Take courage friends. The way is often hard, the path is never clear, and the stakes are very high. Take courage. For deep down, there is another truth: you are not alone.
Rev. Wayne B. Arnason
Exquisite timing.

I was returning to The Hague from Tunis following a three-day training of Tunisian lawyers (29 September to 1 October), when I read that family members of seven imprisoned Tunisian opposition figures submitted a communication to the International Criminal Court (ICC) to investigate political persecution and human rights violations by President Kais Saied’s administration – not that I expect the ICC’s Office of the Prosecution (OTP) to do anything soon, if it decides to do anything at all. Rare is the occasion where a communication is acted upon, even when meritorious. The OTP can only do so much. And if perhaps it decides to do something, expect a frustratingly long preliminary examination, which, for all intents and purposes, can be nothing more than internet surfing and looking at open-source material. Even if the matter progresses, the journey leading to potential charges takes years. Communications, however, do serve a purpose beyond their intended design – they bring international attention, occasionally contributing to a tempering by those who could find themselves in the OTP’s crosshairs.
I was in Tunis playing a small part in the International Bridges of Justice’s (IBJ) Advancing Access to Justice in Tunisia (AAJT) initiative, funded by the United Nations Democracy Fund (UNDF), and hosted by the Tunisian National Bar Association (Ordre National des Avocats de Tunisie) and Tunisian Association of Young Lawyers (Association Tunisienne des Jeunes Avocats). Continue reading “AN ARAB SPRING REVIVAL: Sharing adversarial techniques with Tunisian criminal defense lawyers for advancing their clients’ fair trial rights and greater access to justice”
Article 7(2) of the ICC Code of Professional Conduct for Counsel (Code) presumes that list counsel possess a high level of knowledge of the applicable law and a high level of skills required for the adopted party-driven, adversarial hybrid procedure, and thus must “participate in training initiatives required to maintain such competence.” This presumption is fanciful. Not all list counsel are sufficiently competent – let alone to a high level – simply because they have managed to get themselves on the list. Counsel cannot “maintain a high level of competence” unless they are already competent to a high level. Query whose responsibility is it to ensure that at least those counsel appearing in proceedings before the ICC have a high level of competence. In no small measure I suggest it is the ICC Registrar, through the Counsel Support Section (CSS), which is responsible for setting the standards for the admission of counsel.
Much can be said about the politics of international criminal justice, the tolerated/excused hypocrisy in the behavior of certain states (in particular the permanent five members of the UN Security Council), and yes, the callousness or indifference or obliviousness in viewing, accepting, and even promoting inequity. We often tend to justify or minimize inaction or overreaction or selective action when it either suits us or when we lazily adopt a so what or a that’s the way things are attitude. Even when occasionally we truly believe something is off-kilter, irreconcilable, or just plain wrong, we rarely are willing to call it for what it is, to speak truth to power, to dare voice an unpopular position because it is simply the right thing to do. With no agenda in mind, here are a couple of matters worth expressing, however seemingly distasteful it may be to criticize anything related to Ukraine and its efforts in seeking peace and justice. 
