By Pawan Kumar
The International Criminal Court (ICC), an independent international criminal tribunal, came into existence in July 2002 at The Hague in the Netherlands through its founding treaty, the Rome Statute of 1998. Distinct from the International Court of Justice—an official organ of the United Nations that adjudicates disputes between States—the ICC has jurisdiction solely over individuals. Its mandate extends to anyone, including sitting or former heads of state, presidents, prime ministers, or other high-ranking officials.
The ICC is the first permanent international criminal tribunal empowered to prosecute individuals for the gravest crimes under international law, as defined in Article 5 of the Rome Statute: genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. While the first three fall squarely within the Court’s jurisdiction, the crime of aggression—earlier termed the crime against peace—has had its jurisdiction deferred until 2029, as decided by the Assembly of States Parties in July 2025.
The Rome Statute also broke new ground by establishing the Trust Fund for Victims (TFV), a separate institution mandated to provide compensation and reparations to victims of crimes within the ICC’s jurisdiction. This marked a decisive shift from international penal law towards a more victim-centred international criminal justice system.
VICTIMS AND INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW
The Trust Fund for Victims was created under Article 79 of the Rome Statute with the mission of responding to harm suffered by victims and their families. It fulfils two distinct mandates: providing reparative assistance through psychological rehabilitation, physical rehabilitation, and material support; and implementing judicial reparations awards ordered by the Court against convicted persons.
In just two countries—the Democratic Republic of the Congo and northern Uganda—over 4,00,000 victims have benefited from the Fund’s programmes, underscoring its growing significance in post-conflict recovery.
Equally transformative is Article 68 of the Rome Statute, which provides for victim participation in ICC proceedings. This treaty-based provision is a milestone in international law, making the ICC the first international tribunal to formally recognise victims as participants in proceedings rather than mere witnesses. In doing so, it completes the international rule-of-law framework by placing victims at its moral and legal centre.
THE EVOLUTION OF VICTIMS’ RIGHTS
Earlier international criminal justice mechanisms, most notably the Nuremberg and Tokyo Tribunals, were almost exclusively perpetrator-focused. Victims were largely invisible, appearing only indirectly as witnesses rather than as rights holders. At Nuremberg alone, more than 55,000 witnesses testified, yet victims’ voices remained subordinate to the broader goals of establishing State responsibility and setting legal precedents.
This pattern continued in the ad hoc tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. While these courts made landmark contributions to substantive international criminal law, victims were relegated to the role of prosecution witnesses, with no independent procedural standing. Critics argued that such models instrumentalised victims as evidence rather than recognising them as autonomous stakeholders entitled to justice and redress.
It was only towards the end of the 20th century, amid the rise of human rights discourse and transitional justice, that the international community began to rethink this approach. Advocates of restorative justice, particularly in post-conflict societies, pressed for legal frameworks that acknowledged victims’ dignity, agency, and right to reparations beyond punishment alone.
A “VICTIMS’ COURT”—PROMISE AND PRACTICE
When the ICC was created, it was hailed as a “victims’ court”. Survivors of mass atrocities would not only testify, but also have the right to be heard at all stages of proceedings. Through their legal representatives, victims could comment on decisions to open investigations, admit or reject cases, shape the scope of charges, submit observations to judges, question witnesses, and participate in determining reparations—provided such participation did not prejudice the rights of the accused or the fairness of the trial.
To facilitate this engagement, the ICC established the Victims Participation and Reparations Section (VPRS), a dedicated unit to assist victims in navigating complex legal procedures. Together, these innovations were intended to give the Court a restorative dimension, reflecting a growing global consensus that justice must encompass participation, recognition, and repair.
PROGRESS, CONSTRAINTS, AND THE LONG ROAD AHEAD
Over the past two decades, thousands of victims have been registered as participants before the ICC, with thousands more seeking recognition. Currently, more than 18,000 victims are participating directly or indirectly in proceedings across 34 cases. In its 24 years of operation, the ICC has facilitated victim participation and reparations through the Trust Fund, demonstrating the scheme’s enduring relevance.
Victims’ participation under Article 68(3) and reparations under Article 75 provide procedural standing unparalleled in international criminal justice. Yet, significant challenges persist. Procedural complexities, inconsistent jurisprudence, limited financial resources, and political constraints often undermine the effectiveness of these mechanisms. Ensuring meaningful participation—rather than symbolic inclusion—remains a persistent challenge, particularly given the scale and diversity of victims in mass atrocity situations.
The tension between victims’ rights and the accused’s right to a fair and expeditious trial further complicates the Court’s work. The ICC’s annual budget for 2026 stands at approximately €196.8 million, much of which is absorbed by trial and operational costs. Of the 34 cases admitted so far, the Court has delivered 13 convictions and four acquittals—figures that highlight the slow pace of international criminal trials.
Structural limitations also persist. The ICC depends heavily on State cooperation for arrests and enforcement, yet many countries—including India—are not parties to the Rome Statute. Among the permanent members of the UN Security Council, only France and the United Kingdom are members of the ICC.
Despite these constraints, the Court has restored a measure of confidence among victims that international justice is possible and that impunity is not guaranteed—even for presidents and prime ministers.
The ICC remains one of the few permanent institutions striving to uphold an international rule of law while giving voice to victims long silenced by mass violence. In doing so, it ensures that the world not only hears those voices—but responds to them.
—The writer teaches at Amity Law School, Amity University, Noida
The post The ICC and the Rise of the Victim appeared first on India Legal.