ICC Appeals Chambers Unanimously Confirm Dominic Ongwen’s Conviction and Sentencing Decision Vindicating Over 4,095 Victims

By: Marie LeRoy

Impunity Watch News Staff Writer

Strasbourg, FRANCE – The International Criminal Court (ICC) Appeals Chamber confirmed the Trial Chambers conviction of Dominic Ongwen for all 61 war crimes and crimes against humanity charged. The crimes confirmed included crimes such as murder, torture, “outrages upon personal dignity,” “sexual and gender-based crimes,” and the subjugation of children to hostilities. Mr. Ongwen was sentenced to twenty-five years of imprisonment.

Dominic Ongwen during the ICC Appeals Chamber hearing. Photo
curtesy of the International Criminal Court.

Ongwen’s confirmed crimes were committed in Northern Uganda between July 2002 and December 2005 during the time that Ongwen was a member, and Brigade Commander, of the Lord Resistance Army (LRA). The LRA rebelled against the government of Uganda and believed that anyone associated with the government of Uganda was their enemy. The LRA perceived the citizens of Northern Uganda, particularly the citizens living within “Internally Displaced Persons” camps, to be their enemy and, therefore, targeted them.

In confirming the Trial Chambers conviction, the ICC rejected the Defenses’ ninety grounds of appeal that were raised regarding the conviction and the additional eleven grounds of appeal that were raised regarding the sentencing. These attempted appeals included grounds for excluding criminal responsibility by way of mental disease or duress, violations to Ongwen’s right to fair trial, and challenges to the findings for Ongwen’s individual liability for crimes committed as an “indirect perpetrator” and as an “indirect co-perpetrator.”

This final confirmation at last ends the near decade long matter against Ongwen, liberating the 4,095 victims allowed to participate in this case and the innumerable more who have been touched by Ongwen’s crimes against humanity.

Reparations to victims are still being determined.

  

For further information, please see:

ICC – Case Information Sheet – The Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen – Dec. 2022

ICC — Ongwen Case – The Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen

ICC – Order for Submissions of Reparations – The Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen – 6 May 2021

ICC – Press Release – Ongwen Case – 15 Dec. 2022

Tanzania Reverses Ban on Teenage Mothers in School…Sort of

By: Meghan Wright

Journal of Global Rights and Organizations, Associate Articles Editor

UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA – In September 2022, the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (ACERWC) recommended that Tanzania reform its education policies after ruling that expelling pregnant students from school violated adolescent girls’ human rights. The case, Legal and Human Rights Centre and Center for Reproductive Rights v. United Republic of Tanzania, was brought in June 2019 on behalf of six adolescent girls who were expelled from school for being pregnant, as well as all girls in Tanzania. This case centers around a 1960’s policy implementing a controversial ban that would remain in practice for decades.

15-year-old Tanzanian mother with her baby. Photo Courtesy of Human Rights Watch.

In 2017, then-President John Magufuli made official the 1960s policy that prohibited pregnant girls from returning to school after they gave birth. The late President of Tanzania did not want his government to educate mothers, saying: “I give money for a student to study for free. And then, she gets pregnant, gives birth, and after that, returns to school. No, not under my mandate.” This policy led to more forced pregnancy testing and the expulsion of girls found to be pregnant. Magufuli grounded the power to enforce this ban in the Tanzania Education Act. The Act states that expulsion for a student is deemed necessary when they have “committed an offense against morality.” Pregnant girls and mothers were deemed immoral by the Magufuli Administration.

In March 2021, Samia Suluhu Hassan, Tanzania’s first female president was elected after the death of Magufuli. The Administration announced that pregnant schoolgirls would be allowed to continue their education after giving birth. While they may return after giving birth, the girls are still unable to attend school while pregnant because “there are a lot of activities which may or may not be favorable for pregnant girls,” and “the situation will not be favorable for the other pupils.” While the lift on the ban allows mothers to return to school, pregnant girls are still disadvantaged while trying to obtain an education. The lift is a step in the correct direction for women’s educational rights in Tanzania, but many more steps still need to be taken.

In 2021, the World Bank reported that “[m]ore than 120,000 girls drop out of school every year in Tanzania. 6,500 of them because they are pregnant or have children.” Societal norms instilled by past presidencies – that expulsion is legally necessary for pregnant students – have controlled the educational rights of thousands of girls. This damage to those girls is not simply fixed by lifting the ban on them returning to school after they give birth. The Tanzanian government has pledged to adopt additional measures, but those remain to be seen. 

