chapter ii international tribunals and court · 2017. 12. 16. · cases, and judgments were...

1281

The Hague, continued to implement its completion strategy [YUN 2002, p. 1275], which was endorsed by Council resolution 1503(2003) [YUN 2003, p. 1330].

The Tribunal continued to focus on the comple-tion of all trials and appeals. The Office of the Pros-ecutor made progress towards the completion of the Tribunal’s mandate at both the trial and appellate levels, and continued to seek cooperation of the States of the former Yugoslavia. The Registry provided ad-ministrative and judicial support to the Tribunal, and coordinated practical arrangements for the trans-fer of responsibilities to the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (the Mecha-nism), established by Council resolution 1966(2010) [YUN 2010, p. 1306].

On 17 April, the Secretary-General, in consulta-tion with the President of the Tribunal, reappointed the Registrar, John Hocking (Australia), with effect from 15 May. The President, Judge Theodor Meron (United States), and the Prosecutor, Serge Bram-mertz (Belgium), continued to fulfil their duties at the Tribunal. During the year, the Council adopted resolution 2130(2013), which addressed, among other issues, the extension of the terms of office of the judges and ad litem (short-term) judges (see p. 1283).

President Meron informed the Council on 5 De-cember that the Tribunal continued to make progress in completing the final cases. The Tribunal rendered five judgments. In the Trial Chambers, judgments were rendered in the case of Prlić et al. and Stanišić and Simatović. In addition, the Appeal Chamber rendered a judgment in the rule 98 bis appeal in the Karadžić case. One contempt trial judgment and one contempt appeal judgment were also rendered. The forecast judgment delivery dates remained unchanged in seven of the Tribunal’s 11 remaining cases. Three of the four remaining cases were delayed because of their complexity and the heavy workload of the judges involved. The Karadžic trial judgment, originally planned for July 2015 was currently forecast to be delivered in October 2015, and the judgments in the appeal cases—Tolimir and Stanišić and Zupljanin—in early 2015. The case of Prlić et al. was expected to be completed in mid-2017. Consequently, all icty judi-cial work would not be completed by 31 December 2014. As at 31 July 2013, the Tribunal had concluded proceedings against 136 of the 161 persons indicted.

The activities of icty were covered in two reports to the Security Council and the General Assembly, for the periods from 1 August 2012 to 31 July 2013

In 2013, the International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of Interna-tional Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991 (icty) continued to expedite its proceedings, in keeping with its comple-tion strategy. During the year, icty rendered four Trial Chamber judgments, while the Appeals Chamber ren-dered one final judgment, one contempt judgment and an appeal judgment of a partial acquittal. There were no outstanding indictments for violations of core statutory crimes. As the Tribunal moved towards the comple-tion of its mandate, its activities focused on appeals.

The International Criminal Tribunal for the Prose-cution of Persons Responsible for Genocide and Other Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of Rwanda and Rwanda Citizens Responsible for Genocide and Other Such Violations Committed in the Territory of Neighbour-ing States between 1 January and 31 December 1994 (ictr) also continued to work towards its completion strategy. In 2013, it completed the substantive work before Trial Chamber and rendered two Appeals Chamber judgments. The transition to the Interna-tional Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (the Mechanism) and plans for the closure of the Tri-bunal continued to draw nearer to completion.

Following the opening of its branch in The Hague on 1 July, the Mechanism operated at two branches and performed functions inherited from both the icty and the ictr. Those functions included attending to judicial matters, providing protection to witnesses, su-pervising the enforcement of sentences and managing archives. Considerable progress was made in plans for the construction of a new facility for the Mechanism in Arusha, United Republic of Tanzania.

The International Criminal Court (icc) continued its proceedings with respect to situations of concern. Its caseload increased during the year, with eight situ-ations under investigation and eight more under pre-liminary examination. Arrest warrants were issued by the Court against 12 individuals.

International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

In 2013, the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (icty), established by Security Council resolution 827(1993) [YUN 1993, p. 440] and based in

Chapter II

International tribunals and court

1282 Part Four: Legal questions

YUN 2013—3rd proof—15 November 2017

p. 1282]. The defence commenced its case on 16 Octo-ber 2012 [YUN 2012, p. 1270]. Closing arguments were expected in September 2014. The judgment was ex-pected in October 2015.

Vojislav Šešelj was charged with nine counts of crimes against humanity and violations of the laws or customs of war for acts allegedly committed in Bosnia, Croatia, Herzegovina and Vojvodina (Serbia) between August 1991 and September 1993 [YUN 2003, p. 1311 & YUN 2004, p. 1277]. Trial proceedings concluded on 20 May 2012 [YUN 2012, p. 1271]. On 15 April, Trial Chamber III filed a scheduling order setting 30 Oc-tober as the date for the pronouncement of the judg-ment. The trial continued, despite the disqualification of Judge Harhoff in October 2013.

In the Prlić et al. case, Trial Chamber III rendered judgment on 29 May. The Chamber found them guilty of crimes against humanity, violations of the laws or customs of war, and breaches of the 1949 Geneva Con-ventions. Prlic was sentenced to 25 years’ imprison-ment; Stojic, Praljak and Petkovic were each sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonment; Ćoric to 16 years’ impris-onment; and Pušiyc to 10 years’ imprisonment.

In the Krstić case, the contempt judgment was ren-dered on 18 July. Trial Chamber III found Krstic not guilty of contempt.

In the case of Prosecutor v. Vojislav Šešelj, the Ap-peals Chamber rendered contempt appeal judgments on 28 November 2012 and 30 May 2013.

In the case of Prosecutor v. Momčilo Perišić, the ap-peal judgment was rendered on 28 February 2013. The Appeals Chamber reversed all of Perišic’s convictions.

In the case of Prosecutor v. Radovan Karadžić, on 11 July, the Appeals Chamber rendered a judgment in the prosecution’s appeal of a partial acquittal, which reversed Karadžic’s acquittal and remanded the matter to the Trial Chamber.

Appeal hearings were held in the Šainović et al. and Ðorđević cases, and judgments were forecast by the end of 2013.

A notice of appeal in the case of Prosecutor v. Jadranko Prlić et al. (see above) was filed prior to 1 July. The judgment was forecast for mid-2017.

In the case of Prosecutor v. Milan Lukić and Sredoje Lukić, the Appeals Chamber denied, on 30 August, Sredoje Lukic’s motion seeking reconsideration of the appeal judgment [ibid.].

The Appeals Chamber held an appeal hearing in the Popović et al. case in December.

Judgments in the five Appeals Chamber cases, namely Prosecutor v. Vujadin Popović et al., Prosecu-tor v. Zdravko Tolimir, Prosecutor v. Jovica Stanišić and Franko Simatović, Prosecutor v. Mićo Stanišić and Stojan Zupljanin and Prosecutor v. Jadranko Prlić et al., were respectively forecast to be rendered in October 2014, March and June 2015, November 2015 and mid-2017.

[A/68/255–S/2013/463] and from 1 August 2013 to 31 July 2014 [A/69/225–S/2014/556].

The Assembly took note of the 2012/2013 report on 14 October (decision 68/509). On 27 December, the Assembly decided that the agenda item on icty would remain for consideration during its sixty-eighth resumed (2014) session (decision 68/550).

The ChambersDuring the year, the Tribunal’s three Trial Cham-

bers rendered four judgments involving 11 accused, while the Appeals Chamber rendered one contempt appeal judgment, one final judgment and a judgment in the prosecution appeal of a partial acquittal. Judicial activities included first instance and appeals proceed-ings against judgments, interlocutory decisions, State requests for review and contempt cases. As at 31 July, icty had 22 judges from 21 countries, including 13 per-manent judges, five permanent judges from the Interna-tional Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda serving in the Ap-peals Chambers, and four ad litem (short-term) judges.

New arrests and indictments

In 2013, there were no outstanding indictments for violations of core statutory crimes. Following the ar-rests of the last of the Tribunal’s fugitive, Mladic and Hadžic [YUN 2011, p. 1243], the two cases were in the prosecution evidence presentation phase.

Ongoing cases, trials and appeals

Ratko Mladic was charged with 11 counts of geno-cide, crimes against humanity, and violations of the laws or customs of war, for acts allegedly committed in Bosnia and Herzegovina between 12 May 1992 and 30 November 1995 [YUN 1995, p. 1314]. The Trial com-menced on 16 May 2012 [YUN 2012, p. 1270], and the judgment was expected in July 2016.

In the Stanišić and Simatović case [ibid.], Trial Chamber I rendered the judgment on 30 May 2013.

Goran Hadžic was charged with 14 counts of crimes against humanity and violations of the laws or customs of war, all in relation to acts allegedly committed in Cro-atia and Serbia between 25 June 1991 and December 1993. The trial commenced on 16 October 2012 [ibid.], and the judgment was expected in December 2015.

In the Mićo Stanišić and Stojan Zupljanin case, the judgment was rendered on 27 March 2013. Trial Chamber II found them guilty of crimes against hu-manity and violations of the laws or customs of war, and sentenced each to 22 years of imprisonment.

Radovan Karadžic was charged with 11 counts of genocide, crimes against humanity and violations of the laws or customs of war for acts allegedly committed in Bosnia and Herzegovina between 1992 and 1995. The trial commenced on 26 October 2009 [YUN 2009,

Chapter II: International tribunals and court 1283


26 March 2004, and its previous resolutions concerning the International Tribunal,

Welcoming the commencement of the functioning of the branch of the International Residual Mechanism for Crimi-nal Tribunals for the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia on 1 July 2013, and taking note of the assessment of the Mechanism,

Recalling its previous resolutions on the extension of the terms of office of the permanent and ad litem judges at the International Tribunal, who are members of the Trial Chambers and the Appeals Chamber,

Taking into account the assessments by the International Tribunal in its completion strategy report, and the updated trial and appeals schedule,

Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations,

1. Requests the International Tribunal to take all pos-sible measures to complete its work as expeditiously as pos-sible with the aim of facilitating the closure of the Tribunal, taking into account resolution 1966(2010) of 22 December 2010, in which Security Council requested the Tribunal to complete its trial and appeals proceedings by 31 December 2014, and expresses concern that, in order to complete the work of the Tribunal, trials and appeals will go beyond 2014;

2. Decides to extend the term of office of the following permanent and ad litem judges at the International Tribu-nal, who are members of the Trial Chambers and the Ap-peals Chamber, until 31 December 2014 or until the com-pletion of the cases to which they are assigned, if sooner:

−Mr. Koffi Kumelio A. Afande (Togo)−Mr. Carmel A. Agius (Malta)−Mr. Liu Daqun (China)−Mr. Theodor Meron (United States of America)−Mr. Fausto Pocar (Italy)−Mr. Patrick Lipton Robinson (Jamaica)−Mr. Jean-Claude Antonetti (France)−Mr. Guy Delvoie (Belgium)−Mr. Christoph Flügge (Germany)−Mr. Burton Hall (Bahamas)−Mr. O-gon Kwon (Republic of Korea)−Mr. Bakone Melema Moloto (South Africa)−Mr. Howard Morrison (United Kingdom of Great Brit-

ain and Northern Ireland)−Mr. Alphonsus Martinus Maria Orie (Netherlands)−Mr. Melville Baird (Trinidad and Tobago)−Ms. Flavia Lattanzi (Italy)−Mr. Antoine Kesia-Mbe Mindua (Democratic Republic

of the Congo)3. Underlines that States should cooperate fully with

the International Tribunal, including through the provision of information to assist the Tribunal in its work, as well as with the Mechanism;

4. Decides to remain seized of the matter.

VOTE ON RESOLUTION 2130(2013):In favour: Argentina, Australia, Azerbaijan, China,

France, Guatemala, Luxembourg, Morocco, Pakistan, Repub-lic of Korea, Rwanda, Togo, United Kingdom, United States.

Against: None.Abstaining: Russian Federation.

Judges of the Court

Extension of terms of office and ad litem judgesAppointment. On 12 June, the Security Coun-

cil President transmitted to the Secretary-General [S/2013/349] a 5 March letter from the icty President, seeking the support of Council members in facilitat-ing the completion of the Tribunal’s work through the appointment of an additional judge to be deployed to the Appeals Chamber. On 31 July [S/2013/455], the Secretary-General transmitted to the Council Pres-ident the articles of icty statute pertaining to the qualification and election of judges, and the six nomi-nations received from Member States. On 3 October, the Council President forwarded to the President of the General Assembly [A/68/516] the six nominations regarding the election of one permanent judge to icty. On 21 October [A/68/540], the Secretary-General sub-mitted to the Assembly the curricula vitae of the nomi-nated candidates, as well as a memorandum [A/68/539 & Add.1, 2] regarding the procedure for the election of one permanent judge of icty, and the list of candidates, including notification of withdrawal of candidates pro-posed by Austria, Iran and Jordan.

