Back to Search Start Over

Trial and (potential) error

Authors :
Manon Bax
Rianne Letschert
Alina Balta
INTERVICT
College van Bestuur
Faculty Office
RS: FdR Institute MCfHR
Source :
International Criminal Justice Review, 1-28. SAGE Publications Inc., STARTPAGE=1;ENDPAGE=28;ISSN=1057-5677;TITLE=International Criminal Justice Review, International Criminal Justice Review, 29(3), 221-248. SAGE Publications Inc.
Publication Year :
2018
Publisher :
SAGE Publications Inc., 2018.

Abstract

Twenty years ago, the International Criminal Court (hereinafter ICC or the Court) was established holding the aim of placing victims at the heart of international criminal justice proceedings and delivering justice to them through, among others, reparations. Article 75 of the Rome Statute lays out the reparations regime, and, in practice, court-ordered reparations are a means of delivering such justice. Focusing on Court decisions on reparations, our analysis takes stock of all developments before the ICC and attempts to highlight the mismatch between characteristics inherent to the objectives of international criminal trials such as providing accountability and punishment of the accused and delivering justice for victims of mass crimes—the so-called procedural challenges. We also submit that the Court is facing conceptual challenges, related to an apparent misunderstanding of the various concepts at stake: reparations as such and the various modalities and channels of enforcing them. We conclude that although the ICC’s reparation regime may not be the best reparative response to provide justice to victims in conflict situations affected by mass victimization, we suggest that improving the ICC’s approach includes, at a minimum, tackling these challenges.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
10575677
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
International Criminal Justice Review
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....7fcaf924ff10f008769a56bb5d612f65