Time for Complementarity?

Abstract The establishment of the International Crimes Division (ICD) of the High Court of Uganda was conceived under the Juba Peace Agreement on Accountability and Reconciliation as a means of ensuring accountability for serious violations of international law that occurred in northern Uganda in the wake of conflict between the Lord’s Resistance Army and the Uganda Peoples Defence Forces. Twelve years after the ICD’s establishment, Uganda has registered only one successful prosecution. In the case of Uganda v. Thomas Kwoyelo, the accused was detained without trial for over 15 years. Despite the creation of new laws and institutions, Uganda has not complemented the work of the International Criminal Court (ICC). The ICD has faced several challenges that may be instructive for other contexts, including complex investigative procedures, an amnesty law, the absence of victim and witness protection measures, a lack of a mechanism to regulate victim participation and the high turnover and re-assignment of judges and judicial officers. In addition, international criminal law being a relatively novel area within Uganda’s legal system, it is still to be properly understood and applied by judicial officers, prosecutors, defence counsel, victims’ counsel and other stakeholders. To crown it all, there seems to be no political will and commitment towards really seeking justice for the victims of atrocity crimes. Is it time, then, for the ICC to open further investigations into crimes covered by the ICD? Has Uganda failed in its primary mandate and requires the ICC to complement its jurisdiction and ensure no impunity for atrocity crimes? Is the current dire situation of impunity redeemable? The purpose of this reflection piece is to determine the existing gaps within the domestic legal and institutional framework to ensure effective and efficient administration of justice for atrocity crimes. It also offers practical suggestions and best practice recommendations to ensure effective and efficient domestic prosecution of international crimes within the context of Uganda.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of International Criminal Justice
Published
2024-11-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqaf025
Primary Topic
International Law and Human Rights
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Time for Complementarity?

Brian Kalenge, Zoe Mauki
Journal of International Criminal Justice
International Law and Human Rights
article

Time for Complementarity?

Brian Kalenge, Zoe Mauki
article en

Abstract

Abstract The establishment of the International Crimes Division (ICD) of the High Court of Uganda was conceived under the Juba Peace Agreement on Accountability and Reconciliation as a means of ensuring accountability for serious violations of international law that occurred in northern Uganda in the wake of conflict between the Lord’s Resistance Army and the Uganda Peoples Defence Forces. Twelve years after the ICD’s establishment, Uganda has registered only one successful prosecution. In the case of Uganda v. Thomas Kwoyelo, the accused was detained without trial for over 15 years. Despite the creation of new laws and institutions, Uganda has not complemented the work of the International Criminal Court (ICC). The ICD has faced several challenges that may be instructive for other contexts, including complex investigative procedures, an amnesty law, the absence of victim and witness protection measures, a lack of a mechanism to regulate victim participation and the high turnover and re-assignment of judges and judicial officers. In addition, international criminal law being a relatively novel area within Uganda’s legal system, it is still to be properly understood and applied by judicial officers, prosecutors, defence counsel, victims’ counsel and other stakeholders. To crown it all, there seems to be no political will and commitment towards really seeking justice for the victims of atrocity crimes. Is it time, then, for the ICC to open further investigations into crimes covered by the ICD? Has Uganda failed in its primary mandate and requires the ICC to complement its jurisdiction and ensure no impunity for atrocity crimes? Is the current dire situation of impunity redeemable? The purpose of this reflection piece is to determine the existing gaps within the domestic legal and institutional framework to ensure effective and efficient administration of justice for atrocity crimes. It also offers practical suggestions and best practice recommendations to ensure effective and efficient domestic prosecution of international crimes within the context of Uganda.

Journal of International Criminal JusticeVol. 22(5)
St. Augustine International University (UG)
Openalex Percentile: Top 51%
International Law and Human Rights
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Time for Complementarity? — Brian Kalenge, Zoe Mauki · Journal of International Criminal Justice (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS