Resource Library

Throughout 2023, ICTJ’s experts have offered their unique perspective on breaking news around the globe as part of the World Report. Their insightful commentaries have brought into focus the impact these events have on victims of human right violations as well as larger struggles for peace and justice. In this edition, we look back on the past year through the Expert’s Choice column.

Five years ago, in August 2018, to mark his 100 days in office, Armenian Prime Minister Pashinyan addressed a large rally in Yerevan’s Republic Square to officially announce his government’s intentions to incorporate transitional justice mechanisms into Armenian post-revolution reform agenda. Since then, Armenia has been pursuing a range of transitional justice initiatives alongside other democratic reforms, and it has made some limited headway, despite setbacks and major challenges including renewed conflict with Azerbaijan.

On October 31, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan met with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev in Sochi to discuss steps to normalize relations between Yerevan and Baku and a longer-term peace deal that would finally end the decades-long, on-and-off conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh. This willingness on both sides to come to the negotiating table is without question welcome news. However, the two parties seem to want to talk about peace on different terms and without addressing core human rights issues in their respective countries in connection with the conflict.

It may seem trivial for me to write about why those who continue to mark July 17 as "International Justice Day" should finally stop calling it that. Many human rights groups (including ICTJ), United Nations agencies, and governments have been publicly using that phrase since 2010. It is for victims of massive and systematic human rights violations, including abuses that amount to international crimes under the Rome Statute, that it is important to end the misconception that the phrase encourages.

In the wake of the mass demonstrations in the United States, activists in European cities similarly took the streets to protest against racism and police violence. In Belgium, mostly young activists have defaced statues of King Leopold II with red paint, insisting public spaces be "decolonized" that commemorate the monarch who personally owned the Congo for more than two decades before relinquishing it to the Belgian government which then controlled it for half a century. Are Belgian and other societies in Europe ready to reckon with the truth of their colonial legacies?

In July, the ICC Trial Chamber II rejected victims’ reparations claims in an appeal of the ruling for Germain Katanga, brought by five descendants of the 2003 Bongoro massacre who had suffered psychological harm. In trying to prove causation, the judges considered that the closer the date of birth to the atrocities committed, the greater the likelihood of transgenerational harm. In my view, this linear understanding is flawed. It does not capture the complexity of psychological responses to trauma

The decision on reparations by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the case of Congolese warlord Thomas Lubanga sets a historic precedent, but it should not be celebrated until victims in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) are fully compensated through an inclusive and participatory process. The Lubanga decision stated that reparations “go beyond the notion of punitive justice, towards a solution which is more inclusive, encourages participation and recognizes the need to provide effective remedies for victims.” Yet Ruben Carranza, director of ICTJ’s Reparative Justice program, is cautious about celebrating before the process is complete.

The trial of Thomas Lubanga before the ICC has the potential to set a critical precedent regarding the right to reparations. In our latest podcast ICTJ's Director of Reparations Ruben Carranza discusses recommendations ICTJ submitted to the ICC concerning the implementation of reparations. [Download](/sites/default/files/Carranza_ICTJ_Podcast_06132012.mp3) | Duration: 16:56mins | File size: 9.69MB

The global struggle against impunity relies on a frontline of national judicial systems willing and able to prosecute war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. In this final podcast on complementarity, Phakiso Mochochoko, head of the Jurisdiction, Complementarity, and Cooperation Division of the International Criminal Court, discusses the role the court must play in supporting complementarity in practice. [Download](/sites/default/files/Mochochoko_ICTJ_Podcast_03202012.mp3) | Duration: 10:17mins | File size: 5.88MB

If the international community is seriously committed to fighting impunity for mass atrocity, national courts in the countries where such crimes have been committed must be at the frontline. International development actors are crucial to making this possible. [Download](/sites/default/files/Tolbert_ICTJ_Podcast_11302011_2.mp3) | Duration: 12:33mins | File size: 7KB