Victims' Rights Working GroupPromoting the rights and interests of victims
March 2017
MonTueWedThuFriSatSun
12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031

LEGAL UPDATE Feb-May 2012

ICC Victims’ Rights Legal Update

22 February 2011 – 8 May 2012

 (PDF version)

Note: These are unofficial summaries of ICC decisions and related pleadings relevant to victims’ rights. For further information please consult the linked documents. Please direct any comments to Gaelle Carayon at gaelle@redress.org

  •  Pre-Trial Chambers are reconstituted and assigned to situations

Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)

Lubanga:

  • Found guilty, victim witnesses stripped of their participatory status
  • Chamber considers submissions on reparations and sentencing
  • OPCV opposes decision to strip dual status victims of their participatory status

Katanga & Ngudjolo:

  • Victims file final observations
  • Report from Chamber’s field visit to be part of the casefile
  • TC1 rejects LRV’s request for additional resources

Mbarushimana:

  • Victims to participate in confirmation of charges appeal

Uganda

  • Framework decision on victim participation in situation/investigation phase

Central African Republic

Bemba:

  • Chamber grants hundreds more victims participatory status
  • Chamber considers applications to present evidence and express views and concerns

Darfur

  • Pre Trial Chamber issues a warrant of arrest for Abdel Raheem Muhammad Hussein

Kenya

  • Ruto et al & Muthaura et al. proceed to trial
  • Ruto & Sang: Request additional resources rejected
  • Muthaura & Kenyatta: Request for re-appointment of victims’ counsel for appeals proceedings is rejected

Libya

  • Gaddafi and Al-Senussi, Libyan authorities denied request to postpone surrender of Gaddafi

Ivory Coast

  • Pre-Trial Chamber expand scope of investigations to include 2002-2010 period
  • Gbagbo: Single Judge sets the collective application process for victims in motion

Pre-Trial Chambers are reconstituted and newly assigned to situations

Following the election of six new judges during the 10th Session of the Assembly of States Parties held in New York in December 2011, the re-elected President of the Court, Judge Sang-Hyun Song, reconstituted some of the Chambers.[1]

The Situation in Côte d'lvoire was assigned to Pre-Trial Chamber I, composed of Judge Hans-Peter Kaul (Germany), Judge Van den Wyngaert (Belgium) and Judge Femandez de Gurmendi (Argentina). The Situations in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Darfur were assigned to Pre-Trial Chamber II, composed of Judge Cuno Tarfusser (Italy), Judge Hans-Peter Kaul (Germany) and Judge Ekaterina Trendafilova (Bulgaria) and Pre-Trial Chamber III was dissolved. On 16 March 2012, the Presidency ordered that Judge Chile Eboe-Osuji replace Judge Fatoumata Dembele Diarra for Trial Chamber IV (TC IV).[2]

Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)

Developments in the Lubanga case

Lubanga found guilty; intermediaries under scrutiny; dual status victim-witnesses stripped of their participatory status

On 14 March 2012, Trial Chamber I (TC1) decided unanimously that Thomas Lubanga Dyilo was guilty, as a co-perpetrator, of the war crimes of conscripting and enlisting children under the age of 15 and using them to participate in hostilities from 1 September 2002 to 13 August 2003.[3]

TC1 interpreted conscription, enlisting and use of children in armed conflict as distinct crimes and recognised that the assessment of “participation” should not be based on actions perpetrated by children, but the potential risk to which they were exposed. TC1 declined to analyse whether the use of young girls for sexual purposes was an indirect participation in the conflict, since the Prosecutor had not requested to amend the charges to include such crimes.[4]

The use of intermediaries was criticised, TC1 alluded to testimonies containing inconsistencies and presenting a real risk of manipulation of witnesses, encouraging false statements and bias against the accused. Consequently, the Chamber disregarded 10 witness testimonies and 3 victim testimonies, and decided to withdraw participatory status for all those enjoying dual status as victims and witnesses.

TC1 considers submissions on reparations and sentencing

On 14 March 2012, TC1 also set out a timetable for both reparation and sentencing proceedings, instructingthe Registry and the Trust Fund for Victims (TFV) to file public versions of previously confidential reports on reparations by 28 March 2012.[5] The Registry’s report argued that the Chamber could require the TFV to draw upon its ‘other resources’ without the Board’s consent while the TFV maintained that the Board had discretion.[6] TFV stressed the need for local victim consultation and victim mapping, recommending ‘a collective quality’ to reparations to avoid re-stigmatisation. Legal Representatives of Victims (LRV) were to file observations on i) the principles to be applied and ii) procedure to be followed by the Chamber in sentencing and reparation proceedings by 18 April 2012.

