Procedural position of the victim in international criminal justice

Available in Russian

Price 299 Rub.

Author: Aleksandr Evseev

DOI: 10.21128/2226-2059-2023-4-17-36

Keywords: victimization; compensation; international criminal justice; International Criminal Court; victim; crimes against humanity

Abstract

The article examines the phenomenon of the victim as a key figure, endowed with independent procedural status, in international criminal justice. The historical evolution of the normative consolidation of this status in national and international law is traced. The procedural rights granted to holders of this status in international criminal justice bodies are described in detail. The article reaches the conclusion that over time, the role of victims in legal proceedings conducted at the international level has decreased significantly. This change can be seen in, among other things, limitations on financial expenditures for victims’ legal representation. The practice of the permanent International Criminal Court is analyzed, as the Rome Statute creating it first provided for the procedural figure of the victim. These procedural rules are detailed in the Court’s Rules of Procedure and Evidence. In particular, Rule 86 lays down the so-called “general principle” that the Chamber, when making any decision or order, and other organs of the Court, when discharging their functions under the Statute or the Rules, shall take into account the needs of all victims and witnesses, and, in particular, children, elderly persons, people with disabilities, and victims of sexual or gender violence. In addition, these Rules regulate the procedure for the participation of victims in the proceedings. Data on the amount of compensation payments assigned based on the results of consideration of particular cases are provided. Their symbolic nature is evident in cases where they are insufficient to make amends for the harm caused to a person during an armed conflict. Nonetheless the very appearance of the victim on the international stage and his endowment with even limited procedural rights testify to the humanization of the world system. The article comes to the conclusion that, contrary to the popular perception of the International Criminal Court as a “court for victims,” in it the latter have a very limited range of procedural rights to defend their interests. This is reflected, among other things, by limitations on the expenses of legal representatives, as a result of which one lawyer or member of the Victims and Witnesses Unit might represent the interests of several hundred victims. The figure of a “victim with dual status” has also become widespread, that is, the victim also acting as a witness for the prosecution. This somewhat weakens the world community’s long-term efforts to ensure that victims of international crimes are recognized as victims.

About the author: Aleksandr Evseev – Candidate of Sciences (Ph.D.) in Law, Associate Professor, Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia.

Citation: Evseev A. (2023) Protsessual’noe polozhenie zhertvy v mezhdunarodnom ugolovnom pravosudii [Procedural position of the victim in international criminal justice]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 17–36. (In Russian).

References

Arendt H. (2021) Banal’nost’ zla. Eychman v Ierusalime [Eichmann in Jerusalem: a report on the banality of evil], Moscow: Skriptorium. (In Russian).

Assmann A. (2014) Dlinnaya ten’ proshlogo. Memorial’naya kul’tura i istoricheskaya politika [The long shadow of the past: memorial culture and historical politics], B.Khlebnikov (transl.), Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. (In Russian).

Assmann A. (2016) Novoe nedovol’stvo memorial’noy kul’turoy [The new discontent of memorial culture], B.Khlebnikov (transl.), Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. (In Russian).

Bonacker T., Safferling C. (eds.) (2013) Victims of International Crimes: An Interdisciplinary Discourse, The Hague: T.M.C. Asser Press.

Branch A. (2017) Dominic Ongwen on Trial: The ICC’s African Dilemmas. International Journal of Transitional Justice, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 30–49.

Chernyshev K. (2012) Pervyy prigovor Mezhdunarodnogo ugolovnogo suda: Reshenie Sudebnoy palaty I Mezhdunarodnogo ugolovnogo suda ot 14 marta 2012 goda v sootvetstvii so stat’ey 74 Rimskogo statuta po delu “Prokuror protiv Tomasa Lubangi Diylo” [First conviction of the International Criminal Court: the judgment of the Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court pursuant to Article 74 of the Rome Statute of 14 March 2012 in the case Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 24–31. (In Russian).

