ICC Presidency approves the prosecution of Mr Germain Katanga by national authorities of the Democratic Republic of the CongoToday, 7 April 2016, the Presidency of the International Criminal Court, approved the prosecution of Mr Germain Katanga by the Democratic Republic of the Congo at the request of the DRC authorities. The key factor in the Presidency’s Decision was that the allegations against Mr Katanga in the domestic proceedings in the DRC are not the same for which he was tried before the ICC.On 23 May 2014, ICC Trial Chamber II sentenced Mr Katanga to a total of 12 years’ imprisonment. On 13 November 2015, a Panel of three Judges reviewed and reduced Mr Katanga’s sentence and, on 19 December 2015, he was transferred to the DRC, as the State of enforcement, to serve his sentence of imprisonment. On 10 March 2016, the DRC requested that the Court approve the domestic prosecution of Mr Katanga for offences allegedly committed by him on its territory between 2002 and 2006.This decision constitutes the first time that the Court has been called upon to interpret and apply article 108 of the Rome Statute, paragraph 1 of which requires that the Court approve the prosecution, punishment or extradition of a sentenced person in the custody of a State of enforcement. The Presidency considered that the Court’s approval should only be denied when the prosecution, punishment or extradition of a sentenced person may undermine certain fundamental principles or procedures of the Rome Statute or otherwise affect the integrity of the Court. The Presidency considered that the key relevant principle of ne bis in idem, as specified in article 20(2) of the Rome Statute, was not undermined as the national prosecution related to crimes other than those for which Mr Katanga had been tried by the ICC.The Presidency also noted that Mr Katanga, while informed that he could face domestic criminal proceedings, still requested that the DRC be designated as the State of enforcement. The Presidency also noted that the DRC had provided formal written assurances to the Court that the death penalty would not be sought or carried out against Mr Katanga. Finally, the Presidency noted that the DRC emphasised that the prosecution of Mr Katanga would take place consistently with the rights of the defence recognised in its Constitution, with the Presidency further noting that the DRC is party to a number of relevant international human rights treaties safeguarding the right to a fair trial. Decision pursuant to article 108(1) of the Rome Statute
The first Global Summit on Chemical Safety and Security CHEMSS 2016 will take place on18-20 April 2016 in Kielce, Poland. For the first time in history, representatives from over 40 countries (including the USA, Iran, China) will meet together to discuss issues in chemical safety and security, share best practices and develop tools to ensure that chemicals are used in a peaceful way. The Speakers include representatives of global initiatives and organisations, such as INTERPOL, OPCW, FAO, UNEP, Department of Homeland Security, Green Cross International.Global experts (including representatives from the US Department of Homeland Security and Department of Defense, Iran, China, African countries, Ukraine and Poland) will talk about modern chemical safety and security procedures and their countries’ needs. Over 20 forums will take place during 3 days — the topics will include: safety in the industry, utilisation of hazardous materials, cyber-security of operational systems, transport of chemicals, cooperation with African countries, chemical security in Ukraine and a Seminar on Integrated Impact Assessment.Global Summit on Chemical Safety and Security: www.chemss2016.org
Picture Federica Mogherini, High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.The European Commission and the High Representative adopted today April 6, a Joint Framework to counter hybrid threats and foster the resilience of the EU, its Member States and partner countries while increasing cooperation with NATO on countering these threats.In recent years, the EU and its Member States have been increasingly exposed to hybrid threats that comprise hostile actions designed to destabilise a region or a state. The European Commission and the High Representative adopted today a Joint Framework to counter hybrid threats and foster the resilience of the EU, its Member States and partner countries while increasing cooperation with NATO on countering these threats.High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Federica Mogherini said: “In recent years, the security environment has changed dramatically. We have seen the rise of hybrid threats on EU’s borders. There has been a strong call for the EU to adapt and increase its capacities as a security provider. The relationship between internal and external security needs to be further strengthened. With these new proposals, we want to enhance our capacity to counter threats of hybrid nature. In this effort, we will also step up cooperation and coordination with NATO.” Elżbieta Bieńkowska, Commissioner for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, said: “The EU must become a security provider, able to adapt, anticipate and react to the changing nature of the threats we are facing. This means enhancing our resilience and security from within while increasing our capacity to counter emerging external threats. With this Framework, we act together to counter common hybrid threats. We are presenting concrete proposals for the Union and Member States to increase cooperation in security and defence, improve resilience, address strategic vulnerabilities and prepare a coordinated response.” The Joint Framework offers a comprehensive approach to improve the common response to the challenges posed by hybrid threats to Member States, citizens and the collective security of Europe. It brings together all relevant actors, policies and instruments to both counter and mitigate the impact of hybrid threats in a more coordinated manner. In particular, it builds on the European Agenda on Security adopted by the Commission in April 2015, as well as on sectorial strategies such as EU Cyber Security Strategy, the Energy Security Strategy and the European Union Maritime Security Strategy.
