Abstract: International Criminal Court (ICC): Structure, Framework, and Global Role
The International Criminal Court (ICC), established by the Rome Statute of 1998 and operational since 2002, stands as the world’s first permanent international tribunal dedicated to prosecuting individuals responsible for genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and the crime of aggression. Functioning as a complementary institution to national courts, the ICC embodies a framework designed to ensure accountability, uphold the rights of defendants, and advance victim-centered justice. Its structure comprises independent prosecutorial, judicial, and defence functions, while also granting unprecedented participatory rights to victims, who may engage directly in proceedings and seek reparations.
Since inception, the Court has overseen 33 cases, issued 61 arrest warrants, and delivered landmark judgments, including Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, the first conviction for conscripting child soldiers, and Prosecutor v. Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo, a milestone in applying the doctrine of command responsibility and recognizing sexual violence as war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Institutional Overview
| Aspect | Details |
|---|---|
| Staff Members | Over 900 from approximately 100 states |
| Official Languages | Six – English, French, Arabic, Chinese, Russian, Spanish |
| Headquarters | The Hague, Netherlands |
| Established | 2002 under the Rome Statute (1998) |
With field presences in multiple conflict-affected regions, the ICC has expanded both its institutional and global reach.
Challenges Facing the ICC
- State non-cooperation and jurisdictional restrictions
- Logistical obstacles in conflict zones
- Lack of an independent enforcement mechanism
- Allegations of political bias and regional selectivity
These issues have raised legitimacy concerns and limited the Court’s ability to fully achieve its mandate.
Global Impact and Significance
Despite these limitations, the ICC remains a cornerstone of international criminal justice, shaping legal standards, amplifying victims’ voices, and reinforcing accountability for grave international crimes. Strengthening cooperation among states and addressing structural limitations are crucial for enhancing the ICC’s effectiveness in the pursuit of global justice.
What Is ICC?
“The International Criminal Court (ICC) investigates and, where warranted, tries individuals charged with the gravest crimes of concern to the international community: genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and the crime of aggression.”[1]
The Court actively contributes to the global effort to eliminate impunity, which is the lack of accountability for individuals who commit grave international crimes, by ensuring they face justice and that such acts and violations are effectively prevented from happening again in the future. The Court stands as a leading agent for making the assailants responsible and accountable for their crimes.
The ICC does not replace any national court or justice system but seeks to complement and support them. It is the world’s first permanent international criminal court, operated and administered by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, an international treaty adopted during a conference of 160 states on 17 July 1998. The ICC began its operations on 1 July 2002 from its seat in The Hague, Netherlands.
Inside the Framework
The Court presides over proceedings and ensures fairness in delivering justice. The Office of the Prosecutor, an independent organ of the Court, is the only one that can bring cases before the Court and is responsible for preliminary examinations and investigations.[2]
Rights and Fairness in Proceedings
- The Court ensures fair and public proceedings for defendants to guarantee their rights.
- “All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt before the Court.”[3]
- The counsel for the defense is independent and not part of the ICC staff.
Both voices of the victims and defendants are heard in the courtroom. The Rome Statute grants victims unprecedented rights to participate in ICC proceedings.[4]
Victim and Witness Protection
- Victims and witnesses appearing before the Court are protected under a range of measures established by the ICC.
- Individuals at risk due to testimony are safeguarded through security measures.
- The Court engages directly with affected communities to facilitate communication, participation, and a sense of ownership in judicial proceedings.
Institutional Overview
| Category | Details |
|---|---|
| Staff Members | Over 900 staff members from approximately 100 States. |
| Official Languages | English, French, Arabic, Chinese, Russian, and Spanish. |
| Liaison & Country Offices | 1 ICC Liaison Office to the United Nations in New York and 6 ICC Country Offices and Field Presences located in:
|
| Working Languages | English and French |
Petition Overview Before the Court
- 33 cases have been brought before the Court, with some cases having multiple suspects.
- 61 arrest warrants have been issued by ICC judges.
- 22 people have been detained in the ICC Detention Centre and appeared before the Court.
