Inter-State Dispute Settlement and Africa’s Supranational Courts

in Joanna, Gomula; Wittich, Stephan (Eds.) Research Handbook on International Procedural Law (in press)

The Chapter examines the various regional and sub-regional judicial mechanisms in Africa highlighting their potential for effective inter-state dispute settlement. It explains the lack of inter-state ... [more ▼]

The Chapter examines the various regional and sub-regional judicial mechanisms in Africa highlighting their potential for effective inter-state dispute settlement. It explains the lack of inter-state disputes before Africa’s supranational courts despite the existence of multiple mechanisms providing them with such jurisdiction, and identifies ways through which the potential of these mechanisms can be harnessed to provide effective avenues for the settlement of disputes between African States. [less ▲]

Responsibility for Property and Assets Frozen or Seized by States Upon Request by the International Criminal Court

Scientific Conference (2021, June 10)

Article 57(3)(e) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court empowers the International Criminal Court to ‘seek the cooperation of States pursuant to article 93, paragraph 1 (k), to take ... [more ▼]

Article 57(3)(e) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court empowers the International Criminal Court to ‘seek the cooperation of States pursuant to article 93, paragraph 1 (k), to take protective measures for the purpose of forfeiture, in particular for the ultimate benefit of victims’ while Article 93(1)(k) imposes an obligation on state parties to the statute to provide assistance to the Court in the ‘identification, tracing and freezing or seizure of proceeds, property and assets and instrumentalities of crimes for the purpose of eventual forfeiture’. However, the Court does not yet have sufficient jurisprudence to flesh out the conceptual and practical boundaries of these provisions, including the question of responsibility for the management of the frozen or seized property and assets. If the Court’s very limited relevant jurisprudence is anything to go by, it is urgently necessary to interrogate these provisions and their practical application, as these questions lie at the very core of the Court’s integrity and credibility. This is especially so as the Court seeks to expand its practical reach beyond (mainly indigent) non-state actors to state actors, a situation that is likely to call more attention to the Court’s powers and responsibilities specifically relating to Articles 57(3)(e) and 93(1)(k). This article interrogates the Court’s powers under Article 57(3)(e) and the extent of obligations of the Court and state parties arising from Article 93(1)(k), and the possible implications for the rights of accused persons, the rights and expectations of victims and for state cooperation. [less ▲]

The United States of America, Racism and Sanctions Meet at the International Criminal Court

E-print/Working paper (2021)

Remuneration Debacle at the International Criminal Court: Should ICC Judges Get a Pay Rise? Part II

E-print/Working paper (2020)

‘Grading’ the Nominees for the International Criminal Court Judges Election 2021-2030: The Report of the Advisory Committee on Nomination of Judges—Part I

E-print/Working paper (2020)

Introducing aspects of transformative justice to the International Criminal Court through plea negotiation

in Fraser, Julie; Leyh, Brianne McGonigle (Eds.) Intersections of law and culture at the International Criminal Court (2020)

‘Oops, we misplaced the keys…too bad!’: The International Criminal Court and the fiasco of Mr Jean-Pierre Bemba’s compensation claim

E-print/Working paper (2020)

South Africa’s incomplete transition towards socio-economic justice: A case study on inequality and populism

E-print/Working paper (2020)

South Africa is currently one of the world’s most unequal countries, with massive income inequality, millions of people living in poverty without access to basic services and amenities, unemployment rates ... [more ▼]

South Africa is currently one of the world’s most unequal countries, with massive income inequality, millions of people living in poverty without access to basic services and amenities, unemployment rates consistently above 20% and the top 10% of the population receiving two thirds of the total income. Government economic policies on poverty reduction in the decades since the advent of democracy in South Africa in 1994 have been unable to eradicate the extreme racialised inequality which was the basis of the 342 years of colonialism and apartheid which were characterised by systematic dispossession and socio-economic marginalisation of South Africa’s majority Black population and the systematic privileging of the minority White population. While this history is not the primary focus of this paper, it nonetheless provides useful context. The paper’s primary focus is on the more recent normative and legal challenges of post-1994 South Africa that have resulted in further entrenching socio-economic inequality and contributing to the rise of populism. In this paper we argue that the dire living conditions of a large proportion of the population and disillusionment with the State’s ability to deliver on its promises in this regard, along with the poor implementation of social and economic rights have led to the development of a populist culture in South African politics. [less ▲]

Distant Justice Symposium: Phil Clark’s ‘Distant Justice’–A Wake-Up Call for the International Criminal Court or a Case for Managing Expectations?

E-print/Working paper (2019)

The International Criminal Court and Reparations: Judicial Innovation or Judicialisation of a Political Process?

in International Criminal Law Review (2019), 19(3), 505-531

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court bestows reparative powers upon the court, a significant development in international criminal justice. However, the court still struggles to ... [more ▼]

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court bestows reparative powers upon the court, a significant development in international criminal justice. However, the court still struggles to effectively exercise this mandate. This article proceeds on the assumption that reparations for mass atrocities are best handled through domestic political processes rather than international criminal justice processes. The article interrogates the effectiveness of the court’s reparative powers by testing them as against the court’s practice, specifically in the Lubanga, Katanga and Al-Mahdi cases. The article concludes that despite noble intentions, practical realities and difficulties make doubtful the court’s suitability as a reparative forum for mass atrocities. Nevertheless, in the absence of a more suitable alternative for effective and meaningful reparations, the article proposes policy reforms to achieve robust reparative complementarity between the court and transitional states, and complementarity between the court’s reparative mandate and the Trust Fund for Victims’ assistance mandate. [less ▲]