|
Justice rapid response -
VENICE 2006 - Annexes
Annexes
5
12
Annex 1: chair’s conclusions
5
13
Annex 2: program
5
15
Annex 3: draft documents on cooperation and
deployment
5
17
Annex 4: list of participants
Chair’s Conclusions of the
Venice Conference on Justice Rapid Response
(15-17 June 2006)
Adopted by consensus on 17 June 2006
In accordance with a prior understanding, the outcome and
recommended practical steps from this Conference, the fifth meeting
on Justice Rapid Response, is contained in the following Chair’s
Conclusions. Documents on guidelines were distributed but not
discussed.
The value added of JRR as an international cooperative mechanism
The development and
reinforcement of international justice principles and transitional
justice methods since the early 1990s has not been accompanied in
equal measure by practical assistance to States or international
organizations to meet their responsibilities. In post-conflict
situations, there may be political and security windows of
opportunity conducive to the commencement of an accountability
process that is not matched by available expertise or resources.
Moreover, the sooner information regarding war crimes, crimes
against humanity or genocide during that conflict is identified,
collected and preserved, the more likely it is that such information
will be accurate and adequate for the appropriate accountability
mechanisms. The international community is not now equipped to move
quickly when such windows of opportunity appear. Thus crucial
evidence may be lost and opportunities missed to have justice play a
positive role in securing lasting peace in the post-conflict
society. The JRR mechanism aims to remedy this deficiency in the
context of a wide range of investigative assistance to States and
international institutions.
JRR is intended to be an
international cooperative mechanism for the supply of voluntary
assistance at the request of a State or international institution,
where the identification, collection and preservation of information
would assist at any stage a wide range of international and
transitional justice options. The specific functions most likely to
be carried out by the JRR mechanism in this respect are,
inter
alia: pattern of
violence investigation; forensic mapping; documentary evidence
investigation; visual image collection; identification of potential
witnesses; identification of massacre sites. JRR was identified as
providing an improvement on the status quo by being a cooperative
mechanism that does not need to be created anew each time there is a
request for assistance. In this way, it can significantly reduce
response times in providing assistance that is both impartial and
which meets international standards; it shares the burden of
assistance through coordination of the resources of States,
international organizations and civil society; and, as a global
effort, provides capacity-building by involving all States in the
mechanism, irrespective of resources.
Broadening the base
Conference participants
were of the view that their respective governments and organisations
should continue preparations for the deployment of missions
implementing the JRR mechanism, especially with regard to future
mission arrangements and any other necessary agreements. They also
invite their governments and organizations to use all opportunities
to promote participation in JRR mechanism by States, international
organisations and NGOs.
Practical considerations
Focal
points: It was the
understanding of conference participants that parties interested in
participating in JRR nominate a focal point for contacts in external
relations in the JRR mechanism; as well as identify their resources
to enable them to participate in the mechanism with the necessary
expertise and/or resources.
Rosters and training:
Conference participants identified the need to ask experts and
existing institutions to give advice on generic expert profiles, the
criteria for selection of experts for rosters, possible standards
for roster administration and pre-mission training of experts. They
were of the opinion that rosters of experts ought to be available as
soon as possible.
Future cooperation:
Conference participants felt that partners in the JRR mechanism
should continue their inter-governmental cooperation while at the
same time working with relevant international organizations, of
which some may be in a position to take over the coordination and
implementation of the JRR mechanism.
In addition, they
discussed issues related to future cooperation within the JRR
mechanism and for the deployment of missions implementing this
mechanism, on the continued understanding that decision-making on
contribution of personnel or resources shall remain with individual
States, international organisations and NGOs.
Continuing the process:
Conference participants encouraged a JRR partner to assume the role
of overall coordination and other JRR partners to coordinate on
specific issues of cooperation. In order to facilitate cooperation
of partners in the JRR mechanism, secretarial functions will be
performed by No Peace Without Justice until modalities for
coordination are further developed among JRR participants or an
international organization may be in a position to take over the
coordination and implementation of the JRR mechanism.
