Upload
luca-capri
View
218
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
7/27/2019 ICJ-July2013 Peace Through Law the Utopia
1/16
European Security Review
International criminal
justice: the EUs strategy
for reconciliation and
peace
ESR 68July 2013
July 1st 2013 marked the beginning
of the transfer of the International
Criminal Tribunal for Former
Yugoslavias responsibilities to the
UN Mechanism for International
Tribunals. Twenty years after its
establishment, the ambitious UN
Tribunal started its gradual closuring
process. It is thus time to take stock
of international criminal justice, by
devoting an in-depth reflection to its
contribution to international peace.
The conclusion is clear: alone,
international criminal justice does
not contribute to reconciliation of
peoples or peace; it is therefore time
to rethink the illusory ideology of
peace through Law. Such a
reflection leads to question the role
of the EU as it has proved to be a
strong proponent of international
criminal justice. Why has
international criminal justice beenunable to achieve reconciliation?
What are the consequences for the
EUs own policy?
7/27/2019 ICJ-July2013 Peace Through Law the Utopia
2/16
International criminal justice : the EUs strategy for reconciliation and peaceESR 68 2
Introduction
In July 2012, the International Criminal Court (ICC) painfully celebrated its 10 th
anniversary. In May 2013, it was the turn of the International Criminal Tribunal for Former
Yugoslavia (ICTY) to celebrate its 20 th anniversary. In addition, July 1st 2013 marked the beginning
of the transfer of the ICTYs responsibilities to the UN Mechanism for International Criminal
tribunals (MICT), a process which was already initiated as regards the International Criminal
Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR). It is time to take stock of international criminal justice, particularly
with regard to the aim assigned to it to contribute to the restoration and maintenance of
peace, as stated in both resolutions of the UN Security Council establishing the ICTY and the
ICTR1. We should not forget that the UN Security Council, to justify its authority to create both the
ad hoc tribunals under the Chapter VII of the UN Charter, had to link international criminal justice
and peace and security. In this context, the ideology of peace through Law has been
gradually developed. The Rome Statute establishing the ICC in is line with this approach. Its
Preamble states that grave crimes threaten the peace, security and well being of the world.
The underlying equation of the ideology of peace through Law is simple: international crimes
are a threat to international peace and security; therefore, international criminal justice should
promote national reconciliation which would help to political stability and peace.
As highlighted in Articles 3 of the Treaty on the European Union, the Unions aim is to
promote peace and stability; not only within it, but also in third countries, especially in
neighbouring countries. Combined to a traditional emphasis on the law-based state including
an unwavering faith in justice, the European Union (EU) has proved to be a strong proponent of
the aforementioned ideology of peace through Law. In this perspective, international criminal
justice has become an integral part of the EUs strategy aiming to guarantee peace. Financial
and technical support to the ICC, bilateral political dialogue , the insertion of an ICC clause in
the Cotonou Agreement as well as the insertion of the ICTY conditionality in the enlargement
process of the Balkan countries, are all initiatives established by the EU to promote and
demonstrate its commitment to international criminal justice.
1 United Nations Security Council, S/RES/827 (1993), 25 May 1993, establishing the ICTY and S/RES/955 (1995), 8 November
1995, establishing the ICTR.
7/27/2019 ICJ-July2013 Peace Through Law the Utopia
3/16
International criminal justice : the EUs strategy for reconciliation and peaceESR 68 3
However, the implementation of international criminal justice which has experienced a
remarkable expansion over the last 20 years has revealed that the ideology linking internationalcriminal justice, reconciliation and peace was somewhat idealistic. Indeed, and despite the
commitment on the part of the international community, especially the EU, international criminal
justice has failed to achieve national reconciliation and political stability in post-conflict
countries. There is no objective evidence that international criminal courts have a positive effect
on reconciliation. The whole intellectual construction of the ideology peace through law is
completely theoretical, not to say political, and absolutely not evidence based. In this
perspective, the EU seems no longer able to justify its policy in favour of international criminal
justice by arguing that it promotes international peace. However, such a failure does not mean
that there is no link between justice and reconci liation. The error has been to copy and paste
the traditional model of retributive justice to international criminal justice, while assigning to it a
mission outside its normal field of competence, namely, restoring peace. To effectively influence
on national reconciliation and peace, international criminal justice needs to be rethought. In this
perspective, the EU should itself rethink its approach regarding the ideology peace through
Law.
Why has international criminal justice been unable to achieve reconciliation in post-
conflict countries? How can we rethink international criminal justice in order to foster national
reconciliation? What are the consequences for the EUs own policy?
Peace through Law: the utopia
The ideology of Peace through Law
International criminal justice is composed of two elements. Firstly, it consists in specific
legal institutions established to judge alleged perpetrators where states are unable or unwilling
to investigate and punish crimes within their jurisdiction. In other words, international criminal
justice is, and should stay, an alternative justice. Secondly, as not all crimes can be addressed
at the international level, international criminal justice has established a set of rules based on the
assumption that some offences are so serious (torture, slavery, terrorism...) that they are
7/27/2019 ICJ-July2013 Peace Through Law the Utopia
4/16
International criminal justice : the EUs strategy for reconciliation and peaceESR 68 4
universally recognised as criminal acts and, should be dealt with by international courts. These
acts have been historically classified in three categories of international crimes: genocide,crime against humanity and war crimes2.
