The
v.
is the
in the International Criminal
(
) which involves the criminal
of a former
. The involvement of
in armed conflicts can make them victims at
and
perpetrators in the future.
is accused of having committed
established by the
, while he took part in the Lord's Resistance Army (
), a rebel
, in northern Uganda.
paramilitary
abducted the
when he was a
in
to make him a
in the conflict.
On his journey with the rebel
, he became a loyal, efficient and fearless
, until he reached the commander level.
who came across
.
tell different versions of his
as a
and perpetrator. Some remember that
.
took risks by setting
free from kidnapping.
, others say they have seen him killing pregnant women and boiling
in pots.
Like other
of the
,
.
had contradictory behaviors that reveal the complexity of his character, but he was obedient and skilled enough to be promoted to a
of leadership in the
.
The
investigated the
in which
.
participated between 2002 and 2005 in refugee camps organized by the government, in the northern region of Uganda.
, in June 2005, when
.
was about twenty-nine
old, his
warrant of arrest was issued by the
, and the same happened to other
participants, including
, the
’s
.
is charged with seventy
listed in the
, counted between
against humanity and
. Regarding
against humanity, the alleged ones are:
and attempted
, torture, sexual
, rape, enslavement, forced marriage as an inhumane act, persecution and other inhumane
. As to
: attack against the civilian population,
and attempted
, rape, sexual
, forced marriage, torture, cruel treatment, outrages upon personal dignity, destruction of property, pillaging,
to recruitment and use of
under the
of fifteen to actively participate in hostilities.
On March 23, 2016, the accusations were confirmed by the Pre-Trial Chamber II and
began to be judged by the
Trial Chamber IX and it is still in progress.
It is
important to mention that there are representatives of the 4,115 victims in the
. They were allowed by the
chamber to participate in the trial giving their testimonies against the
. These
are residents of northern Uganda and have suffered different types of
committed by
.
. At the time of the
, an estimated amount of 35,000
were affected by the attacks.
At present, the international community is before a peculiar
of a
who was a
and became the author of serious
. In
writing sample, the
’s
will be
analyzed and
, the
’s.
.
argues that his criminal
and liability should be excluded under the
31(a)(c)(d) of the
Statue as he was under duress .
, it is said that he suffers from a mental disease that destroys his capacity of appreciating the illegality or nature of his
, especially at the time of the
.
, the
claims that
.
does not understand the charges (based on the opinion of the
’s mental health experts) and all his
should be attributed to
.
's
declares that the accused was abducted by the
in 1987, when he was about nine
old, on his way to school. His mother was allegedly murdered by the
and his father disappeared. In the
,
.
was reportedly indoctrinated, tortured, threatened and beaten by the rebels.
, he would have been forced to practice
of
, as well as to witness scenes of hostilities.
According to the
's lawyers,
.
was led to believe that
, the
of the
, had complete
of the
and required discipline from the
.
,
.
is believed to have supernatural and spiritual powers among
.
.
would have suffered coercion since his abduction and feared to be murdered, especially if he tried to escape.
, it is alleged that his participation in the
and his
of leadership would be justified by his ability to survive, which would be better than others’ under duress.
, it is said by the
that the
's criminal
should be excluded because his
were a consequence of the coercion he suffered under threat of death or serious injury, under the
31(1)(d) of the
.
The
, his family and community were allegedly threatened too. According to the
, he would have acted in a necessary and reasonable manner under the
, satisfying the grounds to exclude the criminal
.
, it is said by
.
's lawyers that
.
’s
and other
were beyond his
. The
is said not to have
to cause harm to
, but only to survive
.
The
30(1) of the
establishes the mental
of
related to the criminal
and liability: “Unless
provided, a person shall be criminally responsible and liable for punishment for a
within the jurisdiction of the
only if the material elements are committed with intent and knowledge.”.
.
argues that the mental
of the
would not be present in the
since the accused would have no
to commit the imputed
. He was allegedly coerced to do so.
The
claims that indirect co-perpetration should not be regarded as a mode of liability because there is no
legal provision in the
.
concept would come from customary international law.
,
.
's
claims that the
did not demonstrate the
's planning and effective participation in the alleged
. There would be neither significant contribution from his
nor any possibility of avoiding the atrocities. His behavior would have been based on reasonableness and necessity under duress.
As to the
of forced marriage, it would be subsumed by the
of sexual
and it could not be considered cumulatively with
of
based on gender, as there would be no
to commit them.
.
's
argues that he could not deny women offered to him as wives because
.
's idea was to increase the army with the reproduction of new
,
to recruitment.
The
alleges that the
of 18
old, which serves as a marker for adulthood and criminal
before the
, has little relevance for a former
. The
did not have a normal childhood for he was raised without education. His performance as a
would be indescribable since his life was much more experiential and not intellectual.
Concerning the
’s
, it is understood that the
was a structured, organized and hierarchical
with discipline, ranks and promotions.