On 28 March 2012, the Registry also filed a report on 85 applications for reparation already received and in the event of collective reparations only, recommended expert consultation and appointment of legal representation for victims not participating.[7] On 20 April 2012, the Chamber granted the request to file observations from the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), the International Centre for Transitional Justice (ICTJ), the President of the Congolese Foundation for the Promotion of Human Rights (FOCDP), Women's Initiatives for Gender Justice (WIGJ) and several organisations (all but one being based in Bunia, Ituri).[8] The Office of Public Counsel for Victims (OPCV) was granted leave to make observations on behalf of unrepresented victims and victims who have not submitted applications.[9]

On 18 April 2012, OPCV, the Registry, the Defence, the Prosecution and both LRV teams submitted their observations on principles and procedures to follow in reparations proceedings, with the Prosecution and LRV teams also commenting on principles and procedures in sentencing proceedings.[10] The TFV submitted observations on reparations at a later stage.[11] The sentencing hearing will be held on 13 June 2012.

OPCV opposes TC1’s decision to strip dual status victims of their participatory status

On 14 March 2012, TC1, Judge Odio Benito dissenting, decided to withdraw the status of participant in the proceedings of dual status victims-witnesses due to their unreliable testimonies.[12] On 23 March 2012, OPCV, on behalf of four dual status victims, requested that TC1 reconsider withdrawing their status as victims, arguing that the Chamber had applied the standard of proof used at trial (beyond reasonable doubt) which is higher than the “prima facie” one required to establish status as participant.[13] The request was rejected by the Chamber on 27 March.[14]

Developments in the Katanga & Ngudjolo case

Victims file final observations

On 24 February and 16 March 2012, the two teams of Legal Representative of Victims filed final conclusions in relation to the trial.[15] The trial against Germain Katanga, alleged former commander of the Force de résistance patriotique militia and Matthieu Ngudjolo, alleged former leader of the Front des nationalistes et intégrationnistes started on 24 November 2009, addressing a range of crimes committed in an attack on Bogoro village, Ituri, Eastern DRC.

However, following the issuance of the judgment in the Lubanga case, on 2 March 2012, Trial Chamber II (TC II) invited the Prosecutor and LRVs to submit additional observations on issues that may have arisen.[16] On 22 March 2012, the legal representative for the child soldier victims group endorsed the Lubanga judgment’s legal definition of “actively using children in hostilities” and commented on the criteria applied for finding the accused’s liability.[17] The legal representative for the other, larger group of victims also filed his conclusions commenting inter alia on the Chamber’s definition of an “armed conflict”.[18]

Report from Chamber’s field visit to be part of the casefile

On 1 December 2011, TC II decided to undertake a judicial site visit to Bunia, that took place on 18-19 January 2012.[19] The Chamber, Registrar, parties and LRVs visited the villages of Aveba, Zumbe, Kambutso and Bogoro, taking photographic and audiovisual recordings.[20] On 14 February 2012, TC II ruled that the report from the field visit will form part of the case file.[21]

TC1 rejects LRV’s request for additional resources

On 21 March 2012, the legal representative of victims (LRV) for the principle group of victims requested additional resources to carry out a field mission to i) inform clients of developments and collect their instructions regarding final arguments and ii) meet them individually to get precisions. On 3 April 2012, the Registry rejected LRV’s request, stating that a single Legal Assistant in the field would suffice.[22] On 23 April 2012, TC II rejected the LRV’s request that the Registrar’s decision be reviewed, ruling that personal contact with victims was unnecessary for the purposes of the mission.[23]

Developments in the Mbarushimana case

Victims to participate in appeal of confirmation of charges decision

On 16 December 2011, Pre Trial Chamber I (PTC 1) declined to confirm charges against Callixte Mbarushimana, Executive Secretary of the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda, and ordered his release.[24] On 1 March 2012, leave to appeal by the Prosecution was granted on three grounds: i) whether PTC1 improperly applied a standard of proof tantamount to "beyond a reasonable doubt" at the pre-trial stage, ii) whether PTC1 improperly evaluated the credibility of witness statements at the confirmation hearing, and iii) whether statutory liability requires a “significant” contribution to the commission of the crime.[25] On 2 April 2012, the Chamber granted a request by LRV to participate in the appeal.[26]

