Current Development: The United States of America v Jucontee Thomas Woewiyu: How Immigration Fraud in the US Unearthed Old War Crimes in Liberia

by | Oct 1, 2019 | AYIH, AYIH 2018

Current Development: The United States of America v Jucontee Thomas Woewiyu: How Immigration Fraud in the US Unearthed Old War Crimes in Liberia

Authors Yulia Nuzban

ISSN: 2521-2621
Affiliations: None
Source: African Yearbook on International Humanitarian Law, 2018, p. 146 – 156

Abstract

When Jucontee Thomas Woewiyu applied for US citizenship in January 2006, he set in motion a series of events that would eventually lead to his conviction in July 2018 in connection with old human rights violations and war crimes committed during a civil war in Liberia. In the intervening years, the case was investigated and prosecuted by the US war crimes units — specialised entities responsible for the investigation and prosecution of international crimes. Although Woewiyu was found guilty of immigration fraud and not war crimes proper, his trial and conviction provide a robust record of war crimes committed during an armed conflict in Liberia, document Woewiyu’s role as one of the NPFL leaders, and give a measure of justice to the victims.

Ensuring that State Parties to the Roman Statute Co-operate with ICC Requests to Arrest and Surrender Suspects: Reflecting on the Role of the Security Council through the Lens of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P)

by | Oct 1, 2019 | AYIH, AYIH 2018

Ensuring that State Parties to the Roman Statute Co-operate with ICC Requests to Arrest and Surrender Suspects: Reflecting on the Role of the Security Council through the Lens of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P)

Authors Suzgo Lungu, Ntombizozuko Dyani-Mhango

ISSN: 2521-2621
Affiliations: PhD candidate, School of Law, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg; Associate Professor, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg
Source: African Yearbook on International Humanitarian Law, 2018, p. 119 – 145

Abstract

More than a decade has passed since the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued two warrants for the arrest of the former president of Sudan, Al Bashir, who is accused of committing international crimes in Darfur. The arrest warrants were accompanied by ICC requests to states parties to the Rome Statute of the ICC to arrest and surrender Al Bashir to the ICC. However, a few states parties welcomed Al Bashir to their territories and failed to arrest and surrender him to the ICC, thus breaching their international obligations. The ICC has referred some of the transgressing states parties to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), but the UNSC has failed to act against them. This article examines the role of the UNSC in enforcing state cooperation with ICC requests to arrest and surrender suspects to the ICC. We argue that states that fail to cooperate with ICC requests to arrest and surrender those who are suspected of international crimes threaten international peace and security. Therefore, the UNSC must invoke its Chapter VII powers in the UN Charter, and must be guided by the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) in order to enforce ICC requests when a transgressing state is referred to it.

An Analysis of the Principles on the Award of Reparations per Article 75(1) and (2) of the Rome Statute of the ICC

by | Oct 1, 2019 | AYIH, AYIH 2018

An Analysis of the Principles on the Award of Reparations per Article 75(1) and (2) of the Rome Statute of the ICC

Authors Avitus A Agbor

ISSN: 2521-2621
Affiliations: Research Professor of Law, Faculty of Law, North-West University, Mafikeng Campus, South Africa
Source: African Yearbook on International Humanitarian Law, 2018, p. 98 – 118

Abstract

The award of reparations to victims of serious crimes is quite unprecedented in the pursuit of international criminal justice. In this regard, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (hereafter Rome Statute of the ICC) stands out as it contains arrangements for the award of reparations to victims of crimes over which the Court has jurisdiction. Article 75(1) of the Rome Statute of the ICC mandates the Court to develop principles governing the award of reparations while Article 75(2) grants the Court a discretionary power to make an order for individual and/or collective reparations. So far, three cases concluded by the Court have moved to the reparations phase, laying down the jurisprudential architecture for what principles will be applied in the award of reparations. Using the jurisprudence of the Court on the establishment of principles on the award of reparations, this paper unpacks some of the technicalities therein; examines the relationship between the Court and the Trust Fund for Victims established under Article 79 of the Rome Statute of the ICC, especially in cases where the convicted person is found to be indigent; and considers whether the Court has any kind of control over the resources of the Trust Fund for Victims.

