ICC issues landmark judgment: Bemba convicted as commander-in-chief for sexual violence crimes (Part 2/2)

Yesterday was a day of firsts for the International Criminal Court (ICC). Jean Pierre Bemba Gombo’s conviction is the ICC’s first for sexual violence (see part 1 of this post), including against men. And, not only that, it is the first conviction of a military commander for crimes committed by soldiers under his command – Bemba did not commit any of the crimes himself. Here are some highlights in relation to this second important issue.

First conviction for command responsibility

As I wrote earlier, Bemba stood trial (and was convicted) as President and Commander-in-Chief of the Mouvement de libération du Congo (MLC) for three counts of war crimes (murder, rape, and pillaging) and two crimes against humanity (murder, and rape) committed by MLC soldiers in the Central African Republic (CAR) in 2002-2003. The MLC had entered the CAR to assist then CAR President Ange-Felix Patassé to suppress an attempted military coup. There, the MLC soldiers engaged in a campaign of pillage, murder, and rape against the civilian population. While he did not commit these crimes himself, Bemba stood trial because “he knew” that his troops were committing these crimes, and “did not take all necessary and reasonable measures within his power to prevent or repress their commission”. He is the first person to have been charged at the ICC with command responsibility under article 28 of the Rome Statute. The Trial Chamber included a detailed analysis of the applicable law under article 28, and of the evidence in relation to Bemba’s responsibility.

The Chamber found that Bemba was the MLC’s military and political leader from its creation throughout the entire period of the charges. He took the most important decisions, and held broad formal powers, including controlling the MLC’s funding and issuing operational orders to commanders in the field. The Chamber stressed: “the determination of whether a person has effective authority and control rests on that person’s material power to prevent or repress the commission of crimes or to submit the matter to a competent authority” (698). It found that Bemba maintained such primary disciplinary authority over his troops in the CAR, and that he was “both a person acting as military commander and had effective authority and control over the contingent of MLC troops in the CAR throughout the 2002-2003 CAR Operation” (705).

The Chamber also discussed a broad range of evidence proving Bemba’s knowledge of the commission of crimes by the MLC, including logbooks and intelligence reports, NGO publications and communications, and local and international media sources (706-718). Bemba was in regular communication with his commanders in the field, received updates on troop movements, politics, combat situation, and allegations of crimes, and at times specifically discussed these international reports with his commanders. As it was clearly established that Bemba knew crimes were being committed, the Chamber felt it was “not warranted” to make determinations on the “should have known” element of article 28(a).  Continue reading

ICC issues landmark judgment: Bemba convicted as commander-in-chief for sexual violence crimes (Part 1/2)

Today, 21 March 2016, was a historic day for the International Criminal Court (ICC). Trial Chamber III unanimously convicted Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo (Bemba) for his responsibility as commander-in-chief for crimes of murder, pillage, and rape committed by soldiers under his effective authority and control in the Central African Republic in 2002-2003. This makes Bemba not only the first person to be convicted by the ICC for crimes committed by troops under his command, but the first person to be convicted of sexual violence. I have not yet finished reading the 364-page judgment in full, but in this two-part blog post, I provide some initial highlights on these two questions. Citations are to paragraphs in the judgment.

First conviction for sexual violence

As I wrote previously, Bemba stood trial for two counts of sexual violence: rape as a war crime and as a crime against humanity. The judgment is the ICC’s fourth, but the first to include a conviction for sexual violence. Thomas Lubanga was convicted in 2012, but the case did not include sexual violence charges. Mathieu Ngudjolo and Germain Katanga were tried for rape and sexual slavery, but Ngudjolo was acquitted in full in 2012, and Katanga partially acquitted of the sexual violence charges in 2014. Bemba’s conviction thus marks an important turning point for the ICC regarding accountability for sexual violence.

Importantly, the rape charges in this case were based on evidence from both male and female victims of rape. The trial judgment describes in quite some detail specific acts of rape committed against both men and women. The Chamber heard testimony about rape in public, rape in front of family members and communities, gang rapes, and rape of young girls, some as young as 10 years old. Men were also raped, including when trying to prevent their wives or daughters from being raped. Rapes were often committed in conjunction with other crimes, such as pillaging, and marked by violence, often including beatings and threats with weapons.

