European Rights Watch

Reparations Finally Given to the Many Victims of War Criminal Bosco Ntaganda

By: Samuel Schimel

Impunity Watch Staff Writer

THE HAGUE, Netherlands – Bosco Ntaganda, whose armed forces terrorized the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, was once again on trial in Chamber VI of the International Criminal Court (“ICC” or “Court”) on March 8th, 2021. What was conveyed by the Chamber in a public hearing was the formation of an Order of Reparations to victims under Article 75 of the Rome Statute in the case of The Prosecutor v. Bosco Ntaganda. Ntaganda was originally sentenced by the ICC to 30 years in prison for war crimes and crimes against humanity on November 7th, 2019. In the 2021 decision, the Chamber, composed of Judge Chang-ho Chung, Judge Robert Fremr, and Judge Olga Herrera Carbuccia, set the reparations award, for which Ntaganda is liable, at a total of USD 30,000,000.

Bosco Ntaganda at Trial Chamber VI of the International Criminal Court during the order for Reparations. Photo Courtesy of Reuters.

Nicknamed the “Smiling Terminator,” among others, Ntaganda was first indicted in 2006 for allegedly recruiting child soldiers during the Democratic Republic of Congo’s five-year war. He was a member of the Rwandan-backed Congrès national pour la défense du peuple – National Congress for the Defense of the People (CNDP), a rebel group that has committed countless atrocities against civilians. While a part of this group, he orchestrated an attack where 150 people were killed over two days in the town of Kiwanja, North of Goma. Ntaganda was integrated into the Congolese army and became a general. He commanded military operations in eastern Congo after an agreement was reached between the Congolese Army and the Rwandan government. For many Rwandan donors, the final straw was Ntaganda’s creation of the M23, another rebel group backed by Rwanda. As the leader of the group, Ntaganda orchestrated many other attacks on villages, executed hundreds of people, and was accused of rape, torture, and the forceful recruitment of child soldiers.

He surrendered to the U.S. embassy in Kigali, Rwanda’s capital, in March 2013, and was transferred to the Hague some time afterward. Ntaganda was convicted on thirteen counts of war crimes followed by five counts of crimes against humanity. These counts included murder, rape, and sexual slavery committed during the conflict in the East of the Democratic Republic of Congo, in 2002 and 2003. On the basis of the Rome Statute, Ntaganda was sentenced to 30 years of imprisonment.

Given his criminal history, the eligible victims for reparations are direct and indirect victims of the attacks, victims of crimes against child soldiers, victims of rape and sexual slavery, and children born out of rape and sexual slavery. The Chamber notably found that the priority shall be given to individuals who are in need of immediate medical and psychological care, victims with disabilities, the elderly, victims of sexual or gender-based violence, victims who are homeless or have encountered financial hardship, as well as children born out of rape and sexual slavery and former child soldiers. A gender-inclusive and sensitive approach to the reparations will also be instituted.

The Chamber additionally encouraged the Trust Fund for Victims to add funds that would accompany the reparation awards, to the extent that is feasible given its available resources, and to take part in additional fundraising efforts as necessary to accompany the totality of the award. The Trust Fund for Victims was asked to create a draft implementation plan on the basis of all the modalities of reparations identified in the order, with the victim’s input. These modalities of reparations within the order incorporate measures of restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, and satisfaction, which may incorporate, when appropriate, a symbolic, preventative, or transformative value. The due date for the Trust Fund’s plan is September 8th, 2021 and an urgent plan for priority victims is due on June 8th, 2021. 

Ntaganda’s name is still likely to send chills across the citizens of the Congo and he is particularly remembered for his ruthlessness. Many of the victims of Ntaganda’s crimes have been forced into exile since they were threatened with more suffering if they dared to speak up against him during his trial. Hopefully, the judgment can be of some consolation to the victims, and may they finally be given the reparations they deserve.

