

two Trial Chambers and an Appeals Chamber, are

comprised of a combination of judges appointed by

the UN (a majority) and by Sierra Leone (a minor-

ity). Given this mix of domestic and international

elements, the SCSL is commonly described as a

hybrid tribunal.

While one indictee remains at large, all other SCSL

trials have been completed, including that of Charles

Taylor, the former president of Liberia, which was

exceptionally held at The Hague out of securityconcerns. Charles Taylor's trial conviction is currently

before the SCSL Appeals Chamber.

CREATED IN 2002 THROUGH AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN SIERRA LEONE AND THE UNITED NATIONS

SPECIAL COURT FOR SIERRA LEONE

SCSL ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS, 2002 - 2011 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST OF SCSL

$208,211,374

DATE OF FIRST SCSL INDICTMENT

7 MAR 2003

FIRST SCSL INDICTEES

Bockarie, Brima, Kallon,

Koroma, Norman, Sankoh,

Sesay and Taylor

INDICTMENTS ISSUED


ONGOING PROCEEDINGS

TWO INDIVIDUALS

PLEADED GUILTY

ZERO


ZERO


ONEJohnny Paul Koroma is still consideredat large though there are reports he isdeceased.

NUMBER OF COUNTRIES WHERECONVICTED PERSONS ARE SERVINGTHEIR SENTENCES

ONEsee map for countries and numbers ofconvicted persons

0

50

25

01 03 05 07 09 11

MILLIONS

OF USD

MILLIONS

OF USD

ESTIMATEDTOTAL

CONTRIBUTIONS

SIERRA LEONEUSA

UK

RWANDARWANDA

8


EIGHTAlex Tamba Brima

Morris Kallon

Issa Hassan Sesay

Augustine Gbao

Brima Bazzy Kamara

Moinina Fofana

Allieu Kondewa

Santigie Borbor Kanu

In addition, Charles Taylor,found guilty by the SCSL TrialChamber on 26 April 2012,is currently appealing hisconviction before the SCSL

Appeals Chamber




22/48

L 41

SL

1 BOCKARIE, Sam

2 BRIMA, Alex Tamba

3 FOFANA, Moinina

4 GBAO, Augustine

5 KALLON, Morris

6 KAMARA, Brima Bazzy

7 KANU, Santigie Borbor

8 KONDEWA, Allieu

9 KOROMA, Johnny Paul

10 NORMAN, Samuel Hinga

11 SANKOH, Foday

12 SESAY, Issa Hassan

13 TAYLOR, Charles

PROCEDURES BEFORE THE SCSL ALSO LARGELY MIRROR THOSE

of the ICTY and the ICTR. Thus, the SCSLs Statute and its Rules of Procedure

and Evidence outline the procedures applicable to cases brought before the

tribunal. Under these documents, the Prosecutor has broad discretion to initi-

ate investigations and to indict individuals suspected of crimes that are within

the parameters of the SCSLs jurisdiction.



defendants then appear before the SCSL where they enter a plea of guilty or




or innocence (in which case they are released ). The Trial Chambers

determinations can be appealed to the Appeals Chamber, which, following an

appeals hearing, issues an Appeals Judgment affirming, reversing or revisingthe Trial Judgment. Defendants still in custody who are acquitted on appeal

are released .


convicted on appeal are typically transferred to serve out the remainder

of their sentence to one of the domestic jurisdictions that have signed agree-

ments with the SCSL. Proceedings against these convicted defendants close

once they are released either through early release or after serving out the

entirety of their sentence.

More generally, proceedings against defendants before the SCSL may be ter-

minated if their indictment is withdrawn or if their case is referred to a com-

petent national jurisdiction , and where a defendant dies .

