Complementarity in the Line of Fire: The Catalysing Effect of the International Criminal Court in Uganda and Sudan

Abstract

… if anything, the story of complementarity's catalysing effect has shown that this is not a world of endless 'complementaries' in which efforts for criminal, restorative, political and legal justice seamlessly 'complement' each other. This is a world of horrific constraint, in which the promotion of one value often compromises another. More precisely, the absolute war on impunity succeeds in achieving some justice, but also produces, shapes and legitimates injustices. This is not a moment for concluding. It is the moment for more questioning. 1

Rebranding the State: Uganda's Strategic Use of the International Criminal Court

“…This invitation to the ICC challenges core approaches in international relations theory to less powerful states’ engagement with IOs. Uganda's behaviour differs sharply from the simple third‐party recruiting that ‘kow‐tows to state sovereignty’ Robertson (: 446), predicted of the ICC's role, and goes beyond ‘outsourcing’ responsibility for investigations while reducing domestic accountability (Nouwen, : 10), though it certainly accomplishes the latter. Less powerful states do use great power and IO objectives to accomplish domestic tasks such as targeting opposition figures and relabelling insurgents as terrorists, all of which resulted from the Ugandan referral.…”

“…In addition, while both the Amnesty Act and the ICC enabled some non‐government interests, they also triggered a counter‐movement within the Ugandan state limiting their effectiveness. Some lawyers and law‐enforcement officials began calling for legal solutions, some citing the Amnesty Act, but this took place alongside the securitization of the Ugandan state (Nouwen, : 178). Military personnel head the police force, active servicemen are recruited to serve within it, and the harsh methods officers use to quell demonstrations show their unfamiliarity with civil policing .…”

“…This is not to say that Uganda's engagement with the ICC has been wholly unfavourable to the interests of justice. The ICC Act of 2010 outlawed war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide under domestic law and established the International Crimes Division (ICD) of the Ugandan High Court, which the government likely only pursued when it sought domestic alternatives during the Juba Peace Talks (Nouwen, : 133, 204). Other legal developments may improve the quality of trials and detention procedures.…”

“…But while ICC influence may increase the quantity and quality of justice in the country, the instruments of justice likely remain calibrated to protect regime interests. Maintaining multiple justice mechanisms allows the regime to pick and choose how and when to pursue justice in a way that enhances personalization of power at the expense of the rule of law (Nouwen, : 227). The Registrar of the ICD, for instance, views the ICD and ICC as equally capable and states that if Kony were arrested the two courts would discuss which of them would prosecute .…”

Corporate Crime Conundrums and Globalization

“…Americanization could be regarded as having had a catalyzing effect on Dutch enforcement levels, resulting in more and higher settlements. Using the analysis of catalyzing effects, as applied by Nouwen (2013) to the effect of the Rome Statute's principle of complementarity on justice processes in Uganda and Sudan, the aspects of change I describe represent the composing parts of the catalyzation, the change itself, that has triggered (catalyzed) the enforcement of anti-foreign corruption. The process of change that was manifested in the legal transplanting of the American anti-corruption regime will be analyzed in the following part of this chapter.…”