18TH SESSION OF THE ASSEMBLY OF STATES PARTIES TO THE ROME STATUTE
Day 3 (4 December 2019)
Name of the Event: Victims’ Participation: Lessons for the future (Side Event co-hosted by Italy and Chile)
Overview by: Kelly van Eeten, Junior Research Associate PILPG-NL
Main Highlights:
Paolina Massida noted that victims should be considered full-fledged parties to the proceedings at the ICC and should not be referred to and sees an as ‘participants’.
Francisco Cox stated that victims should have a more central role in the Court.
Summary of the Event:
H.E. Ms. Maria Teresa Infante, ambassador of Chile, opened the event underlining the importance of victim participation. She introduced the three panelists: Mr. Cuno Tarfusser, former judge at the ICC, Mr. Francisco Cox, representative of Victims at the ICC, and Ms. Paolina Massidda, Principle Counsel on the Office of the Public counsel for victims.
After the introduction the presentations started with a video addressing the importance of justice for victims. The video showed several victims, speaking about justice and what it would mean to them if they got the opportunity to speak before the Court. They stated that impunity is not an option and stressed the importance of reparations.
Cuno Tarfusser started by stating that he has always been in favor of victim participation. From his personal experience he witnessed multiple times that victim participation is part of a healing process. It can provide victims with a feeling that the authorities are behind them and give credit to what they are saying. However, from the perspective of a criminal lawyer victim participation must be in balance with the primary function of criminal proceedings. Mr. Tarfusser said that he believes that we should try to find a better balance. According to Mr. Tarfusser, the fact that victim participation is in the Statute, but it is not regulated makes that the judges have to decide about the concrete implication. This creates different practices which is not the best way to do it.
He further raised three issues on victim participation: 1) unclarity about the definition of a victim, 2) the scope of participation, and 3) deadlines. He finally stated that it cannot be that victims can request to participate at any moment during the proceedings as he believes there must be a deadline for requesting participation.
Francisco Cox opened his speech by talking about this experience in the Ongwen case. He stated that he disagrees with the fact that the definition of victims is unclear, since according to him all that are affected by a crime fit into the concept of a victim. He continued his story by stating that victims should be at the center of the courtroom and that in the villages he went to speak with victims, the wish to participate among victims is huge. It might feel like distant justice to them, but is probably the only justice they will get. Therefore it is also part of their healing process to see justice happening.
Paolina Massidda took over after this and stated that she had mixed feelings about the statements by her fellow panelists. She agreed that it is important to understand the scope of the participation and that participation of victims is important. She finally stated that victims should be full-fledged parties to the proceedings and also be able to appeal decisions.