Gender Report Card on the International Criminal ... - YWCA Canada

Judiciary – Key Decisions Victim Participation
The Prosecutor v. Germain Katanga &
Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui
A total of 366 victims have been accepted to
participate in the case against Germain Katanga
and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui. 1733 Only four applicants
were granted victim participant status since 30
August 2010. 1734 No gender breakdown of the current
participating victims is available.
Trial Chamber II first established principles with regard
to victims’ participation in a decision issued as early
as 1 December 2009. 1735 On 22 January 2010, the
Chamber issued a decision on the general modalities of
participation by victims at the trial stage, holding that
victim participants are not parties to the proceedings,
and that their participation is a possibility, rather
than a general right, contingent on their satisfying
conditions related to their personal interest, the
scope of their request, and the burden it places on the
Defence. The Chamber found that, as a rule, victims
satisfying these conditions could participate in the
proceedings through their legal representatives in a
variety of ways, including: testifying, making opening
and closing statements, attending and participating
in the proceedings, questioning witnesses, presenting
documentary evidence, and participating in the
witness familiarisation process. 1736 This decision
followed the first authorisation of victims to appear
as witnesses by Trial Chamber I in the Lubanga case
in June 2009. 1737 The three victim-witnesses in the
Lubanga case subsequently testified in January
2010. They were also granted protective measures
in the form of image and voice distortion. A detailed
discussion of their testimony is provided in the <strong>Gender</strong>
<strong>Report</strong> <strong>Card</strong> 2010. 1738
The Katanga Defence appealed Trial Chamber II’s
22 January decision on the general modalities for
victim participation on three grounds, 1739 all of which
were rejected by the Appeals Chamber in a 16 July
2010 decision, confirming the findings of the Trial
Chamber and affirming the opportunity for victims
to participate in the proceedings. 1740 Trial Chamber II
set a deadline of 15 September 2010 for requests for
the appearance of participating victims as witnesses.
This request was filed confidentially by the Legal
Representative on 15 September 2010. 1741
On 9 November 2010, Trial Chamber II issued a
lengthy decision on the Legal Representative’s request,
authorising the appearance of four participating
victims as witnesses in the Katanga & Ngudjolo
case (victims a/0381/09, a/0018/09, a/0191/08 and
pan/0363/09 acting on behalf of victim a/0363/09,
who is a minor, and on her own behalf). 1742 All four
victims were Hema women who lived in Bogoro at
the time of the attack. The Chamber found that the
victims’ testimony would: clarify the social context,
living conditions and atmosphere both before and
after the Bogoro attack, the unfolding of the attack
itself, the reasons for seeking refuge at the Bogoro
Institute, the ethnic nature of the attack and the
harm suffered. 1743 The Chamber also found that the
proposed testimony would cover the material and
emotional consequences of the attack on civilians,
detailed information on the unfolding of events at the
Bogoro Institute preceding the attack, the action taken
by the Red Cross after the attack, and the distinction
made between Hemas and non-Hemas by the
attackers. The Chamber found that the testimony of
the four victims would contribute to the Court’s truth
seeking function, and that each of the victims had the
required personal interest. The Chamber found the
1733 Based on figures provided by the VPRS by email dated 14
September 2011.
1734 ICC-01/04-01/07-2516 and ICC-01/04-01/07-2693.
1735 ICC-01/04-01/07-1665-Corr.
1736 For a more detailed description of this decision, see
<strong>Gender</strong> <strong>Report</strong> <strong>Card</strong> 2010, p 198-202.
1737 ICC-01/04-01/06-2002-Conf, as cited in ICC-01/04-01/06-
2032-Anx, para 39. A public redacted version of the
decision became available on 9 July 2009, ICC-01/04-
01/06-2032. For more information on this decision, see
<strong>Gender</strong> <strong>Report</strong> <strong>Card</strong> 2010, p 137.
1738 <strong>Gender</strong> <strong>Report</strong> <strong>Card</strong> 2010, p 137-139.
1739 The Katanga Defence was granted leave to appeal on
three grounds: (i) whether it was possible for the legal
representative of the victims to lead evidence and call
victims to testify, including incriminating evidence
and testimony, without disclosing it to the Defence
prior to trial; (ii) whether every item of evidence in
the possession of the legal representative of the
victims, either incriminating or exculpatory, must be
communicated to the parties; and (iii) whether it was
possible for the legal representative of victims to call
victims to testify on matters including the role of the
accused in crimes charged against them. <strong>Gender</strong> <strong>Report</strong>
<strong>Card</strong> 2010, p 201.
1740 ICC-01/04-01/07-2288. For more on this issue see <strong>Gender</strong>
<strong>Report</strong> <strong>Card</strong> 2010, p 201.
1741 ICC-01/04-01/07-2393-Conf, as cited in ICC-01/04-01/07-
2401.
1742 ICC-01/04-01/07-2517.
1743 ICC-01/04-01/07-2517.
283