SYMBOL KEY

FORMAL CHARGES

INITIAL APPEARANCE

TRIAL JUDGMENT

TRIAL CONVICTION


APPEAL JUDGMENT

APPEAL CONVICTION



DEATH OF DEFENDANT


| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10

TRIBUNAL CASES


23/48

C 43

CC

And for the past 32 years [his]absence is something that wecannot bear. It is a permanentabsence. [His] suffering was

and is still our suffering and itdoes not go away with time, andI can tell you that the sufferingin fact is more and more intense.It is like a gigantic screen thatwould be too close to our eyes.Testimony of Witness M. Lefeuvre in Case 001

ESTIMATED NUMBER KILLED:

1.7 MILLIONESTIMATED PROPORTION OFTHE POPULATION KILLEDIN 3.5 YEARS:

MORE THANONE FIFTH

ESTIMATED POPULATION:

7.9 MILLION

EXTRAORDINARY CHAMBERS IN TCOURTS OF CAMBO

ECCC


24/48

LOCATED IN PHNOM PENH, CAMBODIA

EXTRAORDINARY CHAMBERS IN THECOURTS OF CAMBODIA

CC


ECCC 45

The ECCC was created in 2005

through an agreement between

Cambodia and the UN to pros-

ecute the surviving senior leaders

of the Khmer Rouge and those

most responsible for the atroci-

ties committed during the Khmer

Rouge period.

The Khmer Rouge ruled Cambodia

from April 17, 1975, to January 6, 1979, arelatively short period considering the

lasting devastation that the regime

inflicted upon the country and its peo-

ple. At least 1.7 million Cambodians, or

approximately one fifth of the entire

population, are estimated to have died

during the Khmer Rouge regime due to

execution, overwork, starvation, and

disease.

The Khmer Rouge actively sought to

destroy the fabric of Cambodian so-

cial life in order to transform the tra-

ditional, family-centered society into a

state-centered, self-supporting com-

munist model. The Khmer Rouge tore

families apart, arranged mass mar-

riages, destroyed pagodas, and de-

frocked Buddhist monks. Cambodians

suffered through intense forced labor

and widespread famine, all the while

enduring the continuous threat of vio-

lence and death. The Khmer Rouge es-tablished extermination camps, includ-

ing the notorious S-21 security center,

where upwards of 12,000 men, women

and children were systematically in-

terrogated, tortured and executed.

In addition to the profound human

toll brought about by their policies,

the Khmer Rouge destroyed much of

Cambodias civil infrastructure, includ-

ing the judicial system. Only six to ten

lawyers are estimated to have survived

the era.

Khmer Rouge forces fled Phnom Penh

in 1979, in the face of a Vietnamese mil-

itary offensive. Armed conflict contin-

ued in Cambodia throughout the 1980s

as various factions, including those ofthe remaining Khmer Rouge, battled

the Vietnamese-backed government.

Following the 1991 Paris Peace Accords,

national elections were held in Cambo-

dia under UN supervision. In 1997, the

Cambodian government requested

UN assistance in prosecuting former

Khmer Rouge leaders. Several years of

fraught negotiations ensued between

Cambodia and the UN before the ECCC

was ultimately established in 2005.

70,000OTHER

7.1 milli onKHMER

20,000THAI

20,000VIETNAMESE

430,000CHINESE

250,000CHAM

CAMBODIA

Total EstimatedPopulation, 1975:

7,890,000

PHNOMPENH

KMPNGCHAM

KRCHN

STNGTRNG

SIEMRAB

SISOPHON

BATDMBNG

KMPT

KAMPONGSEM

KRONGKAHKONG

CAMBODIACAMBODIA

KMPNGCHHNANG

POUTHISAT

ThailandThailand

LaosLaos

VietnamVietnam

MAP OF CAMBODIA

provincial capital

national capital

OVERVIEW


25/48

C 47

CC

1975

1975

1976

1976

1977

1977

1978

1978

1979

1979

APRIL 1975

Following the Khmer Rouges capture of Phnom

Penh, the foreign presence is reduced to virtually

nothing and Cambodia is sealed off from most of

the outside world for the next 3.5 years.


SUMMER 1975

An exodus of civilians of

Vietnamese origin residing in

Cambodia flee to South

Vietnam.