Cryer R., Robinson D., Vasiliev S. (2019) An Introduction to International Criminal Law and Procedure, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dembour M.-B., Haslam E. (2004) Silencing Hearings? Victim-Witnesses at War Crimes Trials. European Journal of International Law, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 151–177.

D’Hondt S., Pérez-León-Acevedo J.-P., de Almeida F., Barrett E. (2022) Evidence about Harm: Dual Status Victim Participant Testimony at the International Criminal Court and the Straitjacketing of Narratives about Suffering. Criminal Law Forum, no. 33, pp. 191–232.

Eliacheff C., Soulez-Lariviere D. (2022) Vremya zhertv [The time of victims], I.Kushnareva (transl.), Moscow: Institut obshchegumanitarnykh issledovaniy. (In Russian).

Epplee N. (2020) Neudobnoe proshloe. Pamyat’ o gosudarstvennykh prestupleniyakh v Rossii i drugikh stranakh [The uncomfortable past. Commemoration of state crimes in Russia and other countries], Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. (In Russian).

Epplee N. (2024) Volshebnaya strana i ee okrestnosti [The fairy country and its suburbs], Moscow: Illyuminator. (In Russian).

Galenskaya L.N. (2004) Voprosy kompensatsii zhertvam vooruzhennykh konfliktov [Problems of compensation for victims of armed conflicts]. In: Galenskaya L.N., Entin M.L. (eds.) Lektsii po aktual’nym problemam mezhdunarodnogo i evropeyskogo prava [Lectures on relevant issues of international and European law], Saint Petersburg: Rossiya-Neva, pp. 284–311. (In Russian).

Gudkov L. (2004) Negativnaya identichnost’. Stat’i 1997–2002 godov [The negative identity. The articles of 1997–2002], Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. (In Russian).

Golovko L.V. (2022) Gosudarstvo i ego ugolovnoe sudoproizvodstvo [The state and its criminal justice], Moscow: Gorodets. (In Russian).

Golovko L.V. (2006) Osnovy ugolovno-protsessual’nogo prava zarubezhnykh stran [The basics of criminal procedural law of foreign countries]. In: Mikhaylov V.A. (ed.) Kurs ugolovnogo sudoproizvodstva: uchebnik. Tom 3 [The course of criminal justice: a textbook. Vol. 3], in 3 vols., Moscow: Izdatel’stvo Moskovskogo psikhologo-sotsial’nogo instituta, pp. 291–385. (In Russian).

Haskell M. (2019) Stiven Spilberg. Chelovek, izmenivshiy kinematograf. Biografiya [Steven Spielberg: a life in films], Yu.L.Morozova (transl.), Mosсow: Bombora. (In Russian).

Horovitz S. (2013) The Role of Victims. In: Carter L., Pocar F. (eds.) International Criminal Procedure. The Interface of Civil Law and Common Law Legal Systems, Cheltenham: Elgar Publishing, pp. 166–191.

Hoskins A. (2021) SMI i sostradanie v epokhu posle tsifrovoy voyny: pochemu tsifrovym SMI ne udalos’ izmenit’ reaktsiyu na stradaniya zhertv v sovremennykh vooruzhennykh konfliktakh [Media and compassion after digital war: why digital media haven’t transformed responses to human suffering in contemporary conflict]. Mezhdunarodnyy zhurnal Krasnogo Kresta, no. 913, pp. 149–185. (In Russian).

Havkin B.L. (2017) Gross-admiral Dyonits – posledniy fyurer Tret’ego reykha [Gross-admiral Dönitz — the last Führer of the Third Reich]. Novaya i noveyshaya istoriya, no. 2, pp. 165–183. (In Russian).

Kononov A.L. (2009) Kommentariy k stat’e 52 [The commentary to the article 52]. In: Zor’kin V.D., Lazarev L.V. (eds.) Kommentariy k Konstitutsii Rossiyskoy Federatsii [The commentary to the Constitution of the Russian Federation], Moscow: Eksmo, pp. 474–476. (In Russian).

Kvashis V.E. (1999) Osnovy viktimologii. Problemy zashchity prav poterpevshikh ot prestupleniy [The basics of victimology. Problems of protecting the rights of crime victims], Moscow: Nota Bene. (In Russian).

