Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo <i>v.</i> Uganda)

1 War and armed conflict — Violations of international humanitarian law — Compensation — Armed conflict between the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda — Judgment of the International Court of Justice of 19 December 2005 establishing Uganda’s responsibility for breaches of law on use of force and international humanitarian law — Obligation to make reparations — Parties to agree on mutually acceptable reparations — Failure to reach agreement — ICJ to determine reparations — Occupation — Uganda the Occupying Power in Ituri — Duty of vigilance — Responsibility for damage caused by third parties Claims — Democratic Republic of the Congo’s claims for compensation and satisfaction — Principles applicable to deciding reparations — Whether Uganda liable to make reparations for all damage in Ituri — Impact of Uganda’s duty of vigilance — Whether Uganda liable to make reparations for acts of irregular forces outside Ituri — Whether Uganda liable to make reparations for supporting acts of irregular armed forces outside Ituri — Sufficiently direct and certain causal nexus — Whether causal nexus depending on nature of primary obligation — Whether causal nexus different for acts within and outside Ituri — Proof — Burden of proof — Burden of proof different depending on subject-matter and nature of dispute — Uganda’s burden of proof in respect of injury in Ituri — Standard of proof — Whether standard of proof lower where multiple victims of armed conflict — Whether standard of proof lower at reparations phase than at merits phase Evidence before international courts and tribunals — Impact of armed conflict on evidence gathering — Impact of passage of time on evidence gathering — Evidence on file insufficient to reach decision on compensation due — Reliance on evidence not filed by Parties — Reliance on United Nations reports — Reliance on report by Court-appointed experts — Whether absence of adequate evidence precluding award of compensation — Approach where adequate evidence lacking — Equitable considerations — Compensation awarded as global sum 2 Damages — Damage to persons — Loss of life — Injury to persons — Rape and sexual violence — Recruitment of child soldiers — Population displacement — Difficulty in establishing number of civilians killed, injured and raped, child soldiers recruited and population displaced — Insufficiency of evidence of Democratic Republic of the Congo — Uganda responsible for considerable part of damage — Compensation awarded as global sum — Damage to property — Damage in Ituri — Damage outside Ituri — Insufficiency of DRC’s evidence — Insufficiency of information in Court-appointed expert’s report — Compensation awarded as global sum — Damage to property of Société nationale d’électricité and military property — Claims dismissed for lack of evidence — Damage relating to natural resources — Methodology of Court-appointed expert convincing — Damage relating to exploitation of minerals — Gold, diamonds and coltan — Compensation awarded as global sum — Tin and tungsten — Claims dismissed for lack of evidence — Damage relating to flora — Coffee and timber — Compensation awarded as global sum — Deforestation — Claim dismissed for lack of evidence — Damage relating to fauna — Most damage occurring in Ituri — Compensation awarded as global sum — Macroeconomic damage — Whether need to decide if macroeconomic damage was compensable — DRC’s failure to show sufficiently direct and certain causal nexus — Claim dismissed — Whether overall sum within Uganda’s financial capacity to pay — No need to consider financial burden imposed on Uganda — Compensation to be paid in five annual instalments Claims — Democratic Republic of the Congo’s claim for satisfaction — Request that Uganda prosecute officers and soldiers of Uganda Peoples’ Defence Forces — Whether Uganda already having obligation to prosecute — Request for payment of money into trust fund for reconciliation of Hema and Lendu in Ituri — Payment already covered by compensation awarded — Request for payment for non-material harm — Payment already covered by compensation awarded — Costs — DRC’s request to be awarded costs of proceedings — Whether reason to depart from general rule that each Party having to bear its own costs — Interest — No basis to award pre-judgment interest — Award of post-judgment interest — No reason for Court to remain seised of case