The role of the ICC in the DRC’s CRISIS

Democratic Republic of Congo is currently undergoing a serious humanitarian crisis, coupled with displacement and regional insecurity, providing a tough new challenge for international law. Since January, the M23 rebel group and Rwanda’s armed forces launched a major offensive in the east of DRC, starting from North Kivu’s capital, Goma, all the way towards South Kivu. Nevertheless, what makes this offense particularily devastating is its cruelty; thousands were killed, displaced and sexually assaulted. Civilians are being forcibly recruited by the armed forces whilst the others are suffering from shortages of food and water. Hospitals and homes were destroyed in the search for opponents. In this context, the challenge imposed by the armed groups supported by the RDF, already sanctioned by the UN for committing serious violations of international law including war crimes and human rights violations, has called for more concrete action by international legal bodies like the ICC. In this article, we are going to explore how the latter has intervened so far and whether there could be space for improvements.

In April 2002, the DRC ratified the Rome Statute, according to which the ICC intervenes only when States are not able to or willing to act internally and may exercise its jurisdiction only over the crimes listed in the Statute (ICC, s.d.). Nonetheless, the inefficiency of DRC’s security system has paved the path for an almost exclusive dependence on the ICC. In fact, only two years after the Rome Statute, the DRC government deferred its investigations mainly on the eastern regions (ICC, s.d.). Since then, the ICC aimed at identifying the individuals held responsible for the crimes. Overall, 6 lead cases were issued by the court. Among these, noteworthy are the cases of Thomas Lubanga, Bosco Ntaganda and Germain Katanga.

The first conviction ever issued by the ICC dates back to 2012, where Lubanga was found guilty , by unanimous decision of the Trial Chamber, of the war crimes of enlisting and conscripting children and using them as child soldiers (ICC, 2012). Lubanga was sentenced for a total of 14 years of imprisonment and was released only at the end of this time period. The relevance of this case relies on both its national and international impact. Firstly, Lubanga Dyilo was a prominent figure in Congolese politics, having allegedly founded and led the Union of the Congolese Patriots (UPC) and nominated commander in chief of its armed wing, the FPLC. According to Michael Bochenek, Director of Amnesty International’s Law and Policy Programme, the decision against such a relevant figure “will help to strip away the impunity they have enjoyed for crimes under international law because national authorities have consistently failed to investigate these crimes”, setting a global legal precedent on the use of children in conflict (International, 2012).  

The second verdict of guilt issued by the ICC occurred in 2014 and involved Germain Katanga, convicted as an accessory to one count of crimes against humanity and four counts of war crimes (ICC, s.d.). This case is emblematic as it marked the first reparations order that was fully implemented, starting from 2017. Here the ICC Trial Chamber II awarded the 297 victims with an individual symbolic compensation of USD 250 and collective reparations such as support for housing, for income‑generating activities, education aid and psychological support (ICC, s.d.). Therefore, the case was pivotal in introducing a comprehensive approach to victim reparations, especially in group-based atrocities. 

The longest conviction was instead the one appointed to Ntaganda, comprising 18 counts and including crimes like murder, rape and persecution (ICC, s.d.). Eventually, the ICC issued a sentence of 30 years, demonstrating the institution’s interest on applying a thorough accountability. The latter is also guaranteed by letting non-ICC member states to be involved in the investigation; in this case, United States and Rwanda played a crucial role in the transfer Of Ntaganda to The Hague (Coalition for the international Criminal Court , s.d.). On the other hand, for almost a decade, civil society had called on Congolese and international authorities to arrest Ntaganda who had been living freely in eastern DRC while a member of the Congolese armed forces  (Coalition for the international Criminal Court , s.d.).. Although Ntaganda was ultimately held accountable for his crimes, the ICC's intervention was, for the most part, belated.