What is reconciliation? It is an ongoing process whereby groups undertake jointly to
examine the deep historical roots of distrust that fuel tension, and move gradually from a posture
of confrontation to one of co-operation and even friendship3. In this perspective, reconciliation
is always marked by realpolitik. In Europe, the Elyse Treaty (1963), enshrining the Franco -
German friendship, was above all the result of Charles de Gaulles and Konrad Adenauers
personalities.
What is the link? According to the jurist Hans Kelsen, the jurisdictional model is the best
suited to solve conflicts. Applied to armed conflicts, international criminal justice would have a
double purpose: a judicial one (punishing and delivering justice), but also a political one. Its
political purpose would consist, inter alia, in the restoration of peace, which requires
reconciliation between formerly enemy peoples. Reconciliation therefore requires first and
foremost an acknowledgement of past wrongdoings and the conviction of perpetrators of such
wrongdoings. What better way to mediate a conflict than an impartial judicial decision?
However, international criminal justice has, in practice, failed to demonstrate a real link between
justice and reconciliation. The following part will focus on the ICTY and the ICTR. It should be
noticed here that it is possible to doubt that ICTY and ICTR judges and prosecutors really
expected, in their daily work, to reconcile populations torn apart by the inter-ethnic armed
conflicts that were experienced in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia. The ideology peace
through Law has been mainly highlighted by civil society , politics, and not by experts in
international criminal law.
2 The Article 5 of the Rome Statute establishing the International Criminal Court highlights a fourth international crime: the
crime of aggression of which the definition remains unclear.3 Matthew Rojansky, Historical reconciliationMending the rifts , in Security CommunityThe OSCE magazine, Issue 2,2013
7/27/2019 ICJ-July2013 Peace Through Law the Utopia
5/16
International criminal justice : the EUs strategy for reconciliation and peaceESR 68 5
Justice for whom?
On 10 April 2013, Vuk Jeremic, President of the United Nations General Assembly,
convened a thematic debate on the role of international criminal justice in reconciliation
processes, during which international criminal mechanisms were shaken up, especially by
representatives of countries subject to international criminal justice. International criminal justice
is in a crisis with regard to fostering national reconciliation in post-conflict situations, Tharcisse
Karugarama, Attorney-General and Minister for Justice of Rwanda, said4. If international criminal
justice is seen as a justice to serve all humanity, it should above all be a justice for countries and
populations affected by commissions of international crimes. The work of international criminal
tribunals cannot contribute to reconciliation and thus to peace, if local politicians and
populations do not rally to it. On this point, international criminal justice has failed. Why? It seems
important to recall all the weaknesses which give the impression that international criminal
authorities are isolated fortresses. Their functioning is misunderstood, their decisions are
controversial and their mandates themselves are questioned. International criminal justice also
suffers from having been modelled on domestic, mainly western, criminal justice systems and
from having not succeeded in creating a new and independent justice system. However, we
should not forget that if many criticisms can be addressed to international criminal justice, the
recurrent lack of political will to cooperate, often for fear of this justice, is also a major obstacle
to the acceptance of international criminal justice.
With headquarters located in The Hague5, French and English as official languages, and
rules of procedure originally mainly inspired by Common Law etc., international criminal justice
has clearly failed to build a justice close to the populations which are its recipients, despite its
attempts to establish Outreach Programmes6. This is all the more detrimental to the ideology
peace through Law, especially as outreach programmes are insufficient or inefficient. The
4 Sixty-seventh General Assembly, Thematic Debate on International Criminal Justice,
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2013/ga11355.doc.htm5 The international criminal tribunals/courts are all geographically isolated. The ICTY and the ICC have their seat in The
Hague in Netherlands; similarly, the trial of former Liberian President Charles Taylor is held in The Hague; the Special
Tribunal for Lebanon is located in Netherlands as well and the ICTR has its seat in Tanzania.6 For more information about the Outreach Program of the ICTY, see: Janine Natalya Clark, The ICTY and theChallenges of Reconciliation in the Former Yugoslavia, e-International Relations, 23 January 2012, available at:http://www.e-ir.info/2012/01/23/the-icty-and-the-challenges-of-reconciliation-in-the-former-yugoslavia/ and Victoria
Vanneau, Le Tribunal pnal international doit-il faire lvnement? ou les paradoxes dune justice pour lHistoire,Socits & reprsentations, 2011/2 n32, p.135-153
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2013/ga11355.doc.htmhttp://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2013/ga11355.doc.htmhttp://www.e-ir.info/2012/01/23/the-icty-and-the-challenges-of-reconciliation-in-the-former-yugoslavia/http://www.e-ir.info/2012/01/23/the-icty-and-the-challenges-of-reconciliation-in-the-former-yugoslavia/http://www.e-ir.info/2012/01/23/the-icty-and-the-challenges-of-reconciliation-in-the-former-yugoslavia/http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2013/ga11355.doc.htm7/27/2019 ICJ-July2013 Peace Through Law the Utopia
