Imperatives of the Present: Black Lives Matter and the Politics of Memory and Memorialization

Black Lives Matter is having a profound impact on how individuals and communities view their repressive histories and their present environments. The movement has greatly influenced the questioning of everyday landscapes and the role of official memory in the erection, maintenance, or removal of monuments and memorials. In this column, I shed light on these phenomena, and highlight the tensions that exist between the acknowledgement and removal of racist or problematic memorials and statues and the protection of historical monuments and cultural heritage more generally. A human rights approach to memorialization would be a step in the right direction, while recognizing that the imperatives of the present shape memorialization efforts. It calls on those in the human rights field to continue pressing for critical reflection and debate around racism and memory landscapes, and to call out and expose racism in all of its forms in order to bring about social change

Nuremberg's Legacy on Transitional Justice : Prosecutions are Here to Stay

A lasting legacy of the Nuremberg and Tokyo military tribunals is the assertion that individuals are subjects of international law and should be held criminally responsible for perpetrating war crimes and crimes against humanity. Building upon the Nuremberg legacy, the emergence and proliferation of modern international(ized) tribunals has ushered in a new era in international criminal justice, whereby states seek to end impunity for international crimes through criminal trials. This Article addresses the legacy of Nuremberg in transitional justice approaches. It examines the criticisms within the transitional justice field that criminal justice processes are generally ill-suited to address the social forces that characterize collective violence and the push away from criminal prosecutions towards other non-retributive processes. It argues that while post-conflict peacebuilding requires a more holistic transitional justice approach, recourse to at least some criminal prosecutions remains an enduring legacy of Nuremberg, supported by both international actors as well as victim communities

Changing Landscapes in Documentation Efforts : Civil Society Documentation of Serious Human Rights Violations

Wittingly or unwittingly, civil society actors have long been faced with the task of documenting serious human rights violations. Thirty years ago, such efforts were largely organised by grassroots movements, often with little support or funding from international actors. Sharing information and best practices was difficult. Today that situation has significantly changed. The purpose of this article is to explore the changing landscape of civil society documentation of serious human rights violations, and what that means for standardising and professionalising documentation efforts. Using the recent Hisséne Habré case as an example, this article begins by looking at how civil society documentation can successfully influence an accountability process. Next, the article touches upon barriers that continue to impede greater documentation efforts. The article examines the changing landscape of documentation, focusing on technological changes and the rise of citizen journalism and unofficial investigations, using Syria as an example, as well as on the increasing support for documentation efforts both in Syria and worldwide. The changing landscape has resulted in the proliferation of international documentation initiatives aimed at providing local civil society actors guidelines and practical assistance on how to recognise, collect, manage, store and use information about serious human rights violations, as well as on how to minimise the risks associated with the documentation of human rights violations. The recent initiatives undertaken by international civil society, including those by the Public International Law & Policy Group, play an important role in helping to standardise and professionalise documentation work and promote the foundational principles of documentation, namely the ‘do no harm’ principle, and the principles of informed consent and confidentiality. Recognising the drawback that greater professionalisation may bring, it nevertheless concludes by applauding the initiatives undertaken thus far and calls for even more sustained cooperation, dissemination and training for civil society where possible

Procedural justice? Victim participation in international criminal proceedings

In early 2006, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights called for more detailed research into the relevant international standards and national and international practices concerning the role of victims in criminal proceedings. In response to this call and the increased attention paid to victims at international criminal institutions, this study explores the role of victims in international criminal proceedings. As such, the aim of this study is threefold: (i) to describe, explain and clarify the procedural role afforded to victims in international criminal proceedings; (ii) to evaluate whether the current approaches to victim participation in international criminal proceedings are consistent with human rights standards; and (iii) to determine the proper scope and content of victim participation in international criminal proceedings. To structure the analysis, the framework focuses on two central concepts, namely the unique characteristics of international criminal proceedings and human rights standards. Broken up into two main parts, the first part of the study covers criminal law theories and the current role afforded to victims in domestic jurisdictions. It further examines the development of their procedural rights both domestically and internationally. The second part of the study then deals exclusively with international criminal justice institutions and the participatory rights afforded to victims therein. Using two case studies, one on the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia and the other on the International Criminal Court, the research highlights how these courts have approached the issue of victim participation. The study concludes with general recommendations. It is hoped that the findings of this study may contribute to a better understanding of competing rights within international criminal justice and that they provide those involved in the shaping of international criminal justice a means through which to view the participatory rights of victims

