In the area of international crimes, such as genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, the reports issued by the UN Human Rights Committee represent a valuable tool for the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Although not direct evidence, these documents can significantly support investigations and case building in their initial stages. Below, we analyze their usefulness, probative value and limitations.
1. Usefulness of the Reports for the ICC Office of the Prosecutor
The reports of the UN Human Rights Committee are key in the preliminary stage of investigations, contributing in the following areas:
- Preliminary Information Gathering:
- They provide essential data on patterns of systematic violations, possible perpetrators and victims.
- They are used to assess whether the facts meet the threshold of severity established in the Rome Statute.
- Contextualization of the Facts:
- They document the political and social context in which the violations occurred, a crucial element in determining whether there is a systematic and widespread attack against a civilian population.
- Support for Admissibility:
- They support arguments about state inaction, demonstrating that the national judicial system is unable or unwilling to investigate the crimes, allowing the ICC to take up the case under the principle of complementarity.
- Witness Identification and Evidence:
- Although they do not contain direct evidence, the reports may include references to key victims and witnesses, as well as other sources that provide relevant information.
Evidentiary force before the ICC
Despite their usefulness, reports have limitations as direct evidence in international judicial proceedings. Their probative weight depends on several factors:
- Nature of the Reports:
- They are based on information provided by States and independent actors, but do not constitute forensic or judicial investigations.
- Authenticity and Reliability:
- Reports must meet reliability standards under the Rome Statute to be admitted as evidence. Their weight is increased if they include verifiable data and credible sources.
- Corroboration with Other Evidence:
- They are generally used as a supplement to a larger body of evidence, along with testimonies, official documents, videos, satellite images and witness statements.
- Use as Circumstantial Evidence:
- They can serve as support to demonstrate patterns of systematic violations or the existence of an underlying policy motivating the crimes.
3. Practical Examples of Use in the ICC
The Committee's reports have played a key role in prominent cases, such as:
- Darfur (Sudan): They were used to document patterns of systematic attacks during the investigations against Omar al-Bashir.
- Myanmar: They served as a basis for investigating the forced displacement of the Rohingyas.
4. Limitations
Despite their usefulness, these reports face some restrictions:
- Lack of Direct Observation: In many cases, the Committee does not conduct field investigations or collect direct evidence.
- Non-binding nature: These are observations and recommendations, not legal rulings or judicial conclusions.
- Require Corroboration: To be admitted as evidence, they must be supplemented by verifiable evidence that meets ICC procedural standards.
Conclusion
The reports of the UN Human Rights Committee are valuable tools for the ICC Office of the Prosecutor, especially in the initial stage of investigations and as contextual support to prove patterns of international crimes. However, their probative value depends on their reliability and corroboration with direct evidence, which is what the defense, on the one hand, and the victims' office and the prosecution, on the other, must analyze closely in order for them to be challenged in an eventual trial at the ICC.
In a scenario where human rights violations demand international justice, these reports are positioned as a strategic complement rather than as independent evidence, helping to build the most complex cases before the International Criminal Court.