Practical Steps
1.
Focal Points
-
participants in the JRR
mechanism will designate an external focal point for contacts with
the JRR mechanism;
-
each participant will
survey their available resources, expertise and mechanisms for their
deployment, incuding gender requirements related to rosters,
training and ultimately, deployment in missions implementing the JRR
mechanism.
2.
Rosters
-
designate one
participant (Jens Behrendt, ad ref) to coordinate development of
generic expert profiles, the criteria for selection of experts for
rosters and possible standards for roster administration;
-
hold meeting of experts
on rosters to develop common criteria for rosters;
3.
Training
-
designate one
participant (Alexander McLachlan, ad ref) to coordinate development
of common training syllabus for international deployment of experts
in the framework of the JRR mechanism;
-
hold meeting of experts
and international training institutions to develop common training
syllabus for international deployment of experts in the framework of
the JRR mechanism.
4.
Standard operating procedures
-
designate a participant
(Helen Ahrens, ad ref) to coordinate the development of standard
operating procedures, including gender requirements;
-
appropriate
institutions or organisations (GTZ, ad ref) are to identify
logistical requirements for a mission.
5.
Cooperation among interested parties
-
designate a participant
(Pål Wrange, ad ref) to coordinate discussion on vehicles for
cooperation among interested parties;
-
No Peace Without
Justice will establish an electronic discussion vehicle for
information to be circulated among focal points and participants in
the JRR mechanism, provide secretarial support to the thematic
coordinators; and perform other secretarial and research functions
at the request of participants and coordinators.
6.
Ultimate coordination of JRR
7.
Promoting participation
Annex 2
Program JRR Conference
Venice, 15 - 17 June 2006
Thursday,
15 June 2006
5
10
14.00 Opening: Introduction
Welcome remarks: George
Ulrich, EIUC
CHAIR: Hans-Werner Bussmann, hand over to Ambassador Allieu Kanu
Short history of JRR
process, central objectives (Andras Vamos-Goldman)
Update on supplement to
feasibility study (Andras Vamos-Goldman)
State of play
(Hans-Werner Bussmann)
Objectives of the
conference (Hans-Werner Bussmann)
5
10
16.00 New perspectives on the JRR from the field
CHAIR: Mr. Bakhtiar Amin (International Alliance for Justice, Iraq)
Representative of
Government
Julián Guerrero
(Colombia)
Representatives of
national civil society
Hubert Tshiswaka (ACIDH,
DRC); Abdul Rahim Kamara (Manifesto 99, Sierra Leone)
Representative of
international agency dealing with emergencies
Federico Borello, MONUC
Representative of
international civil society
Alison Smith (NPWJ)
17.45 General discussion
Friday, 16 June 2006
CHAIR: Professor Antonio Cassese
5
11
9.00 Implementation of the JRR Feasibility Study and its
supplement
Suggested areas for
evolving the JRR concept (e.g. the elements for a possible draft
agreement; general aspects of implementation)
Presentation: Hans-Werner
Bussmann
9.30 Respondent: Pål
Wrange (Sweden)
9.40 General discussion
CHAIR: Alexander McLachlan (European Commission)
5
11
11.00 Standards of expert rosters:
Tapio Puurunen (Finland)
5
11
11.15 Basic training of experts:
Jens Behrendt (German Centre for International Peace Operations)
Financing: Helen
Ahrens (GTZ)
11.30 Respondent: Luc
Coté (former SCSL)
11.40 General discussion
on both agenda items
CHAIR: Kelvin Ong (UNDP)
5
11
14.30 Role and practical aspects of IGOs/NGOs participation in
the JRR implementation process as associate partners and/or service
providers and end-users
organisation of
interfaces; necessary agreements (general and for missions);
financing
Presentations: EC, ICC,
NPWJ, UNDP
15.00 General discussion
CHAIR: Ambassador Kanu (Sierra Leone)
5
12
16.00 Discussion of Chair’s Conclusions
5
12
17.45 Preparation of Chair’s Conclusions
Linking the results of
the a.m. meetings
Saturday, 17 June 2006
CHAIR: Eileen Olexiuk (Canada)
5
12
9.00 Presentation of Chair’s Conclusions by conference
organisers
Andras Vamos Goldman
5
12
9.30 Perusal and discussion of Chair’s Conclusions in working
groups
5
12
11.30 General discussion of Chair’s Conclusions;
suggestions for amendments; if need, organisation of virtual working
groups to continue work after Venice
CHAIR: Ambassador Kanu
5
12
15.00 Presentation and adoption of final Chair’s Conclusions