Uganda

Developments in the Situation in Uganda

Framework decision on victim participation in the situation/investigation phase

[Background] On 14 March 2008, a ruling on 16 victims’ applications for participation in the ongoing investigation were deferred pending additional information.[27] Several years later, on 21 February 2012, the Chamber instructed the Registry to file any information it might have received regarding these applications, which the Registry did on 29 February 2012.[28]

On 9 March 2012, Single Judge Kaul endorsed the framework decisions on victim participation adopted in the DRC and Libya situations and stated that victims would only be allowed to participate at the situation stage in relation to specific judicial proceedings, if it is appropriate, and provided their personal interests are affected.[29] He ordered the Registry to submit missing information in relation to 18 applications by 29 June 2012 and prepare a standard form for collective applications for participation in the situation. The OPCV will represent all victims, pending the appointment of a common legal representative.

Central African Republic (CAR)

Developments in the Bemba case

TC III grants hundreds more victims participatory status

On 9 March 2012, Trial Chamber III (TC III) granted participatory status to 457 victims and rejected the application of 12 victims, bringing the number of victims participating in the case against Jean-Pierre Bemba to 2,744.[30] Jean Pierre Bemba is the former President and alleged commander-in-chief of the Mouvement de Libération du Congo and was transferred to The Hague on 3 June 2008.

Since last year’s order setting a deadline for new applications, TC III has asked that incomplete applications submitted to the Registry before the deadline that are now complete be transmitted to the Chamber.[31]

TC III considers applications to present evidence and express views and concerns

[Background] On 21 November 2011, TC III ordered the LRVs to file written applications on behalf of victims wishing to express their views and concerns or present evidence to the Chamber.[32] On 21 December 2011, TC III instructed the LRVs to reduce the list of 17 victims to no more than eight.[33]

On 22 February 2012, TC III granted three victims the right to express their views and concerns and two victims the right to present evidence. The Chamber refused to grant any intervention rights to two other victims.[34] TC III explained that views and concerns do not constitute evidence. Victims giving evidence, as well as proving their personal interests are affected, must prove that their evidence would “make a genuine contribution to the ascertainment of the truth” or “bring to light substantial new information” relating to charges. Judge Sylvia Steiner, dissenting, criticised the majority placing “usefulness” of testimonies over victims’ participation, finding no reason to believe that hearing additional testimonies would cause undue delay to proceedings.[35]

Darfur

Developments in the Darfur Situation

PTC1 issues a warrant of arrest for Abdel Raheem Muhammad Hussein

On 1 March 2012, PTC1 issued a warrant of arrest against the current Sudanese Defence Minister Mr Abdel Raheem Muhammad Hussein for 41 counts of crimes against humanity and war crimes allegedly committed in the context of the situation in Darfur.[36]

Kenya

Developments common to Ruto & Sang and Muthaura & Kenyatta cases

The two Kenyan cases to proceed to trial

On 23 January 2012, Pre-Trial Chamber II (PTC II) confirmed charges against Mr Ruto, Mr Sang, Mr Muthaura and Mr Kenyatta, declining to confirm charges against Mr Kosgey and Mr Ali.[37] The charges focus on post-election violence following from December 2007 to February 2008, with Ruto and Sang of the Orange Democratic Movement charged with the crimes against humanity of murder, forcible transfer, and persecution, and Muthaura and Kenyatta of the Party of National Unity charged with the crimes against humanity of murder, forcible transfer, rape, persecution, and other inhumane acts.

On 9 March 2012, PTC II rejected the applications of Mr Ruto, Mr Sang, Mr Muthaura and Mr Kenyatta requesting leave to appeal the confirmation of charges decisions.[38] On 29 March 2012, the Presidency constituted Trial Chamber V (TC V) to try both cases.[39] The appointed judges are: Judge Christine van den Wyngaert, Judge Kuniko Ozaki and Judge Chile Obeo-Osuji. On 26 April 2012, Judge Kuniko Ozaki was elected Presiding Judge.[40]

Developments in the Ruto & Sang case

PTC II rejects LRV’s request for additional resources

On 29 February 2012, LRV Ms Chana, asked the Chamber to order the Registry to provide her with additional resources necessary to complete a field mission during which she intended to meet with clients she had not yet met and inform victims about the outcome of the confirmation of charges hearing.[41]