6/16
International criminal justice : the EUs strategy for reconciliation and peaceESR 68 6
case of the ICTY is certainly the most striking. It seems tragic that twenty years after its creation,
the ICTY has not been successful in reaching out to local communities. This impression of afortress justice is not only due to lack of communication, but more importantly to the
perceived feeling of lack of impartiality of the courts. Indeed, international criminal justice is
synonymous with two-tier justice. As frequently highlighted by international experts,
international criminal courts in practice mean trials of Africans. Similarly, what about NATO
forces criminal accountability? What about UN peacekeepers accountability? Additionally,
international criminal justice frequently seems to be the victor's justice. During the UN thematic
debate on the role of international criminal justice in reconciliation, Utoni Nujoma, Minister of
Justice of Namibia, expressed concerns about a trend within international criminal justice where
only the victor of a warring situation enjoyed justice, while the defeated party faced the
Courts prosecutions7. Since its inception, international criminal justice has appeared to be a
political issue. Indeed, the International Military Tribunals for Nuremberg and Tokyo were clearly a
way to assert the Allies domination on the international scene, as only Nazi and Japanese
criminals were prosecuted. Nowadays, the feeling of a victors international criminal justice
persists. The Serb community with regard to the ICTY and the Hutu community with regard to the
ICTR have the feeling to be discriminated. The recent controversial acquittals of both Croatian
military leaders Ante Gotovina and Mladen Marka indicted for war crimes and crimes against
humanity have strengthened this feeling. Since then, Serbia cooperates with the ICTY only on a
technical level, further weakening the ICTY.
Public opinion, shocked by the terrible wars that ravaged the former Yugoslavia and
Rwanda8, needed to designate perpetrators and victims as required by traditional criminal
justice, bringing out a principle of retribution at any cost9. This is one of the major mistakes
made by the international criminal justice. Similarly, one of the founding principles of Criminal
Law is to individualise guilt; perpetrators are judged on the basis of what they did and not
what they are10
. This principle, seemingly simple in domestic laws, encounters difficulties when
7 Sixty-seventh General Assembly, Thematic Debate on International Criminal Justice,
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2013/ga11355.doc.htm8 The media coverage of both wars played an important rolein mobilizing public opinion.9 Expression used by Vitaly Churkin, Ambassador of the Russian Federation to the UN, during the Sixty-seventh General
Assembly Thematic Debate on International Criminal Justice, 10 April 2013,
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2013/ga11355.doc.htm10 Janine Natalya Clark, The ICTY and the Challenges of Reconciliation in the Former Yugoslavia, 23 January 2012,available at:http://www.e-ir.info/2012/01/23/the-icty-and-the-challenges-of-reconciliation-in-the-former-yugoslavia/
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2013/ga11355.doc.htmhttp://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2013/ga11355.doc.htmhttp://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2013/ga11355.doc.htmhttp://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2013/ga11355.doc.htmhttp://www.e-ir.info/2012/01/23/the-icty-and-the-challenges-of-reconciliation-in-the-former-yugoslavia/http://www.e-ir.info/2012/01/23/the-icty-and-the-challenges-of-reconciliation-in-the-former-yugoslavia/http://www.e-ir.info/2012/01/23/the-icty-and-the-challenges-of-reconciliation-in-the-former-yugoslavia/http://www.e-ir.info/2012/01/23/the-icty-and-the-challenges-of-reconciliation-in-the-former-yugoslavia/http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2013/ga11355.doc.htmhttp://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2013/ga11355.doc.htm7/27/2019 ICJ-July2013 Peace Through Law the Utopia
7/16
International criminal justice : the EUs strategy for reconciliation and peaceESR 68 7
applied at the international level as one of the main features of international criminal courts is to
deal with large-scale crimes. This means that a multitude of actors are involved: several ethnicgroups, several states; some people commit the crime, some others order it, and some others
coordinate it. By indicting 161 people, the ICTY has absolutely not been able to prosecute all the
criminals individually, on the basis of what they did; no other international criminal court has ever
been able to do so. A terrible consequence of this approach is that the conviction of one
person stigmatises an entire group which comes to bear a collective responsibility. For practical
reasons, it is impossible to determine all responsibilities in large-scale conflicts such as in Rwanda
and ex-Yugoslavia. Furthermore, it is impossible to reproduce the classic pattern distinguishing
culprits in opposition to victims. Indeed, at the international level, such a distinction means
designating an ethnic group or a specific part of the population as the main responsible for
atrocities committed, and another one as the main victim. It is not the role of international
criminal justice to define if the Hutus and the Serbs should be considered primarily responsible for
atrocities committed in Rwanda and in the former Yugoslavia. Such a distinction leads to a
reverse effect regarding reconciliation by dividing rather than uniting people. Indeed, why
should one trust in a selective justice?