discussion of the way
ahead
General draft guidelines for cooperation in the JRR Mechanism
(Distributed but not discussed)
1) Scope and Functions
a) JRR participants
will work toward coordinating their activities in order to be ready
to respond quickly, in case of a favorable security and political
climate, to a genuine request for support of a national or
international accountability mechanism, primarily by the provision
of expertise and/or resources in support of efforts to identify,
collect and preserve information, especially that which is most
likely to disappear, concerning alleged genocide, war crimes, and
crimes against humanity.
b) JRR teams may engage
in various functions, including the investigation of the patterns of
violence, forensic mapping, documentary evidence investigations,
visual image collection, compilation of potential witness lists,
identification and marking of massacre sites, initial victim/witness
protection surveys and as appropriate the recording of testimonial
information. If appropriate, a JRR mission or part of it may also
assist in investigations and preparations of prosecution.
c) JRR teams will act
under the authority of the State or the International Institution
that requests in its assistance. The sovereignty of the host state
will be respected. They will, whenever feasible, coordinate their
activities with those of other international and national actors.
2) Participation and partnership
a) States which take part
in the JRR Mechanism shall be “State Participants” of JRR, while
Intergovernmental Organizations shall have the status of “Associate
Participants”. State Participants and Associate Participants shall
collectively be known as “Participants”. Non-governmental partners
are being linked to the JRR Mechanism by agreement of Participants
and shall, whenever they take part in JRR operations, do so under
the authority of one or several Participant.
b) States can participate
by supplying one or more of the following categories of assistance:
i) Putting a number of
experts on a roster for deployment
ii) Paying the costs for
deployment of own experts
iii) Paying the costs for
deployment of experts from other Participants
iv) Paying the costs for
training of own experts
v) Paying the costs for
training of experts from other Participants
vi) Contribute to the
costs of the administration of the JRR, by funding or in kind
vii) Contribute to other
common costs
c) Associate Participants
shall have the opportunity for active participation and full
consultation, as set out in this document and other relevant
documents. In order to become an Associate Participant, the
organization has to be properly constituted with defined rules, and
have a functional and professional role relevant to the work of JRR.
At no time shall the number of Associate Participants exceed that of
the States Participants of JRR.
d) Associate Participants
shall contribute to the work of JRR the same way as States
Participants.
e) Non-Governmental
Partners may contribute to the work of JRR the same way as States
Participants or by other appropriate means, such as consultancy.
Non-Governmental Partners have to be properly constituted with
defined rules, and have a functional and professional role relevant
to the work of JRR.
3) Organization
a) The organization of
this initiative shall commence incrementally, as agreed by
Participants.
b) The JRR Mechanism may
be administered by a Secretariat attached to or by an existing
institution, as decided by the Participants.
c) The JRR Mechanism
shall not have legal personality.
4) Decision Making
a) Participants may meet
in two formations, the permanent Policy Group and the Technical
Group. The Policy Groups shall meet once a year, usually in New
York, to review the activities of the mechanism, take necessary
procedural decisions and deal with other appropriate matters. The
Technical Group will meet as often as necessary. Chairmanship in the
Groups will rotate annually according to a schedule determined by
the Policy Group. Decisions may be taken per capsulam through focal
points of Participants.
b) All decisions
pertaining to general organizational and technical matters will be
by consensus of all States Participants.
c) All decisions
pertaining to missions will be taken in accordance with The
Guidelines for the Deployment of a JRR Mission leading to an
agreement amnongst partners participating in a JRR Mission.