On 9 March 2012, the Single Judge rejected the request, noting that the LRV’s appointment was limited to the confirmation of charges stage of proceedings and did not include, in and of itself, future involvement in the case.[42] The Chamber ruled that issuance of the confirmation of charges decision and rejection of the applications for leave to appeal marked the end of this stage and so the LRV no longer had locus standi to make requests. On 23 April 2012, the Appeals Chamber confirmed that the LRV continued to represent victims but legal aid for any activities undertaken was subject to the Registry’s authorisation.[43]

Developments in Muthaura and Kenyatta case

PTC II rejects LRV’s request to re-appoint legal representation at appeals proceedings

Following the decision in the Ruto case, stating that LRV’s mandate had terminated following the issuance of the confirmation of charges decision, on 19 March 2012, LRV Mr Anyah requested that the Appeals Chamber appoint him or another to represent victim-participants in appeal proceedings in which victim-participants are participating in the Muthaura case.[44] On 23 April 2012, the Appeals Chamber confirmed that Mr Anyah continued to represent victims at appeals stage.[45]

Libya

Developments in the Gaddafi and Al-Senussi case

Libyan authorities denied request to postpone the surrender of Gaddafi

[Background] Saif Gaddafi, son of former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi and former “de facto” Prime Minister of Libya, was arrested in November 2011 on charges of the crimes against humanity of murder and persecution. PTC1 requested information from Libya in relation his transfer to the ICC.[46] Libya replied to the Pre-Trial Chamber on 23 January 2012, and requested a postponement of Saif Gaddafi’s surrender, pending domestic investigations.[47]

On 7 March 2012, PTC1 refused the postponement and ordered Libya to proceed with surrender arrangements.[48] On 22 March 2012, Libya notified PTC1 of its intention to challenge the admissibility of the case on the ground that it is currently investigating the accused at national level and made a second request to postpone Saif Gaddafi’s surrender.[49]

On 4 April 2012, PTC1 rejected the second request, stressing that no admissibility challenge had yet been filed.[50] On 1 May 2012, Libya filed its admissibility challenge.[51]

Ivory Coast

Developments in the Ivory Coast Situation

PTC III expands the scope of the investigations to include the 2002-2010 period

On 3 October 2011, Pre-Trial Chamber III (PTC III), authorized the Prosecutor to open an investigation in Côte d’Ivoire covering crimes committed since 28 November 2010. The Pre-Trial Chamber asked the Prosecutor to provide information on potential crimes committed prior to the 2010 elections, which the Prosecutor did on 4 November 2011.[52] On 22 February 2012, PTC III expanded the scope of the investigation to include any crimes within the Court’s jurisdiction allegedly committed between 19 September 2002 and 28 November 2010.[53]

Developments in the Gbagbo case

Single Judge sets a collective application process for victims in motion

On 6 February 2012, while exploring the possibility of a collective approach to victims' applications for participation in the case against Laurent Koudou Gbagbo, former President of Ivory Coast, accused of the crimes of humanity of murder, rape and other forms of sexual violence, persecution and inhumane acts in post election violence between 16 December 2010 and 12 April 2011 in Ivory Coast (transferred to The Hague on 20 November 2011), the Single Judge requested that the Registry submit a mapping report of victims' communities, their representatives and civil society groups, as well as a proposed collective application form.[54]

While the Prosecution welcomed the proposed system, the Defence and OPCV argued inter alia that the proposed system would be inconsistent with statutory provisions and would actually increase the workload.[55] On 8 March 2012, PTC III granted a request by REDRESS to file amicus curiae observations which it submitted on 16 March 2012, focussing on challenges facing victims in collective applications and comparative practice.[56]

On 5 April 2012, the Single Judge approved a new collective form and set a schedule for collective applications.[57] She ruled that only the Registry could assist applicants in completing the collective form and that VPRS staff should ensure inter alia that accounts of crimes are sufficiently reflective of group members and explain to applicants that they may only apply once (individually or collectively).

Applying collectively does not preclude victims from participating and requesting reparations on an individual basis. The deadline for all applications to be received is set for 16 May 2012.


