Contextualizing Ongwen at the ICC: Underlying Narratives and the Expressivist Function of Judgments

Ganashree, Abhaya

doi:10.1007/978-3-031-45994-8_10

Abhaya Ganashree⁵

Part of the book series: Global Issues ((GLOISS))

36 Accesses

Abstract

The complexities of atrocities have long since demanded a thorough analysis of the situations and circumstances surrounding the crime. Although such analysis was usually limited to academic discourse, the reality of child soldiers forced to join rebel forces once they reach adulthood has brought up complex legal questions that need to be addressed by the courts. On the one hand, international criminal law principles afford protection to all children; however, the same principles call for the prosecution and punishment of those who are guilty of committing serious crimes.

The case of Dominic Ongwen before the ICC, where the accused who was recruited as a child soldier is currently being tried for committing crimes during his adulthood, raises contentious issues regarding the forms of responsibility. The question that this chapter deals with is about the extent of the protection afforded to child soldiers and whether ICL permits the consideration of the impact of the experiences as a child soldier on future conduct. Using this case as a starting point, this paper address the core question of whether mental incapacity can be treated as a defence under Article 31 of the Rome Statute and whether sociological and psychological circumstances could be considered by the ICC. While doing so, the paper uses the case of Ongwen as a case study and considers the arguments put forth by the three parties with regard to the expert psychiatric evidence and other background evidence. Throughout, the paper keeps in mind the purpose of the Rome Statue. The author argues for a more contextual understanding of the core crimes and for a greater effort to develop international humanitarian law, particularly surrounding the issue of child soldiers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Chapter: USD 29.95; Price excludes VAT (USA)

