Join    
 

Global Justice Center Blog

International Criminal Court Upholds Conviction of Lord’s Resistance Army Commander

Ruling in Case Against Dominic Ongwen Sets Historic Precedent on Reproductive Autonomy

NEW YORK/THE HAGUE  — The International Criminal Court today upheld the conviction of Dominic Ongwen, a former commander of the Lord’s Resistance Army, a rebel force that operated in Uganda for decades.

In 2021, Ongwen was found guilty of 61 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Northern Uganda between 2002 and 2005. This included many sexual and gender-based crimes such as forced marriage and forced pregnancy, neither of which had previously tried at the ICC.

The Global Justice Center, Amnesty International, Women’s Initiatives for Gender Justice, and Dr. Rosemary Grey filed an amicus brief on the crime of forced pregnancy in the case in December of 2021. They presented this analysis to the court during appeal hearings in February of this year. In its ruling today, the court affirmed this analysis and found that the legal interest behind the crime of forced pregnancy is “woman’s reproductive health and autonomy and the right to family planning,” and that national abortion laws are irrelevant to the court’s analysis of the crime.

Akila Radhakrishnan, President of the Global Justice Center, issued the following statement:

“Today’s ruling is a victory not only for the victims of Dominic Ongwen, but for all victims of sexual and gender-based violence that come to the ICC for justice. This is especially true for victims of forced pregnancy, whose human rights are now further protected by the creation of a historic precedent on reproductive autonomy in international law.” 

Alix Vuillemin, Advocacy Director at Women’s Initiatives for Gender Justice, issued the following statement:

“Today, the crime of ‘forced pregnancy’ was recognized by the ICC as the incomparable violence done to women who are raped, forcibly made pregnant, and confined with the intent to keep them pregnant. As we said in the 1990s in pushing for the criminalisation of these acts, with forced pregnancy, the invasion of the body and self is total. Women are being treated as chattel for the purpose of reproduction, which is another form of gender enslavement. Decades later, with this judgment, the ICC has given us sharper tools to advance the recognition, accountability and prevention of this violence.”

Matt Cannock, Amnesty International's Center for International Justice, issued the following statement:

“The Appeals Chamber's decision will doubtless prove critical for the future of the International Criminal Court's consideration of the crime of forced pregnancy, and it firmly holds the door open to victims of this horrendous crime to access justice before the court and beyond.

“In particular we welcome the court's crucial finding, centered around human rights considerations, that the crime of forced pregnancy seeks to protect women’s ‘reproductive health and autonomy and the right to family planning’ - an absence of which can cause severe physical and psychological harms and lasting personal, social and economic consequences.”

Dr. Rosemary Grey, Lecturer at Sydney Law School, issued the following statement:

“Today, the value of reproductive autonomy was recognised by the International Criminal Court’s highest chamber. The decision affirms that forced pregnancy is among the most serious crimes of international concern, regardless of whether reproductive rights are protected under national law. It’s inspiring — and long overdue — to see the court taking this strong stance on reproductive rights under international law. And inspiring to see the strength of the two women whose evidence supported this historic conviction for forced pregnancy.”

Coalition Letter to Susan Rice on Establishment of Domestic Human Rights Institution

Last October, President Biden proclaimed that the United States must demonstrate that its “commitment to human rights begins at home.” We, the undersigned, strongly support that sentiment and believe that this principle – that human rights begin at home – should be the basis for a bold approach to ensuring that everyone in the United States enjoys the rights and freedoms guaranteed by international human rights law.

The United States has been a historic leader in the global effort to establish universal standards of human rights protection, beginning with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. At the same time, while state and local authorities have increasingly looked to human rights standards to improve the lives of people, the federal government has not comprehensively integrated the United States’ human rights obligations into domestic law and policy and has resisted efforts to create domestic human rights monitoring, enforcement, and accountability mechanisms. Thus, as we mark the adoption of the Universal Declaration seventy-four years ago this month, we urge the Biden administration to make good on the President’s words by reinvigorating that leadership and starting the process of establishing a National Human Rights Institution (“NHRI”).

Read the Full Letter

Joint Statement at NGO Committee consultation with ECOSOC accredited NGOs

This is a group statement. We welcome the convening of this important meeting, mandated by paragraph 61(a) of ECOSOC resolution 1996/31. However, we deeply regret that this is only the second meeting since 1996 and urge Committee members to fulfil this mandate and organise consultations with accredited NGOs prior to each Committee session.

Resolution 1996/31 acknowledges the breadth of NGOs’ expertise, their capacity to support the UN’s work, and the need to consider the full diversity of NGOs at all levels. The Committee on NGOs is the gatekeeper to civil society access, and entrusted with monitoring the relationship between NGOs and the UN. Yet, the Committee’s practices violate its mandate.

Several Committee members ask repetitive and politically motivated questions to defer applications for consultative status for several years outside the scope of what NGOs are required to submit in their applications under ECOSOC resolution 1996/31. These arbitrary deferrals amount to de facto rejections - and affect NGOs working on human rights, democracy and the rule of law in particular. This is a form of reprisals against NGOs for attempting to engage with and contribute to the UN’s work.

Read the Full Letter