International Law: Effectiveness of ICC in Genocide Victim Reparations

This essay critically examines the effectiveness of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in providing reparations to victims of genocide, both domestically and internationally. The paper begins with an abstract that highlights the international community's commitment to honoring victims and survivors of genocide and the role of the ICC in affirming solidarity with victims of human rights violations. It then delves into a literature review, drawing on key sources to explore the concept of genocide as a crime against humanity and the legal principles of accountability. The essay analyzes the ICC's legal framework, including the rules and statutes that govern reparations, and assesses the challenges faced in implementing these laws. The study emphasizes the importance of effective implementation, addressing technical and procedural challenges, and considering the perspectives of governments, nationals, and international courts. The paper also explores how the ICC's approach to reparations, which often requires convictions before reparations can be issued, has been challenged by separate trust funds. The essay concludes by summarizing the main issues, debates, and experiences that arise from the implementation of laws regarding the reparation of genocide victims, providing insights into the complexities of achieving justice and reconciliation.

INTERNATIONAL LAW 1
INTERNATIONAL LAW
By (Student’s Name)
Professor’s Name
College
Course
Date

INTERNATIONAL LAW 2
INTERNATIONAL LAW
'Discuss the effectiveness of the International Criminal Court in aiding victim reparations
in regard to domestic and international genocide cases'.
ABSTRACT
The international community honor victims and survivors of such things as genocides. In
honoring the victims the international community through international criminal court stands in
affirm solidarity with victims of violation of human rights. The international community is
convinced that adopting a victim oriented perspective affirms its human solidarity with victims
of violations through adopting the international law. Within the law it contains, legal principles
of accountability, justice and the rule of law.
Even in adapting the help for these challenging situations, there have been a lot of
challenges on the effectiveness of the reparation system that is chosen by the international
criminal court on genocide victims. Many organizations have understood the need to provide a
comprehensive support to the victims who have been affected by crimes against humanity. A lot
of initiatives from the international concerns have shown that their concern is actually not about
whether it is the right of the genocide victims to be awarded reparation. The International
Criminal Court already has sounded a legal concern about the right of reparation that should be
given to genocide victims. The Court has also given detailed expositions on how the different
form of reparation might also take place.
The concern of this paper then is the effective implementation of the right reparation to
the genocide victim. The paper explores the practice of governments, nationals and international
courts and commissions on trying to consider the rhetoric that involves application, process,
implementation and enforcement of these laws. The paper even analyzes the legal practice and

INTERNATIONAL LAW 3
how it directly benefits the community affected by the genocide. The paper analyses most of the
technical and procedural challenges that policy makers undergo in trying to help the genocide
victims under reparation. One of the key aims of the study is to provide an analysis of the
aspects of the International Criminal Court and its different statute and how they relate to the
important legal statute and rules that will make the reparation more competent in relation to the
legal statutes. The ICC rules suggest that reparations only work after convictions are made.
Separate trust funds have existed to doubt this move by claiming that victims are not supposed to
complement the operations of the courts and how the reparation procedure is carried out. It is
such places of contradictions that the report aims at clarifying and identifying any possible
solutions. This report attempts to summarize the main issues, debates and experiences that arise
from the implementation of the laws regarding reparation of genocide victims.
Literature review
Genocide is considered a crime against humanity. Just like war crimes and abhorrent
crimes. All these kind of crimes and the perpetrators are considered as enemies of all the
mankind. The perpetrators have to be held account as possible. In any case the perpetrators are
within the help of any government and organizations that enabled them to abuse any of the
crime, and then they too should not escape any liability. It is from the analysis of Bilsky and
Klagsbrun (2018), that re affirms every single aspect of recognizing how perpetrators should
always be held responsible for crimes against humanity. The author reaffirms each of the every
aspect of the jurisprudence of the national and the international criminal courts. The author
explains why each of the aspect of the genocide reparation should be done since it has always
been confirmed that crimes within this law are crimes against humanity1.
1 Bilsky, Leora, and Rachel Klagsbrun. "The Return of Cultural Genocide?." European Journal of International Law 29, no. 2 (2018):
373-396.

INTERNATIONAL LAW 4
In another text Janssen and Kool (2017), reparation for genocide and other crime
violations have traditionally conceived in the context of state responsibility. The progressive
recognition, however, rejects the state’s responsibility and introduces aspects of international
responsibility in implementing reparation. The progressive recognition views this as a
responsibility of the international human rights law citing every aspect of the Second World
War. From the dying effects of the Second World War, it became an international duty to apply
principles of reparation in various fundamental ways. For the text, reparation is understood as a
right of victims not supposed to be implemented as an act of interstate prerogative, but as an act
of compassion and charity.
For Janssen and Kool (2017), reparation is an act of moral imperativeness. The main
objective of the reparation is mending what is broken. For the text, it does not matter how the
reparation is implemented, it effectiveness is only analyzed at the moment where a resolution has
been reached between the two parties2. Amending what has been broken is very important.
Reparation solving genocide is as effective as individual and societal aims of democracy,
reconciliation, consolidation, and rehabilitation have been achieved to restore law3. Most
effectively, the implementation can be effective if it serves to overcome the traditional prejudice
about marginalizing certain sectors of the international community on contributing to the
reparation of genocide victims.
Finally, the text analyzes the procedural challenge that come up during reparation. During
a procedural implementation, there are a lot of challenging factions that come up. Insufficient
outreaches and consultations becomes a challenge in the process of implementing reparation to
2 Ludi, R., and Goda, N. J. Reparations, victims, and trauma in the wake of the Holocaust. (2018).112
3 Janssen, P., & Kool, R. Recognising Victimhood: Lessons from the International Criminal Court and Mass Claim Programmes for
the Compensation Procedure Parallel to the Trial of International Crimes in the Netherlands. Netherlands International Law
Review, 64(2), (2017).237-257.

INTERNATIONAL LAW 5
the genocide victims. The international criminal court also finds it particularly difficult to
implement the factions of the people with special needs cases. People with special need are
supposed to be subjected to a special kind of reparation when they are victims. However, it
becomes quite difficult to effectively get reparation for this special group of people. Lastly, the
effectiveness of reparations cannot be fully implemented if the victims cannot be subjected to the
correct reparation if they are not around or cannot be found. It becomes challenging to subject
the correct implementation with the absence of these victims.
Bibliography
Bilsky, Leora, and Rachel Klagsbrun. "The Return of Cultural Genocide?." European Journal of
International Law 29, no. 2 (2018): 373-396.
Ludi, R., and Goda, N. J. Reparations, victims, and trauma in the wake of the Holocaust.
(2018).112
Janssen, P., & Kool, R. Recognising Victimhood: Lessons from the International Criminal Court
and Mass Claim Programmes for the Compensation Procedure Parallel to the Trial of

INTERNATIONAL LAW 6
International Crimes in the Netherlands. Netherlands International Law Review, 64(2),
(2017).237-257.