On 18 November, the Assembly, by decision 68/413 A, elected Mr. Koffi Kumelio A. Afande (Togo) as a permanent judge of icty for a term of of-fice beginning on 18 November and ending on 31 De-cember or upon completion of the cases to which he was assigned.

ICTY request for extension. On 21 November [A/68/623–S/2013/685], the Secretary-General trans-mitted to the Security Council and the General As-sembly letters dated 30 October and 19 November from the icty President requesting the extension of the term of office of 14 permanent judges of the Trial and Appeals Chambers and three ad litem judges of the Trial Chamber of the Tribunal until the dates set out therein or until the completion of the cases to which they were assigned.SECURITY COUNCIL ACTION

On 18 December [meeting 7088], the Security Council adopted resolution 2130(2013) by recorded vote (14-0-1). The draft [S/2013/746] was submitted by Guatemala.

The Security Council,Reaffirming its determination to combat impunity for

those responsible for serious international crimes and the necessity of all persons indicted by the International Tribu-nal for the Former Yugoslavia (the International Tribunal) being brought to justice,

Taking note of the letter dated 21 November 2013 from the Secretary-General to the President of the Security Council attaching letters dated 30 October and 19 Novem-ber 2013 from the President of the International Tribunal,

Recalling its resolutions 827(1993) of 25 May 1993, 1503(2003) of 28 August 2003 and 1534(2004) of



dence as required. The Office would continue to rely on Croatia’s cooperation in upcoming trials and appeals.

The Bosnia and Herzegovina authorities responded promptly and adequately to most of the Office’s re-quests for documents, as well as access to government archives. In addition, the authorities provided valuable assistance with witness protection matters and facili-tated the appearance of witnesses before the Tribunal. The Office was concerned at the slow pace of investiga-tion and prosecution of category II cases transferred by the Office to Bosnia and Herzegovina. Only four of the 13 cases transferred between June 2005 and December 2009 had been completed. During meetings held in April, the new Chief Prosecutor in Sarajevo indicated that his office would increase efforts to address the is-sue, and the Tribunal’s Prosecutor agreed to return to Bosnia and Herzegovina to discuss practical steps that could be taken towards completing the category II cases.

With respect to cooperation in judicial matters among the States of the former Yugoslavia, the Office continued to promote cooperation and collaboration between Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia in war crimes matters, and fostered working relation-ships between regional prosecutors. The prosecutor’s of-fice of Bosnia and Herzegovina signed protocols on the exchange of evidence and information in war crimes cases with the prosecutor’s offices in Serbia and Croatia on 31 January and 3 June, respectively. The Office en-couraged the respective authorities to continue to take steps to implement the relevant agreements. The Of-fice was also concerned, however, about the remaining challenges in coordinating the activities of judicial in-stitutions across the region, such as legal barriers to the extradition of suspects. Urgent action was needed by political and legal authorities in the region to promote and strengthen regional cooperation in war crime cases.

Support from States outside of the former Yugosla-via and international organizations remained impor-tant to the completion of the Tribunal’s mandate. The Office continued to access the information held in the archives and other institutions of UN Member States, and acknowledged the assistance from the United Na-tions and its agencies, the European Union (eu), the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the Council of Europe and non-governmental organizations, in-cluding those in the former Yugoslavia.

As the Tribunal moved closer to the completion of its mandate, the Office saw an increase in the volume of requests for information to assist national jurisdic-tions in prosecuting crimes arising out of the conflict in the former Yugoslavia. The joint eu/Tribunal “liai-son prosecutors” project continued to form a central component of the Office’s strategy for strengthening the capacity of national criminal justice systems in the former Yugoslavia for war crimes cases. Regard-ing the implementation of the national war crimes

On the same date [A/68/668], the Council President drew the Assembly President’s attention to Council resolution 2130(2013) (see p. 1283).

General Assembly action. On 23 December, the Assembly decided to extend the terms of office of 14 permanent judges and three ad litem judges, who were members of the Trial Chambers and the Ap-peals Chamber, until 31 December 2014, or until the completion of the cases to which they were assigned. The Assembly also requested icty to take all possible measures to complete its work as expeditiously as pos-sible, taking into account Security Council resolution 1966(2010) [YUN 2010, p. 1306], in which the Council requested the Tribunal to complete its trials and ap-peal proceedings by 31 December 2014, and expressed concern that trials and appeals would go beyond 2014. (decision 68/413 B).

Office of the ProsecutorIn 2013, the Office of the Prosecutor made substan-

tial advances in finalizing its trial work and managing an intense appellate caseload, while preparing for the transition and transfer of its functions to the Inter-national Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (the Mechanism) [YUN 2010, p. 1306]. On 1 July, the Office transferred some of its functions to the Mecha-nism and continued to assist Mechanism officials and personnel in transferring functions.

As at 31 July, judgments were issued in five tri-als, four appeals and three contempt cases. Two cases were in the prosecution evidence presentation phase (Hadžić and Mladić), one in the defence evidence presentation phase (Karadžić), and one was awaiting judgment at the Trial Chamber level (Šešelj). In addi-tion, seven cases were on appeal (Popović et al., Šainović et al., Ðorđević, Tolimir, Stanišić and Zupljanin, Prlić et al., and Stanišić and Simatović). The Office responded also to defence motions for review and reconsideration of final judgment in the Delić and Sredoje Lukić cases. The Office was busier than ever with some of the most significant cases yet prosecuted before the Tribunal. With seven appeals under way, the resources of the Appeals Division were stretched.

Serbia continued to cooperate with the Office to ensure the completion of its work. It showed continued diligence in processing requests for assistance and fa-cilitated access to witnesses, including the appearance of witnesses before the Tribunal. Following the ar-rests of the last Tribunal’s fugitives, Ratko Mladic and Goran Hadžic [YUN 2011, p. 1243], Serbia undertook to provide the Office with comprehensive information, as well as to investigate and prosecute individuals who assisted in harbouring the fugitives.

The Croatian authorities provided timely and ad-equate responses to the Office’s day-to-day request for assistance and facilitated access to witnesses and evi-



and others in proceedings before the Tribunal. The Sec-tion also established protocols and implemented sys-tems for the sharing and transfer of judicial records be-tween the Tribunal and the Mechanism. As at 31 July, the Victims and Witnesses Section had assisted 509 witnesses, and worked with the Mechanism in Arusha, Tanzania, to prepare harmonized victim and witness policies and practices. The former Office for Legal Aid and Detention Matters was restructured. Its detention-related functions were transferred to the United Na-tions Detention Unit and its legal aid functions re-mained with the renamed Office for Legal Aid and Defence Matters, which continued to administer the Tribunal’s legal aid system. The United Nations De-tention Unit continued to provide security and care for 24 detainees under the Tribunal’s authority. The Divi-sion of Administration remained engaged in downsiz-ing efforts and the second comparative review process. It also coordinated preparation of the proposed 2014–2015 budget, as well as the formulation of the second budget for The Hague Branch of the Mechanism.

Financing2012–2013 biennium

Report of Secretary-General. In November, the Secretary-General submitted the second performance report on the icty budget for the 2012–2013 bien-nium [A/68/582], in response to General Assembly reso-lution 67/243 [YUN 2012, p. 1274], reflecting a decrease of $4,074,200 gross ($4,476,100 net) compared with the revised appropriation for the biennium. The As-sembly was requested to revise the appropriation for 2012–2013 to $278,993,500 gross ($247,260,800 net).

ACABQ report. In December [A/68/642], the Ad-visory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (acabq) recommended that the Assembly approve the final appropriation for the 2012–2013 biennium.

2014–2015 biennium

In September [A/68/386], the Secretary-General submitted icty resource requirements for the 2014–2015 biennium, which, before recosting, amounted to $191,335,700 gross ($170,160,300 net), reflect-ing a decrease in real terms of $98,786,300 gross ($87,632,400 net), or 34.0 per cent, compared with the 2012–2013 resources at revised rates.

Acabq, in December [A/68/642], recommended ap-proval of the proposed resource requirements for icty for the 2014–2015 biennium.

In December [A/68/660], the Secretary-General submitted revised estimates for the icty 2014–2015 proposed budget, arising from the effect of changes in rates of exchange and inflation, which, after recosting, amounted to $201,688,200 gross. Acabq had no ob-

strategy in Bosnia and Herzegovina, while a few hundred cases had been transferred from the State to entity judicial organs, the Office did not receive any requests for assistance from entity-level authorities and little progress was made in processing cases at that level. A considerable backlog remained, with lit-tle or no prospect of the Bosnia and Herzegovina au-thorities meeting the 2015 deadline. Comprehensive measures and a commitment to radical improvements were required to make the strategy effective, includ-ing the appointment of additional entity prosecutors and other qualified personnel, and the provision of adequate resources, including resources to overcome witness protection problems.

The RegistryThe Registry provided judicial, diplomatic, opera-

tional and administrative support to the Tribunal and managed its outreach programme. The Immediate Office of the Registrar supported the Registrar in its overall responsibility of directing the Registry. It also assisted in formulating and implementing the Regis-try strategic priorities, streamlining operational proce-dures to reflect the continuing shift in the Tribunal’s activities from trials to appeal and the transition from the Tribunal to the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals. In accordance with the Tribu-nal’s completion strategy, the Immediate Office of the Registrar, with the Division of Administration, con-tinued implementing the downsizing process for the reduction of posts and conceptualizing the restructur-ing of the Judicial Support Division. The Immedi-ate Office of the Registrar supported the Registrar in managing the Arusha Branch of the Mechanism and in preparing for the commencement of Mechanism operations in The Hague, on 1 July 2013. The Com-munications Service ensured that journalists had ac-cess to accurate and up-to-date information regarding the Tribunal’s judicial activities, and promoted media coverage of the Tribunal’s twentieth anniversary and the launch of The Hague Branch of the Mechanism.

The Outreach Programme continued to promote the rule of law in the former Yugoslavia by delivering factual information about the Tribunal’s work and legacy. The Programme organized two regional leg-acy conferences, one in Bosnia and Herzegovina and one in Croatia, and launched the second phase of a youth outreach effort in high schools and universities in Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, reaching a total of 1,650 young people.

The Court Management and Support Services Sec-tion supported 9 cases at trial, 11 cases on appeal and 4 contempt cases. It also assisted three self-represented accused through its pro se office. As at 31 July, the Sec-tion had processed 8,774 filings submitted by parties



2. Endorses the conclusions and recommendations contained in the related reports of the Advisory Commit-tee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions, subject to the provisions of the present resolution;

3. Decides that the recosting will be calculated in accor-dance with the formula agreed upon in its resolution con-cerning the programme budget for the biennium 2014–2015;

4. Emphasizes the importance of the continued ef-forts of the Secretary-General to implement the completion strategy for the Tribunal in an efficient and timely manner;

5. Recalls paragraph 36 of the report of the Advisory Committee, and in this regard requests the Secretary-General to ensure that the Tribunal adheres to the revised travel policy pursuant to resolution 67/254 of 12 April 2013 and to reflect any cost savings resulting from the revised travel policy in the context of the second performance report;

6. Decides to appropriate to the Special Account for the International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Re-sponsible for Serious Violations of International Humanita-rian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugo-slavia since 1991 a total amount of 201,688,200 dollars gross (179,998,600 dollars net) for the biennium 2014–2015, as detailed in the annex to the present resolution;

7. Also decides that the financing of the appropriation for the biennium 2014–2015 under the Special Account shall take into account the estimated income of 285,500 dollars for the biennium, which shall be set off against the aggregate amount of the appropriation;

8. Further decides that the total assessment for 2014 under the Special Account shall amount to 100,701,350 dol-lars, being half of the estimated appropriation approved for the biennium 2014–2015, after taking into account 142,750 dollars, which is half of the estimated income for the bien-nium of 285,500 dollars;

9. Decides to apportion the amount of 50,350,675 dol-lars gross (44,928,275 dollars net) among Member States in accordance with the scale of assessments applicable to the regular budget of the United Nations for 2014;

10. Also decides to apportion the amount of 50,350,675 dollars gross (44,928,275 dollars net) among Member States in accordance with the scale of assessments applicable to peacekeeping operations of the United Nations for 2014;

11. Further decides that, in accordance with the provi-sions of its resolution 973(X) of 15 December 1955, there shall be set off against the apportionment among Member States, as provided for in paragraphs 9 and 10 above, their respective share in the Tax Equalization Fund of the esti-mated staff assessment income of 10,844,800 dollars ap-proved for the Tribunal for 2014.