1977

The international community continues

to fail to have any concerted response

to the slaughter in Cambodia.

MARCH 19781979

Caught in a Cold War mentality, the UN refuses to

recognize the new Vietnamese-supported government in

Phnom Penh. Despite the death of upwards of 1.7 million

people under the Khmer Rouge, the UN will instead

continue to recognize the exiled Khmer Rouge

government as the official Cambodian representatives

until the 1990s.

1976

Reports from Cambodian refugees

escaping into camps on the Thai

border describe brutal living

conditions and mass exterminations

of class ennemies.

17 APRIL 1975

Khmer Rouge forces capture Phnom Penh. Pol Pot and the Khmer

Rouge leadership forcibly relocate 2 million Cambodians from urbancenters to the countryside. Reprisals against Lon Nol supporters are

swift and all those corrupted by foreign influences are increasingly

viewed with suspicion by the regime.

MARCH 1970 - APRIL 1975

Following a military coup by General Lon Nol against King Sihanouk

in 1970, Cambodia suffers through a bloody civil war, which opposes

the US-backed General against an uneasy alliance of Communist

Khmer Rouge and pro-royalist forces.

MARCH 1976

Secret directive from Khmer

Rouge leaders is issued that

details which internal groups are

responsible for executing which

perceived ennemies.

FALL/WINTER 1976

Purges within the

Khmer Rouges own

ranks intensify. S-21

receives an ever larger

influx of prisonners.

AUGUST 1975

Initial meetings are conducted to

establish S-21, the infamous execution

camp in Phnom Penh, where upwards of

12,000 individuals were sytematically

interrogated, tortured and executed.

EARLY 1977

As borders clashes between

Cambodia and Vietnamescalate, China sends large

quantities of arms to support

the Khmer Rouge against

Russian-backed Vietnamese

troops.

DECEMBER 1977

Cambodia severs diplomatic

relations with Vietnam. The

Khmer Rouge intensify its

increasingly paranoid internal

purges.

Famine grips large parts of Cambodia. By

1979, more than one fifth of the entire

Cambodian population will have died due

to execution, overwork, disease and

starvation.

JANU ARY 19

Khmer Rouge

Phnom Penh t

Vietnamese f

continue to w

against the Vi

supported gov

1990s.

With Vietnamese forces moving toward

Phnom Penh, Khmer Rouge execute all but

a handful of remaining S-21 detainees.


JANU ARY 197 9

1977 AND 1978



26/48

C 49

CC

Sitting in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, the ECCC was

created through an agreement between Cambodia

and the UN. The ECCC has jurisdiction over inter-

national crimes, namely crimes against humanity,

genocide and war crimes, as well as crimes under

Cambodian law that were committed by senior

leaders of the Khmer Rouge and those most re-

sponsible for these crimes during the period from

17 April 1975 to 6 J anuary 1979.

The judicial chambers of the ECCC are modeled on

the Cambodian civil law system and consist of a

Pre-Trial Chamber (3 Cambodian + 2 International

Judges), a Trial Chamber (3 Cambodian + 2 Inter-

national Judges), and a Supreme Court Chamber

(4 Cambodian + 3 International Judges), as well

as two Co-Investigating Judges (1 Cambodian +

1 International Judge) and two Co-Prosecutors (1

Cambodian + 1 International Prosecutor).

Similarly to the SCSL, the ECCC is commonly referred

to as a hybrid tribunal given its blend of international

and domestic components.

ECCC ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS, 2005 - 2016 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST OF ECCC

$337,850,800

DATE OF FIRST ECCC INDICTMENT

18 JULY 2007

FIRST ECCC INDICTEES

Kaing Guek Eav,Khieu Samphan,Nuon Chea,Ieng Sary and

Ieng ThirithINDICTMENTS ISSUED

5average of 1 per year

ONGOING PROCEEDINGS

THREEINDIVIDUALSOne of the four defendants brought to

trial in Case 2 was found unfit to stand

trial. No named suspects in Cases 3 and 4.