 

For further information, please see:

Al Jazeera – Activists worked to end pregnant schoolgirl ban. They succeeded – Nov. 27, 2021 

Center for Reproductive Rights – African Committee Recommends Tanzania Reform Policies That Barred Pregnant Girls from School – Sept. 20, 2022

Human Rights Watch – Tanzania Allows Teenage Mothers to Be Back in School – Apr. 1, 2022

The Borgen Project – EDUCATION FOR PREGNANT STUDENTS IN TANZANIA – Aug. 24, 2022

The Guardian – Tanzania to lift ban on teenage mothers returning to school – Nov. 26, 2021

Michigan Court of Claims Declares “Adopt and Amend” Unconstitutional

By: Mikaylah Heffernan

Impunity Watch News Staff Writer

Lansing, MICHIGAN – The Michigan Court of Claims has declared that the previously used legislative practice of “adopt and amend” is unconstitutional under Article 2, § 9 of the Michigan Constitution, as it barred the Michigan electorate from proposing, enacting, and rejecting laws through the established initiative process.

Partial aerial view of the Michigan State Capitol Building. Photo Courtesy of Mikaylah Heffernan.

Under the Michigan State Constitution, an issue may become a statewide ballot proposal through several different mechanisms, including through a ballot initiative, as allowed by Article 2, § 9. Michigan Election Law, specifically 1954 PA 116, outlines the requirements and circumstances under which citizens may add statewide proposal to the ballot. The proposal must serve the following reasons; to enact a new law, approve or reject an existing law, or amend the constitution. In order to complete this process, the responsible party must gather signatures from registered electors of no less than eight percent of the total vote cast for all candidates for governor in the last gubernatorial election.

In 2018, two petitions were circulated, one to set rates for accumulated paid sick time, and the other to raise the minimum wage to $12 an hour, including tipped employees who currently earn a lower minimum wage. Article 2, § 9 of the constitution allows the legislature to adopt ballot proposals as written by a majority vote, and the Michigan legislature voted to adopt both acts, keeping the proposals off the ballot. Had these proposals passed via a ballot vote, they could only have been amended by a three-fourths majority in the Legislature.

After the statewide election in November of 2018, the legislature substantially amended the legislation, compromising the original purpose. In May of 2021, several interested groups brought a petition directly to the Court of Claims, challenging the constitutionality of the Improved Workforce Opportunity Wage Act on the basis of the ‘adopt and amend’ procedure used by the legislature.

In the July 2022 ruling, the Court found that the enacting and amending of the Acts during the same legislative session violated the purpose of Article 2, § 9, and that under Article 2, § 9, the Legislature has only three options, adopt the initiative as presented, reject the petition, or propose a new alternative law.  In the decision, Judge Shapiro stated the following; “Once the Legislature adopted the Earned Sick Time Act and the Improved Workforce Opportunity Act, it could not amend the laws within the same legislative session. To hold otherwise would effectively thwart the power of the People to initiate laws and then vote on those same laws—a power expressly reserved to the people in the Michigan Constitution.” Also considered and addressed by the Court was the inability of the State to establish why the Legislature substantially amended 2018 PA 337 and 338 other than as a means to deprive the voters of their access to the initiative process.

The ruling is stayed until February 19, 2023, and pending the outcome of appeal, these changes may not go into effect. 

 

For further information, including further discussion of the actions taken by the legislative body in 2018, please see:

Michigan Supreme Court – In re House of Representatives Request for Advisory Opinion Regarding Constitutionality of 2018 PA 368 – 18 Dec. 2019

Foster Swift – Michigan Court of Claims Declares “Adopt and Amend” Unconstitutional – 5 Aug. 2022

Art. 2 Sec. 9 – Michigan Constitution

1954 PA 116 – Michigan Election Law

Mothering Justice et al. v. Nessel – 19 July 2022

Proceedings will continue against LRA Leader Vincent Otti for attacks against civilians and the Government of Uganda

By: Wendy Neeley

Impunity Watch News Staff Writer

Kampala, UGANDA – The International Criminal Court (ICC) recently made a ruling on the case of Vincent Otti. The prosecution has made a “Renewed Request to Terminate Proceedings against Vincent Otti on Account of His death.”

Two men that survived the massacre and live with bullets still in their bodies. Photo Courtesy of Justice and Reconciliation Project.