A Practitioner’s Perspective on the Kenya I and Kenya II Cases before the ICC

On 10 September 2013 the International Criminal Court (ICC) began hearing a case against William Ruto, Deputy President of the Republic of Kenya, and Joshua Sang. The related case against the President of Kenya, Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta, was scheduled to begin in November 2013 but has since been postponed until October 2014. Both cases are noteworthy since they are the first against sitting politicians. Unsurprisingly, they have not been without controversy. These trials are challenging for the Court, not least because the Kenyan government recently passed a resolution withdrawing from the ICC and repealing its domestic legislation criminalizing international crimes, arguing that Kenya needed to restore it sovereignty and resist neo-colonialism. Although this withdrawal does not affect the current cases before the Court, it certainly makes cooperation with Kenya for the purpose of further investigations more difficult. Karim A.A. Khan, QC, formerly the defense counsel of Muthaura and currently the lead defense counsel of Ruto, raised these issues in an interview taking place one week before his opening statements in the Kenya I case. These same issues and concerns were also raised with Adesola Adeboyejo a lead prosecutor in the Kenya II case in December 2013

A Practitioner’s Perspective on the Kenya I and Kenya II Cases before the ICC

On 10 September 2013 the International Criminal Court (ICC) began hearing a case against William Ruto, Deputy President of the Republic of Kenya, and Joshua Sang. The related case against the President of Kenya, Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta, was scheduled to begin in November 2013 but has since been postponed until October 2014. Both cases are noteworthy since they are the first against sitting politicians. Unsurprisingly, they have not been without controversy. These trials are challenging for the Court, not least because the Kenyan government recently passed a resolution withdrawing from the ICC and repealing its domestic legislation criminalizing international crimes, arguing that Kenya needed to restore it sovereignty and resist neo-colonialism. Although this withdrawal does not affect the current cases before the Court, it certainly makes cooperation with Kenya for the purpose of further investigations more difficult. Karim A.A. Khan, QC, formerly the defense counsel of Muthaura and currently the lead defense counsel of Ruto, raised these issues in an interview taking place one week before his opening statements in the Kenya I case. These same issues and concerns were also raised with Adesola Adeboyejo a lead prosecutor in the Kenya II case in December 2013

Changing Landscapes in Documentation Efforts : Civil Society Documentation of Serious Human Rights Violations

Wittingly or unwittingly, civil society actors have long been faced with the task of documenting serious human rights violations. Thirty years ago, such efforts were largely organised by grassroots movements, often with little support or funding from international actors. Sharing information and best practices was difficult. Today that situation has significantly changed. The purpose of this article is to explore the changing landscape of civil society documentation of serious human rights violations, and what that means for standardising and professionalising documentation efforts. Using the recent Hisséne Habré case as an example, this article begins by looking at how civil society documentation can successfully influence an accountability process. Next, the article touches upon barriers that continue to impede greater documentation efforts. The article examines the changing landscape of documentation, focusing on technological changes and the rise of citizen journalism and unofficial investigations, using Syria as an example, as well as on the increasing support for documentation efforts both in Syria and worldwide. The changing landscape has resulted in the proliferation of international documentation initiatives aimed at providing local civil society actors guidelines and practical assistance on how to recognise, collect, manage, store and use information about serious human rights violations, as well as on how to minimise the risks associated with the documentation of human rights violations. The recent initiatives undertaken by international civil society, including those by the Public International Law & Policy Group, play an important role in helping to standardise and professionalise documentation work and promote the foundational principles of documentation, namely the ‘do no harm’ principle, and the principles of informed consent and confidentiality. Recognising the drawback that greater professionalisation may bring, it nevertheless concludes by applauding the initiatives undertaken thus far and calls for even more sustained cooperation, dissemination and training for civil society where possible