Title Image

William Julié Avocats – News

ICC: Authorisation to investigate the crimes committed in Afghanistan

On 5 March 2020, the ICC Appeals Chamber (AC) authorised the opening of an investigation into the crimes alleged to have been committed on the territory of Afghanistan since 1 May 2003, as well as other alleged crimes that have a nexus to the armed conflict in Afghanistan and are sufficiently linked to the situation in Afghanistan and were committed on the territory of other States Parties to the Rome Statute since 1 July 2002.


ICC : Bosco Ntaganda sentenced to 30 years’ imprisonment by a judgement of 7 November 2019, for 18 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity, committed in Ituri, Democratic Republic of the Congo, in 2002-2003

In its assessment, the Trial Chamber VI of the ICC referenced aggravating circumstances for several of the counts, but failed to find allegations of witness interference as aggravating given a lack of findings on the allegations beyond a reasonable doubt. The Chamber also found no mitigating circumstances warranting reduction of sentence in its analysis. Mr. Ntaganda is granted credit for the time he has served since March 2013. READ MORE

On 14 November 2019, Pre-Trial Chamber III of the International Criminal Court authorised the Prosecutor to proceed with an investigation for the alleged crimes within the ICC’s jurisdiction in the Situation Bangladesh/Myanmar.

Myanmar is not a State Party but Bangladesh ratified the ICC Rome statute in 2010. The Chamber considered that there exists a reasonable basis to believe widespread and/or systematic acts of violence may have been committed that could qualify as the crimes against humanity of deportation across the Myanmar-Bangladesh border and persecution on grounds of ethnicity and/or religion against the Rohingya population.


On 27 November 2019, the ICC Appeal Chamber rejected Mr Bemba’s appeal against the ‘Decision Re-sentencing Mr Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo, Mr Aimé Kilolo Musamba and Mr Jean-Jacques Mangenda Kabongo’ of 17 September 2018, which had sentenced him to one year imprisonment and a fine of 300 000 euros.

The Court found that the Trial Chamber did not fail to comply with its directions on re-sentencing, did not err in law or in fact, nor did it impose a disproportionate sentence. It stressed that : “3. It is unhelpful to compare the sentences imposed on different convicted persons without reference to the specific facts and individual circumstances of each person. 4. It is not an error to consider solvency as a relevant factor for the determination of a fine. Solvency is a relevant consideration in numerous jurisdictions and its underlying rationale is the need to ensure a deterrent effect.”