 

[1] Decision on the constitution of Pre-Trial Chambers and on the assignment of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Darfur, Sudan and Côte d'lvoire situations, 15 March 2012, ICC-02/11-01/11-59, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1380549.pdf

[2]Decision replacing a judge in Trial Chamber IV, 16 March 2012, ICC-02/05-03/09-308, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1382170.pdf

[3] Judgment pursuant to Article 74 of the Statute, 14 March 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06-2842, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1379838.pdf

[4] Judge Odio Benito, dissenting, was critical of the exclusion of sexual violence within the legal definition of “use to participate actively in the hostilities”.

[5] Scheduling order concerning timetable for sentencing and reparations, 14 March 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06-2844, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1379842.pdf; Registry Report on the notification of the Judgment, 28 March 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06-2850, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1387163.pdf

[6]Second Report of the Registry on Reparations of 1 September 2011, 19 March 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06, http://212.159.242.181/iccdocs/doc/doc1224834.pdf; Public Redacted Version of ICC-01/04-01/06-2803-Conf-Exp–Trust Fund for Victims’ First Report on Reparations of 1 September 2011, 23 March 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06-2803-Red, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1380655.pdf

[7] First Report to the Trial Chamber on applications for reparations, 28 March 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06-2847, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1386882.pdf

[8] Registry transmission of communications received in the context of reparations proceedings, 28 March 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06-2855-Anx3, http://icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1387969.pdf (UNICEF); Request for leave to file submission on reparations issues, 28 March 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06-2854, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1387317.pdf;  TITRE DEMANDE DE COMMUNICATION A LA PROCEDURE DE REPARATIONS, 28 March 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06-2855-Anx1, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1387967.pdf; Women's Initiatives for Gender Justice request for leave to participate in reparations proceedings, 28 March 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06-2853, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1387306.pdf; Demande d’intervenir comme Amicus Curiae dans l’Affaire le Procureur c. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, en vertu de la Règle 103 du Règlement de Procédure et de Preuve de la Cour, 28 March 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06-2855-Anx2, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1387968.pdf ; Decision granting leave to make representations in the reparations proceedings, 20 April 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06-2870, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1398002.pdf

[9]Decision on the OPCV's request to participate in the reparations proceedings, 5 April 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06-2858, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1392071.pdf

[10]OPCV: Observations on issues concerning reparations, 18 April 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06-2863, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1396831.pdf ; Registrar's observations on reparations issues, 18 April 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06-2865, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1397007.pdf ; Observations de la Défense sur les principes et la procédure applicables à la reparation, 18 April 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06-2866, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1397006.pdf; Prosecution’s Submissions on the principles and procedures to be applied in reparations, 18 April 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06-2867, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1389202.pdf; Prosecution’s Submissions on the Procedures and Principles for Sentencing, 18 April 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06-2868, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1389203.pdf; Observations sur la fixation de la peine et les réparations de la part des victims a/0001/06..., 18 April 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06-2864, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1396912.pdf; Observations du groupe de victimes VO2 concernant la fixation de la peine et des reparations, 18 April 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06-2869, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1397075.pdf

[11] Observations on Reparations in Response to the Scheduling Order of 14 March 2012, 25 April 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06-2872, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1404406.pdf

[12]Judgment pursuant to Article 74 of the Statute, 14 March 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06-2842, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1379838.pdf

[13] Request for reconsideration of Trial Chamber I’s decision to withdraw the status of participating victims in the proceedings, 23 March 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06-2845, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1380651.pdf

[14] Order refusing a request for reconsideration, 27 March 2012, ICC-01/04-01/06-2846, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1380692.pdf

[15] Conclusions finales - Public avec Annexe A confidentielle, 16 March 2012, ICC-01/04-01/07, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1380573.pdf ; Conclusions finales du représentant des victimes « enfants-soldats », 24 February 2012, ICC-01/04-01/07-3250-Conf-Corr + Conf-Corr-Anx

[16] Decision on the arrangements for the filing of observations by the parties and participants on the judgment handed down in Lubanga, 2 March 2012, ICC-01/04-01/07-3255, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1385346.pdf

[17] Conclusions additionnelles du Représentant légal des victimes enfants soldats, 22 March 2012, ICC-01/04-01/07-3262, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1384489.pdf

[18] Observations additionnelles aux conclusions finales du représentant légal suite au jugement rendu dans l’affaire Lubanga, 22 March 2012, ICC-01/04-01/07-326 http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1384520.pdf

