Charles Taylor's Millions

New York Times journalist Doreen Carvajal has produced a fascinating article on the search for the millions (billions?) that allegedly belong to Charles Taylor.
Thanks to Quincy Diep.

The Right to Peace

The report of the expert workshop on The Right of Peoples to Peace convened pursuant to a resolution of the Human Rights Council has now been issued. Presumably, it should lead to further action at the next meeting of the Human Rights Council, which begins on 31 May.

'Inherent' Powers of the International Criminal Court

Pre-Trial Chamber I has granted the motion of the Prosecutor requesting that it inform the Security Council that Sudan has failed to cooperate with the Court. The decision contains a curious reference to 'inherent powers' of the Court. According to the Chamber, 'the Court has the inherent power to inform the Security Council of such a failure' (p. 6). This is accompanied with a footnote citing the Blaskic subpoena decision of the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia of October 1997. That ruling states that ‘the International Tribunal must possess the power to make all those judicial determinations that are necessary for the exercise of its primary jurisdiction. This inherent power inures to the benefit of the International Tribunal in order that its basic judicial function may be fully discharged and its judicial role safeguarded.’
The Pre-Trial Chamber's brief allusion to 'inherent powers' may seem ephemeral and anodine, but when coupled with the reference to Blaskic it suggests the emergence of a rather bold doctrine. An important difference between the ad hoc Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Court is the insistence by States, with respect to the Court, upon a detailed and comprehensive codification of the powers and procedures available to the Court.
Blaskic is important here, because the idea that judges would have inherent powers did not sit well with those who drafted the Rome Statute. They specifically reacted to the Blaskic decision with one of the most awkward provisions in the Rome Statute, article 72, which concerns national security information.
An 'inherent power' to inform the Security Council is not a big deal, of course. It does not seem to have any particular legal consequences. Presumably the members of the Security Council already know that Sudan is not being cooperative. They hardly need a decision from the Pre-Trial Chamber to tell them this. But the mere suggestion that the judges have 'inherent powers' - especially given that the idea is rooted in the controversial Blaskic decision - is a Pandora's box.
Thanks to Maria Veraki.

Joseph Sebarenzi Defends his Thesis on Gacaca and Restorative Justice

Joseph Sebarenzi successfully defended his PhD thesis at the Irish Centre for Human Rights today. Joseph, who is the former speaker of the Rwandan National Assembly, completed his thesis entitled: 'Beyond Gacaca Courts: Restorative Justice in Rwanda'. The thesis takes a critical look at the Gacaca courts in Rwanda, concluding that they do not fulfil their promise of restorative justice.
Prof. Stephan Parmentier (at the right of the photo) of the University of Leuven was the external examiner, and Dr Shane Darcy (at the left) was the internal examiner.

Fidelma Donlon Appointed Deputy Registrar at Special Court for Sierra Leone

Fidelma Donlon, who is completing her doctorate at the Irish Centre for Human Rights, has been appointed Deputy Registrar of the Special Court for Sierra Leone, according to an announcement issued earlier today. Here is the text of the announcement:

Congratulations, Fidelma. But please don't let this get in the way of finishing your thesis!

Cambodia Tribunal Rejects Joint Criminal Enterprise Theory

A five-judge pre-trial chamber of the Extraordinary Chambers of the Courts of Cambodia has rejected the theory of liability known as 'JCE III'. The JCE III concept was developed by the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, in an expansive interpretation of article 7(1) of its Statute. The Yugoslavia Tribunal said it based itself upon customary international law, citing post-Second World War authorities. Since then, the concept has been controversial, but despite challenges it was reaffirmed by the Appeals Chamber. Nevertheless, decisions from the International Criminal Court appear to reject the concept, favouring a theory known as 'co-perpetration'.
Under JCE III, an accused may be convicted for the crimes that were perpetrated by another to the extent that they were comprised within a 'joint criminal enterprise' to commit crimes within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, even in the absence of evidence that the accused intended to commit the crimes charged. It is similar to what is sometimes called 'common purpose' liability in domestic legal systems. Critics of the approach have quipped that JCE means 'Just Convict Everyone'.
More fuel to this fire now comes from the Cambodia Tribunal in this recent ruling, issued a day ago. The judges review the case law from the Second World War proceedings and reach a different conclusion from that of the Yugoslavia Tribunal. Accordingly, they grant the motion of the defendants to reject charges based upon the JCE III theory, given that this was not part of customary international law in the 1970s when the alleged crimes were committed.
Thanks to Wolfgang Schomburg.

Criminalization of Same-Sex Conduct

The International Commission of Jurists recently issued a very useful paper entitled International Human Rights Law and the Criminalization of Same-Sex Sexual Conduct.

Holocaust Denial Laws in Europe: A Critical Perspective

My colleague Dr Laurent Pech has written a very fine but provocative paper on European Union initiatives aimed at prosecution of holocaust denial. He writes:

Before offering a critical review of the EU FD on racism and arguing that the political necessity of laws punishing genocide denial and the legal need for an EU-wide prohibition may be seriously questioned, this paper will contend that the legal reasoning developed by national courts in “militant democracies” is far from convincing and that the European Court of Human Rights should have refrained from labeling the Holocaust a clearly established historical fact whose denial constitutes ipso facto an “abuse of right”.

See the article.

Executions in Palestine

Three executions were carried out by the Hamas government in Gaza earlier this week. The executions are condemned  by the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, which reviews the history of capital punishment in Palestine in recent years in a detailed statement.
Thanks to Aimé Kalimunda.

Post-Doc and PhD Positions at Amsterdam Centre for International Law

The Amsterdam Centre for International Law is currently hiring 1 or 2 post-doctoral researchers and 3 or 4 PhD candidates for the project Shared Responsibility in International Law (SHARES). This is a five-year research project funded by the European Science Foundation, which has started on 1 May 2010. The SHARES-project will examine problems arising from the fact that as the responsibility for international policies is increasingly shared among multiple states, international organizations and other actors, the discrete responsibility of each individual actor is likely to diminish proportionately. It also seeks to identify substantive and procedural principles that are appropriate for situations of shared responsibility.For a description of SHARES and information on the job openings, click.