Why I wrote an 'angry human rights' piece about rape and international law

Yesterday, A Safe World for Women published my piece on the International Criminal Court's acquittal of DRC warlord Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui.

It's not a balanced piece. Ngudjolo is guilty. His acquittal is not the fault of the ICC judges but of the prosecution team who presented an extremely weak case.

There was no excuse for such a weak case. There is an abundance of evidence in the DRC, where hundreds of thousands of women and children have been raped and millions killed in the last ten years or so.

It's not a PC thing to admit, especially for a human rights folk, that the ICC is essentially 'a court for the guilty' and that an acquittal is unacceptable. But this is the harsh truth. I talk about this further in the piece; thousands and thousands of women have been raped by thousands of militias and soldiers. The DRC does not have the will or capacity to hold them all to account. So the International Community, working through the ICC, attempts to provide some form of justice or recourse for victims. They cannot try the thousands of guilty. So they choose a handful, to make an 'example' of.


And they fail in even that.

It's not enough to have rape listed as a war crime. Last year, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) produced a documentary about the prosecution of sexual violence in international law entitled 'The Triumph of Justice'. It's worth a watch as it is interesting. Although the ICTY has done much for the advancement of the prosecution of sexual violence, the title is disingenuous in the extreme. About 30 individuals have been convicted on charges related to sexual violence by the ICTY. Around 50,000 women were raped during the conflict in Bosnia alone.

Let's not speak about the triumph of anything here except impunity.