Annex

Financing for the biennium 2014–2015 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

Gross Net

(United States dollars)

Estimated appropriation for the biennium 2014–2015

198,667,000 177,140,500

Revised estimates: effects of changes in rates of exchange and inflation

3,021,200 2,858,100

jection to the revised estimates and transmitted them to the General Assembly for consideration [A/68/7/Add.24].

GENERAL ASSEMBLY ACTION

On 27 December [meeting 72], the General Assem-bly, on the recommendation of the Fifth (Administra-tive and Budgetary) Committee [A/68/682], adopted resolution 68/256 without vote [agenda item 145].

Financing 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

The General Assembly,

ISecond performance report on the budget of the

International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia for the biennium 2012–2013

Having considered the second performance report of the Secretary-General on the budget, for the biennium 2012–2013, 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 and the related report of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions,

Recalling its resolution 47/235 of 14 September 1993 on the financing of the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and its subsequent resolutions thereon, the latest of which were resolutions 66/239 of 24 December 2011 and 67/243 of 24 December 2012,

1. Takes note of the second performance report of the Secretary-General on the budget of the International Tri-bunal for the Former Yugoslavia for the biennium 2012–2013, and the related report of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions;

2. Endorses the conclusions and recommendations con-tained in section III.A of the report of the Advisory Committee;

3. Resolves that, for the biennium 2012–2013, the amount of 283,067,700 United States dollars gross (251,736,900 dollars net) approved in its resolution 67/243 for the financing of the Tribunal shall be adjusted by the amount of 4,074,200 dollars gross (4,476,100 dollars net), for a total of 278,993,500 dollars gross (247,260,800 dollars net);

IIBudget for the International Tribunal for the Former

Yugoslavia for the biennium 2014–2015Having considered the reports of the Secretary-General

on the budget for the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia for the biennium 2014–2015 and on the revised estimates arising from the effects of changes in rates of ex-change and inflation,

Having also considered the related reports of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions,

1. Takes note of the reports of the Secretary-General on the budget for the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia for the biennium 2014–2015 and on the revised estimates arising from the effects of changes in rates of ex-change and inflation;



Tribunals (the Mechanism) and supporting national authorities in the prosecution of crimes related to the 1994 Rwanda genocide. Support was also extended to Rwandan authorities to assist them in preparing for the transfer of cases from the Tribunal. The Registry continued to provide administrative and judicial sup-port to the Tribunal and to the Mechanism, ensured the cooperation and assistance of Member States with the Tribunal, and strengthened its outreach and capacity-building activities in Rwanda.

The ictr President, Judge Vagn Joensen, in-formed the Council on 5 December [S/PV.7073] about a joint visit of the ictr and the Mechanism to Rwanda on 4 and 5 November, to strengthen mu-tual assistance and cooperation between both insti-tutions and Rwanda, including the commissioning of a draft project proposal to be carried out by the International Organization for Migration relating to reparations for victims and survivors of the 1994 genocide. The ictr President called on the Council for urgent assistance and cooperation from Mem-ber States to support the Tribunal in finding host countries for the seven acquitted persons and three convicted released persons still residing in Tanzania. The monitoring of all ictr cases referred to national jurisdictions was the responsibility of the Mecha-nism, which would monitor the six fugitive cases transferred to Rwanda once those individuals were arrested and proceedings commenced. The Registrar and the ictr President would continue to oversee the administrative functions of the monitoring of the Uwinkindi trial in Rwanda until the end of 2013. Since the previous report to the Council, ictr com-pleted three temporary archives facilities and handed them over to the Mechanism, which had assumed responsibility for the management of the archives for both Tribunals. The transfer to the Mechanism of judicial records not in active use was expected to be completed by the end of 2014.

The 2013 activities of ictr were covered in two reports to the Council and the General Assembly, for the periods from 1 July 2012 to 30 June 2013 [A/68/270–S/2013/460] and 1 July 2013 to 30 June 2014 [A/69/206–S/2014/546]. The Assembly took note of the 2012–2013 report on 14 October (decision 68/508). On 27 December, the Assembly decided that the agenda item on ictr would remain for consideration during its resumed sixty-eighth (2014) session (deci-sion 68/550).

The ChambersThe Chambers were composed of 10 permanent

judges in the Appeals Chamber and one ad litem judge serving as President. The one ad litem judge was a member of the Trial Chamber, while the ten perma-nent judges sat on the Appeals Chamber.

Gross Net


Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions

– –

Recommendations of the Fifth Committee

– –

Estimated initial appropriation for the biennium 2014–2015

201,688,200 179,998,600

Less: estimated income for the biennium 2014–2015

(285,500) (285,500)

Estimated initial appropriation for the biennium 2014–2015, net of estimated income

201,402,700 179,713,100

Total assessment for 2014Requirements representing half of the

estimated appropriation for the biennium 2014–2015

100,701,350 89,856,550

Decrease in the final appropriation for the biennium 2012–2013

(4,074,200) (4,476,100)

Transfer of credit in accordance with paragraph 3 (c) (i) of resolution 68/245 A on the second performance report for the programme budget for the biennium 2012–2013

4,074,200 4,476,100

Net contributions assessed on Member States for 2014

100,701,350 89,856,550

Of which:Contributions assessed on Member

States in accordance with the scale of assessments applicable to the regular budget of the United Nations for 2014

50,350,675 44,928,275

Contributions assessed on Member States in accordance with the scale of assessments applicable to peacekeeping operations of the United Nations for 2014

50,350,675 44,928,275

On 27 December, the Assembly decided that the agenda item on icty financing would remain for con-sideration during its resumed sixty-eighth (2014) ses-sion (decision 68/550).

International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda

In 2013, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ictr), established by Security Council resolution 955(1994) [YUN 1994, p. 299] and based in Arusha, United Republic of Tanzania, completed its substantive work before the Trial Chamber and deliv-ered two Appeals Chamber judgments. Completion of the appeals work in all but one case was expected by the end of 2014, with the final judgment in the Butare case by August 2015.

The Office of the Prosecutor focused on hand-ing over responsibility for the tracking of fugitives to the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal



Office of the ProsecutorThe Office of the Prosecutor, having concluded

the trial phase of all proceedings, continued to focus on the completion of ongoing appeals and monitor-ing of the referral of cases to national jurisdiction, as well as on transitional activities to ensure a smooth transfer of functions to the Office of the Prosecutor of the Mechanism. The conclusion of the Tribunal’s trial phase had substantially increased the workload of the Appeals and Legal Advisory Division, which was litigating 32 appeals arising from nine cases and two referral proceedings.

The Office of the Prosecutor of the Tribunal had no further fugitive-related workload, as the tracking, arrest and trial of the three top-level fugitives—Augustin Bi-zimana, Félicien Kabuga and Protais Mpiranya—and the monitoring of all referred cases were managed by the Mechanism. All prosecutorial and trial functions were handed over to the Mechanism, and the Office continued to provide administrative services to the Mechanism. The Office started work on the Prosecu-tor’s closing report to the Secretary-General and other essential legacy products that were initiated over the years and were expected to be concluded before the ex-piry of the Tribunal’s mandate.

In September, one Office of the Prosecutor archival facility, along with records of 27 cases, was formally transferred to the custody of the Mechanism. The Of-fice launched its manual on the tracking and arrest of fugitives from international criminal justice at the eighteenth annual conference of the International As-sociation of Prosecutors (Moscow, Russian Federation, 8–12 September).

The RegistryThe Registry supported the judicial process by serv-

icing the Tribunal’s other organs and the defence, as well as by seeking support from States, international organizations and other stakeholders in the conduct of proceedings. It maintained high-level diplomatic con-tacts with Member States, international organizations and non-governmental organizations.

The Office of the Registrar focused on supporting the conclusion of the remaining appeals, providing sup-port to the Mechanism, preparing the records of the Tribunal for archiving and handover to the Mechanism and engaging Member States on a variety of issues nec-essary to achieve an orderly closure of the Tribunal. The Office of the Registrar continued to act as the channel of communication between the organs of the Tribu-nal, as well as between the Tribunal and the diplomatic community. The Registry also dealt with inquiries and requests for legal assistance from national jurisdictions.

The Office of the Registrar transferred its functions to the Mechanism, including the enforcement of sen-

New arrests

In 2013, the Office of the Prosecutor of the Tribunal had no further fugitive-related workload. The track-ing, arrest and trial of the three top-level fugitives—Augustin Bizimana, Félicien Kabuga and Protais Mpiranya—and the monitoring of all referred cases were currently being managed by the Mechanism.


In the case against Augustin Ngirabatware, Trial Chamber II rendered oral judgment on 20 December 2012 [YUN 2012, p. 1276], sentencing him to 35 years of imprisonment after being found guilty of genocide, direct and public incitement to commit genocide and rape as a crime against humanity. The written judg-ment was filed on 21 February 2013.

On 4 February, the Appeals Chamber reversed the conviction of Justin Mugenzi and Prosper Mugi-raneza, each sentenced in 2011 [YUN 2011, p. 1250] to 30 years of imprisonment for conspiracy to commit genocide and direct and public incitement to commit genocide, entered a verdict of acquittal and ordered their immediate release.

In its judgment of 16 December, the Appeals Chamber affirmed the 2011 convictions [ibid.] of Gré-goire Ndahimana for genocide and extermination as a crime against humanity and his sentence to 15 years of imprisonment. The Appeals Chamber, which heard the parties’ appeal on 6 May, increased his sentence to 25 years of imprisonment.

From 7 to 10 May, the Appeals Chamber heard appeals from the judgment of Trial Chamber II in the Ndindiliyimana et al. (Military II) case delivered on 17 May 2011 [ibid.].

Judges of the Court

Extension of terms of office and ad litem judgesAppointment. On 6 August [S/2013/471], the

Secretary-General informed the Security Council President of a vacancy of a permanent judge of the International Tribunal, following the resignation of Judge Andrésia Vaz (Senegal), effective 31 May 2013, and of the nomination of Mandiaye Niang by Sen-egal to replace Judge Vaz. The Council President, on 9 August [S/2013/474], informed the Secretary-General that the Council supported his intention to appoint Mr. Niang as a permanent judge of the International Tribunal. The Secretary-General, on 11 September [S/2013/550], conveyed to the Council President the acknowledgement of the General Assembly President’s support of the appointment, and that Mandiaye Ni-ang would be appointed as a permanent judge of the ictr for the remainder of the term of office of Judge Vaz until 31 December 2014, or until the completion of the cases to which he would be assigned.



ACABQ report. In December [A/68/642], acabq recommended that the General Assembly approve the final appropriation.

2014–2015 biennium

In September [A/68/494], the Secretary-General presented ictr resource requirements for the 2014–2015 biennium, which, before recosting, amounted to $86,949,400 gross ($80,877,600 net) and re-flected a decrease in real terms of $101,310,900 gross ($94,342,000 net), or 53.8 per cent, compared to the 2012–2013 resources at revised rates.

Acabq, in December [A/68/642], recommended ap-proval of the proposed resource requirements for ictr for the 2014–2015 biennium.

In December [A/68/660], the Secretary-General pre-sented revised estimates for the proposed ictr 2014–2015 budget arising from the effect of changes in rates of exchange and inflation, amounting to $93,595,700 gross. Acabq stated that it had no objection to the revised estimates [A/68/7/Add.24].


On 27 December [meeting 72], the General Assem-bly, on the recommendation of the Fifth Committee [A/68/681], adopted resolution 68/255 without vote [agenda item 144].