eBook: USD 129.00; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 169.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
Transcript, The Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen (ICC-02/04-01/15-T-257-ENG), Trial Chamber, 11 March 2020, 49, lines 20–23 (hereafter Ongwen).
2.
M.A. Drumbl, ‘Victims who victimise’, 4(2) London Review of International Law (2016), at 217, 218.
3.
E. K. Baines, ‘Complex political perpetrators: Reflections on Dominic Ongwen’, 46 Journal of Modern African Studies (2009), at 163, 164.
4.
Ibid., at 163, 164.
5.
G. Simpson, The Conscience of Civilisation, and its Discontents” in P. Kastner (ed.), International Criminal Law in Context (1st edn., Routledge, 2018).
6.
P. Levi, The Drowned and the Saved (Rosenthal tr, Vintage Books, 1989), at 44–45.
7.
S. M. H. Nouwen, ‘Legal Equality on Trial: Sovereigns and Individuals before the International Criminal Court’, 43 Netherlands Yearbook of International Law (2012), at 151.
8.
H. Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil (Penguin Books, 1994), at 4–6.
9.
L. G. Minkova, ‘Expressing what? The stigmatization of the defendant and the ICC’s institutional interests in the Ongwen case’, 34 Leiden Journal of International Law (2021), at 223, 226.
10.
Ibid.
11.
L. Douglas, The Right Wrong Man: John Demjanjuk and the Last Great Nazi War Crimes Trial (Princeton University Press, 2016), at 218–219; Minkova, supra note 9, at 223, 227.
12.
Agence France-Presse, ‘Senior Lord’s Resistance Army Commander Surrenders to US Troops’ Guardian, 7 January 2015, available at www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/06/lords-resistance-army-commander-surrenders-central-african-republic (last visited 2 August 2021).
13.
Judgment, Ongwen (ICC-02/04-01/15), Trial Chamber, 4 February 2021, § 9.
14.
Open Society Justice Initiative, ‘Briefing Paper: The Trial of Dominic Ongwen at the ICC: The Judgment’, Open Society Foundations, February 2021, available at www.justiceinitiative.org/publications/the-trial-of-dominic-ongwen-at-the-icc-the-judgment (last visited 13 July 2021).
15.
France-Presse, supra note 12.
16.
Enough Team, ‘BREAKING: LRA Top Commander Surrenders’, Enough Project, 6 January 2015, available at https://enoughproject.org/press-releases/breaking-lra-top-commander-surrenders (last visited 2 August 2021).
17.
Sentence, Ongwen (ICC-02/04-01/15), Trial Chamber, 6 May 2021, § 385.
18.
Drumbl, supra note 2, at 217, 218; W. Nortje, ‘Victim or Villain: Exploring the Possible Bases of a Defence in the Ongwen Case at the International Criminal Court’, 17 (1) International Criminal Law Review (2017) -at 187; S. Omeri, ‘Guilty Pleas and Plea Bargaining at the ICC: Prosecutor v. Ongwen and Beyond’, 16 International Criminal Law Review (2016), at 480.
19.
Warrant of Arrest for Dominic Ongwen, Situation in Uganda (ICC-02/04), Pre-Trial Chamber II, 8 July 2004.
20.
Ongwen (Public Redacted Version of ‘Corrected Version of “Defence Closing Brief” filed on 24 February 2020’), § 487; Judgment, Ongwen, supra note 13, §§ 28–30.
21.
K. Vlassenroot and T. Allen, The Lord’s Resistance Army: Myth and Reality (Zed Books, 2010), at 9–10.
22.
Ibid, at 25; R. Doom and K. Vlassenroot, ‘Kony’s Message: A New Koine? The Lord’s Resistance Army in Northern Uganda’, 98 (390) African Affairs (1999), at 5, 21.
23.
I. Cable, ‘Child Soldiers And Accountability: The Trial Of Dominic Ongwen’, Human Rights Pulse, 21 April 2021, available at www.humanrightspulse.com/mastercontentblog/child-soldiers-and-accountability-the-trial-of-dominic-ongwen (last visited 13 July 2021); OCHA, ‘LRA Regional Update DRC, CAR and South Sudan: June–August 2011’, ReliefWeb, 29 September 2011, available at https://reliefweb.int/map/central-african-republic/lra-regional-update-drc-car-and-south-sudan-june-august-2011 (last visited 13 July 2021): Although the number of attacks have declined and the LRA no longer operates in Uganda, it continues to thrive in the border regions.
24.
Ongwen (Public Redacted Version of ‘Corrected Version of “Defence Closing Brief” filed on 24 February 2020’), supra note 20, at §§ 28–30.
25.
Transcript, Ongwen (ICC- 02/04-01/15) Trial Chamber, 6 December 2016, at 3.
26.
University of Manitoba, ‘VLFL “The Dilemma of Dominic Ongwen: A former child soldier.” Dr. Kjell Anderson’ YouTube, 21 October 2020, available online at www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KPiZr5lBI0 (last visited 4 August 2021).
27.
Third Public Redacted Version of ‘Defence Brief for the Confirmation of Charges Hearing’, filed on 18 January 2016, Ongwen (ICC-02/04-01/15-404-Conf), Trial Chamber, 25 May 2016, at 3.