PLEADED GUILTY

ZEROIn keeping with the Cambodian civil lawsystem, the ECCC does not formally allowfor guilty pleas.


ZERO


CREATED IN 2005 THROUGH AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN CAMBODIA AND THE UNITED NATIONS

EXTRAORDINARY CHAMBERS IN THECOURTS OF CAMBODIA

MILLIONS

OF USD

MILLIONS

OF USD

0

20

30

40

10

50

05 07 09 11 13 15

TOTAL

CONTRIBUTIONS

CAMBODIAJAPA N UN ESTIMATED



ZERO


ONECambodia


ONEKaing Guek Eav (alias "Duch")

In addition to the conviction against Duch,and the ongoing trial proceedings against the

defendants in Case 2, preliminary investiga-

tions were started against unnamed suspects

in Cases 3 and 4. Proceedings in Cases 3 and 4,

which have proven highly contentious within

the ECCC, are ongoing .


27/48

C 51

CC

PROCEDURES BEFORE THE ECCC ARE LARGELY DERIVED FROM CAMBODIA'S

civil legal system and differ substantially from those of the other international

criminal tribunals. The ECCC Law and the ECCC's Internal Rules and Regula-

tions outline the procedures applicable to cases brought before the tribunal.

Under these documents, the Co-Prosecutors have broad discretion to initiate

preliminary investigations against individuals suspected of crimes that are

within the parameters of the ECCCs jurisdiction. If there is sufficient prelimi-

nary evidence, the Co-Prosecutors file an Introductory Submission with the

Co-Investigating Judges , who are tasked with carrying out a judicial investi-

gation into the factual and legal allegations set out in the Introductory Sub-

mission. During their initial appearance before the Co-Investigating Judges

, suspects are notified of the allegations against them. At the conclusion

of the judicial investigation, the Co-Investigating Judges either file a formal

indictment (known as a Closing Order) against a defendant , or dismiss the

proceedings. Disagreements between the Co-Prosecutors or the Co-Investi-gating Judges, as well as appeals of orders from the Co-Investigating Judges,

are settled by the Pre-Trial Chamber.

Following the issuance of a Closing Order by the Co-Investigating Judges, the

case proceeds to trial, at the conclusion of which the Trial Chamber issues a

Trial Judgment , which determines the defendants guilt or innocence (in

which case they are released ). Notably, victims can be formally joined to the

proceedings as Civil Parties, which confers upon them certain procedural rights,

including the right to seek collective and moral reparations. The Trial Cham-

bers determinations, including those regarding reparations, can be appealed

to the Supreme Court Chamber, which, following an appeals hearing, issues an

Appeals Judgment affirming, reversing or revising the Trial Judgment. Defen-

dants still in custody who are acquitted on appeal are released . Defendants

whose Trial Judgment convictions are affirmed and/or who are convicted on

appeal are transferred to a Cambodian detention facility to serve out the

remainder of their sentence. Proceedings against these convicted defendants

come to a close once they are released . More generally, proceedings against

a defendant before the ECCC may also be terminated where the indictment is

withdrawn or where the defendant dies .

SYMBOL KEY

INTRODUCTORY SUBMISSION

INITIAL APPEARANCE

FORMAL INDICTMENT (CLOSING ORDER)

TRIAL JUDGMENT

TRIAL CONVICTION


APPEAL JUDGMENT

APPEAL CONVICTION


INDICTMENT WITHDRAWN

DEATH OF DEFENDANT


1 IENG, Sary

2 IENG, Thirith*

3 KAING, Guek Eav

4 NUON, Chea

5 SAMPHAN, Khieu

6 CASE 003

7 CASE 004

| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10

* Found unfit to stand trial and released from custody.