- Charges have been dropped against 8 people due to their deaths.
- 9 summonses to appear have been issued by ICC judges.
- 11 convictions and 4 acquittals have been delivered by the judges.
Inside the Courtroom: Cases That Shaped Justice
The Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo
ICC Case No: ICC-01/04-01/06
The Lubanga case is the first full trial and conviction case since the establishment of the ICC. Lubanga was convicted under Article 8(2)(e)(vii) of the Rome Statute for conscripting, enlisting, and using children under the age of 15 to participate in armed conflict. The trial lasted around six years, reflecting procedural complexity. This case established the legal and procedural foundation for future ICC prosecutions.
Case Background
| Country | Democratic Republic of the Congo |
|---|---|
| Facts | Lubanga, founder of the Union des Patriotes Congolais (UPC), served as commander-in-chief of its armed military wing. The UPC, dominated by the Hema ethnic group, was established in 2000. Armed conflict has been pervasive in the northeastern Ituri region since the 1990s, involving multiple African states such as Uganda and Rwanda, and linked to the multinational trade in Congolese minerals. Nearly three million people have been killed due to ongoing violence, along with atrocities such as sexual violence, torture, and mutilation. |
Legal Issues
- Use of child soldiers under Article 8(2)(e)(vii) of the Rome Statute.
- Liability as a co-perpetrator pursuant to Article 25(3)(a) of the Rome Statute.
Legal Provisions
Articles 8(2)(e)(vii) and 25(3)(a) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
Court Analysis
The offense is committed once a child under 15 joins an armed group, whether voluntarily or under compulsion. The degree of voluntariness may influence sentencing. Due to prosecutorial deficiencies, the judges declined to expand the definition of “using children in hostilities” to include sexual violence. Attempts to modify charges post-trial were rejected by both the Trial and Appeals Chambers.
Decision
The Court found the accused guilty and delivered the following decisions:
| Date | Decision |
|---|---|
| 14 March 2012 | Found guilty of war crimes for enlisting and conscripting children under 15 years and using them to participate actively in hostilities. |
| 10 July 2012 | Sentenced to 14 years of imprisonment. |
| 1 December 2014 | Verdict and sentence confirmed by the Appeals Chamber. |
| 19 December 2015 | Transferred to a prison facility in the DRC to serve his sentence. |
| 7 August 2012 | Trial Chamber I issued decision on principles for reparations to victims. |
| 3 March 2015 | Appeals Chamber amended the Trial Chamber’s order for reparations. |
| 21 October 2016 | Plan for symbolic collective reparations approved. |
| 15 December 2017 | Trial Chamber II set Lubanga’s liability for collective reparations at USD 10,000,000. |
| 14 December 2020 | Chamber approved implementation of collective service-based reparations to victims. |
The Prosecutor v. Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo
ICC Case No: ICC-01/05-01/08
The Bemba case was a pivotal moment for victim-centered justice before the appeal. It is the first ICC conviction case to convict a military commander under the responsibility of command. It is a milestone in international law in considering the Doctrine of Command Responsibility. The conviction was not for committing the crime by himself, but for failing to preclude it or punish the wrongdoers, which is a significant point under Article 28(a). It is a landmark case that pointed out that rape and sexual violence are war crimes and crimes against humanity.
| Country | Central African Republic (CAR) |
|---|
Facts
In 2002, Bemba was invited to the Central African Republic by Ange-Félix Patassé, who was the president of the Central African Republic from 1993 until 2003. He was facing threats to his power by his former army chief of staff, François Bozizé. Patassé requested military assistance from Bemba and his Movement for the Liberation of Congo (MLC) troops to defend himself. Bemba consented and sent his troops to CAR. During that time, Bemba’s forces committed several massive crimes against civilians, including murders, rapes, and pillaging.
Legal Issues
- Did Mr. Bemba have effective command and control over the MLC troops deployed in the Central African Republic?
- Did Mr. Bemba take all necessary and reasonable measures to prevent or punish crimes committed by MLC troops under his command?
