Browse results
Abstract
This article explores Khmer-language media reporting of the final appeal judgment at the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (Case 002/02). Media reports are interesting for two reasons. First, as a source of opinions expressed in Cambodia’s official language (Khmer), which often remain beyond purview of international observers. Second, as one of the few sources of information about the eccc available to the Cambodian public now that official Court outreach has largely ceased. Yet, free media is significantly curtailed in Cambodia, and reporting on the eccc is likely to be shaped by what is politically safe to print, as well as what is deemed publicly interesting. Against this backdrop this article explores: the press’s tendency to downplay Cambodian political interference in the eccc proceedings; its (mis)representation of the eccc’s genocide findings; its reporting on the prosecution of sexual and gender-based crimes; and its use of ‘justice for victims’ rhetoric.
Abstract
The Ongwen case, concluded in December 2022 at the International Criminal Court (icc), convicted the defendant of a gender-based act that had never been litigated by the icc: forced marriage. This article argues that the judicial consideration of forced marriage in Ongwen has settled the international jurisprudence in three important ways. First, it clarified the classification of forced marriage as an ‘other inhumane act’. Second, it recognised and solidified the conduct and harms captured by the term ‘forced marriage’, distinguishing it from other crimes against humanity. Finally, it confirmed that prosecution of forced marriage does not contravene nullum crimen sine lege principles. These outcomes will play a key role in future recognition and prosecutions of forced marriage in international criminal law. This article suggests that the logical next step is to explicitly list forced marriage as a crime against humanity in the Rome Statute and the draft Crimes Against Humanity Convention.
Abstract
Dominic Ongwen was convicted and sentenced for numerous atrocities by the International Criminal Court (icc) in 2021. The Defence focused on the coercive environment that Ongwen was subjected to from his abduction as a boy until his surrender as an adult. The icc rejected the claim of duress as a ground for excluding criminal responsibility in the context of a past and present coercive environment. This article examines how the icc interpreted and applied duress in the Ongwen case and evaluates whether a coercive environment can be categorised as a unique defence in the icc Statute. This is done by scrutinising whether a coercive environment has been raised as a defence in domestic jurisdictions. This paper shows that national courts have not recognised a defence specific to crimes committed in a coercive environment and thus concludes that no such defence can be used by defendants before the icc.