For further information, please see:

BBC – Bosco Ntaganda – the Congolese ‘Terminator – 8 July

International Criminal Court – Ntaganda case: ICC Trial Chamber VI orders reparations for victims – 8 Mar. 2021

Human Rights Watch – Congo Warlord Gets 30 Years: Persistence Over Many Years Helps Bring Bosco Ntaganda to Justice – 7 Nov. 2019

International Criminal Court – Bosco Ntaganda sentenced to 30 years’ imprisonment – 7 Nov. 2019

Reuters – War crimes court orders record $30 million compensation for Congo victims – 8 Mar. 2021

Ireland Signals Continued Commitment to ICC through Artwork Donation

By: Jamie McLennan

Impunity Watch Staff Writer

THE HAGUE, Netherlands – On March 18, 2021, the Ambassador of The Netherlands and the Ambassador of Ireland unveiled a new artwork that will stand at the International Criminal Court. The newly elected ICC President, Judge Piotr Hofmanski accepted the sculpture at a ceremony. President Judge Piotr Hofmanski will serve as President for a three-year term, alongside two other Vice Presidents. Responsibilities of the ICC President include attendance of all ceremonial events of the ICC, including the unveiling of such art.

President Judge Hofmanski and Ambassador Kelly at the ICC. Photo Courtesy of the ICC.

The ICC holds a series of art pieces from other member countries that reflect each country’s cultural heritage and the international community’s fight against impunity. The donated artwork includes of the Government of Belgium, Canada, Cyprus, Denmark, Japan, Mexico, and The Netherlands.

The newly donated artwork is a set of two green benches sculpted by Irish artist Fergus Martin. The benches titled “Oak” were placed alongside the Court’s landscape and signify an oak tree’s strength, a traditional symbol of justice in Ireland. 

Ireland has a longstanding relationship with the ICC. In 1998, the country signed the Court’s founding treaty, the Rome Statute, and ratified their membership in 2002. Despite recent criticism of the ICC, Ireland vocalizes their support of the Court by commissioning the art piece.

As one of the founding State Parties, Irish Ambassador Kevin Kelly spoke about the importance of peace and justice to achieve stability and development. He also spoke about Ireland’s continual approval of the ICC and their commitment to ending impunity for those who commit grave crimes against humanity. Kelly commended the many victorious cases of the ICC that punished individuals involved in war crimes and genocide.

In response, President Judge Piotr Hofmanski thanked Ireland for its generosity to the ICC and other related institutions. Since 2004, Ireland has donated nearly 1.3 million euros for the Trust Fund for Victims (TFV). The TFV advocates and assists the most vulnerable victims of crimes within the jurisdiction of the ICC. The fund provides court-ordered reparation awards and other payments for victims of genocide and war crimes.

Ambassador Kelly promised that Ireland would continue to aid and support the ICC in its endeavor for peace, justice, and mediation. 

For further information, please see:

ICC – Ireland Continues its Support of Reparative Justice – 14 Dec. 2020

ICC – Irish Delegation Unveils Artwork Donation – 18 Mar. 2021

ICC – New ICC Presidents Elected for 2021-2024  – 11 Mar. 2021

The ECHR issues ruling on COVID-19 related human rights violations

By: Ryan Ockenden

Impunity Watch Staff Writer

STRASBOURG, France – On March 11, 2021, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) awarded compensation to Joseph Feilazoo after a nearly 13-yearlong immigration battle. In 2008, Mr. Feilazoo was sentenced to 12 years in prison in Malta for drug trafficking. He was also fined €50,000 but was unable to pay the fine. As a result, two years were added to his sentence.

Prisoners like Joseph Feilazoo are kept in detention at Safi Barracks where they are subject to forced quarantine with COVID-19 patients. Photo Courtesy of the Council of Europe.

In 2019, he was scheduled for release. He made it known that he intended to return to Spain, which is where he was living prior to his arrest in 2008. However, Spain refused his return. Shortly after his release, he was charged with violence against prison officers and was resentenced to imprisonment. The sentence was changed from imprisonment to deportation and a fine. Mr. Feilazoo could not pay that fine and Nigeria refused to issue a travel document for his deportation. Malta ultimately placed him in the Safi Barracks immigration detention center.

Mr. Feilazoo complained to the ECHR, based on European Convention of Human Rights, alleging violations of: (1) inhuman and degrading treatment; (2) denial of his right to liberty; and (3) denial of his right to individual petition. First, per the European Convention on Human Rights, Malta is required under Article 3 to provide detention conditions that respect human dignity and avoid unnecessary hardship. The ECHR found that Mr. Feilazoo was subjected to non-functioning toilets, pest infestations, solitary confinement without natural light for 77 days, no exercise, and was forced to be in proximity of people in COVID-19 quarantine. Thus, the ECHR found that Malta violated his Article 3 rights by keeping him in inhuman and unacceptable conditions.