Local populations have lost interest in international criminal justice and do not see it as a
way for reconciliation. The case of the Balkans is the most meaningful. The ICTY is regarded by
local populations as a political institution that is heavily biased against their own ethnic group,
more generally against their own ethnic truths about wars 11. Ethnicity is still really strong. In an
interview given in 2011, Serge Brammertz highlighted that 40%of the population considered
Mladic a hero, more than 50% were against his arrest, and 78% were saying that if they had
information on his hiding place, they would not give it to the authorities12.
Justice for whom? In practice, international criminal justice seems to be directed towards
satisfying public opinion, especially NGOs and media which have strongly criticised what theysee as the international communitys inability to prevent the perpetration of international crimes,
11 Janine Natalya Clark, The ICTY and the Challenges of Reconciliation in the Former Yugoslavia, 23 January 2012,available at:http://www.e-ir.info/2012/01/23/the-icty-and-the-challenges-of-reconciliation-in-the-former-yugoslavia/12 United Nations News Centre, Interview with Serge Brammertz, Prosecutor of the ICTY. 9 June 2011 Available at:
http://www.un.org/apps/news/newsmakers.asp?NewsID=33
http://www.e-ir.info/2012/01/23/the-icty-and-the-challenges-of-reconciliation-in-the-former-yugoslavia/http://www.e-ir.info/2012/01/23/the-icty-and-the-challenges-of-reconciliation-in-the-former-yugoslavia/http://www.e-ir.info/2012/01/23/the-icty-and-the-challenges-of-reconciliation-in-the-former-yugoslavia/http://www.un.org/apps/news/newsmakers.asp?NewsID=33http://www.un.org/apps/news/newsmakers.asp?NewsID=33http://www.un.org/apps/news/newsmakers.asp?NewsID=33http://www.e-ir.info/2012/01/23/the-icty-and-the-challenges-of-reconciliation-in-the-former-yugoslavia/7/27/2019 ICJ-July2013 Peace Through Law the Utopia
8/16
International criminal justice : the EUs strategy for reconciliation and peaceESR 68 8
as well as to protect humanity by combating impunity. But this justice does not appear to work in
favour of the populations who need to make peace.
International criminal justice and reconciliation: a tenuous link
The ideology peace through Law is utopian not only because the populations
concerned do not see the benefits of international criminal courts for the purpose of
reconciliation but also because the ideology is itself built on a utopia.
First of all, the ideology attempts to bring together two opposed ideals: justice and
peace. Indeed, in essence, justice is source of conflict, as justice opposes systematically two
parties, each of them defending its own truth. In international criminal law it means opposing
two parts of the populations, more frequently but not systematically two ethnic groups, and their
own truth as individuals are conceived as representatives of their communities. As highlighted
above, local populations have largely rejected this approach. One of the challenges of
international criminal justice was to reconcile justice and peace by establishing a clear cause-
effect relationship between them. If a correlation can undoubtedly be made between
international criminal justice and reconciliation, it must be recognised that this link is, in essence
and despite all the efforts, very tenuous. This is certainly also a reason why justice, as a means
towards reconciliation, has been misunderstood by local populations.
The enthusiasm induced by the establishment of international criminal tribunals has led
the international criminal judges to develop, clarify and enrich international criminal law. They
set themselves up as protectors of international public order, complying with the collective will of
"never again"13. The strong desire to make international criminal law an autonomous discipline
with a dissuasive effect, recognised by the entire international community and combined to the
high level of expectations of public opinion and the necessity to punish terrible atrocities, haveled it to forget its basics. According to Professor William Schabas, there is relative peace in
former Yugoslavia; however, it could neither be proven nor disproven that the ICTY has had a
13 Franois Roux, La ncessaire invention dun nouvel exercice du droit Entretien avec Franois Roux, Revue TiersMonde, 2011/1 n205, p. 103-115
7/27/2019 ICJ-July2013 Peace Through Law the Utopia
9/16
International criminal justice : the EUs strategy for reconciliation and peaceESR 68 9
role in establishing that peace14. International criminal tribunals are first and foremost supposed
to dispense justice. The mission of reconciliation entrusted to them is merely incidental. If judgesdispense justice properly, the result will be peace or reconciliation. Reconciliation is a possible
consequence of their judgment but not its raison d'tre, rightly observes Franois Roux15. It is
highly theoretical, even unrealistic, to believe that justice can lead alone to reconciliation
between peoples. Reconciliation is a long process achieved through the juxtaposition of several
factors, which vary amongst post-conflict states. In this perspective, it is even not possible to
identify all components of reconciliation. For instance, in ex Yugoslavia, many bilateral issues,
mainly related to borders, persist. On this point, reconciliation is not going to be archived by the
ICTY.