Torture ‘Lite’ in the War Against Boko Haram: Taming the Wild Zone of Power in Cameroon

by | Oct 1, 2019 | AYIH, AYIH 2018

Torture ‘Lite’ in the War Against Boko Haram: Taming the Wild Zone of Power in Cameroon

Authors Shannon Bosch

ISSN: 2521-2621
Affiliations: Attorney of the High Court of South Africa, Associate Professor of Law, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa
Source: African Yearbook on International Humanitarian Law, 2018, p. 80 – 97

Abstract

The 2017 Amnesty International Report on Cameroon raises concerns about a myriad of interrogation techniques, akin to the ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ used at Guantanomo Bay, that are being employed in the fight against Boko Haram. The justifications offered by the Cameroonian government suggest that, despite the jus cogens status of the non-derogable prohibition against torture, the ‘war on terror’ permits the use of more drastic interventions. These justifications are offered to appease the taboo around the use of torture under international law. The interrogation techniques being employed violate both international and domestic law obligations, and this wild zone in which power is being wielded through acts of torture must be tamed.

Revisiting the Notion of ‘Organised Armed Group’ in accordance with Common Article 3: Exploring the Inherent Minimum Threshold Requirements

by | Oct 1, 2019 | AYIH, AYIH 2018

Revisiting the Notion of ‘Organised Armed Group’ in accordance with Common Article 3: Exploring the Inherent Minimum Threshold Requirements

Authors Martha M Bradley

ISSN: 2521-2621
Affiliations: Post-Doctoral Research Fellow, South African Research Chair in International Law, hosted by the University of Johannesburg
Source: African Yearbook on International Humanitarian Law, 2018, p. 50 – 79

Abstract

The concepts of ‘organised armed groups’ and ‘intensity’ serve as fundamental benchmark tests for assessing whether a situation is a non-international armed conflict. If both these notions are satisfied, the law of non-international armed conflict applies. In the circumstances a precise understanding of the notion ‘organised armed group’ is imperative. The need for clarity is highlighted by the War Report 2017 and the reality of hybrid warfare, as is exemplified in the case of the somewhat controversial classification of some non-state actors in Colombia (the BACRIM), in El Salvador (the M13 and M18 gangs), and in Mexico (the Sinaloa Cartel and the Jalisco Cartel New Generation). From an African perspective also, it is vital that there is a clear understanding of the minimum threshold for what is understood by ‘organisation’ inherent in the notion ‘organised armed group’ since there are several situations which may constitute non-international armed conflict in various territories on the continent, including the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Libya, Mali, Nigeria, Somalia and South Sudan. This article sets out to interpret the content and minimum threshold requirements inherent in the notion of ‘organised armed group’ under Common Article 3. Although international tribunals and scholars have offered an invaluable clarification of this construct, and the law of treaty interpretation as set out in Articles 31 to 33 of the Vienna Convention is frequently employed to facilitate the interpretation of the scope of the application of Common Article 3, continued scholarly research on the law of non-international armed conflict means that there is room for further research.

Draft Crimes Against Humanity Convention: Prosecuting the Crime Against Humanity of Apartheid: Never, Again

by | Oct 1, 2019 | AYIH, AYIH 2018

Draft Crimes Against Humanity Convention: Prosecuting the Crime Against Humanity of Apartheid: Never, Again

Authors Christopher Gevers

ISSN: 2521-2621
Affiliations: Lecturer, School of Law, University of KwaZulu-Natal
Source: African Yearbook on International Humanitarian Law, 2018, p. 25 – 49

Abstract

Despite being declared a crime against humanity by the United Nations General Assembly in 1966, and being the subject of a convention signed by more than half of the world’s states to demand its punishment (the 1973 Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid), there has never been a single prosecution of the crime against humanity of apartheid committed in South Africa. This paper interrogates the commitment of an ‘invisible college of international (criminal) lawyers’ never to prosecute apartheid, both at Rome in 1998 and more recently in the case of the Crimes Against Humanity Initiative and International Law Commission to produce a specialised convention on crimes against humanity. It argues that at best the ‘symbolic’ inclusion of apartheid in the last-mentioned signifies a commitment once again never to prosecute this crime against humanity (this time at the national level), and at worst discloses the racial politics of international criminal law that render the prosecution of crimes committed by the West or in its name not only untimely, but unthinkable.