TRIBUNAL CASES


28/48

53

L

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

8 9 10 11 12 13 14

15 16 17 18 19 20 21

22 23

2METERS

10 METERS

The Security Council unequivocally condemns the 14

February 2005 terrorist bombing in Beirut, Lebanon,

that killed former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq

Hariri and others and caused serious injury to dozens

of people The Security Council expresses its deepest

sympathy and condolences to the people and Government

of Lebanon and to the victims and their families.Security Council Statement of 15 February 2005

SIZE OF IMPACTCRATER LEFT

BY BOMB

NUMBER OFLIVES LOST

SPECIAL TRIBUNAL FLEBAN

STL


29/48


SPECIAL TRIBUNALFOR LEBANON

L


STL 55

The STL was created in 2007 by

the UN Security Council under

Chapter VII of the UN Charter, in

response to Lebanon's request for

assistance in prosecuting those

accused of carrying out a terror-

ist attack on 14 February 2005 in

Beirut. The attack killed 23 people,

including the target of the bomb-

ing the former Lebanese PrimeMinister Rafiq Hariri.

An investigation carried out shortly af-

ter the 14 February 2005 attack impli-

cated individuals with ties to the Syrian

government. Syria exercized substan-

tial control over Lebanese politics as a

result of its continued military presence

in the country. In the months follow-

ing the attack, hundreds of thousands

of Lebanese citizens gathered to pro-

test Syrias presence in Lebanon, while

more attacks on anti-Syrian journalists

and politicians ensued. In response to

demands from the UN, Syria finally an-

nounced the withdrawal of its military

forces from Lebanon in April 2005.

The STL was created through close

consultation between Lebanon and

the UN. Following the 14 February

2005 attack, the UN secretary-general

sent a fact-finding mission to Beirut toenquire into its causes, circumstances

and consequences. In April 2005, the

UN Security Council established the

UN International Independent Investi-

gation Commission (UNIIIC) to gather

evidence and to assist the Lebanese

authorities in their own investigations.

On 13 December 2005, following a se-

ries of other killings and bombings in

Lebanon, the Lebanese government

requested that the UN create a crimi-

nal tribunal of "an international char-

acter." On 23 January 2007, the UN

and the Lebanese government signed

an agreement to create the STL. The

agreement was given to the Leba-

nese parliament for ratification but its

speaker refused to convene the body

to hold the necessary vote. The Leba-

nese government sent a petition to the

UN Secretary General requesting thatthe UN Security Council form the STL,

which it did via Resolution 1757. The

STLs mandate includes the 14 February

2005 attack and any connected attacks

that may have occurred in Lebanon be-

tween 1 October 2004 and 12 December

2005.

1.3%OTHER

59.7%

MUSLIM

39%

CHRISTIAN

LEBANON


3,826,018

TYRE

ZAHLE

BEITEDDINE

TRIPOLI

BYBLOS

BEIRUT

SyriaSyria

IsraelIsrael

Jor danJor dan

MAP OF LEBANON

provincial capital

national capital

Sy r i aSy r i a

I S R AE LI S R AE L

CYP R U SCYP R U S

L E B A N O NL E B A N O N

S AU D I AR AB I AS AU D I AR AB I A

EGYPTEGYPT

JO RDA NJO RDA N

I R AQI R AQ

SYRIASYRIA

TURKEYTURKEY

JordanJordan

OVERVIEW


30/48

57

L


2004

2004

2005

2005

2006

2006

2007

2007

FEBRUARY 2005

UN Security Council denounces attack in Beirut. UNSecretary General sends fact-finding mission to

Lebanon, which recommends an internationalinvestigation to identify the perpetrators.


MARCH 1978

DECEMBER 2005

7 APRIL 2005

UN Security Council establishes UN

International Independent InvestigationCommission (UNIIIC) primarily to investigate14 February 2005 attack.

MARCH 2006

UN Secretary General given

mandate to negotiate with Lebanonabout tribunal. UNIIC delivers third

report to UN.

UN Security Council acknowledges request fromLebanon to form international tribunal. UNIIC

delivers second report to UN.

JANU ARY 2 007

Lebanon and UN sign agreement for STL

MAY 2007

UN Security Council establishes STL to prosecuteperpetrators of 14 February 2005 attack and

related crimes in Lebanon between October 2004and December 2005.