Second, under Article 5, Malta is required to protect detainees against arbitrary interference of their right to liberty. The ECHR found that Maltese authorities had not diligently pursued the travel documentation from Nigerian officials; they essentially gave up on trying. Thus, the ECHR found Malta violated Mr. Feilazoo’s Article 5 rights by keeping him detained for a period of time beyond necessary to complete deportation proceedings.

Third, under Article 34, Malta is required to ensure that a detainee’s access to the courts and judicial process is uninhibited. Unfortunately, the ECHR found that Mr. Feilazoo had not been allowed to access his documentation which was needed to submit a complaint to the ECHR. In addition, there were insufficient lawyer-client contacts and Maltese authorities were found to have done nothing to rectify this except to blame COVID-19 for the issues. Thus, the ECHR found that Maltese authorities inhibited his right to petition.

This is the ECHR’s first ruling on COVID-19 related detention issues. The ECHR makes it clear that placing someone in unfair detention with people who were exposed to COVID-19, and blaming COVID-19 for preventing a detainee from accessing the necessary documents and legal assistance to access justice, is unacceptable. This should set precedent in the ECHR that COVID-19 is not an excuse to deny detainees, or anyone, any rights granted to them by the European Convention on Human Rights.

For further information, please see:

Council of Europe – Torture prevention committee calls on Malta to improve treatment of detained migrants – 10 Mar. 2021

European Court of Human Rights – Deportation Detainee Housed With COVID-19 Quarantine Patients, And Multiple Other Violations – 11 Mar. 2021

Times of Malta – Man Wins €25,000 Compensation For Degrading Treatment At Detention Centre – 11 Mar. 2021

ECHR Demands the Release of Opposition Leader Navalny from Russian Prison Over Concern for his Life

By: Hannah Gavin

Impunity Watch Staff Writer

STRASBOURG, France – In February, the European Court of Human Rights (ECRH) stood in clear opposition against Russian leader Vladimir Putin by issuing a written statement calling for the release of opposition leader Alexei Navalny.

Woman examines poster depicting opposition leader Navalny in Rome. Photo Courtesy of the Washington Post.

Navalny has created a firestorm of opposition in recent months against Vladimir Putin and his regime. However, Navalny’s calls have been silenced as he sits in a Russian Prison. The ECHR stated in their press release that Navalny’s arrest was necessary for his own safety. The Court cited a recent attack on his life as the main catalyst for their opinion.

Navalny was arrested in mid-January on a return flight from Germany to Moscow. His flight to Russia was following his absence in the country for months following an extended hospital stay in Berlin. In late August of 2020, Navalny had been traveling on a flight from Siberia to Moscow when he suddenly fell into a coma. He was eventually taken to a hospital in Berlin where a Soviet-era nerve agent was found to have poisoned him. Although Putin has denied Navalny’s accusations that he was behind the poisoning, much of the World assumes Putin was involved. A week prior to his arrest, the Russian Prison Service issued a warrant for Navalny’s arrest stating that he violated the terms of a 2014 suspended sentence for embezzlement. This charge was already ruled on by the ECRH in 2017 and found to be unreasonable. Although the warrant was issued, Navalny believed his arrest would be “impossible” upon his arrival to Moscow and chose to fly back regardless. Since his arrest, Navalny has now also been charged with insulting a WWII veteran. Another move that many believe is meant to silence his opposition. 

In a nation long shut off from the progressing World in many respects, Navalny offered promises of globalism. His goal for Russia was simple, in theory. He wanted a European Russia. A nation connected with the whole of the continent and one that participated in free and fair commerce, communication, and travel. Navalny pushed against the Putin regime which has continued to rule without the true will of the people. For a younger generation of Russians and many of their elder cohorts, Navalny signaled change. However, despite his poisoning and arrest, Navalny continues to inspire. After his poisoning, last year and continuing to today, widespread and often violent protests have ignited across Russia. Navalny’s return to Russia amidst imminent threat only bolsters his supporters. Such an extreme show of bravery and care of Russia reminds the people that what they are fighting for is worth it.

However, regardless of how the ECRH or the globe has responded to Navalny’s arrest, Russia has a different tale. Top Russian officials described the ECRH release as unlawful and claimed it was the Western World attempting to meddle in a domestic issue. Russia’s Justice Minister said that the opinion was not based on even a single fact. He claimed there was no reason to release Navalny under Russian law. He further went on to say that the Court’s issue is impossible to fulfill and was a political move that only exacerbates an already strained relationship.