28.
Judgment, Ongwen, supra note 13, §§ 134–138.
29.
Ibid, §§ 142–143.
30.
Ibid, § 143.
31.
Decision on the admissibility of the case under article 19(1) of the Statute, Ongwen (ICC-02/04-01/15), Trial Chamber, 10 March 2009, §§ 33–43.
32.
T. Allen, ‘The International Criminal Court and the Invention of Traditional Justice in Northern Uganda’ (2007) 3(107) Politique Africaine, at 147, 148.
33.
France-Presse, supra note 12.
34.
Judgment, Ongwen, supra note 13.
35.
Allen, supra note 32, at 147, 148
36.
Annual Report of the Secretary-General on Children and Armed conflict to the Security Council, UN Doc. A/62/609 S/2007/757, 21 December 2007.
37.
C. Morini,‘First Victims Then Perpetrators: Child Soldiers and International Law’, 3 Anuario Colombiano de Derecho Internacional (2010), at 187, 194.
38.
A. Smeulers, ‘Perpetrators of International Crimes: Towards a Typology’ in A. Smeulers & R. Haveman (eds), Supranational Criminology: towards a criminology of international crimes (Antwerp: Intersentia, 2008).
39.
G. Simpson, ‘Men and Abstract Entities: Individual Responsibility and Collective Guilt in International Criminal Law’ in H. van der Wilt and A. Nollkaemper (eds), System Criminality in International Law (Cambridge University Press, 2020), at 71.
40.
Smeulers, supra note 38.
41.
Nuremberg IMT, ‘Judgment and sentence’, 41 American Journal of International Law (1947) 41, at 221.
42.
Morini, supra note 37; Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts (adopted 8 June 1977, entered into force 7 December 1978) 1125 UNTS 609, at Art. 4; ICRC, Customary IHL Database, available online at https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/home (last visited 8 August 2021), Rule 136, 137.
43.
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (adopted 17 July 1998, entered into force 1 July 2002), 2187 UNTS 90 (hereafter Rome Statute), at Art 8(2)(b)(xxvi), Art. 8(2)(e)(vii).
44.
Arendt, supra note 8, at 4–6.
45.
K. Lohne, Advocates of Humanity: Human Rights NGOs in International Criminal Justice (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019), at 219.
46.
Allen, supra note 32, at 147, 148.
47.
G. Simpson, ‘Men and Abstract Entities: Individual Responsibility and Collective Guilt in International Criminal Law’, in van der Wilt and Nollkaemper, supra note 39, at 73.
48.
S.-H. Song, ‘7th Consultative Assembly of Parliamentarians for the International Criminal Court and the Rule of Law & World Parliamentary Conference of Human Rights, International Human Rights Day 2012. Remarks at the Opening Session’, ICC-CPI, 10 December 2012, available at https://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/pids/statements/121210pgacap-iccspeech.pdf, (last visited 4 August 2021), at 3.
49.
B. Sander, ‘The Expressive Turn of International Criminal Justice: A Field in Search of Meaning’, 32 (4) Leiden Journal of International Law (2019), at 851, 852.
50.
Minkova, supra note 9, at 223.
51.
Sander, supra note 49.
52.
K. Ambos, Treatise on International Criminal Law. Vol. 1: Foundations and General Part (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), at 72.
53.
M. Aksenova, ‘Symbolism as a Constraint on International Criminal Law’, 30 Leiden Journal of International Law (2017), at 475, 489.
54.
L. D. A Corrias and G. M. Gordon, ‘Judging in the Name of Humanity: International Criminal Tribunals and the Representation of a Global Public’, 13 Journal of International Criminal Justice (2015), at 97; I. Tallgren, ‘The Voice of the International: Who is Speaking?’, Journal of International Criminal Justice (2015) 13, at 135, 151.
55.
Drumbl, supra note 2, at 217.
56.
K. M. Clarke, ‘The Rule of Law Through Its Economies of Appearances: The Making of the African Warlord’, 18 Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies (2011), at 7.
57.
M. Tripkovic, ‘Not in Our Name! Visions of Community in International Criminal Justice’, in M. Aksenova, E. van Sliedregt and S. Parmentier (eds), Breaking the Cycle of Mass Atrocities: Criminological and Socio-Legal Approaches in International Criminal Law (2019), at 165.
58.
S. M. H. Nouwen and Wouter G. Werner, ‘Doing Justice to the Political: The International Criminal Court in Uganda and Sudan’, European Journal of International Law (2010) 21, at 941; Sander, n. 48, 859.
59.
Sloane, ‘The Expressive Capacity of International Punishment: The Limits of the National Law Analogy and the Potential of International Criminal Law’, Stanford Journal of International Law (2007) 43, at 39, 65.
60.
Minkova, supra note 9, at 223, 232.
61.
Ibid., at 223, 232.
