Wow did I get an earful after my post on sanctions against the ICC! And in many cases it came from those I hold in the highest esteem. As expected, most of the criticism directed at my post was steeped more in emotion than in cold, fact-based logic or a sober assessment of geopolitical reality. That’s not a criticism in itself — emotion has its place, especially when discussing justice and law. But emotion, however righteous, cannot override structural power dynamics.
I genuinely commend those who, in Churchillian fashion, continue to defend the ICC, international criminal justice, judicial independence, and the integrity of the Prosecutor. I agree with those values. I said so in my previous post — if read without the haze of moral indignation and with a modicum of intellectual generosity. Perhaps I wasn’t explicit enough. Perhaps I was too restrained in my use of adjectives and adverbs. Perhaps I didn’t indulge in enough rhetorical fire to pass the purity test of those whose compass points only to the ideal. Perhaps. But I think not. Continue reading “Deserve’s Got Nothin’ to Do with It — A response to critiques of my views on U.S. sanctions and the ICC”
Little Bill Daggett: I don’t deserve this… to die like this. I was building a house.
Bill Munny: Deserve’s got nothin’ to do with it.
Little Bill Daggett: I’ll see you in hell, William Munny.
Bill Munny: Yeah.
Unforgiven (1992)[/otw_shortcode_quote]
It is what it is. Don’t shoot the messenger.
Bending another state or institution (such as the International Criminal Court (ICC)) to the will of a more powerful sanctioning state may be distasteful, distressing, disadvantageous (depending on the side of the cause for the sanctions one is aligned with) but the harsh reality is that the use of sanctions is a sovereign prerogative. The sooner this reality is accepted and embraced, the sooner the sanctioned state or institution, along with their cast of supporting states, international and regional organizations, civil society, concerned global citizens can accept the need to explore realizable off-ramps or condition themselves to endure the consequences of the sanctions.
Why it is what it is
Reality is harsh. Powerful and well-positioned states resort to sanctions when it suits their interests. Imposing them may leave a might makes right stench in the nostrils, but it is what it is. Getting emotional, crying foul, engaging in hyperbolic condemnations, calling out the hypocritical and inconsistent use of sanctions against foes for conduct and causes that the sanctioning state engages in or tolerates and even supports when friends and allies do likewise, is not a strategy. It is a reaction. Continue reading “SANCTIONS AS STIMULATIVE MEASURES: a sovereign prerogative untethered from moral discernment”
The Disciplinary Committee takes into consideration, however, that the investigations carried out were not sufficiently thorough, particularly with regard to the role played by Mr. Emmanuel Altit in the management methods that led to the inappropriate behavior denounced by the complainants … nevertheless noted the particular seriousness of the alleged offences, repeated over several years and resulting in deep-seated trauma from which some of the complainants are still suffering today, as evidenced by the tears and clear signs of suffering observed at the hearing.
The International Criminal Court’s award [fine] of costs is justified by the fact that Ms. Jennifer Naouri’s actions were reported by the plaintiffs to both the Registry and the CSS prior to the filing of the complaints, without the Court’s bodies having taken adequate measures (instructions, investigation, control, call to order) to stop or prevent them.
Disciplinary Committee Decision, Disciplinary proceedings against Ms Jennifer Naouri
Part 1 dealt with general context and why the Registry in no small measure is responsible for much of the persistent workplace harassment as it relates to the defence. Part 2 will focus on the Disciplinary Board’s (Board) findings against ICC Defence Counsel Jennifer Naouri. Without reading too much into the tea leaves and mainly relying on what was reported by the complainants/victims and now proven by the Board, as well as what I have heard and observed and surmised for nearly a decade, I will offer my take on why Naouri behaved as she did, and why others in like circumstances are susceptible to behaving likewise. My aim is neither to demean nor moralize. Rather, in examining the findings, I aim to see what lessons can be learned for improving workplace conditions for all members of defence teams. For this it will be necessary to examine how the Registry, Naouri, and all of us in the ICC List of Counsel might improve in providing the best possible representation to suspects and accused during pre-trial and trial and convicted persons on appeal.
The Disciplinary Committee also notes that all of them [complainants] report after-effects resulting from Ms. Jennifer Naouri’s behavior and management style: diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder (Exhibit PL138), anxiety attacks, loss of confidence, feelings of fear and intense stress, burnout, taking medication, even suicidal thoughts.
Disciplinary proceedings against Ms Jennifer Naouri, Decision, p.6.
This made me most angry. Young women come to the ICC with great enthusiasm and dreams, and what happens? They are psychologically mutilated, harassed, they are told that they cannot understand the dossier and cannot analyse all the dangers, so they can only obey.
Catherine Mabille, ICC Disciplinary Commissioner, quoted in Justice Info
Prolegomena
Created with LunaPic
The ICC is yet again at a crossroad. This time the Registry faces a self-inflicted conundrum. The recent Disciplinary Board decision against Defence Counsel Jennifer Naouri exposed numerous systemic weaknesses known to the Registry for years. Sadly, the Registry has been listless and lazy. When it opts to act, it’s too little, too late. And even then, it embraces opaqueness and obfuscation. Query: will the Registry take the path that fosters a workplace free of abusive behavior inflicted on subordinate staff across all organs and independent actors in the court, or will it continue down the path of business as usual.
