Background Briefing

Strategic Planning

Last year the ICC engaged in a process of developing a strategic plan.29 Human Rights Watch believes that this is an important way for the court to articulate its vision of its work, objectives to implement this vision, and plans to achieve objectives.

Human Rights Watch has previously raised concerns that the ICC’s plan does not adequately address the court’s achieving resonance and relevance with communities most affected by the crimes that it investigates and tries.30 While effective investigations and fair, efficient trials are the core business of the court, the ICC will not fully achieve its mandate unless it is meaningful to the populations for whom justice is being done.

Last year, under the facilitation of France, the ASP working group in The Hague produced a report which welcomed the court’s work on the plan and encouraged the ICC to further elaborate on several issues as a matter of priority. These mostly related to the court’s ability to make its work meaningful to affected communities and included: location of court activities, including field activities; the role of victims; outreach and communications; and positive complementarity.31 A resolution adopted by the fifth ASP further echoed the report, inviting ongoing dialogue between the court and the ASP Bureau on the plan, such as regarding the plan’s “concrete implementation” and “cross-cutting issues” including the location of ICC activities, victims, and outreach and communication.32 The ASP resolution further invited the ICC to submit an update on the strategic plan at the sixth ASP session.

The detailed outreach strategy issued by the ICC in 2006 is welcome.33 The work undertaken by the court on a strategy with regard to victims, which we understand is currently being elaborated, is also welcome. We also understand that court officials and staff have made advances in further developing the strategic plan with regard to certain areas identified by them as priorities, such as decision making processes and personnel management at the court.

We, nonetheless, are concerned that overall progress in providing strategies in key areas has been limited in 2007. In particular, we regret that strategies with respect to positive complementarity and location of court activities, including in situ proceedings, have not been developed. Notably, the feasibility of in situ proceedings already is being explored by ICC judges in the case against Thomas Lubanga Dyilo.34 In addition, we understand that the post of Strategic Planning Coordinator, which was approved for this year’s budget to assist in further development and implementation of strategies and will be attached to the presidency, has yet to be filled.

We recognize that developing detailed strategies building on a strategic plan is an intensive effort. However, experience to date regarding outreach and the ICC’s field offices has shown the importance of officials and staff working to identify court wide strategies and objectives to enhancing the court’s effectiveness in the areas that receive this reflection.

At the upcoming session, we urge states parties to signal their continued commitment to the court’s strategic planning and encourage timely progress on key areas. Specifically, we urge states parties in the omnibus resolution to:

  • Affirm the significance of the strategic planning process;

  • Invite the court to submit the strategy regarding victims and also strategies on positive complementarity and location of the ICC’s activities as soon as possible;

  • Invite the court to prepare an updated strategy on outreach and communications within a reasonable period; and

  • Invite continued dialogue with the ASP Bureau, while respecting the court’s independence, on forthcoming material related to strategic planning.

  • In addition, we understand a hearing will be convened by states parties on outreach during the upcoming ASP session, as has been done in the previous two sessions. It will be important for states parties to attend this hearing and to signal the significance of effective outreach and communications. Human Rights Watch is preparing a separate briefing paper for this hearing that summarizes findings on ICC outreach and communications based on field missions conducted to situation countries over the past year.



    29 ICC-ASP, “Strategic Plan of the International Criminal Court,” August 4, 2006, ICC-ASP/5/6, http://www.icc-cpi.int/library/asp/ICC-ASP-5-6_English.pdf (accessed November 5, 2007).

    30 Human Rights Watch, The Strategic Plan of the International Criminal Court: A Human Rights Watch Memorandum, no. 1, July 2006, http://hrw.org/backgrounder/ij/memo0706/ij0706.pdf.

    31 ICC-ASP, “Report of the Bureau on the strategic planning process of the International Criminal Court,” ICC-ASP/5/30, November 20, 2006, http://www.icc-cpi.int/library/asp/ICC-ASP-5-30_English.pdf (accessed November 7, 2007), paras. 21-25.

    32 Official Records of the Assembly of the States Parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, Fifth session, The Hague, 23 November to 1 December 2006 (ICC-ASP/5/32), part III, Resolution ICC-ASP/5/Res.2, paras. 3 and 4.

    33 ICC-ASP, “Strategic Plan for Outreach of the International Criminal Court,” ICC-ASP/5/12, September 29, 2006,

    http://www.icc-cpi.int/library/asp/ICC-ASP-5-12_English.pdf (accessed November 5, 2007).

    34 ICC, Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, Transcript of Hearing (Status Conference), The Hague, September 4, 2007, ICC-012/04-01/06, http://www.icc-cpi.int/library/cases/ICC-01-04-01-06-T-50_en.pdf (accessed November 7, 2007), p. 4.