A warrant for the arrest of Vincenti Otti was issued in July of 2005. The warrant of arrest cites Otti’s connections with The Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA). The LRA is an armed group that has been involved in attacks against the Government of Uganda and the Ugandan Army for over 30 years. The warrant alleges that the LRA is responsible for violence such as “murder, abduction, sexual enslavement, mutilation, as well as mass burnings of houses and looting of camp settlements; that abducted civilians, including children, are said to have been forcibly ‘recruited’ as fighters, porters and sex slaves.” Otti was included in the highest level of leadership for the LRA and he is charged with being criminally responsible for six attacks including one which is described as “hacking and shooting civilians.” He is also reportedly responsible for the Ataik Massacre of April 1995 during which LRA soldiers opened fire on 300 civilian men and boys while the women and children were required to watch and applaud the LRA.

However, in October of 2008, the prosecutors requested that the warrant for Otti be withdrawn and offered some preliminary information in support of the claim that Otti had died. Additionally, in March of 2022 the prosecution filed a request to terminate the proceedings against Otti based on his death. The prosecution claims that there is persuasive evidence that Otti was killed around October 2, 2007 in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The prosecution supplemented the claim in May 2022 based on information obtained from the Government of Uganda indicating that Otti was deceased. The evidence presented to the Court include witness statements, reports from media, and interviews from some Ugandan authorities.

However, in considering the evidence the court determined that it is not significant enough to prove the death of Otti. They indicate that there has been no body discovered and no official death certificate issued. As such, the Court determined that it would not be appropriate to terminate the proceedings against Otti and the prosecution’s request was rejected.

 

For further information, please see:

International Criminal Court – Decision on the Prosecution’s ‘Renewed Request to Terminate Proceedings against Vincent Otti on Account of His Death’ – 10 Dec. 2022

International Criminal Court – Warrant of Arrest for Vincent Otti – 8 July 2005

Liu Institute for Global Issues and the Gulu District NGO Forum – The Justice and Reconciliation Project: Field Notes, Remembering the Ataik Massacre April 20th 1995 – 04 Apr. 2007

NTV – How Vincent Otti’s son came to terms with his family’s history – 29 May 2021

With the Supreme Court Ruling to Overturn Restrictions on Gun Control, the U.S. Sees the Frequency of School Shootings Continue to Rise

By: Jessica Senzer

Journal of Global Rights and Organizations, Senior Associate Member

UNITED STATES – On Friday, January 6, 2023, a six-year-old boy shot his teacher at Richneck Elementary School in Newport News, Virginia. Police Chief Steve Drew said that the shooting was not an accidental one and that there was an altercation between the teacher and student that led to the shooting. Following the incident, Newport News Public Schools Superintendent, Dr. George Parker decided to keep the school closed on Monday, January 9, and he stated that “we need to educate our children and we need to keep them safe.” Superintendent Parker further expressed, I’m sounding like a broken record today because I continue to reiterate that… we need to keep the guns out of the hands of our young people.”

People Protesting for Gun Control Outside the Supreme Court. Photo Courtesy of Vox.

Dr. George Parker is not the only American to feel as if inadequate actions have been taken to address the rising concerns regarding gun control in America. Nabeela Syed, a newly elected member of the Illinois state legislature, grew up in Generation Z, a generation that “grew up on active shooter drills.” Syed recently stated that “sometimes it’s frustrating, being a younger person and feeling like we’ve been crying out for this and feeling unheard.” Despite Americans’ consistent pleas for action to be taken to stop the increase in gun violence across the country, the Supreme Court of the United States recently took the opposite actions.

On June 23, 2022, in the now-landmark case New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n, Inc. v. Bruen, the Supreme Court found a New York state concealed carry law to be unconstitutional on the grounds that it violated the Second and 14th Amendments. The concealed carry law required a prospective gun owner to prove that “proper cause” existed before they could legally carry a concealed pistol or revolver in public. The Court held that this “proper cause” requirement prevented law-abiding citizens with self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms.

In the opinion, Justice Thomas references two major gun rights cases, District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago. Both of these historic gun rights cases recognize the right to keep and bear arms inside the home for purposes of self-defense. The Bruen opinion, however, expanded the constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms, holding that an individual also has the right to carry a gun for self-defense outside of the home. Amidst concerning increases in gun violence nationwide and sweeping pleas for more gun control, the Supreme Court acted contrary to the cries of the American people, and the repercussions are palpable.

For further information, please see:

CNN – 6-year-old in custody after shooting teacher in Virginia, police chief says – Jan. 7, 2023

NYSBA – The Supreme Court’s Bruen Decision and Its Impact: What Comes Next? – Aug. 9, 2022

U.S. News – Growing Into Leadership After Growing Up With Shootings – Nov. 28, 2022