ICC: “Middling sentences” for “middling criminals” (Q&A)

11 June 2014 by Janet H. Anderson, The Hague (The Netherlands)

The sentencing of Germain Katanga last month [IJT-160] at the International Criminal Court (ICC) to 12 years imprisonment is the second in the court’s existence. During extensive post-trial deliberations, his charges were changed – while his co-accused Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui was acquitted. The trial chamber was sharply divided, with Judge Christine van den Wyngaert, from Belgium, expressing strong dissenting opinions. Prosecution and defence have declared their intentions to appeal the conviction. 

Q&A – For the IJT, Mark Drumbl, director of the Transnational Law Institute at Washington and Lee University, returns to the sentencing decision.  

What does this sentence tell about the ICC’s sentencing policy? 

Mark Drumbl: Katanga’s sentence reinforces the notion that the principle objectives are retribution and general deterrence. But in practice both of these are very difficult to attain in the cases of serious international crimes. 

In both Lubanga and Katanga, two separate ICC trial chambers were clear that the determination of sentence proceeds along two steps. First, gravity; then individualized circumstances (aggravating or mitigating factors). Gravity can be measured by the extent of the harm caused and by the extent of the perpetrator’s involvement therein. Katanga was only found to be an accessory, and for that reason the dissenting judge would have acquitted him on all charges. 

Want to read more?

We have tailor-made memberships for students, individuals, groups of professionals and large companies and organizations. A subscription entitles you to receive the International Justice Tribune every two weeks as well as become a member of the Justice Tribune Foundation, supporting independent reporting on international justice.

Subscribe now

Related articles

article
ICC judges in Germain Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui case on a visit to Ituri in January 2012 (Photo: Flickr/ICC-CPI)
11 March 2015 by Tjitske Lingsma, The Hague (The Netherlands)

This is the second in a series of articles delving into the challenges faced by prosecutors at the International Criminal Court. In our last issue [IJT-176], Tjitske Lingsma explored why the ICC seems afflicted by untruthful witnesses. In the third article, we examine the growing importance of technological evidence, like phone records and computer data, to reduce the reliance on witness testimony.

article
25 November 2009 by Sylvere Unen

As the trial of former militiamen Mathieu Ngudjolo and Germain Katanga opened this week at the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, residents of their home district of Ituri in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) are losing faith in the court. 

article
Germaine Katanga at International Criminal Court. Copyright Flickr/ICC-CPI
13 January 2015 by Tjitske Lingsma, The Hague (The Netherlands)

Despite lingering uncertainties, the final convictions of two Congolese warlords raises hopes that this year victims will see reparations handed to them by the International Criminal Court.

article
02 November 2010 by Thijs Bouwknegt

Commercially motivated pillage has taken on increasing importance in recent years as the illegal exploitation of natural resources has emerged as a primary means of financing conflict. But efforts to hold disreputable commercial actors responsible for war crimes or other serious human rights violations have been frustrated, frequently because of difficulties in proving corporate complicity. Larissa van den Herik of Leiden University organised the conference ‘Corporate War Crimes: Prosecuting Pillage of Natural Resources’ in The Hague last week.

article
The ICC trial chamber acquitted Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui (Photo: Flickr/ICC-CPI)
21 April 2015 by Tjitske Lingsma, The Hague (The Netherlands)

Over two years since his initial acquittal by the International Criminal Court (ICC), former Congolese militia leader Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui is still in the Netherlands fighting another legal battle: to get asylum in the ICC’s host country.