I find the contributions refreshing and interesting. However, there appears to be a presumption that the Outreach policy and the program overseeing its implementation is properly constituted and efficient. This may not be the case after all. A cursory observation of the ICC institutional framework reveals that the Outreach Program as presently constituted needs to be re-examined and re-organized. There is a need to seriously reconsider the constitution of the program, its mission and functions. The job description of the staff deployed to this very important function must be well defined. Persons deployed to conduct this function must be selected on the basis of proven professional ability, competence and experience. Diversity must be respected and the variety of institutional and professional resources required attaining defined and assigned goals provided.

Due to my involvement with some situations at the ICC and my prior experience at the ICTR and the Special Court for Sierra Leone, I can make an informed contribution on this important matter. The ICTR and the Special Court for Sierra Leone had very successful Outreach Programs. A key attribute of success was the professionalism and experience of the staff deployed to the Outreach Program and the material resources placed at their disposal. From an institutional perspective, although these professionals functioned within the Registry, it provided assistance and services to all the independent organs of the court, including the defense. There was never ever any perception of a conflation of the duties or roles to the extent of the Outreach Program officials acting as spokespersons for the Office of the Prosecutor or Judges.

There exists a multiplicity of tools and professional resources available for a successful implementation of an Outreach Program. Some of these may be more formal like in the case of diplomatic engagement, state co-operation. Others may be targeted, like in the case of victims of crimes coming within the jurisdiction of the court or towards potential perpetrators of crimes in conflict situations. The Outreach Program must be sufficiently proactive to educate and persuade State Parties and Non State Parties to the Rome Statute to bring their national laws closer to or in conformity with the Rome Statute. This is not the duty of the Prosecutor. The Outreach Program of the ICC must do more in this and other regards so as to free the Prosecutor to concentrate on functions falling within her mandate.

The ICC Outreach must assert its independence in its relation with international and national NGOs. Many of them may support the same objectives like the ICC but their missions and objectives may be political or even controversial. Where there is a perception that members of some in the NGO community with a hostile political or activist agenda are driving or influencing the policies of the ICC by virtue of their participation in the Outreach Program, this may negatively impact on state co-operation on which the ICC depends to realize its mandate. Only a diverse, professional, experienced and competent team will be able to make this useful distinction.