5) Financing
The JRR Mechanism and JRR
activities shall be financed on a voluntary basis. Financing of the
administration of the JRR Mechanism and other common costs shall be
decided by the Policy group on behalf of Participants at the basis
of available funds. The Participants may decide to set up one or
more funds for the financing of the Secretariat and other costs
associated with regular or ad hoc JRR activities. Any necessary
financial regulations may be decided by the Participants.
Draft Basic Elements of the Procedure for the Deployment of Experts
in the Framework of a JRR Mission
(Distributed but not discussed)
1) Any decision
pertaining to a request for JRR assistance shall only be taken after
a comprehensive assessment with recommendations has been circulated
to all States Participants and Associate Participants. A decision
whether to offer expertise and/or other resources for a JRR
deployment shall be made by each participant for itself in
consultation with other interested participants.
2) Procedure
a) A request for a JRR
mission may be received by any Participant. Unless otherwise agreed,
the receiving Participant will be responsible for diplomatic
contacts with the requesting entity. If a administrative mechanism
has been set up, that mechanism will assist the receiving state, in
accordance with terms to be established at such time.
b) The request shall
immediately be transmitted to the Secretariat together with any
relevant information to the other Participants, who will be invited
to respond within an appropriate period. The receiving Participant
may also transmit a proposal as to future action, if appropriate and
feasible, and indicate in which time-frame responses from other
participants shall be given.
c) Responses from other
Participants shall indicate whether they are willing and able to
participate in the requested JRR mission, as well as any other
information or assessments which they might want to give.
d) If the receiving
Participant finds that there appears to be good reasons for
preparing a JRR mission, and if it also finds that there is
sufficient interest among other Participants to merit an indication
that a JRR mission will be possible, the receiving Participant may
proceed, including by consulting whether any Participating State is
willing to take the lead in an operation and making preliminary
inquiries into a possible composition of a mission. Tt will be the
receiving Participant that will be responsible for the handling of
that request until a State has assumed the responsibility of being a
lead State.
e) Before a mission is
finally organized and deployed, an assessment mission will be sent
to the area in question. Such an assessment mission will be
organised and deployed by the receiving Participant or the lead
State after a consultation at short notice to other Participants. It
will be composed of relevant experts and led by an experienced
expert.
f) After the assessment
mission has been completed, the mission will submit a report
including its assessment of the needs and possibilities for a JRR
mission as well as a recommendation. This report will consider in
detail the political, legal and security situation and whether the
request was genuinely made. It will contain a draft SOMA and other
instruments deemed necessary for the deployment of a JRR mission to
be agreed upon with the requesting state or entity or amongst the
latter. All of them will be sent to thedistributed by the lead State
or the receiving Participant, which will transmit it to all
Participants, with a request for responses as to possible
contributions. Based on these responses, the lead State or the
receiving Participant will propose the conditions of deployment and
organization of a JRR mission.
g) The proposal shall be
submitted to all Participants. The lead State or the receiving
Participant will convene a meeting of the Policy Group at the latest
10 working days after the report of the assessment mission was
distributed to participants. Once it has been determined that a
request to deploy a JRR mission was genuinely made and that the
political and security situation in the region warrant the
deployment and the participants that have contributed personnel or
other resources (“contributing states”) have agreed to the
organization, the mission shall be deployed as soon as possible. In
case an international organisation requested the deployment it will
integrate the mission in its own field mission whereby the JRR
mission enjoys at least the same privileges and immunities as the
main mission of the IO.
h) Thereafter those
participants which contribute to the JRR mission may at their
discretion form:
i) A policy ad hoc
committee which monitors the deployment of the JRR mission with
regard to the political and security situation on the ground and
decides on the further treatment of the findings of the JRR mission
in close co-operation with the requesting state or entity.
