Uganda’s war crimes court facing tough hurdles
By Timothy Nsubuga
23rd January 2012:
Judges at the opening of the Kwoyelo trial
Legal and organizational issues that have emerged during Uganda’s first war crimes prosecution pose challenges for Uganda in seeking to ensure justice for victims of the most serious crimes, Human Rights Watch [HRW] said in a briefing paper released last week.
The report partly reads: “…Uganda’s early experience may provide relevant information to other countries seeking to hold domestic trials for serious crimes committed in violation of international law – genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.
In recent years, there has been increasing focus on making it possible for national courts to conduct trials of serious crimes. In particular, states parties to the International Criminal Court (ICC) have devoted greater attention to complementarity – the principle that national courts should be the primary vehicles for prosecuting genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.”
The 29-page briefing paper, “Justice for Serious Crimes before National Courts: Uganda’s International Crimes Division,” provides a snapshot of progress from Uganda’s complementarity-related initiative: The ICD is a division of the High Court with a mandate to prosecute genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity, in addition to crimes such as terrorism.
Based on research by Human Rights Watch in Uganda in September 2011, the briefing paper analyzes the ICD’s work to date, the obstacles it has encountered, and challenges both for the future work of the ICD and for national accountability efforts more broadly.
“…National war crimes trials should provide accountability for crimes committed in Uganda. However, outstanding questions remain for the International Crimes Division if it is to succeed in reaching its potential as a forum for delivering meaningful justice,” said Elise Keppler, senior international justice counsel at Human Rights Watch.”
The one case that is now before the ICD involving war crimes is that of Thomas Kwoyelo, a member of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) rebel group. The case is challenging the very legal framework within which the ICD operates, Human Rights Watch said. Its outcome is likely to be decisive as to whether cases involving serious crimes committed by LRA members during the two-decade conflict in Northern Uganda with the Ugandan government can proceed.
The challenges include whether Uganda’s Amnesty Act will ultimately bar cases against members of the LRA, and whether Uganda’s law implementing the ICC’s Rome Statute can be used to prosecute crimes from the conflict. The paper focuses on the importance of credible justice, including accountability for crimes committed both by the LRA and the Ugandan armed forces, and the need to provide adequate support and time for the accused to properly prepare a defence.
The briefing paper also evaluates the impact of structural inadequacies in the ICD, such as frequent rotation of staff on and off the division and the lack of an adequate witness protection and support scheme. “…The experience of the International Crimes Division may offer insights to other states facing the task of prosecuting war crimes before domestic courts,” Keppler said.
The Ugandan government should ensure that crimes committed by both the LRA and the Ugandan army are addressed and that legal obstacles are surmounted, Human Rights Watch said. Whereas donors have provided funding for the ICD, including for such significant needs as promoting protection of witnesses and providing interpreters, other crucial areas – notably defence representation – still remain underfunded.
“…The Ugandan government will have to provide uncompromised backing for the ICD to ensure fair, effective trials. Donors also have a critical role to play, not only by funding key needs, but also by stressing the importance of justice for crimes committed by both sides,” Keppler said.
The idea for the ICD came about during peace talks between the LRA and the Ugandan government in Juba, Southern Sudan, from 2006 to 2008. The talks produced agreements which provided that Uganda’s government would establish a “special division” to hold national trials of serious crimes.
While the LRA leadership never signed the talks’ final agreement, the Ugandan government made a commitment to carry out the agreement unilaterally to the extent possible. END: Please login to www.ugandacorrespondent.com every Monday to read our top stories and anytime mid-week for our news updates.
