Chapter 7 explores the application of the individual criminal responsibility rules to the facts of individual cases at the International Criminal Court (ICC). It looks at the facts and evidence presented by the prosecutor, as well as the conclusions of the judges at the pre-trial and trial stages of proceedings, to ask whether the requirements of the Rome Statute’s modes of liability are met. In view of the practices of the UN tribunals, many members of the international criminal justice community expected that the ICC judges would apply the Rome Statute in a manner that would render convictions easier. Instead, this chapter argues that the assessment of criminal responsibility at the Court has followed a different line of legal reasoning: applying the modes of liability in a restrained manner, regardless of the trial outcome. At the ICC the quality of the process has been cherished as the ultimate prerequisite for ‘ending impunity’ for those crimes. While this vision of international criminal law has been contested by some members of the international criminal justice field, such as human rights advocates, it has continued to dominate the ICC approach to assessing criminal responsibility.

The Court’s historic movement from theory to practice came with a round of investigations targeting specific conflicts and identifying specific suspects, centered mainly in Africa. The powers and constraints of the ICC Prosecutor were closely monitored by judges as the Court issued its first arrest warrants. The first three suspects to arrive in The Hague were Congolese men from the peripheral Ituri district; and a fourth Congolese suspect was soon apprehended for alleged crimes in the Central African Republic. Lasting more than a decade, each trial faced a series of crises and reversals, indicating fault-lines in the original design. Mixed evidence made it surprisingly difficult for the Court to establish crimes involving child soldiers, as well as sex and gender crimes; and even more difficult to attribute criminal responsibility to the individuals accused. The interests of victims had to be balanced with the legal principle of fair trials. From an initial overview, the reader understands the many difficulties – both practical and institutional – facing the new Court and its ambitious mission.

The Court’s historic movement from theory to practice came with a round of investigations targeting specific conflicts and identifying specific suspects, centered mainly in Africa. The powers and constraints of the ICC Prosecutor were closely monitored by judges as the Court issued its first arrest warrants. The first three suspects to arrive in The Hague were Congolese men from the peripheral Ituri district; and a fourth Congolese suspect was soon apprehended for alleged crimes in the Central African Republic. Lasting more than a decade, each trial faced a series of crises and reversals, indicating fault-lines in the original design. Mixed evidence made it surprisingly difficult for the Court to establish crimes involving child soldiers, as well as sex and gender crimes; and even more difficult to attribute criminal responsibility to the individuals accused. The interests of victims had to be balanced with the legal principle of fair trials. From an initial overview, the reader understands the many difficulties – both practical and institutional – facing the new Court and its ambitious mission.