The Organisation for Co-operation and Security in Europe (OSCE) organised a very
interesting discussion about the multidimensionality of the concept of reconciliation. Following
a Workshop held in December 2012 entitled Towards a strategy for reconciliation in the OSCE
area, the participants highlighted that reconciliation can have political, social, economic,
institutional, scientific, regional and international dimensions16. What is the point to clarify the
truth about past wrong-doings if historical textbooks in each community continue to teach a
certain view of the truth? What is the point of delivering justice if no work is done on the moral
aspect of a post-conflict situation, that is to say if the past continues to affect the present and if
populations are not ready to accept conciliation? How can one even deliver justice, if archives
are closed, if investigations and evidence collection are controversial? It is unrealistic to believe
that justice is fully autonomous. Justice does not operate in a vacuum; it needs other disciplines
to be truly effective. Similarly, as pointed out by the OSCE, all sectors of society should be
included in reconciliation processes; media, religious leaders, political parties must play a key
role as they can assist in creating positive images and perceptions and address stereotypes17.
In other words, the ideology peace through Law is simplistic. Reconciliation consists ofa multitude of factors. International criminal justice is one of them, supposing that this justice fits
14 Sixty-seventh General Assembly, Thematic Debate on International Criminal Justice,
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2013/ga11355.doc.htm15 Franois Roux, La ncessaire invention dun nouvel exercice du droit Entretien avec Franois Roux, Revue TiersMonde, 2011/1 n205, p. 103-11516Final Report, Workshop Towards a Strategy for Reconciliation in the OSCE Area Key Issues and Recommendations, 16January 2013, available at:http://www.osce.org/sg/9869817 Ibid.
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2013/ga11355.doc.htmhttp://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2013/ga11355.doc.htmhttp://www.osce.org/sg/98698http://www.osce.org/sg/98698http://www.osce.org/sg/98698http://www.osce.org/sg/98698http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2013/ga11355.doc.htm7/27/2019 ICJ-July2013 Peace Through Law the Utopia
10/16
International criminal justice : the EUs strategy for reconciliation and peaceESR 68 10
into a broader perspective. Indeed, there is a double problem of perception. On the one hand,
reconciliation requires both judicial and non-judicial mechanisms. On the other hand, justice isnot limited to a retributive international criminal justice. Therefore, international criminal justice
needs to be rethought. Without this step back on the role of international criminal justice in
reconciliation processes, the ideology of peace through Law will definitely fail. In this context,
the European Union could be a key actor.
Rethinking the equation: what role for the European Union?
If the punishment of crimes is not sufficient to reconcile peoples, what are the
alternatives? The European Union has developed some very interesting mechanisms. Its historical
support to international criminal justice should not be questioned as it is absolutely not desirable
that international criminal justice perishes, despite recurrent criticisms addressed to it. Our
previous demonstration aimed to challenge international criminal justice through the prism of
the ideology peace through Law and was absolutely not a plea against international criminal
justice. It is undoubtedly a progress; it should be a progress; even if in practice, there is no
evidence that international criminal law has a positive impact on impunity and recognition of
human rights. But, to really impact on peace, international criminal justice needs to be
combined to other instruments. On this point, besides its support to international criminal justice,
the EU could enhance its role in reconciliation through its enlargement policy (Balkans) as well as
its foreign policy. Furthermore, the EU could go further by combining its different policies in order
to develop a strategic approach to transitional justice.
Existing European policies: a support to reconciliation
EU support to international criminal justice is first and foremost an unwavering support to
the International Criminal Court. Indeed, the EU is one of the strongest and most consistent
supporters of the ICC18. We will limit ourselves to an overview of these initiatives in order to
18 Jan Wouters and Sudeshna Basu, The creation of a global criminal justice system: the European Union and theInternational Criminal Court, Working Paper n0 24, June 2009, Leuven Centre for Global Governance Studies, availableat:http://www.law.kuleuven.be/iir/nl/onderzoek/wp/wp136e.pdf
http://www.law.kuleuven.be/iir/nl/onderzoek/wp/wp136e.pdfhttp://www.law.kuleuven.be/iir/nl/onderzoek/wp/wp136e.pdfhttp://www.law.kuleuven.be/iir/nl/onderzoek/wp/wp136e.pdfhttp://www.law.kuleuven.be/iir/nl/onderzoek/wp/wp136e.pdf7/27/2019 ICJ-July2013 Peace Through Law the Utopia
11/16
International criminal justice : the EUs strategy for reconciliation and peaceESR 68 11
demonstrate that the EU has developed a real strategy towards the ICC19. The EUs commitment
is twofold: within the EU itself, and with its relations to third countries. Besides a general consensuson the philosophy surrounding the ICC, EU Member States provide a financial and technical
support to the Court. On 10 April 2006, the EU signed an agreement, reaffirmed and completed
in Stockholm in 2009, requiring from EU Member States to cooperate with the ICC, including by
exchanging information and best practises. Additionally, EU Member States are the main
contributors of the ICC (around 60% of the ICCs budget). The EUs support to the ICC is not only
internal. The EU finances projects aiming to promote the ratification of the Rome Statute and has
initiated bilateral dialogue for this purpose. Additionally, the EU regularly seeks to include an
ICC clause in its agreements with third countries, such as in the Cotonou Agreement 20 and for
a selected number of countries in the framework of the European Neighbourhood Policy21.
