Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The 1998 Rome agreement to create a permanent International Criminal Court (the ‘ICC’) is a significant psychological advance in the fight against impunity for those who perpetrate massive violations of human rights. It has also been said to be an important step forward in the recognition of the suffering and the rights of the victims and survivors of the international crimes that are defined in the Statute of the ICC. This article will critically analyse from a victimological perspective the provisions of the Statute of the ICC that directly concern such victims. These provisions can be rouped into those that allow for victim participation into pre-trial and trial decisions, victim support and protection, and victim reparation. The conclusion to the article suggests that while the terms of the Statute are clearly an advance for victims, there are a number of concerns that in practice may undermine the usefulness of the ICC from a victimological perspective. Like all measures that promise benefits for victims, they must be carefully implemented and their use continually evaluated through proper scientific research on victims' experiences.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Balint

(1994). Towards the Creation of an Anti-Genocide Community: The Role of Law. Australian Journal of Humnan Rights, 1, 12.

Bassiouni

(1999a). The Need for International Accountability. In International Criminal Law ( Bassiouni

, ed.) Vol. 3, Enforcement , 2nd ed., pp. 3–30. Transnational Publishers Inc., New York.

Bassiouni

(1999b). Historical Survey: 1919–1998. In International Criminal Law ( Bassiouni

, ed.) Vol. 3, Enforcement , 2nd ed., pp. 597–635. Transnational Publishers Inc., New York.

Beigbeder

(1999). Judging War Criminals: The Politics of International Justice. MacMillan Press Ltd; London.

Binder

(1989). Representing Nazism: Advocacy and Identity at the Trial of Klaus Barbie, Yale Law Journal, 98, 1321.

van Boven

(1993). Study concerning the right to restitution, compensation and rehabilitation for victims of gross violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms: Final Report. United Nations Commission on Human Rights, E/CN.4/Sub. 2/1993/8.

van Boven

(1999). The Position of the Victim in the Statute of the International Criminal Court. In Reflections on the International Criminal Court: Essays in in Honour of Adriaan Bos ( Von Hebel

Lammers

J.G.

Schukking

, eds.) pp. 77–89, T.M.C. Asser Press; The Hague.

Danelius

(1986). The United Nations Fund for Torture Victims: The First Years of Activity. Human Rights Quarterly, 8, (2), 294.

Davis

(2000). The Politics of Prosecuting Rape as a War Crime. The Inernational Lawyer, 34, (4), 1223.

10.

Douglas

(1995). Film as witness: Screening Nazi Concentration Camps before the Nuremberg Tribunal. Yale Law Journal, 105, (2), 449.

11.

Fein

(1993). Genocide: A sociological perspective. SAGE publications; London & Newbury Park, California.

12.

Garkawe

(1999). Victimology and the ‘Stolen Generation’. Journal of the Australasian Society of Victimology, 2, (1), 4.

13.

Halberstam

(1999). Association of American Law Schools: Panel on the International Criminal Court. American Criminal Law Review, 36, 223.

14.

Joutsen

(1987). Listening to the Victim: The Victim's Role in European Criminal Justice Systems. Wayne Law Review, 34, (1), 95.

15.

Kirchhoff

(1994). John Freeman Memorial Lecture, presented 22 August 1994 to the 8th International Symposium on Victimology, Adelaide, Australia.

16.

Mandani

(2000). The Truth According to the TRC. In The Politics of Memory: Truth, Healing and Social Justice ( Amadiume

An-Na'im

, eds.) pp. 176–183. Zed Books; London and New York.

17.

Mertus

(2000). Truth in a Box: The Limits of Justice through Judicial Mechanisms. In The Politics of Memory: Truth, Healing and Social Justice ( Amadiume

An-Na'im

, eds.) pp. 142–161. Zed Books; London and New York.

18.

Preparatory Commission for the ICC . (2000). Finalized draft text of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, PCNICC/2000/INF/3/Add.1.

19.

Robertson

(1999). Crimes Against Humanity: The Struggle for Global Justice. Penguin Press; UK.

20.

Sellin

Wolfgang

M.E.

(1964). The Measurement of Delinquency. John Wiley and Sons Inc.; New York.

21.

Sheldon

(1999). Remedies in Human Rights Law. Oxford University Press; Oxford.

22.

Simpson

(1996). War Critnes: A Critical Introduction. In The Law of War Crimes ( McCormack

Simpson

, eds.) pp. 1–30. Kluwer Law Internation; The Hague/London/Boston.

23.

Staub

(1989). The roots of evil: the origins of genocide and other group violence, Cambridge University Press; UK.

24.

Tochilovsky

(1999). Rules of Procedure For the International Criminal Court: Problems to Address in Light of the Experience of the Ad Hoc Tribunals. Netherlands International Law Review, XLVI, 343.

25.

United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime . (2000). U.N. Doc A/55/383, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 15 November 2000.

26.

United Nations Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power . (1985). G.A. Res. 40/34, 40 U.N., GAOR Supp. (No. 53) at 213–215, U.N. Doc.A/40/53.

27.

Villa-Vicencio

(2000). Why Perpetrators should not always be Prosecuted: Where the International Criminal Court and Truth Comnlissions Meet, Emory Law Journal, 49, 205.

The Victim-Related Provisions of the Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Victimological Analysis #

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References