Amsterdam Spanish Film Festival – Second edition- Amsterdam 25 to 30 May 2016After a successful edition last year, the Amsterdam Spanish Film Festival (ASFF) is getting ready for its 2nd edition with yet another extraordinary line-up of new films in Spanish. Initiated and organized by audio visual platform Sin Fin Cinema, in collaboration with the Embassy of Spain in The Hague and other Spanish institutions and companies, ASFF will be held in cinemas Tuschinski and Eye from 25 to 30 May 2016. The festival aims to connect Dutch audiences to the compelling variety of Spanish cinema in all its richness, featuring a selection of films from varying genres: from thrillers to entertaining comedies, from moving dramas and action movies to documentaries and shorts.
ASFF will double its seats offer in comparison to the 1st edition, allowing almost 10.000 spectators to attend 18 screenings, 13 of which will be Premieres in The Netherlands, in 5 different sections: Core Programme, Latin Focus, Vermouth Time, Treasures from the Past and Spanish Cinema Without Fear.
The opening film “La Novia” (The Bride) by Paula Ortiz, an adaptation of the play “Bodas de Sangre” (Blood Wedding) by Federico García Lorca that won two Goya Awards this year (Best Cinematography and Best Supporting Actress) will be presented by actors Inma Cuesta and Asier Etxeandia.
Other recently released highlights include, amongst others, “El Desconocido” (Retribution), an action film directed by Dani de la Torre winning two Goya Awards in 2016 (Best Editing and Best Sound); “A Cambio de Nada” (Nothing in Return), a dramatic comedy about teenage life directed by Daniel Guzman winning the Goya for Best New Director and Best New Actor; “Ma Ma” by Julio Medem, a drama about cancer starring Penélope Cruz, and closing film “Nadie quiere la noche” (Nobody Wants the Night)”, an impressive and perceptive portrait of two women faced with extreme conditions directed by Isabel Coixet, winning four Goya Awards (Best Production, Best Costume Design, Best Make-up and Hairstyles and Best Original Score).
The full program of ASFF will be launched on Monday, May 9th, with a special preview screening of “Truman” with the attendance of its director Cesc Gay, a beautiful ode to friendship winning five Goya Awards this year: Best Film, Best Director, Best Leading Actor, Best Supporting Actor and Best Original Screenplay.
More information about the movies, program schedule and the festival soon to be found at the Website of ASFF (as of April 8th).
Statement by MICT Prosecutor Serge Brammertz Regarding Appeal of the Vojislav Šešelj Trial Judgement
The Hague, 6 April – After reviewing the written reasons given by the Trial Chamber Majority for acquitting Vojislav Šešelj of all charges, my Office has decided to appeal the Judgement.
Given the far reaching nature of the errors we have identified in the Majority Judgement, we underscore for the victims of the crimes that the forthcoming appeal is of utmost priority for this Office. As we will explain in more detail in our forthcoming notice of appeal, we consider there has been a fundamental failure by the Majority to perform its judicial function.
The Majority has omitted to properly adjudicate core aspects of the Prosecution’s case, including by: failing to consider large parts of the evidentiary record; failing to provide proper reasons for its conclusions; failing to properly apply the ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ standard; failing to consider the charges against Vojislav Šešelj in light of the pervasive pattern of crimes proved; failing to distinguish between the ultimate political objective pursued by the joint criminal enterprise members and the criminal means employed to achieve it; making unreasonable and conflicting factual findings; and failing to properly apply the elements of modes of liability such as joint criminal enterprise and aiding and abetting in accordance with established case-law.
At the same time, we consider that the Majority unreasonably allowed for the possibility that criminal conduct was simply a lawful contribution to the war effort, despite the overwhelming body of evidence pointing against it. In our view, this led the Majority to unreasonably credit the possibility that: expelling civilians was a humanitarian gesture; that incendiary hate speech was simply morale boosting for the Serb forces; and that the deployment of ethnic cleansing forces was a measure to protect the Serb population.
In sweeping disregard of the large number of crimes proved at trial the Majority concluded that there was no widespread or systematic attack against the civilian population in parts of Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina as required for crimes against humanity. As with all appeals filed by my Office, we will exert maximum effort to ensure that our appeal in the Vojislav Šešelj case is litigated efficiently, effectively and fairly in accordance with the prescribed appeals process of the Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals.
Violinist Tim de Vries.
On 23/26 April the Zuiderstrand Theatre, Nieuwe kerk, will host the Music Finals 2016 Princess Christina Concours, the famous competition for young and super talented musicians. Many of them will become world renowned musicians. The jury (and the public) can vote for the winner.