EU support to the ICC can be seen as a way to positively influence on the functioning of
the court in order to reduce its flaws and to contribute to the general acceptance of the
jurisdiction of the court, as a consensus around international criminal justice is an indispensable
prerequisite for making it an instrument for reconciliation. However, such initiatives need to be
targeted as they can have both positive and dangerous effects. The EU policy should aim to
improve and expand international criminal justice without influence it. Similarly, supporting the
ICC does not only mean insisting on cooperation with it. In practice, the ICC is becoming more
and more controversial, especially in African countries. This observation should be interpreted as
a necessity to redirect the EU support to the ICC.
In the Balkans, the EU has demonstrated its ability to impact on reconciliation through its
enlargement policy. The EU has not hesitated to impose the obligation to cooperate with the
ICTY as a prerequisite for candidacy. Indeed, to open Stabilisation and Association Processes,
the Balkan countries have to cooperate with the ICTY, including by transferring all defendants to
The Hague and by giving access to documents. EU pressure has been successful as, forexample, Serbia facilitated the arrest of Ratko Mladic. International observers agree that
without external pressure, Serbias willingness and capacity to cooperate with the Tribunal
19For an exhaustive list of the EUs initiatives aiming to promote international criminal justice, see: The European Unionand the International Criminal Court, Brochure produced by the General Secretariat of the Council, May 2010,available at:http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cmsUpload/ICC_may%2010_internet.pdf20 Cotonou Agreement: economical agreement between the EU and African, Caribbean and Pacific group of States.21 Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, Moldova and Ukraine
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cmsUpload/ICC_may%2010_internet.pdfhttp://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cmsUpload/ICC_may%2010_internet.pdfhttp://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cmsUpload/ICC_may%2010_internet.pdfhttp://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cmsUpload/ICC_may%2010_internet.pdf7/27/2019 ICJ-July2013 Peace Through Law the Utopia
12/16
International criminal justice : the EUs strategy for reconciliation and peaceESR 68 12
would have been much lower22. The primary purpose of this ICTY conditionality was obviously
the necessity to respect international law and to combat impunity. However, this conditionalityshould also be interpreted as a means to exploit former Yugoslavias countries ambition to join
the EU to incite them to recognise the Tribunals work. But, what is the real impact of such an
initiative on reconciliation in the Balkans? First of all, the success of this conditionality
presupposes that justice is accepted as one of the pillars of reconciliation, which is absolutely
uncertain, as demonstrated above. Moreover, such an ICTY conditionality does not tackle the
roots of the challenges of reconciliation, mainly, the desire to improve the living together. Yet,
as highlighted by Ambassador Fletcher Burton, Head of the OCSE Mission in Bosnia and
Herzegovina, there is a link between reconciliation and integration the one reinforce the
otheras citizens share the same aspiration for a future within the EU23. Therefore, reconciliation
within a regional framework can contribute to reconciliation. By opting for a regional approach
in this part of Europe in order to achieve greater stability among conflict states and
normalization of relations between them24, the EU has imposed itself as a key player in the
reconciliation process. In this context, on 19 April 2013, Serbia and Kosovo reached an
agreement on power-sharing in northern Kosovo25. Obviously this is not a panacea for
reconciliation, but it is one of the initiatives, besides and in support of international criminal
justice.
More relevant among EU policies contributing to reconciliation are the instruments of the
Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). Reconciliation within a state or a region necessarily
involves the reconstruction of societies destroyed by an armed conflict. If this reconstruction
requires an acknowledgement of past wrong-doings through the prosecution of authors of
crimes, it also requires new stable institutions and a new legal framework. In this perspective, two
instruments are of particular interest: the Instrument for Stability (IfS) and the Common Security
22Mathias Dobbels, Serbia and the ICTY: How effective is EU conditionality?, EU Diplomacy Papers, 6/2009, Department
of EU International Relations and Diplomacy Studies, College of Europe, available at:http://aei.pitt.edu/11556/1/EDP_6_2009_Dobbels.pdf23Contribution by Ambassador Fletcher Burton, Head of the OSCE Mission to Bosnia and Herzegovina , OSCE, Workshop
Towards a Strategy for Reconciliation in the OSCE Area, Vienna, 18 December 2012, available at:http://www.osce.org/sg/9873524 Lucia Vesnic-Alujevic, European inetergration of Western Balkans: From reconciliation to European Future , Centre for
European Studies, 2012, p.1225 During an exchange of view with the member of the Foreign Affairs Committee in May 2013, the Serbian Prime Minister
gave the impression that the agreement with Kosovo was above all a way to make a good impression with view to a
future integration than a real desire to initiate a process of reconciliation. Parliamentary Update n36, 29 May 2013,Exchange of view with Ivica Dai, Prime Minister of Serbia, available at: http://www.isis-europe.eu/sites/default/files/publications-downloads/epupdate-afet-29May13LA_0.pdf