OMESTIC EVENTS

APRIL 2005

Following large anti-Syria protests in Beirut andin response to demands from the UN, Syriawithdraws its military forces from Lebanon.

14 FEBRUARY 2005

A large explosion in Beirut kills 23 people, including formerLebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri, and injures many others.

13 DECEMBER 2005

Following a series of other killings ofanti-Syrian figures in Lebanon, Lebanese

government requests that the UN createan international tribunal.

FALL 2005

Lebanese authorities carry out domesticinvestigation, which results in the arrest offour Lebanese generals, along with theindictment of Syrian figures. In 2009, the four

generals are freed by order of the STL.

JAN UARY 2 007

Speaker of Lebanese parliamento convene the body to vote onratification. Instead, Lebanesegovernment requests that the U

Security Council directly form thunder its UN Charter powers.

JANU ARY 2 007Lebanon and the UN sign an agreement forthe creation of the STL, which is given to

Lebanese parliament for ratification.

OCTOBER 2004

Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri resigns following Syrianinterference in Lebanons political affairs. Syria continues tomaintain a military force in Lebanon and exert influence over itsgovernment.


31/48

59

L

Sitting right outside The Hague, The Netherlands,

the STL was created by the UN Security Council

under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. The STL's

jurisdictio n is limited to crime s unde r domes tic

Lebanese law, including acts of terrorism, related

to the 14 February 2005 attack that killed former

Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Hariri or any con-

nected attacks that may have occurred in Lebanon

between 1 October 2004 and 12 December 2005.

The judicial chambers of the STL consist of a Pre-Trial

Chamber (1 international judge), a Trial Chamber (2

international + 1 Lebanese judge), and an Appeals

Chamber (3 International + 2 Lebanese judges).

In addition to the case regarding the 14 February

2005 attack, which is being tried against four at

large indictees in absentia, the STL has established

jurisdiction over three other connected attacks.

STL ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS, 2009 - 2013 TOTAL CURRENT COST OF STL

$241,097,507

DATE OF FIRST STL INDICTMENT

28 JUNE 2011

FIRST STL INDICTEES

Salim Jamil Ayyash, Mustafa

Amine Badreddine, Hussein

Hassan Oneissi, Assad Hassan

Sabra

INDICTMENTS ISSUED


ONGOING PROCEEDINGS

FOUR INDIVIDUALS

PLEADED GUILTY

ZERO


ZERO


FOURIn keeping with the unique procedures beforethe STL, the four at large indictees are beingtried in absentia.


ZERO


ZERO

CRE ATE D IN 20 0 7 PURSUAN T TO SE CURITY CO UN CIL RE SO LUTIO N

SPECIAL TRIBUNAL FOR LEBANON

MILLIONS

OF USD

MILLIONS

OF USD

0

20

30

40

10

80

70

60

50

09 10 11 12 13

TOTAL

CONTRIBUTIONS

LEBANON ESTIMATED




32/48

61

L

SYMBOL KEY

FORMAL CHARGES

INITIAL APPEARANCE

TRIAL JUDGMENT

TRIAL CONVICTION


APPEAL JUDGMENT

APPEAL CONVICTION



DEATH OF DEFENDANT


THE STL'S STATUTE AND RULES OF PROCEDURE AND EVIDENCE

outline the procedures applicable to cases brought before the tribunal. Under

these documents, the Prosecutor has broad discretion to initiate investiga-

tions and to indict individuals suspected of crimes that are within the param-

eters of the STL's jurisdiction.



defendants then appear before the STL where they enter a plea of guilty or

not guilty on each count of the indictment against them. In keeping with the

unique procedures before the STL, defendants may also be tried in absentia.