Whilst the ICC was clearly successful in setting global precedents and holding heads of rebel groups accountable for their crimes, perhaps given the complexity of determining an individual responsibility in group coordinated atrocities, the ICC has not yet been able to address completely alleged crimes by senior government and military officials from Congo, Rwanda and Uganda (Evenson, 2011). For this reason, the UN Mapping Report emphasizes that the ICC should prioritize the prosecution of those crimes that are too complex or politically sensitive to be tried within the DRC due to the indirect involvement of actors who often enjoy protection or support in their home countries. Furthermore, according to the UN , the ICC should extend its investigations beyond the national border as often individuals with the greatest responsibility for atrocities reside outside the DRC and remain beyond the reach of national justice  (Evenson, 2011).

Following Karim Khan, the Chief Prosecutor of the ICC, declarations of concern over the escalating violence in the eastern regions, the institution appears to be promoting a new path, namely that of a hybrid court (Le Monde with AFP, 2025). The latter would combine international and local judges, paving the road for a new strategy that strengthens internal capacities while maintaining effectiveness and international support  (Le Monde with AFP, 2025). This approach is, according to the ICC, ideally to be implemented in the long term, in order to fill those impunity gaps and curb violence at its internal roots.

Overall, the ICC with its judicial activity has proved its ability in setting global precedents and holding a trial within a reasonable timeframe, despite the gravity of the facts. Although its judgements reached international recognition, the ICC’s role alone won’t likely be able to be effective in the long term. Only a more intensive role of domestic courts through the hybrid court model and an extensive investigation on those who finance and coordinate the rebel groups from behind the scenes would account for a successful protection of the ICC towards the people of DRC.

Bibliography

Coalition for the international Criminal Court . (s.d.). Bosco Ntaganda. Tratto da coalition for the icc.org: https://www.coalitionfortheicc.org/cases/bosco-ntaganda

Evenson, E. (2011, September 15). Unfinished Buisness:Closing Gaps in the Selection of ICC Cases. Tratto da hrw.org: https://www.hrw.org/report/2011/09/15/unfinished-business/closing-gaps-selection-icc-cases

“Human Rights in Democratic Republic of the Congo.” Amnesty International, www.amnesty.org/en/location/africa/east-africa-the-horn-and-great-lakes/democratic-republic-of-the-congo/report-democratic-republic-of-the-congo/. Accessed 08 Apr. 2025.

ICC. (s.d.). Democratic Republic of Congo . Tratto da International Criminal Court : www.icc-cpi.int/drc#:~:text=The%20ICC%20investigations%20in%20the,Provinces%2C%20since%201%20July%202002.

ICC. (2012, March 14). ICC First Verdict: Thomas Lubanga Guilty of Conscripting and Enlisting Children under the Age of 15 and Using Them to Participate in Hostilities. Tratto da International Criminal Court : https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/icc-first-verdict-thomas-lubanga-guilty-conscripting-and-enlisting-children-under-age-15-and

 International, A. (2012, March 14). Landmark ICC verdict over use of child soldiers. Tratto da amnesty.org: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/press-release/2012/03/landmark-icc-verdict-over-use-child-soldiers/

 “International Criminal Court Takes Important Step in DR Congo.” Human Rights Watch, 16 Oct. 2024, www.hrw.org/news/2024/10/16/international-criminal-court-takes-important-step-dr-congo. Accessed 08 Apr. 2025.

“Katanga Case: ICC Trial Chamber II Awards Victims Individual and Collective Reparations.” International Criminal Court, www.icc-cpi.int/news/katanga-case-icc-trial-chamber-ii-awards-victims-individual-and-collective-reparations. Accessed 08 Apr. 2025.

Le Monde with AFP. (2025, February 27). ICC chief backs special tribunal for DR Congo, admits failure to halt atrocities . Tratto da lemonde.fr: https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2025/02/27/icc-chief-backs-special-tribunal-for-dr-congo-admits-failure-to-halt-atrocities_6738616_4.html

“Ntaganda.” International Criminal Court, www.icc-cpi.int/drc/ntaganda. Accessed 08 Apr. 2025.