http://aei.pitt.edu/11556/1/EDP_6_2009_Dobbels.pdfhttp://aei.pitt.edu/11556/1/EDP_6_2009_Dobbels.pdfhttp://www.osce.org/sg/98735http://www.osce.org/sg/98735http://www.isis-europe.eu/sites/default/files/publications-downloads/epupdate-afet-29May13LA_0.pdfhttp://www.isis-europe.eu/sites/default/files/publications-downloads/epupdate-afet-29May13LA_0.pdfhttp://www.isis-europe.eu/sites/default/files/publications-downloads/epupdate-afet-29May13LA_0.pdfhttp://www.isis-europe.eu/sites/default/files/publications-downloads/epupdate-afet-29May13LA_0.pdfhttp://www.isis-europe.eu/sites/default/files/publications-downloads/epupdate-afet-29May13LA_0.pdfhttp://www.osce.org/sg/98735http://aei.pitt.edu/11556/1/EDP_6_2009_Dobbels.pdf7/27/2019 ICJ-July2013 Peace Through Law the Utopia
13/16
International criminal justice : the EUs strategy for reconciliation and peaceESR 68 13
and Defence Policy (CSDP)26. The IfS finances cooperative actions aiming to prevent or re-
establish a situation of instability such as the development of democratic public institutions andindependent judiciaries or the support to the establishment of national and international criminal
courts and national reconciliation commissions27. On the other hand, the EU has imposed itself as
a key player in crisis management and peacebuilding through the establishment of CSDP
missions. Despite numerous criticisms, especially their lack of ambition, these missions, in
particular those with a rule of law (EULEX) and Security Sector Reform (SSR) mandate,
constitute very interesting initiatives in order to help states to reconstruct and, therefore, to
reconcile populations. The assistance to local authorities and judiciary institutions in the rule of
law area is an indispensable complement, even a prerequisite, to the establishment of a viable
international criminal justice regarding its objective of maintaining peace. As perfectly
highlighted by Article 1 of the Rome Statute, international criminal justice has to be
complementary to national criminal justice, and even be used as last resort. As pointed out by
Serge Brammertz, Prosecutor for the ICTY, the best place to have criminal justice performed is
inside the community which is the victims and perpetrators community, because it is much
closer to their natural environment, it is in their language and respecting their legal
frameworks28. If this fact seems to be unanimously accepted by the international community,
initiatives in this direction are clearly not sufficient.
All these policies combining judicial, political, financial and supportive instruments put
the EU in a dominant position to play a key role in the redefinition of the ideology peace
through Law and, more generally, to contribute to international peace . But, should the EU not
go further?
Going further into a strategic approach to transitional justice
How can one question international criminal justice in its reconciling role without takingan interest in transitional justice? Is transitional justice a buzzword or a real alternative? The
approach adopted by transitional justice deserves an in-depth reflection, including in the
26 For more information about CSDP missions, See CSDP MAP Portal, available at:www.csdpmap.eu27http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/development/general_development_framework/l14171_en.htm28 United Nations News Centre, Interview with Serge Brammertz, Prosecutor of the ICTY. 9 June 2011 Available at:
http://www.un.org/apps/news/newsmakers.asp?NewsID=33
http://www.csdpmap.eu/http://www.csdpmap.eu/http://www.csdpmap.eu/http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/development/general_development_framework/l14171_en.htmhttp://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/development/general_development_framework/l14171_en.htmhttp://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/development/general_development_framework/l14171_en.htmhttp://www.un.org/apps/news/newsmakers.asp?NewsID=33http://www.un.org/apps/news/newsmakers.asp?NewsID=33http://www.un.org/apps/news/newsmakers.asp?NewsID=33http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/development/general_development_framework/l14171_en.htmhttp://www.csdpmap.eu/7/27/2019 ICJ-July2013 Peace Through Law the Utopia
14/16
International criminal justice : the EUs strategy for reconciliation and peaceESR 68 14
framework of EU external policy. Indeed, transitional justice offers a real alternative by rethinking
and complementing the traditional concept of retributive justice and, more generally, byrethinking the mechanisms leading to a sustainable reconciliation of peoples. The main
weakness of transitional justice is probably that it is not a ready-made solution that could be
applied in the same way regardless of the situation. However, it is also its main strength. By
offering accompanying measures to reconciliation and stability rather than imposing a model of
peace, transitional justice is supposed to respect specificities characterising each country in
post-conflict situation29. This is probably the key for a viable and perennial peace.
Concretely, as defined by the UN Secretary-General, transitional justice consists of both
judicial and non-judicial processes and mechanisms, including prosecution initiatives, truth-
seeking, reparations programmes, institutional reform or an appropriate combination thereof, in
order to ensure accountability, serve justice and achieve reconciliation 30. Therefore, criminal
prosecution is only one means among many to achieve reconciliation. The concept peace
through Law is reversed to give birth to a new ideology: Law for peace.
The EU contributes significantly to promote and implement mechanisms related to
transitional justice, as defined by the UN, through isolated initiatives. Indeed, through its
Common Security and Defence Policy, the EU has become an expert in peacebuilding,
mediation, crisis management, institution-building, security sector reform (SSR) as well as
disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration (DDR). All these areas are closely related to
transitional justice as they can constitute instruments favouring it31. Combined to the EU
commitment towards international criminal justice, the EU has developed a set of instruments
enabling it to positively and effectively influence on reconciliation and peace. However, some
reservations should be expressed concerning the EUs support to international criminal justice.
