The Court’s historic movement from theory to practice came with a round of investigations targeting specific conflicts and identifying specific suspects, centered mainly in Africa. The powers and constraints of the ICC Prosecutor were closely monitored by judges as the Court issued its first arrest warrants. The first three suspects to arrive in The Hague were Congolese men from the peripheral Ituri district; and a fourth Congolese suspect was soon apprehended for alleged crimes in the Central African Republic. Lasting more than a decade, each trial faced a series of crises and reversals, indicating fault-lines in the original design. Mixed evidence made it surprisingly difficult for the Court to establish crimes involving child soldiers, as well as sex and gender crimes; and even more difficult to attribute criminal responsibility to the individuals accused. The interests of victims had to be balanced with the legal principle of fair trials. From an initial overview, the reader understands the many difficulties – both practical and institutional – facing the new Court and its ambitious mission.

The trial of Jean-Pierre Bemba grew out of a separate fact situation in the Central African Republic (CAR). Bemba was a powerful politician on the Congolese national stage, and was also the leader of an armed rebel force, a part of which had been sent across the border in a vain effort to halt a coup against the CAR President. Bemba’s men were accused of widespread crimes against civilians, including sexual crimes against both women and men. The trial tested a theory of criminal responsibility intended for remote commanders who fail to prevent or punish crimes on the ground. Although Bemba was convicted on this basis and sentenced to eighteen years' imprisonment, two years later his convictions were overturned by a bold Appeals Chamber majority. At stake on appeal were fair trial concerns about the need for greater specificity in criminal charges, which led the divided appeals panel to debate the meaning of core legal principles. Looking back to earlier judicial controversies, reversals, dissents, and acquittals, the dialogue surrounding Bemba’s successful appeal identified key questions for future judges to ponder.

The Court’s historic movement from theory to practice came with a round of investigations targeting specific conflicts and identifying specific suspects, centered mainly in Africa. The powers and constraints of the ICC Prosecutor were closely monitored by judges as the Court issued its first arrest warrants. The first three suspects to arrive in The Hague were Congolese men from the peripheral Ituri district; and a fourth Congolese suspect was soon apprehended for alleged crimes in the Central African Republic. Lasting more than a decade, each trial faced a series of crises and reversals, indicating fault-lines in the original design. Mixed evidence made it surprisingly difficult for the Court to establish crimes involving child soldiers, as well as sex and gender crimes; and even more difficult to attribute criminal responsibility to the individuals accused. The interests of victims had to be balanced with the legal principle of fair trials. From an initial overview, the reader understands the many difficulties – both practical and institutional – facing the new Court and its ambitious mission.

The trial of Jean-Pierre Bemba grew out of a separate fact situation in the Central African Republic (CAR). Bemba was a powerful politician on the Congolese national stage, and was also the leader of an armed rebel force, a part of which had been sent across the border in a vain effort to halt a coup against the CAR President. Bemba’s men were accused of widespread crimes against civilians, including sexual crimes against both women and men. The trial tested a theory of criminal responsibility intended for remote commanders who fail to prevent or punish crimes on the ground. Although Bemba was convicted on this basis and sentenced to eighteen years' imprisonment, two years later his convictions were overturned by a bold Appeals Chamber majority. At stake on appeal were fair trial concerns about the need for greater specificity in criminal charges, which led the divided appeals panel to debate the meaning of core legal principles. Looking back to earlier judicial controversies, reversals, dissents, and acquittals, the dialogue surrounding Bemba’s successful appeal identified key questions for future judges to ponder.