Abstract

The basic claim of this contribution is simple: the manner in which the International Criminal Court (ICC) would possibly implement judicial reparations in Northern Uganda has the potential to provoke conflict within beneficiaries’ communities as well as between those communities that receive reparations and those that do not. While it is positive that the ICC, unlike its predecessors, considers victims in their capacity as victims and provides for reparations, the reparation principles, which the Appeals Chamber adopted in the recent Judgment on the appeals against the ‘Decision establishing the principles and procedures to be applied to reparations’ (hereinafter Lubanga, Appeals Judgment on reparations and Lubanga, Decision on reparations respectively), [fn1] would need to be modified for other contexts. Until such time, the Court could consider not implementing judicial reparations in Northern Uganda. footnote 1: ICC, The Prosecutor v Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, Appeals Chamber, Judgment on the appeals against the ‘Decision establishing the principles and procedures to be applied to reparations’ of 7 August 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06-3129, 3 March 2015.