A case will then proceed to trial, at the conclusion of which the Trial Cham-

ber will issue a Trial Judgment which determines the defendants guilt

or innocence (in which case they are released ). The Trial Chambers deter-

minations can be appealed to the Appeals Chamber, which, following an ap-

peals hearing, issues an Appeals Judgment affirming, reversing or revisingthe Trial Judgment. Defendants still in custody who are acquitted on appeal

are released .


convicted on appeal would typically be transferred to serve out the re-

mainder of their sentence in one of the domestic jurisdictions that has signed

an agreement with the STL. Proceedings against these convicted defendants

close once they are released either through early release or after serving out

the entirety of their sentence.

More generally, proceedings against defendants before the STL m ay be termi-

nated if their indictment is withdrawn or if their case is referred to a compe-

tent national jurisdiction , and where a defendant dies .

1 AYYASH, Salim Jamil

2 BADREDDINE, Mustafa Amine

3 ONEISSI, Hussein Hassan

4 SABRA, Assad Hassan

| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10

TRIBUNAL CASES


33/48

63

5.4 MILLIONESTIMATED DEATHS

300,000

IVORY

COAST

3,0

00

UGANDA2,

300

CENTRALAFRICAN

REPUBLIC

>1,

000

DARFUR

DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE CONGO

LIBYA1

2,5

00

There was a motherthat came [to thearmy camp.] For daysshe was crying at thecamp's entrance. Wehad to chase her away.

She kept on saying,Give me back my son,he's only age 12.Witness P-0017 - Thomas Lubanga Dyilo Trial, testimony on 27 March 2009

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COUICC


34/48


INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT


CC 65

The ICC was established as a per-

manent international criminal

tribunal through a multilateral

treaty, the Rome Statute, which

entered into force on 1 July 2002.

Unlike the so-called international ad

hoc (ICTY, ICTR) or hybrid (SCSL, ECCC,

STL) criminal tribunals, which were

established in response to a particu-

lar conflict or event, the ICC was es-

tablished to prosecute internationalcrimes in future situations (to use

the ICC term). Crimes committed be-

fore 1 July 2002 are therefore not within

the ICCs mandate.

Pursuant to the Rome Statute, situa-

tions can be brought before the ICC in

one of three ways. The ICC Prosecutor

can initiate an investigation of a situ-

ation on the basis of (1) a referral from

any State Party to the ICC, including

a self-referral or (2) a referral from

the UN Security Council acting under

Chapter VII of the UN Charter. In addi-

tion, the ICC Prosecutor can (3) ini tiate

investigations of her own accord, sub-

ject to various procedural safeguards,

on the basis of information received

from individuals or organizations. Once

one of these three triggering mecha-

nisms has been invoked, the ICC must

assure itself that it has jurisdictionover the crimes alleged and the situ-

ation at issue. Currently, the ICC can

prosecute the international crimes of

genocide, crimes against humanity and

war crimes, and, after 2017, potentially

the crime of aggression. Further, the

ICC may only exercise jurisdiction over a

situation where either: a) these crimes

were committed by a national of a

State Party to the ICC; b) these crimes

were committed on the territory of a

State Party to the ICC; c) the situation

was referred to the ICC by the UN Se-

curity Council; or, d) a Non-State Party

accepts the jurisdiction of the ICC.

As of January 2013, there were eight

situations before the ICC, all of which

concerned countries in Africa. Four of

these situations were self-referred by

ICC State Parties (Uganda, the Demo-

cratic Republic of the Congo, the Cen-

tral African Republic and Mali), two

situations were referred by the UN Se-

curity Council (Darfur and Libya), and

another two situations were initiated

proprio motu by the ICC Prosecutor

(Ivory Coast and Kenya).

Within each broad situation, there may

be a number of specific cases brought

against one or more defendants. While

the history of the conflicts in these

eight situations is too varied to sum-

marize here, a timeline highlighting

key dates is provided for each situa-

tion in the following pages. Informa-

tion regarding the situation in Mali is

not included given the recent official

announcement of an investigation.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