62.
Rome Statute, supra note 43, at Art. 30, Art. 25.
63.
Report of the Preparatory Committee on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, Volume II, UN Doc. A/51/22, 13 September 1996, at 92–93.
64.
D. Piragoff and D. Robinson, ‘Article 30: Mental Element’ in O. Triffterer (ed.) Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court—Observer’s Notes, Article by Article (CH Beck Hart Nomos, 2nd edn., 2008), at 850.
65.
Rome Statute, supra note 43, at Art. 25(3).
66.
M. E. Badar, ‘The Mental Element in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Commentary From a Comparative Criminal Law Perspective’, Criminal Law Forum, (2008), at 473, 476.
67.
Decision on the confirmation of charges, Lubanga (ICC-01/04-01/06-803) Trial Chamber, 29 January 2007; The three degrees of dolus encompasses dolus directus of the first and second degree and dolus eventualis.
68.
Rome Statute, supra note 43, at Art. 31.
69.
Ibid., at Art. 31.
70.
Ibid., at Art. 55(2).
71.
Judgment, Ongwen, supra note 28, § 2454.
72.
Report of the Preparatory Committee on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, Volume II, UN Doc. A/51/22, 13 September 1996.
73.
A. Eser, ‘Article 31: Grounds for Excluding Criminal Responsibility’ in O. Triffterer, supra note 64, at 875.
74.
Rome Statute, supra note 43, at Art. 31(1)(d).
75.
Decision on Defence Request for the Chamber to Issue an Immediate Ruling Confirming the Burden and Standard of Proof Applicable to Articles 31(1)(a) and (d) of the Rome Statute, Ongwen (ICC-02/04-01/15), Trial Chamber, 5 April 2019, § 15.
76.
Judgment, Ongwen, supra note 28, §§ 85–93.
77.
Ibid, § 2456.
78.
Transcript, Ongwen, supra note 25, at 3.
79.
P. Bourdieu, ‘The Force of Law: Towards a Sociology of the Juridical Field’, 38 Hastings Law Journal (1987), at 226.
80.
Rome Statute, supra note 43, Art. 78(1).
81.
Rome Statute, supra note 43, Art. 31(1)(a).
82.
Rome Statute, supra note 43, Art. 55(2).
83.
Judgment, Ongwen, supra note 28, § 2450.
84.
Ibid, § 870.
85.
Ibid, § 2464.
86.
Ibid, §§ 2464–2469.
87.
Ibid, § 2480; M. Fortuna, ‘The “Mental Disorder” Defence in Prosecutor v. Ongwen’, Blog of Groningen Journal of International Law, 16 February 2021 available at https://grojil.org/2021/02/16/the-mental-disorder-defence-in-prosecutor-v-ongwen/ (last visited 8 August 2021).
88.
Transcript of Evidence of Witness P-0446, Ongwen (ICC-02/04-01/15), Trial Chamber, 21, lines 9–19.
89.
Judgment, n. 9, § 2481.
90.
Professor Mezey Report UGA-OTP-0280-0786, Ongwen (ICC-02/04-01/15), Trial Chamber, 0811-0812; Judgment, n. 9, §§ 2483, 2489.
91.
Professor Ovuga and Dr. Akena’s First Report UGA-D-26-0015-0004, Ongwen (ICC-02/04-01/15), Trial Chamber, §§ 0004-5, 0020-23.
92.
Professor Ovuga and Dr. Akena’s First Report, Ongwen, supra note 91, § 0017.
93.
Professor Ovuga and Dr. Akena’s Second Report UGA-D26-0015-0948, Ongwen (ICC-02/04-01/15), Trial Chamber, 0951, 0961-62.
94.
Transcript, Ongwen, supra note 28, at 13.
95.
Ibid, at 15.
96.
Ibid, 12 March 2020.
97.
Defence Closing Brief, n. 1 Public Redacted Version of ‘Corrected Version of “Defence Closing Brief” filed on 24 February 2020’, Ongwen (ICC-02/04-01/15), Trial Chamber, 13 March 2020, § 529.
98.
Transcript, Ongwen (ICC-02/04-01/15), Trial Chamber, 10 March 2020, at 53.
99.
Ibid, at 54.
100.
Ibid, at 56.
101.
Ibid, at 61.
102.
Ibid, at 45.
103.
Ibid, 6 December 2016.
104.
Ongwen (Public Redacted Version of ‘Corrected Version of “Defence Closing Brief” filed on 24 February 2020’), § 680.
105.
Ibid, §§ 681–722.
106.
Public Redacted Version of “Prosecution Closing Brief”, Ongwen (ICC-02/04-01/15-1719-Red), Trial Chamber, 24 February 2020, § 472.
107.
Transcript, Ongwen, supra note 28, at 62.
108.
Public Redacted Version of ‘Corrected Version of “Defence Closing Brief” filed on 24 February 2020’, Ongwen (ICC-02/04-01/15), Trial Chamber, 13 March 2020, § 529.
109.
Transcript, Ongwen, supra note 28, at 62.
110.
Ibid, at 43.
111.
Ibid, at 60.
112.
Ibid, at 61.
113.
Ibid, at 65.
114.
Ibid, at 43.
115.
Victim’s Joint Submission on Sentencing, Ongwen (ICC-02/04-01/15), Trial Chamber, 1 April 2021, § 88.
116.
Transcript, Ongwen, supra note 28, 11 March 2020, at 45.
117.
Victim’s Joint Submission on Sentencing, Ongwen (ICC-02/04-01/15), Trial Chamber, 1 April 2021, § 82.
118.
News Correspondent, ‘Dominic speaks out on why he quit the LRA’, Daily Monitor, 18 January 2015, available at https://www.monitor.co.ug/uganda/news/national/ongwen-speaks-out-on-why-he-quit-lra-1597490, (last visited 9 August 2021).
119.
Drumbl, supra note 2, at 217.
120.
Judgment, Ongwen, supra note 13, § 2497.
