Publications

This report was submitted to the International Criminal Court in order to aid reflection on what reparation means and should mean in the context of mass atrocity. The report examines the shortcomings of the existing normative framework for reparations of international crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court, comparing it to various international and domestic frameworks. The report also refers to lessons learnt on reparations at the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, and the Extraordinary Chambers of the Courts of Cambodia. The report also examines the respective roles of the judges’ Chambers, the Registry and the Prosecutor’s Office in ensuring victim-sensitive policies to allow for the effective discharge of their respective functions.

Our annual report for 2011 provides an overview of the work that REDRESS undertook from 1 April 2010 to 31 March 2012.

This report presents constructive observations to the Board of Directors of the ICC Trust Fund for Victims (TFV) concerning the discrete areas that may pose particular challenges should the Chambers order reparation in the Lubanga case. The observations set out below are presented in the spirit of ongoing collaboration, and we hope that they are useful to the Board in the fulfillment of its objectives. We remain committed to working with the Board and the Secretariat to realise their important mandate to assist victims of the most serious crimes of concern to humanity.  

The joint letters from REDRESS to the French Ministry of Justice concern the current issues surrounding prosecution of War Criminals within France, and the length of time it takes to carry out proceedings, particularly in the case of the 1994 Rwanda Genocide. From observing the way past cases have been handled, REDRESS recommends the creation of a specialised class of judicial personnel, whom are able to best understand the issues and the regions involved in the cases, with a knowledge of international law, that they can best use to reach timely decisions, reducing some of the issues that lead to lengthy procedures. Les lettres conjointes de REDRESS au ministère français de la Justice concernent les questions actuelles  entourant les poursuites contre les criminels de guerre en France et le temps qu'il faut pour mener à bien les procédures, en particulier dans le cas du génocide rwandais de 1994. En observant la façon dont les cas passés ont été traités, REDRESS recommande la création d'un personnel judiciaire spécialisé, capable de comprendre au mieux les problèmes et les régions impliqués dans les affaires, avec une connaissance du droit international, qu'ils peuvent utiliser au mieux pour atteindre décisions opportunes, réduisant certaines des questions qui mènent à de longues procédures.

As part of our on-going partnership with the Uganda Victims Foundation, REDRESS facilitated a three-day workshop on reparations in Lira, Northern Uganda from 18 to 20 January 2011. The workshop provided expertise on the right to remedy and reparation, focusing on the process rights of victims to be informed and participate in decision-making processes leading to reparations. Case studies on other reparations processes were provided in order to help UVF and new members joining the group identify key objectives for their campaign, as well as draft a preliminary action plan. The UVF campaign is currently focused on the upcoming conference organised by the UN Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights on reparations in Kampala, schedules for later this year. A follow up workshop is planned for March 2011, to build further capacities to ensure effective and inclusive participation of victims as integral to the UVF campaign.

This commentary has been submitted in response to the Joint Committee on Human Rights' call for evidence in relation to its inquiry into the human rights implications of UK extradition policy. Jurisdiction over international crimes committed abroad by suspects in the UK is firmly established by a robust legislative framework with few “impunity gaps”. Despite this, there have been very few prosecutions. Rather, the apparent policy seems to be to leave cases in limbo in the hope of a successful extradition, even where an attempt to extradite has already failed. This approach is wrong is principle, and is at variance with the UK’s obligations under international law. Redress calls for a holistic policy of extradition aimed at ensuring accountability for the most egregious crimes within our jurisdiction.

This submission concerns Clause 151 of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Public Bill, which, if adopted, would signals to those responsible for international crimes that this jurisdiction is increasingly ‘perpetrator-friendly’, and one where the important role of civil society organisations seeking to end impunity for grave violations is obfuscated. REDRESS has a long-standing interest in the strengthening and enforcement of universal jurisdiction legislation and principles in the UK. In January 2010, along with five other NGOs, REDRESS submitted a briefing to parliamentarians opposing proposals for the Attorney General to interfere in the arrest warrant procedure. Most recently, in November 2010, REDRESS together with FIDH, published a report examining the exercise of extraterritorial jurisdiction in all Member States of the European Union, focusing on trial strategies from the perspective of victims and witnesses of international crimes.