.
would be in a
of authority and he would have
over the troops.
he would be aware of the
, acting as a senior commander, and becoming the biggest one in 2005, an essential participant in the
's
.
.
's compulsory wives, as well as former commanders, former
and abductees of the
witnessed
.
participation in the armed conflict as a
.
As
Fatou Bensouda pointed out at the opening statement at
, the
was a structured and hierarchical organization.
, the general commander, was at the top of the organization called "
Altar". Below
were four brigades: Sinia, Gilva, Trinkle and Stockree. Bensouda highlighted that “orders flowed down the chain of command. Reports on operations were transmitted back up the chain of command”.
.
commanded the Sinia brigade by March 2004.
There are reports of former
who accuse
.
of murdering and beating
for futile reasons, as well as coldly raping his compulsory wives. According to witnesses,
.
subordinate
followed his orders to immediately kill
who tried to escape, without prior consultation or direct
, but with a later report.
, the
accuses
.
of having
over the distribution of women and girls to the
fighters.
The
admits that
.
was the
of the same
he became a perpetrator: the
of using and recruiting
under the
of fifteen
to participate actively in hostilities, under the
8(2)(e)(vii) of the
.
, the
points out that
.
would be fourteen
old at the time of the abduction, not over nine
old as presented by the
.
It is said that the fact that
.
was a
in the past would be neither a justification nor an excuse for committing
. The moral
is necessary. The criminal process in the
does not focus on the goodness nor on badness of
, but on the criminal
practiced by them.
The
obtained by interception recordings from the
's radio conversations by Ugandan military and security organizations.
are very significant and the records would confirm the
's allegations, especially concerning
.
confessions of
. For these and other
, the
understood that he had the knowledge and the
to commit the alleged
, a fact that would satisfy the mental
of the
, under the
30(1) of the
.
, the material
(the action itself) established by the same
above would be satisfied because the
provides
of
.
essential contributions to the
and the coordinated manner he acted with other perpetrators.
, the
concludes that the
is criminally responsible and liable for punishment for the alleged
.
According to the
,
.
would have failed to act in a necessary and reasonable way within his powers in
to prevent
committed by his subordinates, or he would have failed to submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and
.
For many times he was allegedly away for days or weeks from any
authority and he could have escaped or released
under his command.
, between July 2002 and December 2005, the Amnesty Commission records show that around 9,000
surrendered and received amnesty, but
.
would not have choosen to do so.
He would have continued his criminal activities with the rebels, as emphasized by the
, executing operations, which caused misery and death to many civilians, and afterwards, reporting them on the radio with enthusiasm and no regret.
With regard to individual criminal
,
.
is charged pursuant to the articles 25(3)(a) (direct perpetration, indirect perpetration and indirect co-perpetration), 25(3) (b) (ordering), 25(3) (d) (i) and (ii) and 28(a) (command
) of the
, for
against humanity and
, which have already been mentioned in
writing sample.
Presented both parties’ allegations, it is necessary to analyze the criminal
of former
soldiers before the
.
analysis must be critical, on a
-by-
basis in
to achieve justice.
In armed conflicts, many
are coerced for
in paramilitary groups, even after becoming adult
. Each one has a particular experience, which varies according to
, personality, education, maturity, the place of
, beliefs, religion, level of poverty and
, their length of service in the
, etc. Each person’s unique experience as a
must be taken into consideration by the
.
In a hypothetical
in the
,
, a former
is accused of
committed at the
of 19.
,
was hypothetically abducted by an extreme violent
of rebels when he was only 6
old and his parents were killed by
. During his 13
of service, he was abused, exposed to
, coercion, training and indoctrination.
The attempt to escape from
would result in immediate death and disobedience would result in serious bodily injury. Still, hypothetically,
demonstrate that accused acted as a mere
, obeyed commands and executing them necessarily, proportionally and reasonably.
, the
’s criminal
would be more likely to be excluded since
hypothetical
describes a more favorable
to the accused if compared to
.
.
As to
, analyzing both parties’
and the non-confidential
presented in
, it is reasonable to say that the
’s
and
are stronger and solider rather than the
’s. The
are not favorable to
for many reasons.
The
grew up in the
and was not an ordinary
throughout his journey. He achieved a
of leadership, and he was able to act along with other perpetrators in a coordinated manner in a common plan.
He had power to
the
, and to give orders.
.
was engaged to be successful while committing atrocities. The interception recordings from the
's radio conversations demonstrate his enthusiasm and his commands to subordinate
to proceed with
.
These
show the mental
of the
: the
to commit them with knowledge of the
and the consequences.
As the
Fatou Bensouda points out,
will be judged for what he did as an adult, not for what he did as a
.
, his bad experiences in the past, as she says: “may perhaps amount to some mitigation of sentence in the event that he is convicted of these
”.
would be a reasonable conclusion about the
to bring reparation and justice to the victims, as well as to satisfy their expectations.