Strengthening gender justice in the Asia-Pacific through the Rome Statute
Many conflicts in the Asia-Pacific region have included sexual violence crimes targeted primarily against women. However, in comparison to other regions, Asia-Pacific states have been reluctant to embrace international law innovations to end impunity for such crimes into the future, as evidenced by their unwillingness to become signatories to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Of the 39 countries constituting the Asia-Pacific region, only 17—less than half—have joined the Rome Statute. This article initially surveys some of the reasons for non-ratification of the Statute. It further examines the role of civil society and the potential normative impact of the Statute to enhance national sexual violence legislation and prosecutions. Finally, it identifies some practical steps that the Australian government could take to encourage regional states to ratify, implement and enforce the Rome Statute in order to further protect all victims of international crimes and bolster the broader Women, Peace and Security framework.
The Role of the ICC in Transitional Gender Justice: Capacity and Limitations
According to feminist legal scholar, Katherine Franke, the main objective of transitional justice is to ‘honor the injuries and crimes of the past while creating the possibilities for new ways of being the future’ (Franke, 2006: 823). The International Criminal Court (ICC), and the Rome Statute which underlies it, has an important role to play in this process. By combining elements of both a traditional, retrospective retributive justice approach alongside forward-looking restorative measures, it attempts to remove the ‘impunity gap’, which has existed under domestic and international law for the perpetrators of the most egregious crimes at the same time as offering victims/survivors of war torn communities new avenues for rebuilding their lives.
Overpromised, underdelivered: transitional justice in Sub-saharan Africa
From Sierra Leone to South Africa, calls for prosecutions, truth seeking, reparations and institutional reform are increasingly common as countries seek to address human rights abuses. While transitional justice measures are thought to contribute towards ending impunity and advancing reconciliation, the effectiveness of such interventions are thought to depend largely on the capacity of state institutions at the administrative, judicial, and political and security level. In African countries, despite the realities of institutional deficiencies, poor governance, and poverty, transitional justice measures continue to be laden with high expectations. The paper looks at obstacles that have been encountered in a number of countries in Africa , in the hope of cultivating modest expectations. Original in English.