No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Situation in the Central African Republic; Prosecutor v. Bemba; (“Bemba Case”)
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 August 2022
Abstract
International tribunals — Evidence and procedure — Errors of law and fact — Whether conviction exceeding scope of charges against appellant — Whether criminal acts not established beyond reasonable doubt to form part of facts and circumstances described in charges — Whether Appeals Chamber required to defer to Trial Chamber’s factual findings — Whether appellant to be acquitted of crimes against humanity and war crimes
International criminal law — International Criminal Court — Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 1998, Article 28(a) — War crimes and crimes against humanity — Command responsibility — Requirements — Whether entailing strict liability of commander for crimes committed by subordinates — Effective control over military troops — Whether appellant having taken all necessary and reasonable measures to prevent commission of crimes by his troops — Whether appellant to be acquitted of crimes against humanity and war crimes
War and armed conflict — War crimes — Crimes against humanity — Murder, rape and pillage — Whether contextual elements of crimes against humanity established — Command responsibility — Concept of military necessity — Reasonableness — Whether acquittal of appellant appropriate
Damages — Reparations — Article 75 of Rome Statute of International Criminal Court, 1998 — Whether reparations order could be made against appellant following acquittal on appeal — Whether final decision on reparations within power of Trial Chamber — Whether appropriate for Chamber to make concrete findings on extent and scope of victimization — Whether appropriate to issue principles on reparations
Damages — Right to compensation for acquitted defendant — Article 85 of Rome Statute of International Criminal Court, 1998 — Whether grave and manifest miscarriage of justice — Whether award of compensation under Article 85(3) of Rome Statute appropriate — Whether acquitted person having right to be compensated — Whether grounds for exercise of discretion to make award of compensation — Damage to assets and property of acquitted person allegedly resulting from their mismanagement — Whether within scope of Article 85 of Rome Statute
Treaties — Interpretation — Application — Article 85 of Rome Statute of International Criminal Court, 1998 — Whether acquitted person having right to be compensated — Whether grave and manifest miscarriage of justice — Article 85(3) — Travaux préparatoires — Right to compensation — International human rights treaties — International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 — Whether right to compensation for acquitted person having emerged as general principle of international human rights law — Treaties — Customary international law — Jurisprudence of regional and international human rights bodies — Practice of international ad hoc criminal tribunals — Relevant national legal systems
Human rights — Right to a fair trial — Duration of criminal proceedings — Reasonableness — Jurisprudence of European Court of Human Rights — Assessing reasonableness of length of proceedings in light of circumstances and certain criteria — Approach enshrined in Article 85(3) of Rome Statute of International Criminal Court, 1998 — Absence of statutory limits on duration of proceedings and of custodial detention — Whether case for review of Rome Statute — Whether length of proceedings excessive in this case
Keywords
- Type
- Case Report
- Information
- Copyright
- © Cambridge University Press & Assessment 2022