UGANDA

DEMOCRATICREPUPBLIC

oftheCONGO

CENTRALAFRICAN

REPUBLIC

SUDAN

LIBYA

IVORYCOAST

KENYA

MILLIONS

IVORY COAST

S

L

S U D A N

KENYA

DEMOCRATIC

REPUBLIC OF

THE CONGO

UGANDA

DARFUR

LIBYA

CENTRAL AFRICAN

REPUBLIC

MALI

MAP OF ICC JURISDICTIONAL TRIGGERS

ICC State Party Referral

UN Security Council Referral

ICC Office of the ProsecutorProprio Motu Investigation

Population Estimates:

UGANDA (2002):

24,699,073

DRC (2002):

55,225,478

CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC (2002):

3,642,739

SUDAN (2002):

37,090,298LIBYA (2011):

6,597,960

IVORY COAST (2010):

21,058,798

KENYA (2007):

36,913,721

OVERVIEW


35/48

67

MAY 1997

Following a 9 month war, Laurent Kabilatakes power and renames Zaire the

Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).

SUMMER 1997

Kabila tries to evict from the DRC the Rwandan

and Ugandan troops that supported him duringthe war, which causes them to throw theirsupport behind opposition rebel groups.

1998

Rebel groups supported by Rwanda and Uganda attack DRC forces,which are backed by Angola, Chad, N amibia and Zimbabwe. Rebelgroups proliferate throughout the DRC.

JAN UARY 2 001

President Kabila is assassinated and succeeded by his son Joseph Kabila.

By this time, there are at least 10 conflicts in the DRC involving 9 nationalarmies and 19 irregular armed forces.

Renewed violence flares up,

particularly in Ituri, with crimesagainst civilians widespread.

AUGUST 2002

DRC self-refers its Situation to the ICC forcrime committed in its territory since July2002. The ongoing DRC conflict is

estimated to be the deadliest since WWII.

MARCH 2004

ICC opens formal investigation into Situation in DRC.

JUNE 2004

DEMOCRATICREPUBLIC OFTHE CONGO

LRA flees from Sudan back into NorthernUganda where it begins more wide-scaleabductions, killings and looting.

MARCH 2002

Following years of armed conflict,

Ugandan army launches militarycampaign, with Sudanese consent,to destroy the Lords ResistanceArmy (LRA), which is operating out

of Southern Sudan.

SEPTEMBER 2005

LRA begins relocating itsforces into the DemocraticRepublic of the Congo.

UGANDA

Following the LRAs return to Uganda, the number ofinternally displaced persons doubles to 800,000.

FEBRUARY 2004

LRA massacres 330 people at

an internally displaced personscamp in Lira District.

JULY 20 04

ICC opens formal investigationinto Situation in Uganda forcrime committed in its territorysince July 2002.

DECEMBER 2005

1.67 million people are estimated internallydisplaced across northern and easternUganda as the armed conflict continues.

President ofUganda self-refersSituation in

Uganda to ICC.

DECEMBER 2003

SPRING - SUMMER 2002

DECEMBER 2002

OCTOBER 2002

CAR army officials attempt to overthrow

President Patass, prompting forces loyal to thePresident, including those led by Jean-PierreBemba, to fight and retaliate.

MARCH 2003

Forces loyal to Franois Boziz,former Chief-of-Staff of theCAR armed forces, overthrow

the Patass government.

DECEMBER 2004

CAR self-refers its Situation tothe ICC for crimes committedin its territory since July 2002.

MAY 2007

ICC opens formal investigation intoSituation in CAR, the first in whichallegations of sexual crimes faroutnumber alleged killings.

OCTOBER - NOVEMBER 2002

During the armed conflict, forces under Mr.Bembas command reportedly commit widespread

and systematic crimes against civilians, includingrape, pillaging and murder.

APRIL 2006

CARs highest court determines thatnational authorities are unable to carryout necessary criminal proceedings forthe referred crimes

FEBRUARY - MARCH 2003

Intense fighting continues with reportsof crimes against civilians stillwidespread.

CENTRAL AFRICANREPUBLICCENTRAL AFRICANREPUBLIC

2002

2002

2003

2003

2004

2004

2005

2005

2006

2006

2007

2007

2008

2008

2009

2009

international criminal tribunals

Documents