Striking the Balance: The Effectiveness of the International Criminal Court in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

Abstract

On 8 July 2010, Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court (ICC) ordered, for the second time in the case of The Prosecutor vs. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, the stay of proceedings and the release of the accused. Although, this decision was overturned by the Appeals Chamber on 8 October 2010, this incident has raised new questions on the success of the ICC in general and in the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) in specific. As the term of the first Prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, is coming to an end, it is time to start evaluating the successes and the problems of the ICC and with this knowledge, look at the future. This research investigates the ICC’s effectiveness in the DRC by examining its effectiveness in achieving its two objectives of ending impunity for the perpetrators of the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole and contributing to the prevention of such crimes. In addition, it examines the local perception, because I believe it is also necessary to include the view of the victims and affected communities to whom the Court is supposed to bring justice. This research finds that the ICC is largely ineffective in the DRC in all three fields mostly due to the mistake of bringing on limited charges in its first cases and not persecuting perpetrators of illegal exploitation of national resources, of neighbouring countries and of the government’s ranks. However, this research also finds that the ICC intervention did not impede peace or exacerbated the violence. In regard to the peace versus justice debate, this research concludes therefore that justice can be pursued without jeopardizing peace or peace negotiations, but ongoing conflict does make it more difficult to achieve that justice.