ICC on the road to reparations

If it took 6 years to convict the Congolese rebel leader Thomas Lubanga, how long will it take the International Criminal Court (ICC) to decide on reparations for the victims?
by Josephine Uwineza, Brussels
[related-articles]The ICC has made its mark on international justice by introducing victims’ participation into trials.
The Lubanga trial continues to be a trail blazer for the Rome Statute, as the court’s first conviction has now led to the first reparations proceedings.
ICC judges received submissions on reparations from parties including victims, prosecution and defence teams last Thursday. Every recruited child soldier who qualified as a victim and participated in the trial is entitled to individual reparations. Both prosecution and victims’ representatives insist that experts must be appointed to evaluate who is entitled to reparations and the level of damages to be considered. 
“The case of Thomas Lubanga is particular in that the victims are child soldiers and it is their family that was affected rather than a community,” Belgian lawyer for victims, Luc Walleyn told IJT. “There must be a solution between individual reparations and collective reparations,” he added.
Reparations should be estimated, he states in his motion, on the situation of a victim before he/she was recruited and experts will evaluate psychological and physical damage. For instance, paying the price of a dowry of a former female child soldier to her family – 3 cows and 7 goats depending on traditions – could be an option. “They (girls) have in most cases been excluded from their communities and are unlikely to get married,” argue the victims’ representatives.
Ocampo: “Order Lubanga to apologise”
“The Chamber must order Thomas Lubanga to apologise,” ICC prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo told the court. Other collective reparations could be awarded to groups of victims, says a victims’ motion, including those who were in the same military training camp, coming from the same battle area or under orders of a particular commander. It was also submitted that the families who have injured former child soldiers or lost family members linked to the crimes relevant to the case are entitled to reparations.
The defence, on the other hand, argues that unless certain documents are disclosed to its team, it is unable to make submissions. “The defence only knows the identity of 1 person out of 85 applications,” reads the motion. “We need time to investigate these applications especially because the Chamber dismissed 9 victims and 10 prosecution witnesses,” it continues. But according to Luc Walleyn, it is essential to “identify what mechanism is suitable for reparations” – first of all.
How much time is needed to settle the question of reparations, their extent and their timing, is still very much open to specualtion.