Non-contributing participants and partners may attend without
participating in decision making which will be by consensus.
ii) A technical ad hoc
committee which prepares and supervises the deployment of the JRR
mission, decides on its format and funding etc.
3) Financing
a) States Participants
agree that the entity requesting JRR assistance shall as a main rule
be responsible for all costs directly associated with that
assistance. Such costs shall include, inter alia:
i. Pre-deployment
training;
ii. All travel costs;
iii. All costs associated
with the experts (salary, pension, insurance etc);
iv. Cost of all
equipment;
v. All costs associated
with offices, housing, storage of documentation etc;
vi. All
telecommunications costs;
vii. Standby costs such
as medical evacuation.
b) Each contributing
Participant in a JRR deployment shall decide if it wishes to provide
the services of its expert or its resources free of cost to the
requesting entity.
c) A Participant who has
not provided experts to a mission may contribute through a financial
contribution.
d) States Participants
may also agree to seek financial contributions from other actors,
such as interested International Organizations.
4) Legal responsibility, liability and criminal accountability.
Issues of responsibility,
liability and criminal accountability should be agreed upon before a
mission is launched. The following principles shall be the basis for
such agreements.
a) The Lead Participant
will be responsible for the overall conduct of a JRR mission. The
Lead Participant will also be responsible for the documents and the
archives. In legal matters relating to a JRR mission, the Leading
Participant will represent the mission.
b) JRR missions will not
have legal personality.
c) When personal death or
injury or material loss or damage arises from the activities of a
JRR mission, the Participants shall be jointly and severally liable,
provided that a Participant which establishes that no part or only a
part of the damage results from its activities shall be liable in
respect of that part only.
d) Claims between the
Participants for compensation for personal death or injury or for
material loss or damage, caused by one Participant to another
Participant in the performance of duty, will be settled in
accordance with international law.
e) Each Contributing
Participant ensures that its experts are accountable under its
domestic law for any wrongs committed and will exercise its
authority concerning penalties, disciplinary measures and other
sanctions or measures in accordance with its national criminal,
disciplinary and procedural laws.
f) In case an Associate
Participant or a Non-Governmental Partner offers to contribute to a
mission an expert who will perform tasks usually associated with the
exercise of authority, such as direct handling of evidence, that
offer may be accepted only on the condition that one of the States
Participants which has jurisdiction accepts that person. In case of
offers of other experts from an Associate Participant or a
Non-Governmental Partner, it will be preferable but not necessary
that that person is under the jurisdiction of a State Participant.
g) The Lead Participant
of a JRR Mission shall, on behalf of all other Contributing
Participants, enter into a Status of Mission Agreement with the host
state that protects the Mission and its experts. For experts in a
JRR Mission that are covered by the jurisdiction of one or more
State Participant, such an agreement shall provide for immunity from
legal processes in respect of words spoken and all actions performed
by them in their official capacity. For other experts, protection
from legal processes shall be provided as appropriate.