Financing of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Genocide

and Other Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory

of Rwanda and Rwandan Citizens Responsible for Genocide and Other Such Violations Committed in the Territory of Neighbouring States between

1 January and 31 December 1994


ISecond performance report on the budget

of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda for the biennium 2012–2013

Having considered the second performance report of the Secretary-General on the budget, for the biennium 2012–2013, of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Genocide and Other Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of Rwanda and Rwandan Citizens Responsible for Genocide and Other Such Viola-tions Committed in the Territory of Neighbouring States between 1 January and 31 December 1994 and the related report of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions,

Recalling its resolution 49/251 of 20 July 1995 on the fi-nancing of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and its subsequent resolutions thereon, the latest of which were resolutions 66/238 of 24 December 2011 and 67/242 of 24 December 2012,

tences, witness protection and support in completed cases, the tracking of the three remaining fugitives and assistance to national authorities in completed cases. It continued to provide assistance to the Arusha branch of the Mechanism to ensure the continuation of those op-erations and the discharge of the Mechanism’s mandate.

The President and the Registrar continued efforts to find host countries for the remaining seven acquitted persons and three released convicts, and submitted to the Security Council a strategic relocation plan on 30 May.

The Tribunal reorganized the Judicial and Legal Services Division in line with the downsizing pro-cess and the reduced requirements in certain sections within the Division. The reorganization combined the Witness and Victims Support Section, the Court Management Section, and the Defence Counsel and Detention Managements Section to form the Judicial and Legal Affairs Section. The new Section provided legal support to the Trial Chamber and the Office of the President, and managed activities, including court management, defence counsel and detainee support, and witness and victim support. Legal officers of the Section also assisted the Mechanism by acting as in-terim monitors of the Uwinkindi trial in Rwanda. The focal point for witness and victim support worked with the Mechanism to prepare witness files for handover in relation to 57 completed cases before the Tribunal. The United Nations Detention Facility, as at 30 June, housed 17 detained persons.

The Division of Administrative Support Services continued to respond to the challenges posed by downsizing. A staff retention exercise was conducted to determine the number and composition of staff to be retained until the completion of the Tribunal’s work. The Career Development and Counselling Unit im-plemented a four-pronged strategy to support the com-pletion of the Tribunal’s mandate, including training programmes to support the personal and professional transition of staff; the completion of operations, stress counselling and coaching support; and the provision of welfare support to separating and relocating staff and families.

Financing2012–2013 biennium

Report of Secretary-General. In response to General Assembly resolution 67/242 [YUN 2012, p. 1281], the Secretary-General, in November, submitted the second performance report on the ictr budget for the 2012–2013 biennium [A/68/579], which reflected a decrease of $1,756,300 gross ($2,586,800 net), com-pared with the revised appropriation for the bien-nium approved in that resolution. The Assembly was requested to revise the appropriation for 2012–2013 to the Special Account for ictr to $180,407,300 gross ($166,921,200 net).



8. Further decides to apportion the amount of 23,398,925 dollars gross (21,797,100 dollars net) among Member States in accordance with the scale of assessments applicable to the regular budget of the United Nations for 2014;

9. Decides to apportion the amount of 23,398,925 dollars gross (21,797,100 dollars net) among Member States in accordance with the scale of assessments applicable to peacekeeping operations of the United Nations for 2014;

10. Also decides that, in accordance with the provisions of its resolution 973(X) of 15 December 1955, there shall be set off against the apportionment among Member States, as provided for in paragraphs 8 and 9 above, their respective share in the Tax Equalization Fund of the estimated staff assessment income of 3,203,650 dollars approved for the Tribunal for 2014.

Annex

Financing for the biennium 2014–2015 of the International Criminal Tribunal for the

Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Genocide and Other Serious Violations of International

Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of Rwanda and Rwandan Citizens Responsible for Genocide and Other Such Violations Committed in the Territory of Neighbouring States between

1 January and 31 December 1994

Gross Net



95,283,500 88,879,600


(1,687,800) (1,691,200)


– –

Recommendations of the Fifth Committee – –


93,595,700 87,188,400

Total assessment for 2014Requirements representing half of the

estimated appropriation for the biennium 2014–2015

46,797,850 43,594,200


(1,756,300) (2,586,800)


1,756,300 2,586,800


46,797,850 43,594,200

Of which:

Contributions assessed on Member States in accordance with the scale of assessments applicable to the regular budget of the United Nations for 2014

23,398,925 21,797,100


23,398,925 21,797,100

1. Takes note of the second performance report of the Secretary-General on the budget of the International Crim-inal Tribunal for Rwanda for the biennium 2012–2013 and the related report of the Advisory Committee on Adminis-trative and Budgetary Questions;

2. Endorses the conclusions and recommendations con-tained in section II.A of the report of the Advisory Committee;

3. Resolves that, for the biennium 2012–2013, the amount of 182,163,600 United States dollars gross (169,508,000 dollars net) approved in its resolution 67/242 for the financing of the Tribunal shall be adjusted by the amount of 1,756,300 dollars gross (2,586,800 dol-lars net), for a total amount of 180,407,300 dollars gross (166,921,200 dollars net);

IIBudget for the International Criminal Tribunal for

Rwanda for the biennium 2014–2015Having considered the reports of the Secretary-General

on the budget for the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda for the biennium 2014–2015 and on the revised estimates arising from the effects of changes in rates of ex-change and inflation,


1. Takes note of the reports of the Secretary-General on the budget for the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda for the biennium 2014–2015 and on the revised estimates arising from the effects of changes in rates of ex-change and inflation;


3. Decides that the recosting will be calculated in accordance with the formula agreed upon in its resolu-tion concerning the programme budget for the biennium 2014–2015;

4. Emphasizes the importance of the continued ef-forts of the Secretary-General to implement the completion strategy for the Tribunal in an efficient and timely manner;

5. Recalls paragraph 18 of the report of the Advisory Committee, and in this regard requests the Secretary-General to ensure that the Tribunal adheres to the revised travel policy pursuant to its resolution 67/254 of 12 April 2013 and to reflect any cost savings resulting from the revised travel policy in the context of the second perfor-mance report;

6. Decides to appropriate to the Special Account for the International Criminal Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Genocide and Other Serious Vio-lations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of Rwanda and Rwandan Citizens Responsi-ble for Genocide and Other Such Violations Committed in the Territory of Neighbouring States between 1 January and 31 December 1994 a total amount of 93,595,700 dol-lars gross (87,188,400 dollars net) for the biennium 2014–2015, as detailed in the annex to the present resolution;

7. Also decides that the total assessment for 2014 under the Special Account shall amount to 46,797,850 dollars, being half of the estimated appropriation approved for the biennium 2014–2015;



continued to bring the work of the Tribunal closer to communities in the former Yugoslavia. The Tribunal also worked to ensure a smooth transition to the In-ternational Residual Mechanism. Staff attrition and staff shortages posed major obstacles to the expeditious completion of the Tribunal’s work. The Tribunal took measures to address those challenges, including the use of a roster system and in-house incentives, such as compensation time. In line with the Tribunal’s com-pletion strategy, the Tribunal’s field offices in Belgrade and Sarajevo continued liaison and outreach work in their respective countries.

As the Tribunal worked towards the completion of its activities, it continued to face challenges in relation to the relocation of witnesses. In addition, requests from national authorities for assistance and consul-tation under the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure were putting a strain on the resources of the Victims and Witnesses Section, especially in the context of down-sizing. The process of downsizing continued to be im-plemented, and the Tribunal expected to abolish 120 posts in line with the trial and appeal schedule. It was preparing also for the comparative review process for post reductions for the 2014–2015 biennium, with the aim of providing staff with maximum contractual security. The Tribunal continued to secure additional agreements for the enforcement of Tribunal sentences. It also continued working with local authorities and international partners on establishing information centres in the region of the former Yugoslavia. In Feb-ruary, the Tribunal President received official notifica-tion that the Bosnian Serb member of the Presidency would support the establishment of information cen-tres in Sarajevo and Banja Luka.

As at 18 November, four individuals were on trial, and 21 were in appeal proceedings. The Tribunal con-cluded proceedings against 136 of the 161 individuals it had indicted. It continued to implement measures to expedite its work, including altering preparations for drafting judgments so that that work could begin at an earlier stage of trials and appeals; actively managing the translation process for judgments and assigning ad-ditional resources to key translations; and maintaining rosters of qualified applications to ensure that depart-ing staff could be replaced promptly.

The Tribunal would not be able to complete the trial proceedings involving Karadžić, Mladić and Hadžić by 31 December 2014, the date for completion indi-cated by the Security Council in resolution 1966(2010) [YUN 2010, p. 1306]. Appeals in the cases of Tolimir and Stanišić and Zupljanin were expected to be completed by March and April 2015, respectively. In the case of Prlić et al., the appeal judgment was expected in June 2017. Appeals in the Hadžić, Karadžić, Mladić, and Šešelj cases, if any, would be filed after 1 July and would fall within the jurisdiction of the Mechanism. With re-spect to the 13 persons transferred to national jurisdic-

On the same date, the Assembly decided that the agenda item on ictr financing would remain for con-sideration during its resumed sixty-eighth (2014) ses-sion (decision 68/550).

Functioning of the Tribunals

Working Group report. On 31 December [S/2013/794], the Chair of the Informal Working Group on International Tribunals submitted to the Security Council President an account of the Group’s activities for the period from 1 January to 31 December 2013. The Working Group continued to meet regularly and held seven meetings, including with the Presidents and Prosecutors of the two tribunals in New York for their presentations to the Security Council. The Group’s working methods were also discussed following a proposal by Guatemala to include matters concerning the International Criminal Court, but no consensus was reached. The Russian Federation also presented proposals for preventing further delays in completing cases and optimizing the Tribunals’ working methods, including an external independent assessment of the performance of icty. The Working Group discussed the relocation of acquitted persons and convicted per-sons who had completed their sentences but were cur-rently located in Arusha. In that regard, the Working Group agreed that the Registrar should continue to pursue all possible options, including the possibility of reaching an agreement on voluntary return to Rwanda.

Implementation of completion strategiesICTY

In response to Security Council resolution 1534(2004) [YUN 2004, p. 1292], the icty President reported in May [S/2013/308] and November [S/2013/678] on progress made in implementing the icty completion strategy.

The large number of trial and appeal judgments rendered during the reporting period brought the Tribunal closer to the completion of its mandate, and although in certain cases some judgments were ex-pected later than previously predicted, the Tribunal was doing its utmost to limit and avoid such delays. As the Tribunal moved towards the completion of its mandate, its judicial activity focused on appeals, thus increasing the workload of the Appeals Chamber. The multitude and complexity of cases being assigned to the Appeals Chamber would impact its ability to com-plete its work as expeditiously as possible. That matter was being considered by the Security Council Infor-mal Working Group on International Tribunals. The Tribunal undertook initiatives aimed at providing as-sistance and support to victims and pursued legacy and capacity-building projects. The Outreach programme



ing and multiple activities for the Prosecutor’s closing report to the Secretary-General, as well as other es-sential legacy projects initiated over the years. On 4 and 5 November, the President, the Prosecutor and representatives of the Registrars of the Tribunal and the Mechanism visited Rwanda, the first joint visit by the Tribunal and the Mechanism to that country. They discussed, among other matters, the importance of continuing cooperation and communication, in-cluding sharing practical experience, and the critical issue of tracking and apprehending the remaining nine fugitives indicted by the Tribunal. The Tribunal offices in Arusha, the Information and Documenta-tion Centre in Kigali, Rwanda, and the 10 additional provincial mini-information centres located across Rwanda continued to play a key role in information dissemination, improved communication and access to the jurisprudence of the Tribunal and other legal materials. The handover of judicial responsibilities to the Mechanism was almost complete, with the first Mechanism appeal from a Tribunal judgment under way. The Tribunal continued the process of transfer-ring records and archives to the Mechanism, and handed over three temporary archives storage facili-ties in September and October. A smooth transition of prosecutorial tasks also remained on track.

International Residual MechanismThe International Residual Mechanism for Crimi-

nal Tribunals, established by Security Council resolu-tion 1966(2010) [YUN 2010, p. 1306], had as its mandate to execute the residual functions of icty and ictr, fol-lowing the closure of those entities. The Mechanism had two branches: the one for ictr was launched on 1 July 2012 and the one for icty commenced functioning on 1 July 2013. In response to resolu-tion 1966(2010), the President and the Prosecutor of the Mechanism submitted progress reports in May [S/2013/309] and November [S/2013/679] for the periods from 15 November 2012 to 23 May 2013, and from 23 May to 15 November 2013, respectively.

