Thursday, April 12, 2007
ICC or internal remedies in Uganda?
Uganda’s democratic government is struggling to reconcile internal human rights abuses. As Uganda’s President, Yoweri Museveni is responsible for securing peace in the Uganda and restoring public confidence in his government. One of the major obstacles in thwarting violence from the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) is the decision to either prosecute LRA leaders in the International Criminal Court (ICC) or negotiate peace with the LRA leaders; the later will result in more immediate, but perhaps short-lived national cohesion and stable relationships among the government, Ugandans, and former rebels. The unsuccessful negotiations between the LRA and the government have stipulated that the LRA give up their weapons and cease violence indefinitely.
Since its early years, the LRA terrorized civilians using brutal insurgency tactics to overthrow the government. Thousands have died in the two-decade conflict between rebels and the government, and about two million have been forced to flee their homes. The LRA targets northern Uganda’s Acholi tribe, while trying to motivate the victims’ communities to join the fight against the National Resistance Movement (NRM). An international assessment of the LRA’s history of human rights abuses follows,
"a pattern of brutalization of civilians by acts including murder, abduction, sexual enslavement, mutilation, as well as mass burnings of houses and looting of camp settlements; that abducted civilians, including children, are said to have been forcibly recruited as fighters, porters and sex slaves and to take part in attacks against the Ugandan army (UPDF) and civilian communities.”*
The United Nations under-secretary general for humanitarian affairs, Jan Egeland, called the destruction of Uganda’s communities and the human rights crimes “among the world’s most neglected crises”** International actions are apparent, but only effective marginally, due to limitations in disrupting state sovereignty.
In order for Uganda’s government to demonstrate democratic efforts at negotiations, it must incorporate citizens’ opinions represented throughout Uganda, or use a third party like the ICC to evaluate the fate of human rights criminals. Negotiations will include a cessation of LRA abuses and the former rebels’ subsequent integration into Ugandan communities and will demonstrate the government’s ability to assert national protection, power, and control. The ICC, on the other hand, will determine the incarceration of individual leaders responsible for the most elevated evidence of international violations of human rights law.
In either case, the Director of the International Center for Transitional Justice, Juan Mendez says “settling the problem of criminal liability for the very worst crimes is essential to peace, because it separates the responsibility of the individual who exploits the fears and anxieties of the population,”*** Notable to this viewpoint is evidence that when LRA attacks result in retaliation from the Uganda’s Peoples Defense Force (UPDF), a cycle of violence and fear throughout Uganda continues.
*“Warrant of Arrest unsealed against five LRA Commanders,” International Criminal Court, The Hague, 14 October 2005, (18 March 2007).
**Payam Akhavan, “The Lord’s Resistance Army Case: Uganda’s Submission of the First State Referral To the International Criminal Court,” Developments at the International Criminal Court, 99, no. 3 (2005): 420.
***Méndez, Juan E, “In Defense of Transitional Justice,” in Traditional Justice and the Rule of Law in New Democracies, ed. A. James McAdams (University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, 1997), 8.
Since its early years, the LRA terrorized civilians using brutal insurgency tactics to overthrow the government. Thousands have died in the two-decade conflict between rebels and the government, and about two million have been forced to flee their homes. The LRA targets northern Uganda’s Acholi tribe, while trying to motivate the victims’ communities to join the fight against the National Resistance Movement (NRM). An international assessment of the LRA’s history of human rights abuses follows,
"a pattern of brutalization of civilians by acts including murder, abduction, sexual enslavement, mutilation, as well as mass burnings of houses and looting of camp settlements; that abducted civilians, including children, are said to have been forcibly recruited as fighters, porters and sex slaves and to take part in attacks against the Ugandan army (UPDF) and civilian communities.”*
The United Nations under-secretary general for humanitarian affairs, Jan Egeland, called the destruction of Uganda’s communities and the human rights crimes “among the world’s most neglected crises”** International actions are apparent, but only effective marginally, due to limitations in disrupting state sovereignty.
In order for Uganda’s government to demonstrate democratic efforts at negotiations, it must incorporate citizens’ opinions represented throughout Uganda, or use a third party like the ICC to evaluate the fate of human rights criminals. Negotiations will include a cessation of LRA abuses and the former rebels’ subsequent integration into Ugandan communities and will demonstrate the government’s ability to assert national protection, power, and control. The ICC, on the other hand, will determine the incarceration of individual leaders responsible for the most elevated evidence of international violations of human rights law.
In either case, the Director of the International Center for Transitional Justice, Juan Mendez says “settling the problem of criminal liability for the very worst crimes is essential to peace, because it separates the responsibility of the individual who exploits the fears and anxieties of the population,”*** Notable to this viewpoint is evidence that when LRA attacks result in retaliation from the Uganda’s Peoples Defense Force (UPDF), a cycle of violence and fear throughout Uganda continues.
*“Warrant of Arrest unsealed against five LRA Commanders,” International Criminal Court, The Hague, 14 October 2005,
**Payam Akhavan, “The Lord’s Resistance Army Case: Uganda’s Submission of the First State Referral To the International Criminal Court,” Developments at the International Criminal Court, 99, no. 3 (2005): 420.
***Méndez, Juan E, “In Defense of Transitional Justice,” in Traditional Justice and the Rule of Law in New Democracies, ed. A. James McAdams (University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, 1997), 8.
Subscribe to Comments [Atom]
