ASP18 Side Event: European States & Civil Society: Strengthening the ICC and Rome Statute System

18TH SESSION OF THE ASSEMBLY OF STATES PARTIES TO THE ROME STATUTE

Day 3 (4 December 2019)

Name of the Event: European States & Civil Society: Strengthening the ICC and Rome Statute System (Co-hosted by Finland and the Coalition for the International Criminal Court (CICC))

Overview by: Hester Dek, Intern PILPG-NL

Main Highlights:

  • Cooperation with the ICC is key for the Court to work efficiently and effectively.

  • One of the main challenges for the ICC is the lack of outreach and information dissemination, for instance in countries such as Georgia.  

Summary of the Event:

Virginie Amato (Regional Coordinator for Europe, Coalition for the ICC) opened the side event by discussing the threats human rights defenders, who continue to fight for global justice in a continuously hostile environment, face worldwide. She highlighted how the promise of the Rome Statute towards victims and ending impunity is threatened increasingly through the decrease in multilateral cooperation. 

Next, Saija Nurminen (counsellor, desk officer ICC, Ministry of Foreign Affairs Finland) discussed the strong support of the ICC by the EU. She called for the increasing need for support in order to strengthen the ICC so it can be “as efficient and effective as possible.” 

Eamon Gilmore (EU Special Representative for Human Rights and EU Special Envoy for the Peace Process in Colombia) continued on the topic of support, stating that in the current time “political support provided might be more important than financial support.”  However, he mentioned that the issue of resources is very important as well, as “to act adequately, the ICC has to be properly resourced.” He stressed that in the end it goes beyond the issue of resources, as cooperation is key. 

Nadia Volkova (director, ULAG) spoke about the current attitude towards the ICC in Ukraine. She discussed the military opposition to the Court, and their arguments regarding its ineffectiveness, inefficiency, and costs. She stated that in light of the military stance, they appreciate the effort from the international community and continue to hope for a more radical push by the EU and allies. 

Next, Nino Jomaridze (lawyer at GYLA) discussed the Georgian case. She stated that the Georgian situation is of importance for the ICC, as it poses exemplary challenges to the ICC. Jomaridze went on to discuss four main challenges in the interaction between the ICC and Georgia. First, the lack of outreach. She stated that a lot of Georgians have never heard about the ICC, its investigation, its mandate etc. Second, the lack of information on the progress of the Office the Prosecutor.  She mentioned that “while during the first years of ICC involvement the interest of victims was quite high, this interest has faded away due to lack of information”. Third, the lack of cooperation from for example Russia. Fourth, the importance of the role of victims, who should not be forgotten by the ICC or other stakeholders. 

Next, Andreas Schueller (director of the International Crimes and Accountability program, ECCHR) discussed the importance of the ICC functioning as a criminal court. He mentioned the importance of investigations, instead of the long preliminary investigation process, and called for support of the review process to guarantee an independent court with constructive criticism of the current process. 

Lastly, the floor was opened for questions and comments. The first comment regarded outreach of the Court, stating that many public officials, the media, and people in general do not know about the Court: “the media spoke about the ICC while portraying photos of the ICJ”.  It was stated that this makes it difficult to manage expectations, for example in explaining that “international justice is not quick justice”. 

Another issue that was mentioned was political willingness. Roberta Dariol (EU Focal Point on the ICC, EEAS) took Ukraine as an example and stated that often the lack of knowledge about the court results in a lack of political will; “When people don’t fully understand what is at stake they are reluctant to work towards this”. She argued that civil society has a strong role in this respect in terms of education. On this latter aspect Nadia Volkova commented. She stated that in the Ukraine, politicians and the military have had plenty of chances to do that: “those who wanted to learn about it have had a chance”.