- Can a commander be held criminally responsible for the acts of his subordinates even if he did not have actual knowledge of the crimes being committed?
Legal Provisions
- Article 7(1)(A) of the Rome Statute
- Articles 7(1)(G) and 8(2)(E)(Vi) of the Rome Statute
- Article 8 of the Rome Statute
- Article 8(2)(C)(I) of the Rome Statute
- Article 8(2)(E)(V) of the Rome Statute
- Article 28 of the Rome Statute
- Article 7 of the Rome Statute
Court Analysis
The Trial Chamber found that Bemba was in full control of his troops and knew they were committing serious crimes but didn’t do anything to stop or hold them accountable. The Trial Chamber also emphasized the severity of the crimes. The court came to its decision after closely examining all the evidence, including witness testimonies. The case highlighted the importance of leadership responsibility in preventing war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Decision
- 21 March 2016: Trial Chamber III declared Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo guilty beyond any reasonable doubt of two counts of crimes against humanity (murder and rape) and three counts of war crimes (murder, rape, and pillaging).
- 21 June 2016: Trial Chamber III sentenced Mr. Bemba to 18 years of imprisonment.
- 8 June 2018: The Appeals Chamber found errors that affected the Trial Chamber III’s conviction.
- 14 August 2009: Pre-Trial Chamber II granted interim release to Mr. Bemba, but this decision was reversed on appeal on 2 December 2009.
- 8 June 2018: After acquittal, the Appeals Chamber found no reason to keep Mr. Bemba in custody for alleged crimes in CAR.
- 12 June 2018: Trial Chamber VII ordered interim release under specific conditions.
- 17 September 2018: Trial Chamber VII sentenced Mr. Bemba to one year imprisonment and fined him EUR 300,000 for offences against the administration of justice.
Victims Participation
Who Is Considered as a Victim?
“Victims are individuals who have suffered harm as a result of the commission of any crime within the jurisdiction of the ICC. Victims may also include organizations or institutions that have sustained harm to property dedicated to religion, education, art, science, or charitable purposes.”
Rights of Victims
- Victims can send information to the Office of the Prosecutor and ask to initiate an investigation.
- They are entitled to participate in proceedings through a legal representative, allowing them to express opinions independently of the Prosecution or Defence.
- Victims can challenge the admissibility or relevance of evidence presented by the parties.
- They can seek reparation for the harm they have suffered.
How Can Victims Participate?
If the Court considers it appropriate, victims may present their point of view directly to the judges at various stages in the proceedings. Such participation is generally through legal representation. They are required to fill out an application for participation form to facilitate involvement.
Behind the Court: Challenges and Limitations Faced by ICC
Cooperation and Enforcement Challenges
Many state parties are unwilling to cooperate with the Court’s requests for arrest and surrender. As of now, the ICC has issued 46 arrest warrants, with only 21 of them executed with the help of member states.
Jurisdictional Limitations
The ICC’s jurisdiction is limited to crimes committed after July 1, 2002, and only to four major international crimes: genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and aggression. These limitations undermine the Court’s relevance to contemporary conflicts and contribute to impunity gaps in international justice.
Logistical and Investigative Hurdles
The ICC often investigates in remote or conflict-affected areas, facing obstacles such as security risks, evidence deterioration, witness protection concerns, cultural and linguistic barriers, and limited access—all of which hinder evidence collection.
Absence of Enforcement Mechanism
The Court must rely on state authorities to execute arrest warrants and enforcement decisions. This dependence creates operational weaknesses, including detention challenges and an inability to apprehend suspects or enforce sentences.
Political Challenges and Accusations of Bias
There have been increasing accusations that political interests external to the Court have biased its judicial activities. By providing the UN Security Council (UNSC) with the power to refer or block cases, the ICC may be perceived as subordinate to the political interests of non-member states with veto power.
Legitimacy Concerns
The ICC’s effectiveness in delivering justice is debated, with critics arguing that its case selection has been disproportionately focused on African nations. This perception prompted the African Union to consider a “Withdrawal Strategy from the ICC,” which was approved by its highest authority.
