Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T08:58:07.767Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Situation in the Central African Republic; Prosecutor v. Bemba; (“Bemba Case”)

International Criminal Court.  08 June 2018 ; 03 August 2018 ; 18 May 2020 .

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 August 2022

Get access

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

Type
Case Report
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press & Assessment 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)