Indeed, within the EU, all Member States do not always play the game of international criminal
justice, which is an aberration and severely damages the credibility of the EU.
29Hlne Flautre, La justice transitionnelle dans le prisme de lUnion europenne,Mouvements, 2008/1 n53, p.26-3030United Nations Approach to Transitional Justice, Guidance Note of the Secretary-General, March 2010, available at:http://www.unrol.org/files/TJ_Guidance_Note_March_2010FINAL.pdf31 Laura Davis, The European Union and transitional justice, Initiative for Peacebuilding Democratisation andtransitional justice cluster, June 2010, available at:http://www.initiativeforpeacebuilding.eu/pdf/EUTransJustice0610.pdf
http://www.unrol.org/files/TJ_Guidance_Note_March_2010FINAL.pdfhttp://www.unrol.org/files/TJ_Guidance_Note_March_2010FINAL.pdfhttp://www.initiativeforpeacebuilding.eu/pdf/EUTransJustice0610.pdfhttp://www.initiativeforpeacebuilding.eu/pdf/EUTransJustice0610.pdfhttp://www.initiativeforpeacebuilding.eu/pdf/EUTransJustice0610.pdfhttp://www.initiativeforpeacebuilding.eu/pdf/EUTransJustice0610.pdfhttp://www.unrol.org/files/TJ_Guidance_Note_March_2010FINAL.pdf7/27/2019 ICJ-July2013 Peace Through Law the Utopia
15/16
International criminal justice : the EUs strategy for reconciliation and peaceESR 68 15
It is regrettable that despite its experience and its support to state reconstruction, the EU
does not have a strategic approach to transitional justice. Indeed, the EU could better put inperspective the initiatives developed within the CSFP and, in particular, within the CSDP, to
formulate a clear policy focusing on post-conflict situations. While EU foreign policy is constantly
questioned, developing a comprehensive approach through a clear commitment to transitional
justice could give a fresh boost to the CSFP. Therefore, in order to make the EU an effective key
player in post-conflict management, the multitude of instruments existing, including expertise
through the European External Action Service, civilian CSDP missions, EU Special Representatives
etc., needs to be better coordinated. In this perspective, defining a comprehensive approach
to transitional justice could be fruitful. However, of course, the definition of such an approach
should be accompanied by the allocation of the necessary resources, particularly with regard to
the supervision and coordination of instruments deployed. The success of the EUs commitment
in the countries in transition following the Arab Spring in particular, will certainly depend on the
ability of the EU to go further in its strategy aiming to promote peace.
Conclusions
The impact of international criminal justice on reconciliation is minimal, and sometimes
even counterproductive. This is due to recurrent criticisms on the legitimacy of international
criminal justice, and, above all, to the fact that reconciliation is not its core purpose.
However, justice can undoubtedly be an instrument serving peace. In this context,
international criminal justice needs to be combined with other instruments to really lead to
reconciliation. Moreover, justice should not be limited to setting up a retributive justice which
would be the guardian of the laws as it is not an end in itself. If at the domestic level a courts
verdict implies the closure of a case, a judicial decision at the international level heavily affects
national reconciliation processes. Contrary to retributive justice, international criminal justice,
therefore, needs to be adaptable and flexible and perpetually rethought.
Despite very encouraging initiatives, the EU does not seem to measure the role that it
could potentially play. The concept of transitional justice appears to be an appropriate way to
7/27/2019 ICJ-July2013 Peace Through Law the Utopia
16/16
International criminal justice : the EUs strategy for reconciliation and peaceESR 68 16
rebuild justice as a means to achieve reconciliation. Through its foreign policy, the EU should
lead a reflection on transitional justice and develop a comprehensive approach to transitionaljustice. Of course, transitional justice should not be seen either as a cure for reconciliation of
peoples and peace. By challenging the traditional acquis on justice, transitional justice has the
merit of asking the right questions about the role of international criminal justice in peace
process and, therefore, can be a very interesting starting point in order to reverse the ideology
peace through Law in Law for peace.
by Lorne Fara-Andrianarijaona
Programme AssociateISIS Europe
Follow us onTwitter,Facebook, orBlog
Web:www.isis-europe.eu
https://twitter.com/ISIS_Europehttps://twitter.com/ISIS_Europehttps://twitter.com/ISIS_Europehttp://www.facebook.com/pages/ISIS-Europe/234628629951724http://www.facebook.com/pages/ISIS-Europe/234628629951724http://www.facebook.com/pages/ISIS-Europe/234628629951724http://isiseurope.wordpress.com/http://isiseurope.wordpress.com/http://isiseurope.wordpress.com/http://www.isis-europe.eu/http://www.isis-europe.eu/http://www.isis-europe.eu/http://www.isis-europe.eu/http://isiseurope.wordpress.com/http://www.facebook.com/pages/ISIS-Europe/234628629951724https://twitter.com/ISIS_Europe