Conclusion
The ICC was created to deliver justice to victims of the world’s most serious crimes when their own countries could not. Over the years, it has made strides in holding individuals accountable, supporting victims, and strengthening international law. However, persistent challenges—such as lack of cooperation, political interference, and enforcement difficulties—continue to hinder its effectiveness. To truly serve global justice, the ICC must be strengthened through enhanced cooperation and meaningful reforms.
References:
- International Criminal Court, ‘About the Court’ (International Criminal Court) <https://www.icc-cpi.int/about/the-court> accessed 9 July 2025.
- ibid
- Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (adopted 17 July 1998) 2187 UNTS 90 art 66
- International Criminal Court, ‘About the Court’ (International Criminal Court) <https://www.icc-cpi.int/about/the-court> accessed 9 July 2025
- ibid
- ibid
- Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (adopted 17 July 1998) 2187 UNTS 90 art 8(2)(e)(vii)
- Mark A Drumbl, ‘Prosecutor v Thomas Lubanga Dyilo: Decision sur la Confirmation des Charges’ (2007) 101 American Journal of International Law 841
- Phil Clark, ‘In the Shadow of the Volcano: Democracy and Justice in Congo’ [2007] Dissent 29, 31 <http://dissentmagazine.org/article/?article=724> accessed 12 July 2025
- Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (adopted 17 July 1998) 2187 UNTS 90 art 8(2)(e)(vii)
- ibid art 25(3)(a)
- ibid
- Prosecutor v Lubanga Dyilo Case No ICC-01/04-01/06 (ICC, 14 March 2012) <https://www.internationalcrimesdatabase.org/Case/814> accessed 12 July 2025
- International Criminal Court, ‘Prosecutor v Lubanga Dyilo: Case Information Sheet’ (Case No ICC-01/04-01/06, March 2020) <https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/CaseInformationSheets/LubangaEng.pdf> accessed 12 July 2025
- Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (adopted 17 July 1998) 2187 UNTS 90 art 28(a)
- REDRESS, ‘The Prosecutor v Jean-Pierre Bemba’ (REDRESS) <https://redress.org/casework/the-prosecutor-v-jean-pierre-bemba/> accessed 18 July 2025
- International Crimes Database, ‘The Prosecutor v Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo’ (International Crimes Database) <https://www.internationalcrimesdatabase.org/Case/3320/Bemba> accessed 18 July 2025
- ibid
- International Criminal Court, ‘Case Information Sheet: The Prosecutor v Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo 1’ (8 June 2018) <https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/CaseInformationSheets/BembaEng.pdf> accessed 18 July 2025
- International Criminal Court, Understanding the International Criminal Court (2020) <https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/Publications/understanding-the-icc.pdf> accessed 18 July 2025
- Vision IAS, ‘International Criminal Court (ICC)’ Current Affairs Monthly Magazine (22 June 2024) <https://visionias.in/current-affairs/monthly-magazine/2024-06-22/international-relations/international-criminal-court-icc-1> accessed 22 July 2025
- TheLaw.Institute, ‘Exploring the Challenges Faced by the International Criminal Court’ (LAW NOTES) <https://thelaw.institute/application-of-ihl/challenges-international-criminal-court/> accessed 22 July 2025
- ibid
- ibid
- Good Governance Africa, ‘Ten Years of the ICC: Politicised Puppet or Legal Pioneer?’ (1 October 2012) <http://www.legal-tools.org/doc/37da68/> accessed 22 July 2025
- Zhu Dan, ‘Who Politicizes the International Criminal Court?’ (FICHL Policy Brief Series No 28, Torkel Opsahl Academic EPublisher, 2014) 1 <https://www.toaep.org/pbs-pdf/28-zhu> accessed 22 July 2025
- African Union, ‘Decision on the International Criminal Court’ (Assembly/AU/Dec.622(XXVIII)) [2017] para 8 <https://au.int/sites/default/files/decisions/32520-sc19553_e_original_-assembly_decisions_621-641-_xxviii.pdf> accessed 22 July 2025