Annex 4
List of Participants
(*) designated or acting Focal Point
Helen Ahrens, Senior Planning Officer, GTZ (Germany)
Bakhtiar Amin, President, International Alliance for Justice (Iraq)
David Ashley, Team Leader, Police and Justice Team, Conflict Issues
Group, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (United Kingdom) (*)
Kelly Dawn Askin, Senior Legal Officer, Open Society Institute
Justice Initiative (USA)
Amal Basha, Chair, Sisters Arab Forum (Yemen)
Jens Behrendt, Head of Recruitment, Centre for International Peace
Operations (ZIF-Germany),
Leonardo Bencini, Ministry Foreign Affairs (Italy)
Federico Borello, Human Rights Officer, United Nations Mission in
the Democratic Republic of Congo
Hans-Werner Bussmann, Commissioner for the ICC, Foreign Office
(Germany) (*)
Carla Caraccio, Program Assistant, No Peace Without Justice
Antonio Cassese, Professor, University of Florence and EUI (Italy)
Simone Cergnul, Program Assistant, No Peace Without Justice
Luc Côté, International Criminal Law Expert (Canada)
Gérard Dive, Coordinator of the Belgian Task Force ICC-ICT, Belgian
Ministry of Justice (Belgium) (*)
Jacques Djoli, Directeur de Cabinet du Ministre des Affaires
Etrangères (Democratic Republic of Congo) (*)
Niccolò Figà-Talamanca, Program Director, No Peace Without Justice
Mathieu Gbayoro, Magistrat, Directeur des Affaires Juridiques et
Consulaires au Ministère des Affaires Etrangères (Côte d'Ivoire) (*)
Julian Guerrero, Counselor-Chargé d'Affaires, Ministry of Foreign
Affairs (Colombia)
Agneta Johansson, Deputy Director, International Legal Research
Assistance Consortium (Sweden)
Abdul Rahim Kamara, Executive Director, Manifesto 99 (Sierra Leone)
Allieu I. Kanu, DPR of Sierra Leone to the United Nations (Sierra
Leone) (*)
Nicolas Kyriakou, Attaché, Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Cyprus) (*)
Marcus Lenzen, Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery, United
Nation Development Programme
[Jürg Lindenmann, Directorate for Public International Law, DFA
(Switzerland)] (*)
Désirée Lurf, Legal Officer, Legal and Governance Support
Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Austria)
Alexander McLachlan, Conflict Prevention and Crisis Management Unit,
European Commission (*)
Ahmed Bilal Mehboob, Executive Director, Pakistan Institute of
Legislative Development and Transparency (Pakistan)
Guénaël Mettraux, Counsel, ETHICS (Switzerland)
Claudia Moser, Coordinator of the Swiss Expert Pool for Civilian
Peacebuilding (Switzerland)
Zénon Mukongo Ngay, Legal Adviser, Mission of the Democractic
Republic of Congo to the United Nations (DRC)
Cecilia Nilsson Kleffner, Legal Adviser, NGO Coalition for the
International Criminal Court (Netherlands)
Maria Nystedt, Training and Project Officer, Folke Bernadotte
Academy (Sweden)
Eileen Olexiuk, Stabilization and Reconstruction Task Force,
Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Canada) (*)
Kelvin Ong, Team Leader Justice and security sector Reform Unit,
United Nation Development Programme (*)
Maija Paeglite, Deputy Director, European Matters Coordination,
Ministry of Justice (Latvia) (*)
Laura Peconi, Administration Assistant, No Peace Without Justice
Elio Polizzotto, Program Officer, No Peace Without Justice
Tapio Puurunen, Legislative Counselor of. the Unit for Public
International Law of the Legal Department, Ministry of Foreign
Affairs (Finland) (*)
Franco Radeschi, Liaison Officer, Royal Mounted Police (Canada)
Hussain Ramoz, Secretary General, Afghan Independent Human Rights
Commission (Afghanistan)
Alison Smith, Legal Counsel and International Justice Coordinator,
No Peace Without Justice
Khalil Rahman Timuri, United Nations Department Ministry of Foreign
Affairs (Afghanistan)
Hubert Tshiswaka, Executive Director, Action contre l’impunité pour
les droits humains (DRC)
Patrick Tumwine, Advocacy Officer, Human Rights Network (Uganda)
Pascal Turlan, Situation Analyst, International Criminal Court (*)
George Ulrich, EIUC Secretary General (Italy)
Andras Vamos-Goldman, JRR Consultant (Canada)
Martin Witteveen, Team Leader, International Criminal Court
Pal Wrange, Principal Legal Adviser, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
(Sweden) (*)
Salvatore Zappalà, Associate Professor of International Law
University of Florence and EUI (Italy) |
46.png)