[19] Decision on the judicial site visit to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 1 December 2011, ICC-01/04-01/07-3213, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1301247.pdf

[20] Enregistrement au dossier du procès-verbal du transport judiciaire en République démocratique du Congo, 3 February 2012, ICC-01/04-01/07-3234-Anx-Red, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1327049.pdf

[21] Décision relative à la nature du « Procès-verbal de l'opération de transport judiciaire en République démocratique du Congo»,14 February 2012, ICC-01/04-01/07-3240, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1331954.pdf

[22] ICC-01/04-01/07-3270-Conf-Exp-Anxl

[23] Decision on the Urgent Requests by the Legal Representative of Victims for Review of Registrar's Decision of 3 April 2012 regarding Legal Aid, 23 April 2012, ICC-01/04-01/07-3277, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1403084.pdf

[24] Decision on the confirmation of charges, 16 December 2011, ICC-01/04-01/10-465-Red, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1286409.pdf

[25] Decision on the "Prosecution's Application for Leave to Appeal the 'Decision on the confirmation of charges'", 1 March 2012, ICC-01/04-01/10-487, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1345006.pdf

[26] Decision on the “Requete tendant à obtenir autorisation de participer à la procédure d'appel contre la Décision relative à la confirmation des charges", 2 April 2012, ICC-01/04-01/10-509, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1388666.pdf ;Application for leave to participate in the appellate proceedings against the Decision on the confirmation of charges (ICC-01/04-01/10-465-Conf), 7 March 2012, ICC-01/04-01/10-494, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1386865.pdf

[27] Decision on victims' applications for participation, 14 March 2008, ICC-02/04-125, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc454972.pdf

[28] Transmission of consolidated applications including supplementary information, 29 February 2012, ICC-02/04-190, http://icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1344472.pdf , one of the three applications being also registered in the Kony et Al case.

[29] Decision on Victim's Participation in Proceedings Related to the Situation in Uganda, 9 March 2012, ICC-02/04-191, http://212.159.242.180/iccdocs/doc/doc1368784.pdf ; Decision on victims’ participation in proceedings relating to the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 11 April 2011, ICC-01/04-593, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1053881.pdf ; Decision on Victim's Participation in Proceedings Related to the Situation in Libya, 24 January 2012, ICC-01/11-18, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1315759.pdf ; Decision on 471 applications by victims to participate in the proceedings, 9 March 2012, ICC-01/05-01/08-2162, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1368833.pdf

[30] Decision on 471 applications by victims to participate in the proceedings, 9 March 2012, ICC-01/05-01/08-2162, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1368833.pdf

[31] Decision on 401 applications by victims to participate in the proceedings, 8 July 2011, ICC-01/05-01/08-1590, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1114216.pdf

[32] Order regarding applications by victims to present their views and concerns or to present evidence, 21 November 2011, ICC-01/05-01/08-1935, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1274199.pdf

[33] Second order regarding the applications of the legal representatives of victims to present evidence and the views and concerns of victims, 21 December 2011, ICC-01/05-01/08-2027, http://icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1292120.pdf

[34] Decision on the supplemented applications by the legal representatives of victims to present evidence and the views and concerns of victims, 22 February 2012, ICC-01/05-01/08-2138, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1341474.pdf

[35] Partly Dissenting Opinion of Judge Sylvia Steiner on the Decision ICC-01/05-01/08-2138, 23 February 2011, ICC-01/05-01/08-2140, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1341688.pdf

[36] Warrant of Arrest for Abdel Raheem Muhammad Hussein, 1 March 2012, ICC-02/05-01/12-2, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1344965.pdf

[37] Decision on the Confirmation of Charges Pursuant to Article 61(7)(a) and (b) of the Rome Statute, 23 January 2012, , ICC-01/09-01/11-373, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1314535.pdf ; Judge Kaul, dissenting, maintained that the ICC lacked competence because the nature of the crimes did not amount to crimes against humanity as codified by the Rome Statute.

