The international criminal court judgment in the Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen case: a critique.
Loading...
Date
2024
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
University of the Western Cape
Abstract
The use of Restorative justice or Traditional justice mechanisms in Uganda was introduced as a way of reconciliation, accountability, and reparations after the mass atrocities committed by the Lord’s Resistance Army in Northern Uganda. The Juba Peace Agreement was established to pledge the use of both International Criminal Law (ICL) and Traditional Justice Mechanisms (TJMs) in Northern Uganda as part of the foundations of accountability and reconciliation after the conflict. However, this agreement was futile as arrest warrants had already been filed against the top leaders of the LRA before the agreement was signed. Dominic Ongwen was the only one amongst the 5 top commanders of the LRA who was tried and convicted by the International Criminal Court (ICC). In February 2021 the ICC found Dominic Ongwen guilty of 61 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity for his involvement in the atrocities committed by the Lord's Resistance Army. The objective of this thesis is to critique the court's ruling, starting with its perceived failure to holistically consider the appropriateness of Traditional Justice Mechanisms (TJMs), Dominic Ongwen’s dual status as both a victim and perpetrator and the influence of spirituality in the crimes he committed. Furthermore, it aims to address the question of whether the ICC was the best forum to try Ongwen.
Description
Keywords
International Criminal Court, Dominic Ongwen, Traditional justice mechanisms, TWAIL, Victim turned perpetrator
Citation
N/A