The judgment reiterates many of the Rome Statute’s gender sensitive legal standards. The Chamber emphasised that rape under the Rome Statute is a gender-neutral crime: it is committed by the “invasion” of a part of the victim’s body (or that of the perpetrator) by “a sexual organ”, can include same-sex penetration, and can thus encompass both male and female perpetrators and victims. Oral penetration can also amount to rape (100-101). The Chamber also recalled that invasion using objects or any other part of the body constitutes rape under the Rome Statute (99). The fact that acts are committed by force, threat of force or coercion, by taking advantage of a coercive environment, or against a person incapable of giving genuine consent for the Chamber gives the invasion of a body “a criminal character” (102). The Chamber reiterated that a victim’s lack of consent is not a legal element of the crime of rape at the ICC (105). Finally, the Chamber noted that in analysing the evidence, it was guided by Rules 70 and 71, which detail important principles regarding evidence of sexual violence. Continue reading

Charging Hissène Habré with Sexual Violence Crimes

With gratitude to Kim Thuy Seelinger of UC Berkeley’s Human Rights Center, who coordinated and led in drafting the Amicus brief, as well as other members of the drafting team Naomi Fenwick and Khaled Alrabe, I share news regarding the Amicus Brief we drafted to assist the Extraordinary African Chambers (EAC) in Dakar, Senegal presiding over the trial of former Chadian dictator Hissène Habré concluded last week.

Habré was charged with torture, war crimes and crimes against humanity for acts he allegedly committed while in power from 1982 to 1990. Despite ample allegations in the factual record detailing multiple incidents of rape, sexual slavery, genital injury, forced nudity, and violations of reproductive health by Hissène Habré himself and agents under his command, he was not formally charged with sexual violence crimes.

With experts like Justice Richard Goldstone, George Kegoro, Dr. Patricia Sellers, and IntLawGrrls Dr. Kelly Askin and Professor Beth Van Schaack, Amici encouraged the judges to revise the charges against Habré to more fully account for sexual crimes. Amici argued that the Extraordinary African Chambers has the power and responsibility to revise the charges against the defendant to include these acts of sexual violence, which constitute crimes under the Statute of the Court. These acts were prohibited and criminalized under customary international law at the time Habré was in power (7 June 1982 to 1 December 1990). Charging these acts as such under the Statute is supported by customary international law as it existed at the time of the Habré regime.

Amici explained that rape and other acts of sexual violence can be characterized as various war crimes and crimes against humanity, as well as the independent crime of torture under the Statute. Specifically, the Court may find that, at the time of the Habré regime: (i) rape could qualify as the war crimes of “torture or inhuman treatment” and “outrages upon personal dignity”, as a crime against humanity, and as a form of torture under customary international law; (ii) slavery, including sexual slavery, could qualify as a crime against humanity, while forced prostitution could qualify as a war crime and a crime against humanity; and (iii) other forms of sexual violence of comparable gravity could qualify as the war crimes of “torture or inhuman treatment” and “outrages upon personal dignity”, as crimes against humanity, and as a form of torture.

This week, Judge Gberdao Gustave Kam, President of the EAC, personally acknowledged receipt of the brief and said it would be useful to chambers. However, he was not inclined to admit the brief formally into the record.

Please find here the amicus in French and English:

Mémoire D’Amicus Curiae

Amicus Curiae Brief in English

Recent developments in Colombian jurisprudence on conflict-related sexual violence

During her first visit to Colombia last month, UN Special Representative on Sexual Violence in Conflict Zainab Bangura drew attention to the issue of sexual violence in Colombia’s five decade long conflict. She met with government officials, survivors and civil society to discuss the progress made in preventing and responding to sexual violence. The conflict, which has involved left-wing guerrillas, right-wing paramilitaries and state security forces, has taken a heavy toll on the civilian population, in particular women and children. Those who have experienced sexual violence want their crimes acknowledged. Ms Bangura’s message was clear: Colombian authorities must work to end the silence and impunity surrounding these crimes.

This is an important message. Despite their prevalence, sexual violence crimes are rarely prosecuted, and impunity levels remain high. However, several recent decisions—in which courts have stressed the need for accountability—reflect positive developments in the judiciary’s handling of these crimes.

Colombia’s Constitutional Court has played a significant role in giving sexual violence crimes visibility. In January of this year, the Constitutional Court issued Auto (Order) 009, in which it noted “with alarm” the persistence of sexual violence as a serious form of gender discrimination. It urged authorities to not only address these crimes, but to comply with their obligations to prevent and ensure their non-repetition. Importantly, it stressed that all parties to the conflict were responsible for such crimes, and referred over 400 sexual violence cases to the Attorney General’s Office for investigation and prosecution.

The Court also highlighted two underreported issues. It noted that sexual violence against children illegally recruited by armed groups persists, in particular against indigenous children. During her visit, Ms Bangura also referred to this issue as well as to the silence that exists regarding the generations of children born out of rape. Additionally, the Court recognized that women are at times targeted for sexual violence and displaced because of their sexual orientation−an aspect of the conflict often ignored.

This ruling follows the Court’s landmark decision of 2008, Auto 092 on women and displacement, in which it acknowledged that women are among those most affected by displacement and that displaced women are particularly at risk of sexual violence. In that ruling, the Court stressed that sexual violence is “a habitual, extensive, systematic and invisible practice in the context of the Colombian armed conflict”. It called on the Attorney General’s Office to investigate 183 cases attached to the decision. Continue reading