The Princess Christina Concours has been organising competitions for young musicians for more than forty years. Each year around 500 participants take part in the Princess Christina Concours for classical music. There are also editions of the competition for young composers and jazz musicians. Children can take part in the Princess Christina Junior Concours by putting a film of their own performance on YouTube.
Participants in the competitions get the chance to win great prizes. After the contest, the winners also receive further coaching. Every year the Princess Christina Concours organises around 2,000 stage sessions which enables winners to gain valuable stage experience.
Cellist Sasha Witteveen.The Princess Christina Concours travels throughout the Netherlands with the Classic Express. On board this mobile concert hall contest winners give concerts for primary school pupils. Almost 100.000 primary school pupils have been able to enjoy a classical concert in the Classic Express. The Princess Christina Concours has also managed to reach thousands more children throughout the country with its ‘Kies je instrument’ (Choose your instrument), a free magazine aimed at eight-year-olds, the website www.kiesjeinstrument.nl and online music lessons at www.benniebriljant.nl. Would you like to support the Princess Christina Concours? For as little as € 30,- per year you can become a Friend and give young people the chance of having unforgettable musical experiences.
Ruto and Sang case: ICC Trial Chamber V(A) terminates the case without prejudice to re-prosecution in future
Today, 5 April 2016, Trial Chamber V(A) of the International Criminal Court (“ICC” or “Court”) decided, by majority, Judge Olga Herrera Carbuccia dissenting, that the case against William Samoei Ruto and Joshua Arap Sang is to be terminated. According to the majority, this decision does not preclude new prosecution in the future either at the ICC or in a national jurisdiction. This decision may be subject to appeal.
The Chamber considered the requests of Mr Ruto and Mr Sang that the Chamber find that there is ‘no case to answer’, dismiss the charges against both accused and enter a judgment of acquittal. The Chamber also considered the opposing submissions of the Prosecutor and the Legal Representative of the Victims, and received further submissions during hearings held from 12 to 15 January 2016. On the basis of the evidence and arguments submitted to the Chamber, Presiding Judge Chile Eboe-Osuji and Judge Robert Fremr, as the majority, agreed that the charges are to be vacated and the accused are to be discharged. They provided separate reasons for this decision.
Judge Fremr found that there is no case for the accused to answer based on an assessment of the Prosecution’s evidence in accordance with the Trial Chamber’s Decision of 3 June 2014, which outlined the principles and procedure for the Defence’s submissions of no case to answer. In his view, the Prosecution did not present sufficient evidence on which a reasonable Trial Chamber could convict the accused. Accordingly, he considered that there is no reason to call the Defence to bring their case or to prolong the proceedings any further.
Judge Eboe-Osuji, concurring with Judge Fremr’s evidential assessment, also vacated the charges and discharged the accused without prejudice to re-prosecution in the future. However, he declared a mistrial in the case, because it cannot be discounted that the weaknesses in the Prosecution case might be explained by the demonstrated incidence of tainting of the trial process by way of witness interference and political meddling that was reasonably likely to intimidate witnesses. In his opinion, Judge Eboe-Osuji also discussed several matters including reparations, immunities and elements of the “crimes against humanity” definition.
The majority of the Chamber, having concluded that the Prosecution did not present sufficient evidence on which a reasonable Trial Chamber could convict the accused, also concluded that a judgment of acquittal was not the right outcome, but only vacation of the charges and discharge of the accused. The majority also agreed that there is no reason to re-characterise the charges.
Judge Herrera Carbuccia appended a dissenting opinion. In her view, the charges against both accused should not be vacated in the present case as such outcome departs from the legal standard established in the Trial Chamber’s Decision of 3 June 2014. Judge Herrera Carbuccia considered that the Prosecution case had not ‘broken down’ and she concluded that there is sufficient evidence upon which, if accepted, a reasonable Trial Chamber could convict the accused.
Background
The trial of William Samoei Ruto and Joshua Arap Sang opened on 10 September 2013. Mr Ruto and Mr Sang were accused of crimes against humanity (murder, deportation or forcible transfer of population and persecution) allegedly committed in the context of the 2007-2008 post-election violence in Kenya.
Over the course of 157 trial days, the Trial Chamber heard the testimony of 30 witnesses for the Prosecution, including two expert witnesses. During that time, the Chamber admitted into evidence 335 exhibits for the Prosecution, 226 exhibits for the Ruto Defence, and 82 exhibits for the Sang Defence. The Prosecution closed its case on 10 September 2015. At the close of the Prosecution’s case, the evidentiary record contained 92 photographs, 27 maps, 77 items of audio/visual material, and over 8,000 pages worth of documentary evidence. Throughout the trial proceedings, the Trial Chamber rendered over 400 written and oral decisions.