121.
Ibid, § 2498.
122.
Ibid, § 2501.
123.
Ibid, § 2521.
124.
Transcript of Evidence of Witness P-0142, Ongwen (ICC-02/04-01/15), Trial Chamber, 16, lines 2–22; Judgment, Ongwen, supra note 13, § 2519.
125.
Judgment, Ongwen, supra note 28, § 2504; Judgment, Ongwen, supra note 13, § 2519.
126.
J. Koleski, ‘Narratives of (In)Justice: Faulty Historical Narratives and Bias in the Case of The Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen At the International Criminal Court’ (Thesis on file at Kent State University, Ohio), at 44.
127.
Judgment, Ongwen, supra note 13, § 2524.
128.
Ibid, § 2531.
129.
Ibid, §§ 2532–2533.
130.
Ibid, § 2569.
131.
Ibid, § 2537.
132.
Ibid, §§ 2556–2576.
133.
Ibid, § 2519.
134.
Ibid, §§ 2478, 2485, 2496.
135.
Rome Statute, supra note 43, at Art. 31(1)(d); Judgment, Ongwen, supra note 13, § 2585.
136.
Judgment, Ongwen, supra note 13, § 2590.
137.
Ibid, § 2590.
138.
Ibid, § 2592.
139.
Transcript of Evidence of P-0231, Ongwen (ICC-02/04-01/15-T-123-Red2-ENG), Trial Chamber, 2 November 2017, 84 lines 8–9.
140.
Ibid., at 83, lines 23–25.
141.
Judgment, Ongwen, supra note 13, § 2601.
142.
Judgment, The Prosecutor v. Dražen Erdemovć (IT-96-22), Trial Chamber, 28 November 1996; Sentencing Judgment, The Prosecutor v. Issa Hassan Sesay, Morris Kallon and Augustine Gbao (SCSL-04-15-T), Trial Chamber, 8 April 2009, § 220.
143.
M. A. Drumbl, ‘Shifting Narratives: Ongwen and Lubanga on the Effects of Child Soldiering’, Justice Conflict, 20 April 2016, available at https://justiceinconflict.org/2016/04/20/shifting-narratives-ongwen-and-lubanga-on-the-effects-of-child-soldiering/ (last visited 8 August 2021).
144.
Judgment, Ongwen, supra note 13, § 2609.
145.
Transcript of Evidence of D-0032, Ongwen (ICC-02/04-01/15-T-199-Red-ENG), Trial Chamber, 19 February 2019, 31, lines 9–12.
146.
Judgment, Ongwen, supra note 13, § 2619.
147.
Ibid, §§ 2623–2628.
148.
Ibid, § 917.
149.
Ibid, § 2645.
150.
Ibid, §§ 2660–2663.
151.
Sentence, Ongwen, supra note 17, § 389; Partially Dissenting Opinion of Judge Raul C. Pangalangan, Ongwen, (ICC-02/04-01/15-1819-Anx 06-05-2021), Trial Chamber, 6 May 2021, § 16.
152.
Sentence, Ongwen, supra note 17, § 385.
153.
Simpson, “Anti-death League” (2018) Queen Margaret University, at 1, 12.
154.
Decision on Confirmation of Charges, Ongwen (ICC-02/04-01/15), Pre-Trial Chamber, 23 March 2016, §§ 150–156.
155.
Allen, supra note 32, at 147, 151.
156.
Ibid, at 147, 151.
157.
M. Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison (Sheridan tr, Vintage Books, 2nd edn., 1995), at 505.
158.
J. Atingo, ‘Watching the ICC Judgement of LRA commander Dominic Ongwen with Ugandan victims of enforced marriage’, Africa at LSE, 17 February 2021, available at https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/africaatlse/2021/02/17/watching-icc-judgement-lra-commander-dominic-ongwen-uganda-victims-rape-marriage/ (last visited 8 August 2021).
159.
Baines, supra note at 163, at 185.
160.
Minkova, supra note 9, at 223, 224.
161.
Rome Statute, supra note 43, Art. 21.
162.
A. Z. Borda, ‘Precedent in International Criminal Courts and Tribunals’, 2(2) Cambridge Journal of International Comparative Law (2013), at 287, 304.
163.
Decision on Sentence pursuant to Article 76 of the Statute, Lubanga (ICC-01/04-01/06-2901), Trial Chamber, 13 July 2012, §§ 39–42.
164.
Sentencing Judgment, Prosecutor v. Issa Hassan Sesay, Morris Kallon, Augustine Gbao (SCSL-04-15-T), Trial Chamber, 8 April 2009, § 220.
165.
Judgment, Zejnil Delalić, Zdravko Mucić also know as “Pavo”, Hazim Delić and Essad Landžo also known as “Zenga”, (IT-96-21), Trial Chamber,16 November 1998.
166.
Ibid.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

London School of Economics, London, UK
Abhaya Ganashree

Authors

Abhaya Ganashree
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Faculty of Law, Palacký University, Olomouc, Czech Republic
Martin Faix
Faculty of Law, Palacký University, Olomouc, Czech Republic
Ondřej Svaček

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ganashree, A. (2024). Contextualizing Ongwen at the ICC: Underlying Narratives and the Expressivist Function of Judgments. In: Faix, M., Svaček, O. (eds) ICC Jurisprudence and the Development of International Humanitarian Law. Global Issues. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-45994-8_10

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-45994-8_10
Published: 29 March 2024
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-45993-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-45994-8
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics