The ICC’s success cannot be solely determined by counting the number of convictions achieved during its existence. Currently, there are roughly twenty cases in total that are either under investigation or at the preliminary examination stage. Even if these expensive investigations do not result in convictions, the ICC has not failed. Rather, the ICC is still a success if it promotes domestic prosecutions of international atrocities, prevents atrocities from happening, and deters future atrocities. This may be achieved through the successful arrest of a war criminal, or an indictment which may remove a war criminal from a conflict out of fear of arrest. Indictments may prevent atrocities from occurring. The ICC may also prevent future atrocities through a preventive outreach program.

In Part II of this comment, I examine the general information on outreach programs implemented by international tribunals. Based on this information, I note that an effective outreach program must be implemented by the ICC going forward. In Part III, I propose certain outreach strategies that the ICC may implement in the next ten years. One strategy I propose is for the ICC to implement preventive outreach programs, in which the ICC determines at risk countries and tries to spread knowledge and awareness about the ICC before conflicts start. This may prevent atrocities from occurring out of fear that the ICC may scrutinize an individual’s actions and arrest them more easily. I also propose that the ICC implement outreach programs in areas where propaganda has been spread heavily that disputes the work and legitimacy of the ICC. If the ICC seeks to gain support from citizens of countries in which it is conducting an investigation, propaganda cannot go unrebutted for a substantial length of time.

II. Background and the Importance of Outreach Programs

Outreach programs have been implemented for decades to achieve a variety of objectives, including to promote public awareness and peace among affected communities.2 Additionally, outreach programs have been used as a method to deter crimes.3 The ICC itself has recognized that an effective outreach program is necessary to accomplish its goals.4 As seen previously, international tribunals including the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) were not initially as effective as the courts hoped to be because the courts delayed implementing outreach programs. In the ICTY’s 1999 report, the ICTY recognized that the distance between the affected communities of crimes committed in the former Yugoslavia and where these war criminals were prosecuted resulted in difficulties for the ICTY.5 The ICTY, and other international tribunals are complex tribunals that do not conduct criminal proceedings in the country where the crimes occurred.6 Issues due to the distance between trial proceedings and the affected community has also been recognized by the ICTR.

International Tribunals and their workers are often not assimilated within the communities in which they are investigating. War criminals and other individuals are free to release unrebutted propaganda to citizens of their country, portraying international tribunals as illegitimate biased institutions. As a result, many citizens shelter war criminals and do not support international tribunals in their search for justice.7 Therefore, outreach programs are essential for an international tribunal to successfully operate and better conduct investigations.8 Although international tribunals have recognized the importance of outreach programs, international tribunals have trouble establishing successful outreach programs due to the unique nature of an international tribunal.

International Tribunals have previously implemented outreach programs, but have not historically always done so outright following the tribunals inception. As mentioned above, the ICTY initially struggled due to not having an outreach program from its inception in its investigations and trials.9 In fact, the ICTY operated for many years before implementing an outreach program. The ICTY began the process of implementing an outreach program roughly five years after the tribunal was created.10 Once the ICTY began to operate, the court was:

[F]requently politicized and used for propaganda purposes by its opponents who portray the Tribunal as persecuting one over other ethnic groups and mistreating persons detained under its authority.11

These claims went unrebutted for many years. The ICTY was forced to respond to these difficulties and implemented outreach programs to relieve the damage done by propaganda. The court needed to dispel lies about the ICTY’s work. Serbian citizens were exposed to this propaganda for years without any substantial rebuttal efforts by the ICTY. This delay may have created a stigma against the ICTY’s work. As a result, the ICTY did not receive full support when it arrested war criminals.

Other International Tribunals have had success in implementing outreach programs early on in their search for justice.12 The Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL) implemented outreach programs right from when the court started operating. The SCSL conducted town and village meetings to better connect the victims to the court’s workings.13

Additionally, the SCSL provided information on the trials it conducted through video and written materials.14 These outreach programs promoted community involvement and the affected community in Sierra Leone felt involved in the search to obtain justice for the atrocities they suffered. This commitment by the SCSL to engage, communicate, and be transparent with the local population in Sierra Leone may have factored into the success of the SCSL in its prosecutions.

Unlike the ICTY and the SCSL, the ICC was not created to investigate, prosecute, and seek justice in response to crimes committed in a specific conflict or geographic region. Rather, the ICC has jurisdiction over specific crimes listed in the Rome Statute, and may be, at any given time, conducting investigations and prosecutions based on crimes that occurred in vastly distinct countries.15 Further, unlike the SCSL, the ICC conducts trial proceedings in The Hague, which is nowhere near the location where most of the war criminals prosecuted by the ICC committed their crimes.16 Therefore, the ICC has to overcome different obstacles then the ICTY and SCSL, in that it has to formulate outreach programs that tend to different societies with vast different cultures. Despite facing more complex issues on outreach, the ICC must still learn from the difficulties experienced by the ICTY and ICTR, and invest in outreach programs.

When created, the ICC did not initially implement an active outreach program.17 This resulted in “disengagement from on-the-ground situations and from the communities that it was meant to serve.”18 Based on the mistakes of its predecessors, it is crucial that, in the next ten years, the ICC invest in more outreach efforts early on in its new investigations to avoid problems that have plagued international tribunals. The wealth of information available proves the importance of having effective outreach programs. If the ICC does not emphasize outreach moving forward, it will face an uphill battle against propaganda and charges against its legitimacy.

III. Proposals

A. Preventive Outreach

The ICC’s outreach programs were created to:

1. provide accurate and comprehensive information to affected communities regarding the Court’s role and activities;

2. promote greater understanding of the Court’s role during the various stages of proceedings with a view to increasing support for them among the population;

3. foster greater participation of local communities in the activities of the Court;

4. respond to the general concerns and expectations expressed by affected communities and by particular groups within these communities;

5. counter misinformation; and

6. promote access to, and understanding of, judicial proceedings among affected communities.19

Like its predecessors, the ICC focuses outreach efforts on already affected communities. In addition to targeting affected communities, the ICC should implement creative outreach programs to a worldwide audience that may prevent future atrocities from occurring. Therefore, in the next ten years, I urge the ICC to implement preventive outreach programs. This type of program will focus on preventing atrocities from occurring through education and legitimizing the work of the court by providing information worldwide.

B. At-Risk List

The ICC should formulate a list of nations that are at risk for conflicts. This can be done by gathering intel from different State Parties and other government research documents. Countries in which conflicts may be imminent are to be included in this list. Before a conflict occurs, the ICC should disperse information to citizens and the government of these countries. This can be done through a study of the way a country spreads information and news to its citizens. The ICC should use the exact method war criminals or domestic governments communicate to citizens.

The ICC should also provide parties with information on the specific crimes within the ICC’s jurisdiction. The ICC’s goals and missions should also be included. Parties who may engage in a conflict should know about the consequences that certain war crimes may result in. As a result, individuals will be on notice that if they commit a crime within the courts jurisdiction, the ICC will investigate and prosecute them. Further, if the ICC is engaged in countries before conflicts occur, individuals may be reluctant to take certain actions out of fear that the ICC will heavily scrutinize their actions. Ultimately, the ICC may prevent atrocities from occurring when individuals, especially low level military personnel, are on notice that there may be severe consequences to committing “acts of war.” This type of outreach will send a message that international crimes will not be committed with impunity.

C. Worldwide Outreach

As noted above, the ICC’s outreach program focuses its efforts on already affected communities. Rather than solely focus efforts on affected communities, the ICC should implement a worldwide outreach program. Individuals who have very limited knowledge in international law should be aware of the Court’s work. This may be accomplished through social media campaigns and conducting informational sessions on college campuses across the world.

The ICC can employ social media interns in different countries whose job is to spread information on the ICC catered to their geographic region. Interns can work remotely, create creative pages for the ICC in their native language, and frequently update the ICC’s website on the ICC’s work. Additionally, interns can help develop strategies to spread information on the ICC to a larger number of individuals. This may be done through blogging or other methods information is spread in a specific area. Since the ICC may be conducting investigations in multiple countries at once, the ICC needs diverse viewpoints in conducting its work. Interns may contact newspapers and have articles published about the court in local newspapers. Interns may also alert people about upcoming live streams or provide local communities with live updates on court proceedings.

The ICC should also strive to have professors and scholars at universities worldwide educating students and professors on the ICC’s work. If successful, students and professors, who have not done so yet, may strike an interest in the ICC and conduct independent research. Such knowledge about the ICC will spread through word of mouth which can garner more support for the court. Individuals may, as a result, donate to the court, which can increase the ICC’s ability to create new programs. Individuals may also donate money to victims, volunteer their time, and provide better support to the ICC themselves, if possible.

D. Funded Fellowships: Better Diversity?

Currently, the ICC offers multiple internship opportunities for individuals to get exposure to the complexities of international justice with one caveat: the ICC does not provide funding for these internships. Unfunded fellowships prevent many bright and ambitious individuals from contributing their diverse viewpoints to establish programs. Without offering funding, or directions on how to obtain funds, many individuals will shy away from interning or working for the ICC. The ICC suffers as a result, as many ambitious individuals could contribute immensely.

The ICC should provide funded fellowships, especially for students or individuals from areas that have a history of international crimes being committed in them that are within the ICC’s jurisdiction. For example, a fellow from Serbia will have an interesting perspective on international tribunals that can improve ICC programs and work. The ICC can bring individuals of all ages from high risk communities, or who were previously affected by the crimes of war criminals, to provide their perspective on certain issues faced by the ICC. A fellow that was a victim who received justice by the ICC’s prosecution may also help create programs for future victims. If bringing these individuals to The Hague would be too expensive, the ICC can implement remote fellowships. If tasked well, the ICC may have fellows from high risk communities and be able to create and implement effective outreach programs.

E. Rebut Propaganda

In addition to preventive outreach programs, the ICC must establish a policy of responding to propaganda spread regarding the court’s work. In the next ten years, the ICC must be more active when it dispels misinformation. This can be done by actively dispersing information on the court to various countries, even before it has intel that propaganda has been spread. As seen in Serbia, war criminals and even governments may spread propaganda to tarnish the reputation of the ICC. This results in limited participation from the local communities. The ICC already has a tough time arresting indicted individuals. Propaganda further implicates these arrest difficulties. Therefore, the ICC must implement outreach programs to rebut propaganda, which, in return, may result in more citizen participation in arresting war criminals, or individuals may be more willing to provide information. This may be done by implementing the same strategies used by individuals who spread propaganda. The ICC may also drop leaflets or otherwise disseminate documents to rebut propaganda.

IV. Conclusion

Even if the ICC has a low indicted to conviction ratio, the ICC is still a success if it provides affected communities with the power to prosecute war criminals domestically, and deters atrocities from occurring. Atrocities may be prevented by implementing a preventive outreach program. Also, the ICC must rebut propaganda in order to gain better support in its search to arrest individuals. A creative outreach program will accomplish many of the ICC’s goals, as affected communities will be exposed to the ICC’s workings and may be motivated to take over court proceedings themselves. Since the ICC is faced with the task of conducting outreach programs in multiple countries concurrently, the ICC must be creative. The average individual must be recruited by the ICC to spread awareness and communicate with their communities. There cannot be a divide between those who are well exposed to international law, and those who do not have currently have access to information on international law. Ultimately, whether the Rome Statute is still up to task in ten years may be irrelevant if the ICC does a proper job of promoting people to prosecute war criminals domestically, and putting the world on notice that mass atrocities and war crimes will no longer be tolerated.

Endnotes — (click the footnote reference number, or ↩ symbol, to return to location in text).

1. 1.

   Victor Peskin, Courting Rwanda: The Promises and Pitfalls of the ICTR Outreach Programme, 3 J. Int’l Crim. Just. 950, 953 (Sep. 1, 2005), available online, archived, doi. ↩

2. 2.

   Patrick Vinck & Phuong N. Pham, Outreach Evaluation: The International Criminal Court in the Central African Republic, 4 IJTJ 421, 422 (Sep. 11, 2010), available online, doi. ↩

3. 3.

   Id. ↩

4. 4.

   Id. at 3. ↩

5. 5.

   United Nations Security Council, Sixth Annual Report of the International Tribunal For the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia Since 1991, UN Doc. A/54/187-S/1999/846, at 38 (Aug. 25, 1999) [hereinafter Sixth Annual Report], available online. ↩

6. 6.

   Id. at 37. ↩

7. 7.

   Sixth Annual Report, supra note 5, at 38. ↩

8. 8.

   Id. ↩

9. 9.

   Sara Darehshori, Lessons for Outreach from the Ad Hoc Tribunals, The Special Court for Sierra Leone, and the International Criminal Court, 14 New Eng. J. Int’l & Comp. L. 299, 301 (Dec. 3, 2008), paywall, archived. ↩

10. 10.

    Id. ↩

11. 11.

    Sixth Annual Report, supra note 5, at 38. ↩

12. 12.

    Darehshori, supra note 9, at 301. ↩

13. 13.

    Id. at 302. ↩

14. 14.

    Id. ↩

15. 15.

    Darehshori, supra note 9, at 302. ↩

16. 16.

    Id. ↩

17. 17.

    Id. at 303. ↩

18. 18.

    Id. ↩

19. 19.

    Vinck & Pham, supra note 2, at 3. ↩