The President of the Mechanism supervised issues relating to the establishment and management of the Mechanism, coordinated the work of the Chamber, and decided applications for early release and a request for review of an administrative decision. The Office of the Prosecutor focused on the activities in its remit, including the tracking of the remaining fugitives in-dicted by ictr, the rendering of assistance to national authorities, and the prosecution of the Mechanism’s first appeal. The Registry was responsible for provid-ing and coordinating a wide range of administrative and judicial support to the Mechanism.

The activities of the Mechanism were covered in two reports to the Security Council and the General Assembly, for the periods from 1 July 2012 to 30 June

tions, proceedings against 12 of them had concluded. The remaining individual, Vladimir Kovačevic, was determined not fit to stand trial by the Serbian judici-ary in 2006 [YUN 2006, p. 1487].

ICTR

In response to Security Council resolution 1534(2004) [YUN 2004, p. 1292], the ictr President submitted re-ports in May [S/2013/310] and November [S/2013/663] that assessed progress made in implementing the ictr completion strategy.

As at 5 November, the Tribunal had completed its work with respect to the substantive cases at the trial level for all 93 accused indicted by the Tribunal, including 55 first-instance judgments involving 75 accused, 10 referrals to national jurisdictions, three top-priority fugitives whose cases were transferred to the Mechanism, two withdrawn indictments and three indictees who died prior to or in the course of trial. Appellate proceedings were concluded in respect of 46 persons. The Appeals Chamber met its acceler-ated projection of delivering one judgment concerning two persons in the first quarter of 2013. One more appeal case concerning one person was expected to be disposed of by the end of 2013, four appeal judg-ments concerning eight persons would be delivered in 2014, and the remaining appeal judgment concern-ing six persons was projected to be completed by July 2015. On 24 July 2013, the case against Bernard Mu-nyagishari was transferred to Rwanda, marking the completion of transfer work by the Tribunal. Nine of the accused indicted by the Tribunal remained at large. The Mechanism would retain jurisdiction over three of those indictees: Augustin Bizimana, Félicien Kabuga and Protais Mpiranya. The cases of the re-maining six fugitives were referred to Rwanda. The transition to the Mechanism and plans for closure of the Tribunal continued to draw nearer to comple-tion. Most judicial and prosecutorial functions were handed over, and administrative services were being provided to the Mechanism. The monitoring of all referred cases fell under the jurisdiction of the Mecha-nism, and the Tribunal assisted the Mechanism by providing interim trial monitors. As the Tribunal continued to make progress towards completing its mandate, all organs worked to facilitate the closing of the Tribunal and the transition to the Mechanism. The downsizing process continued with the proposed abolition of 212 posts. As the Tribunal entered into the final phase of its completion strategy, the Office of the Prosecutor continued to focus efforts on the completion of ongoing appeals, the monitoring of cases referred to national jurisdictions, transitional dispositions to ensure a smooth transfer of functions to the Office of the Prosecutor of the Arusha branch of the Mechanism, preparation of materials for archiv-



toring of cases referred to national jurisdictions, the updating of fugitive files in anticipation of arrest, and the prosecution of an appeal and related litigation be-fore the Mechanism Appeals Chamber. The 14 core staff members of the Arusha branch of the Office were recruited and assumed office. The Prosecutor also des-ignated three other ictr prosecution staff to also work for the Mechanism. The Prosecutor recruited an ad hoc appeals team to handle the appeal from judgment and sentence in the Ngirabatware case. The Office also began preparation for the establishment of The Hague branch of the Office on 1 July. The first joint branch meeting of the Office of the Prosecutor was held in Arusha in November.

The arrest and prosecution of three fugitives, namely, Augustin Bizimana, Félicien Kabuga and Pro-tais Mpiranya, was a priority of the Office, which in-tensified efforts at tracking them, placing focus on the Great Lakes and southern African regions. The Office responded to 92 requests for assistance from 16 Mem-ber States and international organizations. Monitors appointed by the ictr Prosecutor to monitor the cases of Bucyibaruta and Munyeshyaka that were transferred to France in 2007 and the case of Uwinkindi that was transferred to Rwanda in 2012 [YUN 2012, p. 1280] re-ported to the Mechanism Prosecutor. Following the decision on 3 May of the ictr Appeals Chamber upholding the referral of the case of Munyagishari to Rwanda for trial, the Prosecutor appointed a monitor to observe the proceedings in that case.

The Registry

The Registry was responsible for the provision of legal, judicial, policy, diplomatic and administrative support to all Mechanism operations. It provided assistance to national jurisdictions, offered protec-tion and support services to witnesses, monitored the enforcement of sentences, administered the Mecha-nism’s legal aid scheme, made arrangements for the monitoring of cases referred to national jurisdictions for trial, explained the mandate of the Mechanism, and managed its archives and records. The Registry also processed judicial filings, assigned and remuner-ated defence teams, and provided translations of cor-respondence and judicial documents.

The Arusha branch of the Witness Support and Protection unit provided the same level of services previously offered by the Tribunal. It developed strate-gies to strengthen the management and safekeeping of confidential witness information, and handled protec-tions issues not only in Rwanda but also in the Great Lakes region.

The Mechanism Archives and Records Section of-fered guidance to the Tribunals in the preparation of their records for transfer to the Mechanism. It also was engaged in the review and development of policies

2013 [A/68/219–S/2013/464] and from 1 July 2013 to 30 June 2014 [A/69/226–S/2014/555].

On 16 September, the Assembly decided to de-fer consideration of the item entitled “International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals” and to include it in the draft agenda of its sixty-eighth (2013) session (decision 67/567).

The Assembly took note of the first annual report of the Mechanism [A/68/219–S/2013/464] on 14 October (decision 68/510).

Activities of the President and the Chambers

During the year, the President developed and adopted practice directions, held regular meetings with the Registrar on operational and managerial matters, and represented the Mechanism in a wide variety of forums. The President issued two decisions on applica-tions for early release received from Paul Bisengimana and Omar Serushago, and one decision on a request for the review of an administrative decision by the Mechanism’s Registrar. The President assigned matters to a single judge and to the Appeals Chamber, presided over the Appeals Chamber, and served as pre-appeal judge on the Mechanism’s first appeal from judgment in the case of the Prosecutor v. Augustin Ngirabatware.

Judge Joensen, as the Mechanism duty judge or single judge, dealt with numbers of motions, includ-ing requests to amend indictments and to reissue ar-rest warrants for three fugitives from ictr. He also considered allegations of contempt arising out of the case of the Prosecutor v. Augustin Ngirabatware. In ad-dition, Judge Joensen issued six decisions on request for variation of witnesses’ protective measures.

The Appeals Chamber was seized of one appeal from judgment concerning the case of Augustin Ngi-rabatware, who was sentenced to 35 years of imprison-ment in 2012, following his conviction of genocide, direct and public incitement to commit genocide, and rape as a crime against humanity [YUN 2012, p. 1276]. Mr. Ngirabatware filed notice of appeal against the ictr trial judgment on 9 April and the briefing was in progress. The Appeals Chamber was also seized of one appeal challenging a decision of the ictr to refer the case of Phénéas Munyarugarama to Rwanda for trial and other requests and appeals. The Appeals Chamber rendered one decision in the Munyarugarama matter, one interlocutory appeal decision, one decision related to a post-appeal request, and seven pre-appeal orders and decisions.

Office of the Prosecutor

In 2013, the Arusha branch of the Office of the Prosecutor was fully functional and discharged its mandate, including the tracking of fugitives, the ren-dering of assistance to national authorities, the moni-



continued bilateral exchanges with the African Court to explore the possibility of sharing facilities in the future. It encouraged the Secretary-General to con-tinue to explore options for reducing the duration of the project. Acabq also recommended that the As-sembly request the Secretary-General to continue to provide updates on the progress of the project and more details on the methodology used in calculating the cost estimates, and to include information regard-ing associated costs as part of overall costs of future construction and refurbishment projects. The Assem-bly should authorize the activities related to all phases of the project, including the construction phase; note that the additional requirements of the project would be included in the proposed budget for the Mecha-nism for the 2014–2015 biennium; decide to establish a multi-year special account for the expenditures of the project; and approve an additional assessment in the amount of $1,500,000 of the appropriation of $3 million for the construction of the facility.


On 12 April [meeting 73], the General Assembly, on the recommendation of the Fifth Committee [A/67/676/Add.1], adopted resolution 67/244 B with-out vote [agenda item 144].

Financing of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals

B

The General Assembly,Recalling its resolutions 66/240 B of 21 June 2012 and

67/244 A of 24 December 2012,Having considered the report of the Secretary-General

on the construction of a new facility for the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals, Arusha branch, and the related report of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions,

1. Takes note of the report of the Secretary-General on the construction of a new facility for the International Re-sidual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals, Arusha branch;

2. Endorses the conclusions and recommendations contained in the report of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions, subject to the provisions of the present resolution;

3. Notes with appreciation the continued efforts of the Government of the United Republic of Tanzania in facili-tating the construction project;

4. Welcomes the progress made in the implementation of the mandates related to the construction of the facility;

5. Authorizes the activities related to all phases of the construction of the facility;

6. Authorizes the Secretary-General to establish a multi-year special account to record income and expendi-tures for the construction of the facility;

7. Welcomes the use of local knowledge in the design stage, and in this regard encourages the Secretary-General to continue his efforts in including local knowledge and capacity in the implementation of the project;

and guidelines on record management, including the operations of record centres.

The Arusha branch of the Registry began to re-view enforcement of sentence agreements previously entered into by ictr to ensure that they met the needs of the Mechanism. The Registry was also exploring the possibility of entering into enforcement of sen-tence agreements with additional Member States. The Arusha branch facilitated requests for assistance from national authorities conducting investigations, pros-ecutions and trials of individuals charged in relation to the genocide in Rwanda.

The Registry approached international and regional organizations for assistance with the monitoring of the cases referred by the Tribunal to Rwanda, and engaged with Member States to carry out its mandate, includ-ing the enforcement of sentences, the monitoring of referred cases and the protection of witnesses.

Construction of new facilities

Report of Secretary-General. In response to General Assembly resolution 66/240 B [YUN 2012, p. 1284], the Secretary-General, in a January report [A/67/696], provided information, as well as an update on the progress of the project plan and overall cost estimate of the planned new facility for the Mecha-nism. Considerable progress had been made. A suit-able building site was identified, the project team concluded the conceptual design, and a detailed cost estimate was done. The overall project schedule was re-duced from five years and three months to four years. The Tribunals continued to offer assistance to the project, including in the areas of security, telecommu-nications, budget, human resources and procurement. The Mechanism took steps to ensure that the procure-ment of architectural and construction services was conducted in a timely and efficient manner. The cost of the project was estimated at $7,737,362, inclusive of construction costs, site works, architect fees, project supervision, and management and travel of staff to provide technical assistance. Total project costs, in-cluding a 15 per cent contingency, would amount to $8,787,733. Given that the construction of the new facility in Arusha would not be completed until the end of 2015, according to the shortened schedule, the Secretary-General proposed that a multi-year special account be utilized for the project.

ACABQ Report. On 28 February [A/67/768], acabq commended the Secretary-General for the sav-ings achieved by using in-house capacity for develop-ing the conceptual design. It recommended that the Assembly request the Secretary-General to apply the flexible use of office space in the project, and ensure that the final space requirements for the new facility reflected the actual number of staff needed to perform the functions of the Mechanism. Acabq encouraged



ploring the possibility of sharing facilities, particularly a courtroom, in the future and to report on the outcome of the exchanges in the context of the progress reports;

20. Notes that additional requirements for the project will be included in the proposed budget for the Mechanism for the biennium 2014–2015.

Financing

2012–2013 bienniumReport of Secretary-General. In response to

General Assembly resolution 67/244 A [YUN 2012, p. 1285], the Secretary-General, in November, sub-mitted the second performance report [A/68/594] on the budget of the International Residual Mechanism for the 2012–2013 biennium, which reflected a decrease of $34,677,800 gross ($33,006,900 net) compared with the revised appropriation for the biennium. The Assembly was requested to revise the appropriation for 2012–2013 to $18,998,700 gross ($18,078,700 net).

ACABQ report. Acabq, in December [A/68/642], recommended that the Assembly approve the final ap-propriation for the 2012–2013 biennium at $18,998,700 gross ($18,078,700 net) for the Mechanism.