The implications for Russia’s arrest of Navalny extend beyond the obvious threat he posed to Putin’s grip on unwavering power. Navalny became the figurehead of a movement in Russia, the force of which has not been seen in decades. Navalny’s principals stood in stark opposition to those and gave millions in Russia a sense of hope for the future. With Russia facing potential expulsion from the European Council and sanctions by many Western nations, this may be a turning point for the country. Although Russia is notoriously secretive, the World will wait with bated breath to see if the ECHR ruling will hold any ground. Until then, Russian citizens supporting Navalny will continue to organize and fight for the nation at the center of it all.

For further information, please see:

AP News – Russia Rejects European Rights Court’s Order to Free Navalny – 17 Feb. 2021                     

DW News – ‘Release’ Alexei Navalny, European Court of Human Rights tells Russia – 17 Feb. 2021

DW News – Alexei Navalny: Prosecutors Urge Fine in Slander Case – 16 Feb. 2021

European Court of Human Rights – The Court Grants an Interim Measure in Favour of Aleskey Navalnyy and Asks the Government of Russia to Release him – 17 Feb. 2021

Politico – Kremlin Critic Navalny Arrested After Landing in Moscow – 17 Jan. 2021

Reuters – Russia Dismisses European Court of Human Rights’ Call to Free Navalny – 17 Feb. 2021

Turkish Criminal Proceeding Violates the European Convention on Human Rights

By: Genna Amick,

Journal of Global Rights and Organizations, Lead Articles Editor

ISTANBUL, Turkey – The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) recently released a decision involving a sexual abuse case that began nearly two decades ago. On January 8, 2003, a Turkish individual identified only as N.Ç. filed a complaint against two women who forced N.Ç. to engage in prostitution alongside them.

Chambers within the European Court of Human Rights. Photo Courtesy of Bianet.

After an investigation was conducted, the prosecutor in the case filed a bill of indictment against twenty-eight individuals on various charges, including raping a girl who was under fifteen years old, falsely imprisoning a person to fulfill sexual desires, and inciting someone to prostitution. In 2010, after thirty-five hearings, the Mardin Assize Court acquitted several defendants, struck certain charges, such as “consensual imprisonment” and incitement to prostitution, and held that the sexual acts could not affirmatively be deemed nonconsensual as a psychiatric report found that N.Ç. “had not been totally unwilling.” On this basis, the Mardin Assize Court imposed on defendants the minimum sentence outlined in the Criminal Code.

On March 25, 2011, an application was submitted to the ECHR based on a complaint regarding the manner in which N.Ç.’s case was handled by the Mardin Assize Court. The application sought relief based on Article 3, which prohibits inhumane or degrading treatment, Article 6, which provides for the right to a fair hearing, Article 8, which provides for the right to respect for private and family life, and Article 13, which provides for the right to an effective remedy. A number of events occurred during the criminal proceeding that prompted N.Ç.’s application to the ECHR.

In the early stages of the proceedings, N.Ç. was subjected to ten, extremely intrusive medical examinations. All of the examinations were performed at the request of judicial authorities. The ECHR deemed the number of medical examinations to be excessive. Further, the Court stated that the intrusive nature was an unacceptable interference with N.Ç.’s psychological and physical integrity.

Several other human rights violations arose during the trial. On the same day that the defendants, N.Ç., and her representatives first appeared for a hearing before the Mardin Assize Court, N.Ç. and her representatives were attacked by relatives of some of the defendants as they left the courtroom. The Court ignored their request for protection measures, and later dismissed a request that the trial be transferred for safety reasons. Furthermore, N.Ç. was forced to confront her assailants on numerous occasions at various hearings. She also had to recount in detail the threats that the respondents had made and how she was raped. The Court held that the judicial authorities had not properly balanced the varying interests at play. Their failure resulted in a lack of protection for N.Ç. from the defendants in an extremely serious sexual abuse case.

Numerous other oversights on the part of the Turkish court resulted in the Court holding that the criminal proceedings had not been conducted in a manner that protected the values espoused by Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention. The Court ordered Turkey to pay N.Ç. 25,000 euros for non-pecuniary damages, as well as an additional 3,000 euros for costs and expenses.

For further information, please see:

European Court of Human Rights – Criminal proceedings against persons charged in connection with prostitution of a fourteen-year-old child: violations of the Convention – 09 Feb. 2021