Countries frequently threaten to take other countries to the International Criminal Court. In Latin America, they go one step further. Every day, claims are filed against presidents and government leaders. Usually these claims are pointless because they are outside the jurisdiction of the Court. But the ICC has effectively become a tool for spreading alarm, a sort of 'bogeyman'. Lawyers are worried.

Tweet

By Peter Hooghiemstra and Luisa Lopez

The ICC was established in 1998 to prosecute persons suspected of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. The ICC headquarters in The Hague is visited every day by an endless stream of individuals and groups who are submitting requests for prosecution. It's notable that most of these requests seem to be directed at former or current Latin American leaders.

Chávez and Correa
Thus, President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela is accused because of his alleged support for the Colombian guerrilla movement FARC. His counterpart in Ecuador, Rafael Correa, is accused of crimes against humanity by the opposition in his country.

The chance that any of these claims will lead to an investigation by the ICC, let alone a trial, is slim in most cases, say lawyers. According to them it's often a case of determining whether there really is
evidence of 'genocide' or 'crimes against humanity".

Fabián Raimondo, Professor of International Law at the University of Maastricht, is not happy with this development: "The terms 'genocide' and 'crimes against humanity" have increasingly been misused in recent years, which dilutes their meaning. Certain facts and events in the above examples may be very serious and criminal, but they are not necessarily in one of these categories."

He notes that there's a lack of information about the ICC: "Apparently many people know too little about the role, powers and jurisdiction of the ICC. Therefore, the tribunal is abused as a political tool, as a bogeyman."

Asia
Outside Latin America the picture is diverse, says professor of international criminal law Geert-Jan Knoops, "I am personally familiar with an ICC complaint filed by the red shirts, the opposition in Thailand, against the former prime minister."

Thailand doesn't recognize the ICC, but an indictment against the country can still be made, says Knoops, who advised in favour of the indictment. "Thailand didn't know that, which demonstrates that many countries are still ignorant of the precise mechanisms of the ICC."

Africa
In Africa, knowledge of the ICC is better as Herman van Gelderen, head of the African desk of RNW, explains: "Certainly in countries such as Kenya, they know precisely what the ICC is and what things are handled there." That can be explained by the fact that to date the ICC has concentrated on African countries (see box).

Michael Reed-Hurtado of the International Center for Transitional Justice says that the Court must make very clear what it does: "Often acucrate and adequate information is missing. One of the important tasks of the ICC in The Hague is to try to communicate more clearly and to show what it stands for."

Danger
The danger is that the ICC could also become a 'bogyeyman' outside Latin America - a tribunal to which people can lodge complaints to their heart's content. Thereby it won't be used to investigate crimes, but rather to threaten political opponents. And that's easier as long as people are ill-informed about what the Court actually does.

Mr Reed-Hurtado warns: "This overestimation of the scope of the tribunal is increased by the enormous mistrust that prevails in many countries towards their own judicial system. This excessive mistrust is
maintained by the high degree of impunity in many states."

(as)