Side Event: “National Jurisdictions in the front line of fighting impunity” (hosted by the EU Network for investigation and prosecution of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes)

Highlights:

  • Henrik Attorps, Senior Public Prosecutor of the International Public Prosecution Office in Sweden, suggested in terms of best practice a rather “educational approach” regarding trials under national jurisdiction, since the prosecutor needs to explain circumstantial issues to the judges and needs to put the offense in its proper context.
  • Lars Büngener, Public Prosecutor, and Christian Ritscher, Federal Prosecutor, both from the War Crimes Unit at the Federal Public Prosecutor General in Germany, stressed that there was no statute of limitations for gross human rights violations such as war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. Thus, it may be necessary to initiate investigations decades after the crimes.
  • Aurélia Devos, Head of the Specialized Unit for Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes, Prosecution Office in Paris, France, identified the major challenges of her case as witness testimonies from Rwanda, including their transport and translations, as well as the immense public interest and the trial before a jury.

The side event was opened by moderator Matevz Pezdirc, Head of the Genocide Network Secretariat. He announced presentations by prosecutors from three European countries regarding cases of war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity tried in these countries.

The first presentation was held by Henrik Attorps, Senior Public Prosecutor of the International Public Prosecution Office in Sweden. He had successfully tried the first case in Europe regarding the ongoing conflict in Syria. He pointed out that, besides the frustrations on the ongoing conflict, this was the first time that criminal proceedings were taken place while the conflict was still ongoing. He also emphasized the importance of social media in cases where access to the area is impossible, since valuable evidence can be obtained through them. His investigation has had to face many obstacles, such inaccessibility of the crime scene by the Swedish police and the initial difficulty to identify the victim. Besides these issues, it was possible to make a case since the suspect was easily identifiable through video evidence, and had the Swedish nationality. In terms of best practice, he suggested a rather “educational approach” regarding trials under national jurisdiction, since the prosecutor needs to explain circumstantial issues to the judges and needs to put the offense in its proper context.

Lars Büngener, Public Prosecutor, and Christian Ritscher, Federal Prosecutor, both from the War Crimes Unit at the Federal Public Prosecutor General in Germany, presented three current cases in Germany regarding war crimes and terrorism charges. They explained that their office has had a focus on African States such as the Democratic Republic of Congo or Rwanda, but that this focus has shifted to Iraq and Syria. The reason was that several Germans joined armed groups, which blurred the line between “traditional” terrorism and core international crimes, and that some refugees entering Germany are suspected war criminals. In Germany, the principle of universal jurisdiction is applicable regardless if there is a link to Germany. They furtherly stressed that there was no statute of limitations for gross human rights violations such as war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. Thus, it may be necessary to initiate investigations decades after the crimes.

Aurélia Devos, Head of the Specialized Unit for Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes, Prosecution Office in Paris, France, presented the course of events as well as its challenges regarding the trial of a person from Rwanda suspected to have committed Genocide. The suspect had applied for refugee status and was then tried for the alleged crimes in Rwanda. She described the development of the case as difficult, since the suspect was first treated as an accomplice and then as a perpetrator. Additionally, the application of French law required Genocide to be committed in the course of a broader plan (policy element). Major challenges had been witness testimonies from Rwanda, including their transport and translations, as well as the immense public interest and the trial before a jury.

Richard Dicker, Director of the International Justice Program at Human Rights Watch, pointed out the important work of the government officials within their respective jurisdiction. He called their work a crucial component in the fight against impunity and the most serious crimes. He furtherly encouraged more intergovernmental cooperation, which he saw as a crucial addition to the work of individual investigate and prosecutorial efforts. He urged States Parties to take the example of the presentations.

This report from the 2016 Assembly of States Parties of the International Criminal Court was originally published on PILPG’s blog Lawyering Justice.