2014–2015 bienniumIn September [A/68/491], the Secretary-General

presented resource requirements for the Mechanism for the 2014–2015 biennium, which before recosting amounted to $110,520,000 gross ($103,581,900 net). Of the 126 temporary posts proposed for 2014–2015, 30 would support the administrative activities of the Mechanism, 17 in Arusha and 13 in The Hague, respectively.

Acabq, in December [A/68/642], recommended ap-proval of the proposed resource requirements for the 2014–2015 biennium for the Mechanism.

In December [A/68/660], the Secretary-General pre-sented revised estimates for the 2014–2015 biennium, arising from the effect of the evolution of rates of ex-change and inflation, which after recosting amounted to $120,296,600 gross.

Acabq found no objection to the revised estimated arising from the recosting of the effect of changes in rates of exchange and inflation, and transmitted them to the General Assembly for consideration [A/68/7/Add.24].


On 27 December [meeting 72], the General Assem-bly, on the recommendation of the Fifth Committee [A/68/683], adopted resolution 68/257 without vote [agenda item 146].

Financing of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals


8. Commends the Secretary-General for the savings achieved by using in-house capacity for developing the conceptual design, and encourages him to continue to find further savings where possible during the implementation of the project;

9. Recalls paragraph 9 of the report of the Advisory Committee, and in this regard requests the Secretary-General to apply the flexible use of office space in the Arusha branch project, upon the approval by the General Assembly of flexible workspace arrangements in the Secretariat;

10. Requests the Secretary-General to entrust the Of-fice of Internal Oversight Services of the Secretariat with ensuring effective oversight of the implementation of the construction of the facility and with submitting to the Gen-eral Assembly information on key findings in the context of its annual reports;

11. Recalls the mandate that the Mechanism should be a small, temporary and efficient structure, whose functions and size will diminish over time, with a small number of staff commensurate with its reduced functions;

12. Also recalls paragraph 36 of the report of the Secretary-General, and encourages the Secretary-General to continue his efforts to ensure that the required court-room space is completed in a cost-effective manner, keeping in mind the varying judicial requirements of the Mecha-nism, and to continue to report thereon in the context of the performance reports;

13. Requests the Secretary-General to make further efforts to shorten the duration of the construction project, to allocate the resources provided in the most effective and efficient manner and to submit a progress report no later than at the first part of the resumed sixty-eighth session of the General Assembly;

14. Also requests the Secretary-General, through the Office of Central Support Services of the Department of Management of the Secretariat, to update Member States regularly on the progress of the construction project;

15. Emphasizes the importance of guidance, inter-action and coordination between the Secretariat in New York, including the Office of Central Support Services, on the one hand, and the Mechanism, Arusha branch, on the other hand, with clear reporting lines during the implemen-tation of the project;

16. Stresses the importance of the leadership and guid-ance of the Secretary-General and senior management, as well as of a commitment to the construction project by all parties concerned during the execution and completion of the project;

17. Takes note of paragraphs 21 and 22 of the report of the Secretary-General, and in this regard requests the Secretary-General to ensure that the procurement of goods and services for the construction project is carried out in strict compliance with the existing regulations, rules and relevant provisions of General Assembly resolutions govern-ing procurement in the United Nations;

18. Recalls paragraph 33 of its resolution 62/269 of 20 June 2008;

19. Also recalls paragraph 12 of the report of the Advi-sory Committee, and in this regard requests the Secretary-General to continue bilateral exchanges with judicial insti-tutions such as the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights to discuss issues of mutual interest, including ex-



(112,831,500 dollars net) for the biennium 2014–2015, as detailed in the annex to the present resolution;

6. Also decides that the total assessment for 2014 under the Special Account amounting to 61,648,300 dollars gross shall consist of:

(a) 60,148,300 dollars, being half of the estimated ap-propriation approved for the biennium 2014–2015;

(b) 1,500,000 dollars, being the increase reflecting the deferred assessment decided by the General Assembly in its resolution 67/244;

7. Further decides, for the year 2014, to apportion the amount of 30,824,150 dollars gross (28,957,875 dollars net) among Member States in accordance with the scale of as-sessments applicable to the regular budget of the United Nations for 2014;

8. Decides to apportion the amount of 30,824,150 dol-lars gross (28,957,875 dollars net) among Member States in accordance with the scale of assessments applicable to peacekeeping operations of the United Nations for 2014;

9. Also decides that, in accordance with the provisions of its resolution 973(X) of 15 December 1955, there shall be set off against the apportionment among Member States, as provided for in paragraphs 7 and 8 above, their respective share in the Tax Equalization Fund of the estimated staff assessment income in the amount of 3,732,550 dollars ap-proved for the Mechanism for 2014.

Annex

Financing for the biennium 2014–2015 of the International Residual Mechanism

for Criminal Tribunals

Gross Net



120,282,100 112,863,000


14,500 (31,500)


– –

Recommendations of the Fifth Committee – –


120,296,600 112,831,500

Total assessment for 2014

Requirements representing half of the estimated appropriation for the biennium 2014–2015

60,148,300 56,415,750


(34,677,800) (33,006,900)


34,677,800 33,006,900

Increase reflecting the deferred assessment of $1.5 million as decided by the General Assembly in resolution 67/244

1,500,000 1,500,000


61,648,300 57,915,750

ISecond performance report on the budget

of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals for the biennium 2012–2013Having considered the second performance report of the

Secretary-General on the budget of the International Re-sidual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals for the biennium 2012–2013 and the related report of the Advisory Commit-tee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions,

Recalling its resolutions 66/240 A of 24 December 2011 and 66/240 B of 21 June 2012, as well as its reso-lutions 67/244 A of 24 December 2012 and 67/244 B of 12 April 2013,

1. Takes note of the second performance report of the Secretary-General on the budget of the International Re-sidual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals for the biennium 2012–2013;

2. Endorses the conclusions and recommendations contained in section IV.A of the report of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions;

3. Resolves that, for the biennium 2012–2013, the amount of 53,676,500 United States dollars gross (51,085,600 dollars net) approved in its resolution 67/244 A for the financing of the Mechanism shall be adjusted by the amount of 34,677,800 dollars gross (33,006,900 dol-lars net), for a total amount of 18,998,700 dollars gross (18,078,700 dollars net);

IIBudget for the International Residual Mechanism for

Criminal Tribunals for the biennium 2014–2015Having considered the reports of the Secretary-General

on the budget for the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals for the biennium 2014–2015 and on the revised estimates arising from changes in rates of exchange and inflation,


1. Takes note of the reports of the Secretary-General on the budget for the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals for the biennium 2014–2015 and on the revised estimates arising from the effects of changes in rates of exchange and inflation;


3. Decides that the recosting will be calculated in accordance with the formula agreed upon in its resolu-tion concerning the programme budget for the biennium 2014–2015;

4. Recalls paragraph 50 of the report of the Advisory Committee, and in this regard requests the Secretary-General to ensure that the Mechanism adheres to the revised travel policy pursuant to its resolution 67/254 of 12 April 2013 and to reflect any cost savings resulting from the revised travel policy in the context of the second perfor-mance report;

5. Decides to appropriate to the Special Account for the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals a total amount of 120,296,600 dollars gross



Emphasizing that justice, especially transitional justice in conflict and post-conflict societies, is a fundamental building block of sustainable peace,

Convinced that ending impunity is essential if a society in armed conflict or recovering from armed conflict is to come to terms with past crimes committed and to prevent such crimes in the future,

Acknowledging the fact that the International Criminal Court has achieved considerable progress in its analyses, investigations and judicial proceedings in various situations and cases which were referred to it by States parties to the Rome Statute and by the Security Council, and which the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court has initi-ated proprio motu, in accordance with the Rome Statute,

Recalling that effective and comprehensive cooperation and assistance in all aspects of its mandate by States, the United Nations and other international and regional or-ganizations remain essential for the International Criminal Court to carry out its activities,

Expressing its appreciation to the Secretary-General for providing effective and efficient assistance to the Interna-tional Criminal Court in accordance with the Relationship Agreement between the United Nations and the Interna-tional Criminal Court,

Acknowledging the Relationship Agreement as approved by the General Assembly in its resolution 58/318 of 13 Sep-tember 2004, including paragraph 3 of the resolution, with respect to the payment in full of expenses accruing to the United Nations as a result of the implementation of the Relationship Agreement, which provides a framework for continued cooperation between the International Criminal Court and the United Nations, which enables, inter alia, facilitation by the United Nations of the Court’s field ac-tivities, and encouraging the conclusion of supplementary arrangements and agreements, as necessary,

Noting the need for funding of expenses related to in-vestigations or prosecutions of the International Criminal Court, including in connection with situations referred to the Court by the Security Council,

Welcoming the continuous support given by civil society to the International Criminal Court,

Expressing its appreciation to the International Crimi-nal Court for providing assistance to the Special Court for Sierra Leone,

1. Welcomes the report of the International Criminal Court for 2011/12;

2. Welcomes the States that have become parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court in the past year, and calls upon all States in all regions of the world that are not yet parties to the Rome Statute to consider ratifying or acceding to it without delay;

3. Welcomes the States parties as well as States not parties to the Rome Statute that have become parties to the Agreement on the Privileges and Immunities of the In-ternational Criminal Court, and calls upon all States that have not yet done so to consider becoming parties to that Agreement;

4. Notes the recent ratifications of the amendments adopted at the Review Conference of the Rome Statute, held in Kampala from 31 May to 11 June 2010;

5. Underlines, bearing in mind that in accordance with the Rome Statute the International Criminal Court

Of which:

Contributions assessed on Member States in accordance with the scale of assessments applicable to the regular budget of the United Nations for 2014

30,824,150 28,957,875


30,824,150 28,957,875

On 27 December, the Assembly decided that the agenda item on the financing of the Mechanism would remain for consideration during its sixty-eighth resumed (2014) session (decision 68/550).

International Criminal Court

The International Criminal Court (icc), based at The Hague, was established by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court [YUN 1998, p. 1209] as a permanent institution with jurisdiction over per-sons accused of the most serious crimes of interna-tional concern—genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and the crime of aggression.

In 2013, the caseload of the Court continued to increase, with eight situations under investigation and eight under preliminary examination. Arrest warrants issued by the Court remained outstand-ing against 12 individuals. Two cases moved to the appeals stage, and one accused was acquitted. The Court continued to require States parties’ support in its activities, including in the arrest and surren-der of persons, asset tracking and freezing, and vic-tim and witness protection, as well as for acquittals, provisional releases, the enforcement of sentences and the execution of the decisions and orders of the Court. Reports covering icc activities during the year [A/68/314, A/69/321 & Corr.1] were submitted to the Gen-eral Assembly. As at 31 December, 122 countries were parties to the Rome Statute.


On 22 August [meeting 95], the General Assembly adopted resolution 67/295 [draft: A/67/L.76 & Add.1], without vote [agenda item 74].