Harsh but well-earned criticism. The Registry has been too lax and too indisposed to bother with providing the necessary training, upholding high standards, affording adequate remuneration for qualified personnel, and monitoring the working conditions of the Defence. If there is an existing standard, it is one of marginal competence, marginal remuneration, marginal resources, marginal training, and marginal workplace oversight. Quality of representation, quality of competence, quality of skill level, quality of training, quality of the working environment has been of little concern to the Registry. Some have suggested that this is purposeful to give the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) a winning chance. Cynical as it sounds, subliminally, such intentions may be a factor when considering the OTP’s modest successes in the trial and appeal trenches. Continue reading “Workplace Harassment at the ICC Stubbornly Persistent — Part 1: willful blindness, callous indifference, blissful incompetence or institutional protectiveness? “
He always holds on to me and leads me to the bed. It’s the feeling of being trapped. People have told me to stand up against this man, yet everyone, including elected officials, seem to be very scared of him and says there is nothing we can do [about making him step aside] because he refuses.
Prosecutor Karim A. A. Khan’s accuser, as quoted in the WSJ
In my last post, I warned of the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) self-inflicted quandary: being at a credibility and sustainability crossroads. I referred to two imminent tests. The first test dealt with jurisdiction in the Rodrigo Duterte case. With some Judges/Chambers indulging enthusiastically in creative judicial activism on jurisdictional issues in general, I warned that reversing course will take judicial courage and restraint. Both are in short supply if past is prologue. The second test dealt with the Khan affair.
For months it had been reported that ICC Prosecutor Karim A.A. Khan was accused by his female assistant of sexual harassment, and that with the help of others, he obstructed the investigation by intimidating witnesses or pressuring them to recant. I warned against dragging out the investigation or sweeping the matter under the proverbial rug. When I posted, Khan had yet to be interviewed. Optically, the process seemed as quick as a snail and as transparent as my grandmother’s thick velvety-green pea soup. Then last week it was reported in the conservative but respected US newspaper, The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), that Khan had finally been interviewed. The article is a bombshell. What was initially reported as alleged sexual harassment is much more serious. As reported in the WSJ, the lurid details of what the accuser is claimed to have stated when interviewed as part of the investigative process into her allegations, amount to Khan sexually assaulting her on multiple occasions in multiple locations, including in the residence of Khan’s wife in The Hague, where Khan resides.
Based on a holistic reading of the relevant provisions, as set out above, we consider that there is a distinction between the existence of jurisdiction and the Court’s ability to exercise the jurisdiction, and that the preconditions to the exercise of the Court’s jurisdiction set out in article 12 of the Statute must exist at the time that the exercise of the jurisdiction is triggered pursuant to article 13 of the Statute.
In the past I have posted about former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, cautioning against making public pronouncements and statements that would assuredly be considered self-incriminating by the ICC. I’ve also stressed that he should not be prejudged; his case must be considered with full regard to the ICC framework and his fair trial / human rights.
The Prosecutor, Jack Fairweather, Penguin Random House, 2025, 478 pages,
If you think you are too small to make a difference, try sleeping with a mosquito.
Dalai Lama
The Integrity of the global order rested on these proceedings, started Jackson. The wrongs of which the court would hear were “so calculated, so malignant and so devastating that civilization cannot tolerate their being ignored, because it cannot survive their being repeated.” Yet Jackson also argued that the German people were not responsible for the Nazis’ crimes. They, too, had suffered under Hitler. He urged them to become partners in restoring the country’s ruined reputation and establishing a moral and legal code that could unite the world against future wars. With these brief words, Jackson had realized Bauer’s worst fear: the unearned exoneration of the German people. (p. 81)
One of the quandaries of post conflict transitional justice is how to deal with legacies of systemic, pervasive, industrial-size abuses, human rights violations, and mass atrocity crimes. Even more so when a very large segment of the population, at every level, enthusiastically participated and supported, apathetically acquiesced, or simply turned a blind eye to the government/regime’s actions and horrific treatment of their fellow citizens. Continue reading “BOOK REVIEW: The Prosecutor, by Jack Fairweather”
To understand genocide as a class of calculated crimes, such crimes must be appreciated as goal-oriented acts from the point of view of perpetrators: genocide is rationally instrumental in their ends.
… major adjustments to address environmental harm would provoke the fundamental question whether they constitute too great a departure from the Court’s conception, which is distinctly anthropocentric in orientation. Balancing human interests against environmental interests is a fraught exercise, particularly given that these interests frequently overlap and are inter-connected depending on the point of view of the person making the assessment. Nonetheless, the risk of environmental harm being ultimately de-prioritized in ICC proceedings would remain, even if amendments were made to the Rome Statute to add a form of environmental crime to the arsenal of prohibitions. (p. 337)
Sobering.
Tinkering with the Rome Statute to add more arrows in the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) prosecutorial quiver to combat serious environmental destruction seems simple, an elegantly attractive solution to an obvious although not entirely unintended lacuna. Also, query whether the tinkering could plausibly result in an ecocentric framework which would include, among other things, prosecuting corporations (not just individuals) and affording victim reparations beyond the expressed contours of the Rome Statute.
Considering what it took to include the crime of aggression, not to mention its lack of acceptance by all States Parties (opt-in /opt-out permutations), this is a virtual non-starter. And good luck finding consensus on defining ecocide and amending the Rome Statute to include lower standards of proof as argued by the proponents who find proof beyond reasonable excessively high for achieving desired convictions. Continue reading “BOOK REVIEW: Prosecuting Environmental Harm before the International Criminal Court, by Matthew Gillett”