Judges and lawmaking at the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda

In this study the author examines the question of whether the judges at the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda are entitled to make law. Instances of substantive and procedural lawmaking at the tribunals are analysed. The context within which tribunal law is made and the institutional culture at the tribunals are discussed. The author examines the influence of the principle of legality in distinguishing between legitimate and illegitimate exercises of the lawmaking power of tribunal judgesUBL - phd migration 201

The Lubanga Reparations Decision: A Missed Opportunity?

In March 2012 the ICC delivered its first and long-awaited judgment in Prosecutor v Lubanga. Trial Chamber I found Thomas Lubanga guilty as co-perpetrator of the war crimes of conscripting and enlisting children into the armed forces. The guilty verdict was followed by a reparations decision on 7 August 2012. This article examines the extent to which the ICC has successfully fulfilled its mandate to formulate reparations principles. The position of reparations within international law generally is discussed. This is followed by an explanation of how the ICC reparation regime functions. The bifurcated reparations mandate of the ICC is also explained. The focus of the article is on a critical assessment of the Lubanga reparations decision. The Court’s treatment of the harm requirement and the requirement of causation is examined. It is argued that the Court’s failure to clarify the requirements of “harm” and “causation” meant that it did not fulfil its mandate to formulate reparations principles