Report of the International Criminal Court

The General Assembly,Recalling its resolution 66/262 of 29 May 2012 and all

its previous relevant resolutions,Recalling also that the Rome Statute of the International

Criminal Court reaffirms the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations,

Reiterating the historic significance of the adoption of the Rome Statute,



Criminal Court, accept the exercise of jurisdiction by the Court with respect to the crime in question;

16. Urges all States parties to take the interests, needs for assistance and mandate of the International Criminal Court into account when relevant matters are being dis-cussed in the United Nations, and invites all other States to consider doing the same, as appropriate;

17. Emphasizes the importance of the full implemen-tation of all aspects of the Relationship Agreement, which forms a framework for close cooperation between the two organizations and for consultation on matters of mutual interest pursuant to the provisions of that Agreement and in conformity with the respective provisions of the Charter and the Rome Statute, as well as the need for the Secretary-General to continue to inform the General Assembly at its sixty-eighth session of the expenses incurred and reimburse-ments received by the United Nations in connection with assistance provided to the International Criminal Court;

18. Encourages further dialogue between the United Nations and the International Criminal Court, and wel-comes in this regard the increased interaction of the Secu-rity Council with the Court under various formats, includ-ing the holding of an open debate on peace and justice, with a special focus on the role of the Court;

19. Welcomes the statement by the President of the Security Council of 12 February 2013 in which the Coun-cil reiterated its previous call regarding the importance of State cooperation with the International Criminal Court in accordance with the respective obligations of States, and expressed its commitment to effective follow-up of Council decisions in this regard;

20. Expresses its appreciation for the work undertaken by the International Criminal Court liaison office to United Nations Headquarters, and encourages the Secretary-General to continue to work closely with that office;

21. Encourages States to contribute to the Trust Fund established for the benefit of victims of crimes within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court and the families of such victims, and acknowledges with apprecia-tion contributions made to that Trust Fund thus far;

22. Recalls that, at the Review Conference of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which was convened and opened by the Secretary-General, States parties reaffirmed their commitment to the Rome Statute and its full implementation, as well as its universality and integrity, and that the Review Conference undertook a stocktaking exercise of international criminal justice, con-sidering the impact of the Rome Statute on victims and affected communities, peace and justice, complementarity and cooperation, called for the strengthening of the en-forcement of sentences, adopted amendments to the Rome Statute to expand the jurisdiction of the Court to cover three additional war crimes when committed in armed conflicts not of an international character, adopted amend-ments to the Rome Statute to define the crime of aggression and to establish conditions under which the Court could exercise jurisdiction with respect to that crime, and decided to retain article 124 of the Rome Statute;

23. Acknowledges the report of the Secretary-General on the work of the Organization, in which it was stated that the United Nations continued to promote accountability for international crimes and advocate for further ratifica-tion of the Rome Statute and that the first judgement of the

is complementary to national criminal jurisdictions, that States need to adopt appropriate measures within their national legal systems for those crimes for which they are required under international law to exercise their responsi-bility to investigate and prosecute;

6. Encourages further efforts by the United Nations, other international and regional organizations and States, as well as civil society, to appropriately assist States, upon their request, to strengthen their domestic capacity to in-vestigate and prosecute crimes;

7. Emphasizes the importance of international coop-eration and judicial assistance in conducting effective in-vestigations and prosecutions;

8. Recognizes the role of the International Criminal Court in a multilateral system that aims to end impunity, establish the rule of law, promote and encourage respect for human rights, achieve sustainable peace and further the development of nations, in accordance with international law and the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations;

9. Calls upon States parties to the Rome Statute that have not yet done so to adopt national legislation to imple-ment obligations emanating from the Rome Statute and to cooperate with the International Criminal Court in the exercise of its functions, and recalls the provision of techni-cal assistance by States parties in this respect;

10. Welcomes the cooperation and assistance provided thus far to the International Criminal Court by States par-ties as well as States not parties, the United Nations and other international and regional organizations, and calls upon those States that are under an obligation to cooperate to provide such cooperation and assistance in the future, in particular with regard to arrest and surrender, the provision of evidence, the protection and relocation of victims and witnesses and the enforcement of sentences;

11. Recalls article 3 of the Relationship Agreement ac-cording to which, with a view to facilitating the effective discharge of their respective responsibilities, the United Nations and the International Criminal Court shall co-operate closely, whenever appropriate, with each other and consult each other on matters of mutual interest pursuant to the provisions of the Relationship Agreement and in con-formity with the respective provisions of the Charter and the Rome Statute, and shall respect each other’s status and mandate, and requests the Secretary-General to continue to include information relevant to the implementation of article 3 of the Relationship Agreement in a report to be submitted to the General Assembly at its sixty-eighth ses-sion;

12. Takes note of the latest guidance issued by the Secretary-General on contacts with persons who are the subject of arrest warrants or summonses issued by the In-ternational Criminal Court;

13. Emphasizes the importance of cooperation with States that are not parties to the Rome Statute;

14. Invites regional organizations to consider conclud-ing cooperation agreements with the International Crimi-nal Court;

15. Recalls that, by virtue of article 12, paragraph 3, of the Rome Statute, if the acceptance of a State which is not a party to the Rome Statute is required under article 12, paragraph 2, of the Rome Statute, that State may, by declaration lodged with the Registrar of the International



the dialogue with the Court and other stakeholders on the issue, including on complementarity-related capacity-building activities by the international com-munity to assist national jurisdictions; on possible situation-specific completion strategies of the Court; and the role of partnerships with national authorities and other actors. A resolution on victims and repara-tions [ICC-ASP/12/Res.5] called on the Court to explore ways to harmonize the application process for victim participation in trial proceedings and invited the Bu-reau to explore the need for possible amendments to the legal framework for such participation. The As-sembly requested the Court to continue to develop a scheme for the declaration of indigence of the accused for the purpose of legal aid and to report back to the Assembly. It requested the Court and the Trust Fund for Victims to develop a strong collaborative partner-ship to implement Court-ordered reparations, and de-cided to continue to monitor the implementation of the rights of victims under the Rome Statute.

In a resolution on the Independent Oversight Mechanism [ICC-ASP/12/Res.6], the Assembly decided that the Oversight Mechanism should perform the functions of investigations, inspection and evaluation in accordance with the Rome Statute, and urged it to continue to develop the legal framework for those functions and to submit it to the Assembly for consid-eration at its next session. It invited the Court to work with the Oversight Mechanism on the amendments to existing legal instruments necessary for the full opera-tionalization of the functions of the Mechanism, for adoption at the Assembly’s next session. The Assembly decided on an amendment to the Rule of Procedure and Evidence [ICC-ASP/12/Res.7] aimed at strengthen-ing the institutional framework of the Rome Statute system and enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of the Court to replace the current rule 100. A resolu-tion on strengthening icc and the Assembly of States Parties [ICC-ASP/12/Res.8] addressed, among other is-sues, cooperation, victims and reparations, comple-mentarity, and the programme budget. It adopted the amendments to the procedure for the nomination and election of judges and endorsed the proposed “Revised Road Map” for the consideration of proposals for expe-diting the criminal process of the Court.

The ChambersThe judicial activities of the Court were conducted

by the Chambers, which consisted of 18 judges organ-ized in three divisions: the Appeals Division, the Trial Division and the Pre-Trial Division.

New arrests, warrants and summonses

On 2 August, Pre-Trial Chamber II issued an ar-rest warrant against Walter Osapiri Barasa for offences

International Criminal Court, in the Lubanga case, consti-tuted an important step in ensuring the accountability of those responsible for international crimes;

24. Takes note of the decision of the Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court at its eleventh session, while recalling that, according to article 112, paragraph 6, of the Rome Statute, the Assem-bly of States Parties shall meet at the seat of the Court or at United Nations Headquarters, to hold its twelfth session in The Hague, looks forward to the twelfth session, which is to be held from 20 to 28 November 2013, and requests the Secretary-General to provide the necessary services and fa-cilities in accordance with the Relationship Agreement and resolution 58/318;

25. Encourages the widest possible participation of States in the Assembly of States Parties, invites States to contribute to the Trust Fund for the participation of least developed countries, and acknowledges with appreciation contributions made to that Trust Fund thus far;

26. Invites the International Criminal Court to sub-mit, in accordance with article 6 of the Relationship Agree-ment, a report on its activities for 2012/13, for considera-tion by the General Assembly at its sixty-eighth session.

Assembly of States Parties

The Assembly of States Parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court adopted eight res-olutions at its twelfth session (The Hague, 20–28 No-vember) [ICC-ASP/12/20].

The Assembly approved the Court’s 2014 pro-gramme budget amounting to €118,595,000, and es-tablished the Working Capital Fund in the amount of €7,405,983. It noted that the Contingency Fund did not require replenishing in 2014 but it requested the Bureau to keep the €7 million threshold level of the Fund under review in the light of further experience on its functioning [ICC-ASP/12/Res.1].

A resolution on the Court’s permanent premises [ICC-ASP/12/Res.2] welcomed the fact that the construc-tion project remained within the €190 million budget, and, as a result of realized savings, the current pro-jected construction cost was set at €184.4 million. It also welcomed the beginning of construction in March and the implementation of the cost-review strategy put in place by the Oversight Committee. In a resolution on cooperation [ICC-ASP/12/Res.3], the Assembly wel-comed the increased cooperation between icc and the United Nations and other international and regional organizations and inter-governmental institutions. The Assembly also encouraged States to establish a national focal point and/or a central authority or working group to coordinate and mainstream Court-related issues, including requests for assistance, within and across government institutions.

In resolution on complementarity [ICC-ASP/12/Res.4], the Assembly of States Parties resolved to continue to strengthen effective domestic implementation of the Rome Statute, and requested the Bureau to continue



defence was instructed to complete its presentation of evidence within eight months but by April, only 25 of the 63 witnesses had appeared before the Chamber. On 16 July, the Chamber issued a decision ordering that the defence’s completion of the presentation of evidence and issues related to the closing of the case should be concluded by 25 October. It also gave direc-tions relating to the submission of closing briefs.

In the Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir case (situa-tion in Darfur, Sudan), Pre-Trial Chamber II issued an order, on 15 February, regarding the alleged upcoming visit by Mr. Al Bashir to Ndjamena, requesting Chad to arrest and surrender him to the Court. On 22 Febru-ary, the Chamber requested observations from Chad on its alleged failure to execute the request and to consult with the Court on problems that might have impeded such action. On 26 March, the Chamber, in its decision on the non-compliance of Chad with the cooperation requests, referred the matter to the Security Council and the Assembly of States Parties. On 15 July, having received notification from the Prosecutor that Mr. Al Bashir had arrived in the Nigerian capital, Abuja, the Chamber requested Nigeria to arrest him and surren-der him to the Court. On 5 September, the Pre-Trial Chamber issued a decision on the cooperation of Nige-ria regarding Mr. Al Bashir’s arrest and surrender to the Court, whereby it decided not to refer the matter to the Assembly of States Parties and the Security Council. The Chamber also invited the competent authorities of the following countries, on the respective dates, to cooperate with the Court in the arrest and surrender of Mr. Al Bashir in the event he entered their territories: United States (18 September); Ethiopia, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait (10 October and 18 November).

In the Abdallah Banda Abakaer Nourain and Saleh Mohammed Jerbo Jamus case (situation in Darfur, Su-dan), the Chamber, on 6 March, announced that the trial would commence on 5 May 2014. On 23 April, the defence notified the Chamber that Mr. Jerbo Ja-mus had died in Northern Darfur. Trial Chamber IV terminated the proceedings against Mr. Jerbo Jamus on 4 October without prejudice to resuming the pro-ceedings should information become available that he was alive.

In the Abdel Raheem Muhammad Hussein case (situ-ation in Darfur), the Prosecutor, on 25 April, notified Pre-Trial Chamber II that Mr. Hussein was planning to participate in a conference in Chad. On 26 April, the Chamber issued an order reminding Chad of its obligation to arrest Mr. Hussein and surrender him to the Court. In September, Pre-Trial Chamber II requested observations from Chad and the Central African Republic concerning their alleged failure to arrest Mr. Hussein when he was in their territory. On 13 November, the Chamber decided not to refer the matter to the Assembly of States Parties and the Security Council.

against the administration of justice under article 70 of the Statute, for corruptly influencing or attempting to corruptly influence three icc witnesses. Surrender proceedings were ongoing in Kenya.

In the Charles Blé Goudé case (situation in Cote d’Ivoire), Pre-Chamber I, on 30 September, decided to unseal the warrant of arrest issued under seal against Mr. Blé Goudé in December 2011.

Also on 30 September, Cote d’Ivoire lodged an admissibility challenge and requested the postpone-ment of the request for the arrest and surrender of Ms. Simone Gbagbo. The matter was pending before the Pre-trial Chamber.


In the Thomas Lubanga Dyilo case (situation in the drc), on 8 April, the Trust Fund for Victims submitted observations on the documents in support of the ap-peals, upon the invitation of the Appeals Chamber.

In the Germain Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui case (situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (drc)), the Chamber decided to consider the possibility that Mr. Katanga could be responsible under article 25(3)(d)(ii) of the Statute instead of ar-ticle 25(3)(a). Mr. Katanga challenged that decision, but his appeal was rejected by the Appeals Chamber on 24 March. The Chamber decided that Mr. Katanga should be given an opportunity to re-examine previous or new witnesses, or to present other evidence. The deadline for the defence to submit its final list of evi-dence was 17 September.

