Fulfilling the Mandate of National Reconciliation in the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC) – An Evaluation through the Prism of Victims’ Rights

in International Criminal Law Review
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

The central theme of this article is to assess whether the mandate of national reconciliation has been fulfilled in the ECCC. Recent retreats in the scope of victims’ participatory rights reveal a palpable gap between the Court’s rhetorical promises and the manifested reality. This article begins with providing some justifications for the primitive role given to national reconciliation. Then, in traversing the evolution of international criminal justice, this article highlights its departure from the traditional model of the exclusive retributive justice paradigm. Rather, there is a synergy of the retributive justice and the restorative justice paradigms within international criminal trials in the 21st century. The expanded role of victims in proceedings and the ECCC reparation regime will then be examined in this context. This article will thereafter emphasize the recurrent themes that could promote victims’ rights and herald the fulfilment of national reconciliation.

Fulfilling the Mandate of National Reconciliation in the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC) – An Evaluation through the Prism of Victims’ Rights

in International Criminal Law Review

Sections

References

13)

Jasinisupra note 2.

14)

ECCCProsecutor v. Kaing Guek Eav “Duch” Decision on Civil Parties’ Co-Lawyers’ Joint Request for a Ruling on the Standing of Civil Parties Lawyers to make Submissions on Sentencing and Directions Concerning the Questioning of the Accused Experts and Witnesses Testifying on Character Trial Chamber No. 001/18-07-2007/ECCC/TC 12 October 2009 <www.eccc.gov.kh/sites/default/files/documents/courtdoc/E72_3_EN. pdf> 29 June 2012.

27)

Agreementsupra note 9.

35)

ICTRProsecutor v. Kambanda Trial Chamber I No. ICTR-97-23-S 4 September 1998 para. 28 <www.ictr.org/ENGLISH/cases/kambanda/judgment/kambanda.html> 29 June 2012.

54)

Kerrsupra note 44.

55)

Vinjamuri and Snydersupra note 28.

67)

Vinjamuri and Snydersupra note 28.

69)

Stahn and Kleffnersupra note 61 p. 216.

75)

Bottiglierosupra note 52 p. 37.

78)

Renée Lettow Lerner‘The Intersection of Two Systems: An American on Trial For an American Murder in the French Cour D’assises,’ U. Ill. L. Rev. (2001) 791.

83)

Lernersupra note 78.

84)

Codesupra note 81 Articles 312 and 346.

86)

Liesbeth Zegveld‘Victims’ Reparations Claims and International Criminal Courts: Incompatible Values?,’ 8 J. Int’l Crim. Just. (2010) 79.

87)

ECCC Internal Rulessupra note 22 Rule 23 quinquies (1)(a) provides that “if an accused is convicted the Chambers may award only collective and moral reparations to civil parties. Collective and moral reparations for the purpose of these rules are measures that acknowledge the harm suffered by civil parties as a result of the commission of the crimes for which an accused is convicted”.

89)

McGonigle (2009)supra note 20 pp. 132-133.

93)

ICCThe Prosecutor v. Dyilo Judgment on the Appeal of Mr. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo Against the Decision of Pre-Trial Chamber I The Appeals Chamber No. ICC-01/04-01/06 13 February 2007 p. 13.

94)

ICCProsecutor v. Lubanga Dyilo Decision on Victims’ Participation Trial Chamber I No. 01/04-01/06-1119 18 January 2008 para. 101.

98)

ICCProsecutor v. Lubanga Dyilo Decision of the Appeals Chamber on the Joint Application of Victims a/0001/06 to a/0003/06 and a/0105/06 concerning the “Directions and Decision of the Appeals Chamber” of 2 February 2007 The Appeals Chamber No. ICC-01/04-01/06 OA8 13 June 2007 para. 19 (per Judge Pikis in a concurring opinion).

100)

ECCC Internal Rulessupra note 22 Rule 21(1)(a).

102)

ECCC Internal Rulessupra note 22 Rule 80(2).

104)

Decisionsupra note 101.

106)

Decisionsupra note 101.

108)

ICCProsecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo Judgment on the appeals of The Prosecutor and The Defence against Trial Chamber I’s Decision on Victims’ Participation of 18 January 2008 The Appeals Chamber No. ICC-01/04-1/06-1432 OA 9 OA 10 11 July 2008 paras. 54-58.

110)

Decisionsupra note 101 para. 61.

114)

Decisionsupra note 101 para. 49.

116)

ICCProsecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo Decision on “Indirect victims” Trial Chamber I No. ICC-01/04-01/06-1813 8 April 2009 para. 49; Decision supra note 101 para. 32.

117)

Decisionsupra note 101 para. 93.

120)

ECCC Internal Rulessupra note 22 Rule 12 bis (h) provides that “the Victims Support Section shall …undertake outreach activities related to Victims especially Civil Parties”.

125)

McGonigle (2009)supra note 20 pp. 132-133.

127)

McGonigle (2009)supra note 20 pp. 132-133.

128)

Sperfeldtsupra note 126.

129)

Rome Statutesupra note 74 Article 75(2).

131)

Bottiglierosupra note 52 p. 227.

135)

Bottiglierosupra note 52 p. 229.

137)

Sperfeldtsupra note 126.

Information

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 14 14 2
Full Text Views 16 16 7
PDF Downloads 5 5 2
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0