Download - Africa Peace and Conflict Journal - The University for ...

Rediscovering Mato Oput: The Acholi Justice System and the Conflict in Northern Uganda 29doubted the ability of the ICC to successfully carry out the arrests. As the court lacksan enforcement arm, the people assumed that the court would have to rely on governmentforces, the Uganda People’s Defence Force (UPDF), for this purpose. 12 The governmenthad been unable, however, to defend its citizens from attacks and abductionsby the LRA. 13 In 1996 the Ugandan government had moved almost the entire Acholipopulation into internally displaced persons camps to protect them from the LRA, buteven then, its soldiers could not manage to adequately secure the camps against LRAassaults. 14Another objection to the ICC intervention concerned the issue of abducted children,which raised not only legal but moral questions because of the likelihood thatapprehending LRA members would likely involve military operations. The situationin northern Uganda remains an ongoing conflict, so pursuing the culprits militarilywould likely involve loved ones being killed. The chances of this occurring was higherthan it might be under other circumstances because the majority of the combatantsor perpetrators in the LRA had been forcibly abducted and indoctrinated, makingthem victims as well.Some Acholi questioned the objectivity of the ICC. This concern revolved aroundthe manner of referral to the ICC and the fact that the ICC did not target the UPDF,which like the LRA was believed to have committed atrocities against the Acholi population.15 Among these sceptics is Charles Abok, who said, ‘The conflict in northernUganda is complex and it is difficult to state who was really fighting for the people andwho was against the people. Both the government and the LRA claimed to have beenfighting for the Acholi, yet both have committed very serious and vengeful crimesagainst the Acholi people’. 16 Government forces have been accused of looting propertyand raping women and torturing whomever they suspect of being rebel collaborators.17 Caroline Auma agreed, stating, ‘The LRA abducted children, but the UPDF alsocommitted very grave human rights abuses [against] our people, like raping, torturingand killing’. 18In this regard, it did not escape the attention of the Acholi population that one ofthe conflict’s protagonists—President Museveni—had made the referral to the ICC. 19Moreover, when the ICC prosecutor announced the referral, it was at a joint press conferencewith Museveni. 20 These events led to suspicions about the primary intent ofissuing the referral. Some believed that the Ugandan government might be using thecourt as a weapon against the LRA; further, some felt that the ICC’s failure to targetthe UPDF was due to the force’s association with the government. 21 This explains thelocal population’s misgivings that any judgment in the case would be unjust unless12. Interview, group of elders, Lacor internally displaced persons (IDP) camp, Gulu, 11 May 2008.13. Interview, Abel Ojara, Kitgum, 16 May 2008.14. Interview, Caroline Auma, Lapuje IDP camp, Kitgum, 31 May 2008.15. Allen, Trial Justice, 175.16. Interview, Charles Abok, Pabo IDP camp, Amor district, 23 April 2008.17. Interview, Christine Achar, Kitgum, 19 May 2008.18. Interview, Caroline Auma, Lapuje IDP camp, 31 May 2008.19. Interview, Crispin Opiyo, Kitgum, 29 May 2008.20. Human Rights Watch, ‘Courting history: Landmark international court’s first years: II. Office of theprosecutor’, 2008, www.hrw.org/reports/2008/icc0708/5.htm.21. Allen, Trial Justice, 97.