[38] Decision on the Defences' Applications for Leave to Appeal the Decision on the Confirmation of Charges, 9 March 2012, ICC-01/09-01/11-399, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1368281.pdf; Decision on the Defence Applications for Leave to Appeal the Decision on the Confirmation of Charges, 9 March 2012, ICC-01/09-02/11-406, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1368282.pdf

[39] Decision constituting Trial Chamber V, 29 March 2012, ICC-01/09-01/11-406, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1380732.pdf; Decision referring the case of The Prosecutor v. Francis Kirimi Muthaura and Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta to Trial Chamber V, 29 March 2012, ICC-01/09-02/11-414, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1380733.pdf

[40] Decisions notifying the election of the Presiding Judge, 26 April 2012, ICC-01/09-01/11-411 and ICC-01/09-02/11-420, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1405138.pdf and http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1405137.pdf

[41] Urgent Request by the Victims' Representative for an order from the Chamber requiring the Registrar to provide appropriate resources, 29 February 2012, ICC-01/09-01/11-392-Red, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1344610.pdf

[42] Decision on the Defences' Applications for Leave to Appeal the Decision on the Confirmation of Charges, 9 February 2012, ICC-01/09-01/11-399, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1368281.pdf

[43] Decision on the "Application of the Victims' Representative pursuant to Article 83 of the Regulations", 23 April 2012, ICC-01/09-01/11-409, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1403077.pdf

[44] Notification regarding the Legal Representation of Participating Victims in these Appeals Proceedings, 19 March 2012, ICC-01/09-02/11-409, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1382458.pdf 

[45] Decision on the "Notification regarding the Legal Representation of Participating Victims in the Appeal Proceedings", 23 April 2012, ICC-01/09-02/11-416, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1403204.pdf

[46] Public Redacted Version of Decision Requesting Libya to file Observations Regarding the Arrest of Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi, 6 December 2011, ICC-01/11-01/11-39-Red, http://icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1283037.pdf

[47] Report of the Registrar on Libya's observations regarding the arrest of Saif AI-Islam Gaddafi, 23 January 2012, ICC-01/11-01/11-44 , http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1314688.pdf

[48] Decision on Libya's Submissions Regarding the Arrest of Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi, 7 March 2012, ICC-01/11-01/11-72 http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1365494.pdf

[49] Notification and Request by the Government of Libya in response to ”Decision on Libya’s Sumbissions Regarding the Arrest of Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi”, 22 March 2012, CC-01/11-01/11-82, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1384800.pdf

[50] Decision Regarding the Second Request by the Government of Libya for Postponement of the Surrender of Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi, 4 April 2012, ICC-01/11-01/11-100, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1391624.pdf

[51] Application on behalf of the Government of Libya pursuant to Article 19 of the ICC Statute, 1 May 2012, ICC-01/11-01/11-130, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1405819.pdf

[52] Decision Pursuant to Article 15 of the Rome Statute on the Authorisation of an Investigation into the Situation in the Republic of Côte d'Ivoire, 03 October 2011, ICC-02/11-14, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1240553.pdf; Prosecution’s provision of further information regarding potentially relevant crimes committed between 2002 and 2010, 4 November 2011, ICC-02/11-25, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1261558.pdf

[53] Decision on the "Prosecution's provision of further information regarding potentially relevant crimes committed between 2002 and 2010", 22 February 2012, ICC-02/11-36, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1341467.pdf

[54] Decision on issues related to the victims' application process, 6 February 2012, ICC-02/11-01/11-33, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1327517.pdf; Proposed partly collective application form, 29 February 2012, ICC-02/11-01/11-45-AnxB, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1344297.pdf and Report on mapping of victims, 12 February 2012, ICC-02/11-01/11-55, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1373926.pdf

[55] Observations de la Défense sur la proposition du Greffe d’un formulaire de participation partiellement collectif, 9 March 2012, ICC-02/11-01/11-52, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1368283.pdf; Prosecution’s observations in relation to victims’ application process, 9 March 2012, ICC-02/11-01/11-54, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1368185.pdf; Observations on the practical implications of the Registry’s proposal on a partly collective application form for victims’ participation, 19 March 2012, ICC-02/11-01/11-66, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1382704.pdf

[56] Decision on the "Application by Redress Trust for Leave to Submit Observations to Pre-Trial Chamber III of the International Criminal Court Pursuant to Rule 103 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence", 8 March 2012, ICC-02/11-01/11-50, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1367385.pdf; REDRESS TRUST OBSERVATIONS TO PRE-TRIAL CHAMBER I OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT PURSUANT TO RULE 103 OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE AND EVIDENCE, 16 March 2012, ICC-02/11-01/11-62, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1382363.pdf

[57] Second decision on issues related to the victims' application process, 5 April 2012, ICC-02/11-01/11-86, http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1392379.pdf