At the close of the Prosecution case, the Chamber admitted into evidence the prior recorded testimony of five Prosecution witnesses for the truth of their content. However, on 12 February 2016, the ICC Appeals Chamber held the statements to be inadmissible. The current decision is thus rendered on the basis of the evidentiary record as it stood on 10 September 2015, when the Prosecution closed its case, minus the prior recorded testimony of the five witnesses concerned.
Arusha, The Hague, 5 April – The Mechanism today launched its first online exhibition entitled “A Glimpse into the Archives”.
The purpose of this exhibition is to allow the general public to contextualize, access, and understand the value of the archives of the International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda (ICTR) and for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), which are now in the custody of the Mechanism.
The exhibition features a selection of interesting items to illustrate the diversity of the records in the archives. The items include photographs of artefacts used as evidence in court, drawings made by witnesses, and an extract from a historic trial judgement.
The exhibition, which can be found on the Mechanism’s website, aims to create an interactive experience. Each image has descriptive details and links to databases where other records can be found.
This exhibition is an opportunity to reflect on the many facets these records have: they document the judicial process while also depicting specific events that are part of larger contexts. The archives also help make tangible the complexity of the events that took place in Rwanda and in the former Yugoslavia. Visit the Online Exhibition – A Glimpse into the Archives
By Roy Lie A Tjam.
Eden Gardens, Kolkata, India, 3 April 2016. 22 cricketers from the Caribbean made it the Garden of the West Indies, as both the men and women teams, won their respective ICC World T20 titles at the Eden Gardens in Kolkata. The Windies received congratulation from many quarters such as, the Prime Minister of Trinidad & Tobago:
“Champions All”, Dr Keith Rowley made this pronouncement when he paid tribute to the winning West Indies cricket teams. Rowley extended heartfelt congratulations to the West Indies Women’s and men’s cricket teams, who both emerged as champions in their respective final matches of the 2016 ICC World Cup Twenty20 played at Eden Gardens, Kolkata, India.
Congratulations also came from the Prime Minister of Grenada and Chairman of the CARICOM the Right Hon. Dr. Keith Mitchell, has congratulated the West Indies Men and Women’s teams on their heart-warming victories in the World T20 competitions.
By Barend ter Haar.
Everybody claims to be in favour of democracy. But what does democracy mean when most contentious issues are transboundary rather than internal issues? In contrast to what one might expect, the answer has to be sought at the international rather than at the national level.
Let us start with looking at democracy at the national level. The essence of democracy is that people have a say in the way they are governed by choosing their political leaders in free elections. In addition referenda can be held to decide on specific questions. All this can work out well as long as a government deals with internal matters.
However, nowadays only few issues are of a purely internal nature. Take for example monitoring farming. At first sight, that might seem an internal matter, but if the Netherlands would be slow in reacting to an outbreak of bird flu, its neighbours would feel the consequences; and if Morocco would be too lax on the use of insecticides, Dutch people eating Moroccan oranges might fell ill.
Therefore, how democratic would it be if Dutch voters decide on sanitary measures for their poultry that are of direct influence on the citizens of other European states? Or how democratic would it be if Dutch voters would block a association agreement that the governments of 500 million other Europeans have agreed to?
Let us make a thought experiment and presume that all democracies would introduce the possibility of national referenda that could lead to the withdrawal of previous consent of both government and parliament. And let us assume that parties in other counties would follow the Dutch example and would promote a No-vote, not on the merits of the case, but for other reasons? It requires little imagination that this could easily lead to international chaos.
So what is the alternative? Politicians and political parties will have to face the truth that we no longer live in sovereign states that are free to decide what to do. Those times are long gone. No matter whether a state is member of the EU or not, it has to accept a large number of standards and rules, not because these rules are legally binding (they often are not), but because there is no practical alternative, just as a traditional Englishman who wants to drive on the left will experience when he visits the continent. This is even true for a powerful country like the United States. Take for example the Law of the Sea Convention and the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. The American Congress has refused to ratify both treaties, nevertheless the US government respects both treaties in practice.
Does this mean that we are now subjected to a global undemocratic elite? No, in fact the global decision process is about as democratic as a process involving seven billion people can be. Take for example the Climate Change Conference that took place last year in Paris. The chosen representatives of every country could participate and the preparations and negotiations took place in a transparent manner that could be an example for many national democracies.
![Sasha-Witteveen_Marieke-Wijntjes-467x700[1]](https://i0.wp.com/diplomatmagazine.eu/wp-content/uploads/Sasha-Witteveen_Marieke-Wijntjes-467x7001.jpg?fit=467%2C700&ssl=1)