Lebedeva N.S. (ed.) (1991) Nyurnbergskiy protsess: sbornik materialov. Tom 5 [The Nuremberg trial: collection of materials. Vol. 5], in 8 vols., Moscow: Yuridicheskaya literatura. (In Russian).

Lingsma T. (2017) All Rise: The High Ambitions of the ICC and the Harsh Reality, Utrecht: Ipso Facto.

Moffett L. (2012) The Role of Victims in the International Criminal Tribunals of the Second World War. International Criminal Law Review, no. 12, pp. 245–270.

Nabokov V.V. (1996) Iz vstupitel’noy lektsii o Chekhove [From the introductory lecture about Chekhov]. In: Korobov V.B. (ed.) Puteshestvie k Chekhovu [The way to Chekhov], Moscow: Shkola-Press, pp. 648–653. (In Russian).

Nagorski A. (2017) Okhotniki za natsistami [The nazi hunters], R. Romanenko, M. Nikolenko (transl.), Moscow: Grand Master. (In Russian).

Nielsen C.A. (2018) Collective and Competitive Victimhood as Identity in the Former Yugoslavia. In: Adler N. (ed.) Understanding the Age of Transitional Justice. Crimes, Courts, Commissions, and Chronicling, New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, pp. 175–193.

Nikolaev A.N. (1990) Tokio: sud narodov [Tokyo: the peoples’ court], Moscow: Yuridicheskaya literatura. (In Russian).

Ostroumov S.S., Frank L.V. (1976) O viktimologii i viktimnosti [On victimology and victimization]. Sovetskoe gosudarstvo i pravo, no. 4, pp. 74–79. (In Russian).

Romanenko S. (2005) Zakonchilas’ li na territorii raspavsheysya Yugoslavii Vtoraya mirovaya voyna? [Did the Second World War end in the disintegrated Yugoslavia?]. In: Gabovich M. (ed.) Pamyat’ o voyne 60 let spustya: Rossiya, Germaniya, Evropa [The memory of the war 60 years later: Russia, Germany, Europe], Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, pp. 452–462. (In Russian).

Russkikh K. (2017) Seksual’naya ekspluatatsiya detey-soldat ikh vooruzhennoy gruppoy kak voennoe prestuplenie: Kommentariy k Postanovleniyu Apellyatsionnoy palaty Mezhdunarodnogo ugolovnogo suda po delu Prokuror protiv Bosko Ntagandy ot 15 iyunya 2017 goda [The sexual exploitation of child soldiers by their armed groups as a war crime: A commentary to the Judgment of the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court in the case of the Prosecutor v. Bosco Ntaganda of 15 June 2017]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 26–33. (In Russian).

Schabas W. (2020) An Introduction to the International Criminal Court, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Schneider H.J. (1994) Kriminologiya [Criminology], Yu.A.Nepodaev (transl.), Moscow: Progress-Univers. (In Russian).

Schvabe Yu., Gayssler T. (eds.) (2018) Izbrannye resheniya Federal’nogo Konstitutsionnogo Suda Germanii [The selected decisions of the German Federal Constitutional Court], Moscow: Infotropik Media. (In Russian).

Schwöbel-Patel C. (2018) The “Ideal” Victim of International Criminal Law. The European Journal of International Law, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 703–724.

Stahn C. (2019) A Critical Introduction to International Criminal Law, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Stover E., Shigekane R. (2002) Litsa, propavshie bez vesti v rezul’tate voyny: kogda stalkivayutsya interesy semey zhertv voyny i mezhdunarodnykh tribunalov po rassledovaniyu voennykh prestupleniy? [The missing in the aftermath of war: when do the needs of victims’ families and international war crimes tribunals clash?]. Mezhdunarodnyy zhurnal Krasnogo Kresta, no. 848, pp. 141–165. (In Russian).

Stover E. (2005) The Witnesses: War Crimes and the Promise of Justice in The Hague, Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.