In the Bosco Ntaganda case (situation in the drc), on 26 March, Mr. Ntaganda appeared before Pre-Trial Chamber II after his voluntary surrender to the Court. On 12 April, Pre-Trial Chamber II set the regime for evidence disclosure and requested the parties to pro-ceed with a detailed analysis of each piece of evidence to be presented in order to describe its relevance for the case. On 17 June, the confirmation of changes hearing, which was initially scheduled to start on 23 September, was postponed until 10 February 2014. On 28 May, Pre-Trial Chamber II established principles on the vic-tims’ application process and, on 26 June, rejected a request by the legal representative of nine victims par-ticipating in the case of Mr. Lubanga Dyilo in order for them to be admitted in the case against Mr. Ntaganda. On 2 December, Pre-Trial Chamber II appointed two common legal representatives of victims in the case, considering the number of victims who had applied to participate at the pre-trial stage and the conflicting in-terests between the different groups of victims.

In the Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo case (situation in the Central African Republic), on 6 February, the Chamber granted the defence’s request to lift the tem-porary suspension of proceedings. The presentation of evidence by the defence resumed on 25 February. The



12 February, Libya filed a request for leave to appeal that decision, which was rejected on 25 February by Pre-Trial Chamber I. On 2 April, Libya filed an appli-cation challenging the admissibility of the case before Pre-Trial Chamber I. On 26 April, Pre-Trial Chamber I issued its decision on the conduct of the proceedings following the admissibility challenge filed by Libya. The Chamber invited the Defence for Abdullah Al-Senussi, the Office of Public Counsel for Victims as legal representative of victims in the case, and the Se-curity Council to submit observations on the admis-sibility challenge filed by Libya no later than 14 June. On 14 June, Pre-Trial Chamber I decided that Libya could postpone the execution of the surrender request in relation to Mr. Al-Senussi pending determination of its admissibility challenge filed before the Court and rejected a renewed request to make a finding of non-cooperation by Libya and refer the matter to the Security Council. On 16 July, Pre-Trial Chamber I authorized Libya to file a reply to the observations filed by the Prosecutor, the Office of Public Counsel for Victims and the Defence for Abdullah Al-Senussi by no later than 14 August.

In the Laurent Gbagbo case (situation in Cote d’Ivoire), the Chamber, on 6 February, admitted 60 further victims to participate at the confirmation of charges and related proceedings and appointed the Office of Public Counsel for Victims as the common legal representative for all victims admitted to partici-pate. The hearing on the confirmation of charges was held from 19 to 28 February. On 3 June, the Chamber adjourned the hearing and requested the Prosecutor to consider providing further evidence or conducting further investigation with respect to all charges and to submit by 15 November, amended charges and the list of evidence. On 11 June, Pre-Trial Chamber I rejected the challenge against the admissibility of the Defence case filed on 15 February. On 31 July, the Chamber partly granted the Prosecutor leave to appeal, follow-ing the request on 10 June regarding the decision to adjourn the hearing on the confirmation of charges. On 12 March and 11 July, Pre-Trial Chamber I issued decisions on the review of Mr. Gbagbo’s detention, and decided to keep him in detention.

In the Simone Gbagbo case (situation in Cote d’Ivoire), on 30 September, Cote d’Ivoire lodged an admissibility challenge and requested the postpone-ment of the request for the arrest and surrender of Ms. Gbagbo.

Communications. On 15 April [S/2013/229], the Secretary-General transmitted to the Security Council President a letter dated 27 March from the President of the Court conveying the decision of the Court on the non-compliance of Chad with coop-eration requests regarding the arrest and surrender of Omar Hassan Ahmad Al-Bashir, issued by Pre-Trial Chamber II on 26 March.

In the William Samoei Ruto and Joshua Arap Sang case (situation in Kenya), the trial commencement date, which was moved twice, was set to 10 Septem-ber. In an 18 June decision, the Chamber exempted Mr. Ruto, owing to his duties as Deputy President of Kenya, but directed him to sign a waiver in respect to his right to be present during the trial and set out the stages during which he was required to do so. On 18 July, the Chamber granted the Prosecution’s re-quest for leave to appeal the decision. The Prosecu-tor filed a document in support of the appeal against that decision on 29 July. On 10 September, the trial commenced. On 25 October, the Appeals Chamber reversed the previous decision of Trial Chamber V to grant Mr. Ruto conditional excusal from continu-ous presence at trial. On 13 December, the Appeals Chamber rejected the Prosecutor’s appeal against the decision of Pre-Trial Chamber II.

In the Francis Kirimi Muthaura and Uhuru Mui-gai Kenyatta case (situation in Kenya), the Prosecutor, on 22 January, requested permission from Pre-Trial Chamber II to amend charges to reinsert a factual allegation that the Chamber had denied at the time of the confirmation of charges because of insufficient evidentiary support. On 21 March, the Chamber granted the request, as the Prosecutor had provided reasonable justification. The Prosecutor terminated proceedings against Mr. Muthaura. On 26 April, the Chamber denied a defence request to stay the proceed-ings due to the invalidity of the confirmation decision. In respect of the case against Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta, on 31 October, Trial Chamber V (b) vacated the trial commencement date of 12 November and provision-ally set a new trial commencement date of 5 February 2014. On 19 December, the Prosecution stated that it did not have sufficient evidence to meet the standard required for a conviction at trial and sought a further adjournment of the trial date.

In the Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi and Abdullah Al-Senussi case (situation in Libya), the Court re-jected Libya’s request of 4 March, and reiterated on 28 March, to adduce further evidence. On 31 May, Pre-Trial Chamber I rejected the admissibility chal-lenge presented by Libya in October 2012 [YUN 2012, p. 1290] in the Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi case. On 7 June, Libya filed an appeal against that decision. On 18 July, the Appeals Chamber rejected the request for suspensive effect. The defence of Abdullah Al-Senussi, on 9 January, filed an application requesting the Chamber to refer Libya and Mauritania to the Security Council for their non-compliance with their obligations to cooperate with the Court. On 15 and 16 January, Libya confirmed that Mr. Al-Senussi was in its custody and that national judicial proceedings were ongoing. On 6 February, Pre-Trial Chamber I ordered the Libyan authorities to proceed with the im-mediate surrender of Mr. Al-Senussi to the Court. On



suant to the resolution 1593(2005) [YUN 2005, p. 324]. She noted reports of the ongoing involvement of icc indictee Ali Muhammad Ali Abd-Al Rahman, also known as Ali Kushayb, with the Sudanese Central Reserve Police in clashes in Central Darfur in an at-tack on 8 April on the town of Abu Jeradil, as well as the ongoing involvement of indictees, Ahmad Harun and Abdel Raheem Hussein in alleged crimes else-where in the Sudan.

Ms. Bensouda presented a brief to the Security Council on 14 November [S/PV.7059] on the situation in Libya, pursuant to resolution 1970(2011) [YUN 2011, p. 1261], and on 11 December [S/PV.7080] on the Su-dan and South Sudan. The Prosecutor informed the Council that the Office and the Government of Libya concluded a burden-sharing memorandum of under-standing to ensure that individuals responsible for committing crimes in Libya as at 15 February 2011 were brought to justice. The Office and the Govern-ment of Libya committed to supporting each other’s investigation and prosecutions through the exchange of information.

Preliminary examinationThe Office continued to monitor information on

crimes potentially falling within the jurisdiction of the Court and analysing communications received from various sources. Between 1 August 2012 and 30 June 2013, the Office received 572 communica-tions relating to article 15 of the Rome Statute. The Office of the Prosecutor opened a preliminary exami-nation of the situation regarding registered vessels of the Comoros, Greece and Cambodia; continued preliminary examinations in Afghanistan, Colombia, Georgia, Guinea, Honduras, the Republic of Korea and Nigeria; and concluded its preliminary examina-tion of the situation in Mali.

The Registry

The Registry provided judicial and administrative support to all organs of the Court and carried out its responsibilities concerning victims, witnesses, de-fence and outreach. The Registry sought to develop an understanding and awareness of icc and its activities by strengthening the Court’s public information ca-pacity for outreach services in countries in which the Court was active. It provided security, administrative and logistical support to the Court’s investigations.

The Registry transmitted 691 requests for visas and 220 requests for cooperation, including 11 requests to international organizations. With regard to the situation in Libya, the Registry had not yet finalized a memorandum of understanding creating a legal framework for the operational arrangements of the Court in that country. In the context of the constant interactions of the Court with authorities of situation

On 6 November [S/2013/649], the Secretary-General transmitted to the Council President the decision is-sued on 11 October by Pre-Trial Chamber I on the admissibility of the case against Abdullah Al-Senussi declaring the Abdullah Al-Senussi case inadmissible before the Court.

Office of the Prosecutor

InvestigationsIn 2013, the Office of the Prosecutor continued to

investigate situations in the Central African Republic (car), Cote d’Ivoire, Darfur (Sudan), the drc, Kenya, Libya, Mali and Uganda.

During the period from 1 August 2012 to 31 July 2013, the Office conducted two missions to the drc to collect information in support of trials and to address the arguments raised by the Defence in the case against Mr. Lubanga Dyilo, Mr. Katanga and Mr. Ngudjolo Chui; six missions to three countries for its third inves-tigation, focusing on crimes committed by the Forces démocratiques de libération du Rwanda (fdlr) in the Kivu provinces; and following the voluntary surrender of Mr. Ntaganda, 11 missions to four countries for collecting evidence, screening and interviewing wit-nesses, and securing the continued cooperation of its partners. Nineteen further missions were conducted in relation to the activities of the Office in the drc. The Office did not conduct any missions in relation to the situation in Uganda.

The Office continued its investigation into the situation in the car, conducting 17 missions to five countries to meet with witnesses and follow up on information received.

On the situation in Darfur, the Office conducted six missions to five countries. It continued to monitor and gather information regarding the situation that indicated crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide continued to be committed.

On the situation in Kenya, the Office undertook 104 missions to 15 countries.

The Office conducted 27 missions to 12 countries in relation to the investigation into the situation in Libya.

On the situation in Cote d’Ivoire, the Office con-tinued its investigation into the situation, conduct-ing 48 missions to five countries to collect evidence, screen and interview witnesses, and secure the contin-ued cooperation of its partners.

On 16 January, the Office opened an investigation into alleged crimes committed on the territory of Mali since January 2012. It conducted 12 investigative mis-sions to four countries. The Office continued to col-lect information and evidence about alleged crimes on the entire territory of Mali.

The Prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, briefed the Secu-rity Council on 5 June [S/PV.6974] on the Sudan, pur-



of cooperation. The annual round table between the United Nations and the Court was held via video link on 17 and 19 December.

Reports of Secretary-General: In accordance with General Assembly resolution 67/295 (see p. 1295), the Secretary-General, in September, respectively submitted a report [A/68/366] on expenses incurred and reimbursements received by the United Nations in connection with assistance provided to icc. From 1 July 2012 to 30 June 2013, the United Nations pro-vided facilities and services in the amount of $671,568, including costs for staff, satellite communications, conference and related services, and costs related to recruitment, filed security and library services.

In a September report [A/68/364], the Secretary-General presented information relevant to the imple-mentation of article 3 of the Relationship Agreement between the United Nations and icc. The Organi-zation provided extensive assistance to the Court, particularly in the form of extensive access to UN records and archives and making available a number of personnel for interview by the prosecution in con-nection with certain situations before the Court and with certain situations under preliminary examina-tion by the Prosecutor. A court-wide memorandum of understanding for cooperation between unoci and the Court was concluded and signed on 12 June. The new memorandum of understanding superseded the previous memorandum for cooperation between unoci and the Prosecutor.

countries, the new Registrar carried out its visit to the drc from 23 to 26 June.

International cooperation

The New York Liaison Office continued to pro-mote cooperation between the Court and the United Nations. On 12 June, the Court concluded a memo-randum of understanding with the United Nations Operations in Cote d’Ivoire (unoci), encompassing cooperation matters. On 11 July, the Registrar met with the Under-Secretary-General of the UN Depart-ment of Safety and Security to discuss amendments to the memorandum of understanding to reflect the modified template approved by the United Nations Inter-Agency Security Management Network in 2010 [YUN 2010, p. 1477].

In March and June (Nuremberg, Germany), the Court organized two high-level seminars for fostering cooperation to promote mutual understanding and cooperation between the Court and Governments, as well as international and regional organizations. A seminar on the protection of witnesses for French-speaking African States (Dakar, Senegal, 25–26 June) was organized by Estonia, the Netherlands, and Nor-way, with the assistance of the Court. On 23 August, the Office of the Prosecutor signed a memorandum of understanding with the United Nations Institute for Training and Research to foster collaboration and develop projects and activities and other forms

chapter ii international tribunals and court · 2017. 12. 16. · cases, and judgments were...

Documents