LeGreffe

TheRegistry

Projecttodefinepoliciesgoverningrelations
betweentheICCandintermediaries1

DRAFT

May2010

1 Thisisaworkingdocument,whichdoesnotreflectsofartheofficialpositionoftheCourt.

Maanweg174,2516ABTheHague,TheNetherlandsMaanweg174,2516ABLaHaye,PaysBas
www.icccpi.int
TelephoneTlphone+31(0)705158515/FacsimileTlcopie+31(0)705158555
 CONTENTS

I.Introduction

II.Policiesonintermediaries:

1.Howtoidentifyandselectintermediaries

2.CriteriaforSelectionofIntermediaries

3.EstablishingaRelationshipwithanIntermediary

4.ManagingRelationshipswithIntermediaries

5.ConsequencesofaRelationshipwithanIntermediary

III.MonitoringandEvaluation

IV.BudgetaryImplications

V.Annexes

Page:2/25

I.Introduction

TheobjectiveofthepresentprojectistoimproveefficiencyoftheCourtsoperationsaswell
astoprovidetransparencyandclarityforthirdpartieswhomayinteractwiththeCourt.

Thepresentprojectaroseoutofarealizationoftheexistenceofavacuumandthelackofa
clearframeworktogoverntheCourtsrelationshipwithintermediaries.Manypartsofthe
Courtrely on intermediaries already and cooperate with them sometimes on the basis of a
formal framework or merely on an informal basis. Intermediaries carry out work at the
Courtsrequest,orontheirowninitiative.Thereisdisparitybetweenhowdifferentorgans
and units of the Court engage intermediaries in many aspects including criteria for
selection,natureoftherelationshipandsupportprovided.

AtthisstageintheCourtsdevelopment,itwasidentifiedthatthereisaneedforastandard
setting exercise to provide guidance to different parts of the Court, to identify good
practicesindifferentareasandprovideclaritytothoseoutsidetheCourtwhomaywishto
engagewiththeCourt.

There is no definition of the term intermediary in any of the legal texts of the Court as
such, though there are references to different forms of engagement with third parties.
However,theCourthasconsistentlyreceivedquestionsregardingtherelationshipbetween
intermediaries and the Court. Consequently, in 2009 the Registrar decided to initiate a
consultation process on policies and practices as regards to the selection, protection and
support of intermediaries with the objective to clarify and harmonise internal policies and
practiceswherepossible.TherelevantunitsoftheOfficeoftheProsecutorandtheRegistry,
the Secretariat of the Trust Fund for Victims and the Offices of Public Counsel for Victims
and for the Defence, with a representative of the Presidency as observer, came together to
exploretowhatextentitwaspossibletoestablishacommonframeworkthatwouldserveto
guide the Court in its relations with intermediaries. The present document is the result of
thatprocess.Asafirststep,aninternalWorkingGroupwasestablishedandinformationon
a wide range of key issues relating torelationships with intermediaries were shared in the
formofquestionnaires.Otherpolicydocuments,StandardOperatingProcedures(SOPs)etc.
werealsoshared.Consultationswerealsoheldwithexternalstakeholdersincludingsome
intermediaries, and the policies and practices of other international organisations were
examinedtoseetowhatextenttheycouldprovideusefulmodels.

Page:3/25

The outcomes expected from this project include the elaboration of common standards in
areas where this is possible, including written guidelines, SOPs, templates and standard
forms.

Contextfortheexercise

The Courts activities regularly take place in different countries far from the Courts
headquartersandeachofwhichinvolvesdistinctchallenges.Tofacilitatetheseactivitiesin
thefield,theCourtusesdifferentformsoffieldpresence.TheCourtsactivitiesalsodepend
to a large extent on the cooperation it receives from community, regional, national
(governmental) organizations and individuals operating in the country where the Court
operates. To carry out their respective functions effectively, the different organs and units
of the Court2 must establish contacts within local communities, where appropriate, and
worktogetherwithreliablelocalactors,socalledintermediaries.

The Court recognizes the efforts carried out by intermediaries cooperating with the Court,
particularly at community and local level. The Court equally recognizes the fact that these
individuals and organisations working locally together with the Court in one way or
another, play a role in supporting the Court in accomplishing the objectives of the Rome
Statute.

Comment [F1]: ItisNOT

The table below summarises some of the main purposes for which organs and units of the
Courtinteractwithintermediaries.
Function
a. Toassistincarryingoutoutreach
andpublicinformationactivities
inthefield.
proposedthatthetwotablesbelow
wouldbeincludedintheeventual
document(butcouldbeinanannex
andsimplysummarisedhere).
Howevertheyareincludedhereat
Organ/Unit Activitiescarriedout(nonexhaustive)
thisstageforthesakeofdiscussion.
Raiseawarenessoftheaffectedcommunitiesin
situationcountriesabouttheCourtandits
workandconductoutreachactivities
RaisepublicawarenessabouttheCourtand
provideinformationrelatingtotheCourt
PIDS
InformvictimsabouttheTFV
coordinates Organisecapacitybuildingworkshopsforor
withlocalactors(includingofficials,media,
legalprofession,communityleaders,NGOs)

2 ThetermorgansandunitsoftheCourtwillbeusedthroughoutthisdocument.Themainparts
oftheCourtthatinteractwithintermediariesaretherelevantunitsoftheOfficeoftheProsecutor
andtheRegistry,theTrustFundforVictimsandtheOfficeofPublicCounselforVictims.
Page:4/25


b. Toassistapartytoconduct
investigationsinidentifying
evidentiaryleadsand/orwitnesses
andfacilitatecontactwith
witnesses.
c. Toassist(potential)victimsin
relationtosubmissionofan
application,requestfor
supplementaryinformationand/
ornotificationofdecisions
concerningrepresentations,
participationorreparations.
d. Tocommunicatewithavictim/
witness,insituationsinwhich
directcommunicationcould
endangerthesafetyofthe
victim/witness.
Monitorthesituationsanddocument
internationalcrimes
Assistinthepreservationofevidence
AssisttheOTPtolocateandcontactwitnesses
andotherinvestigativeleads,and/orto
maintaincontactsbetweentheOTPand
witnesses(forbothinvestigationandprotection
purposes),particularlywhereitisadjudgedto
OTP
betooinsecureforOTPstafftodosodirectly
Counsel AssistDefenceCounseltocontactpotential
witnessesandcollectevidenceforaparticular
submission
Assistlegalrepresentativesofvictimsto
contactpotentialwitnessesandcollectevidence
foraparticularsubmission
Identifyvictimsinaffectedcommunities
Informvictimsinaffectedareasabouttheir
rights
AssistvictimstogetintouchwiththeCourt
AssistCourtstafftomeetwithvictims
Assistvictimsincompletingapplicationsfor
representations,participationorreparation
Providesupportandassistancetovictims
VPRS linkedtotheirparticipation,e.g.psychosocial
services,security,legalservicesetc.
OPCV
Facilitatetheinformationflowbetweenthe
Courtandthevictimapplicantsegtoobtain
missinginformationorimplementotherorders
oftheChambers
Assistvictimstounderstandjudicialdecisions
oftheCourtrelevanttothem(egregarding
commonlegalrepresentationorcriteriafor
acceptanceasavictim)
AssistOTPtocommunicatewith
victims/witnesses
Facilitatetheflowofinformationbetweenthe
Courtandthevictimapplicants
AssisttheOPCVorVPRStocommunicatewith
OTP
victims
VWU Actasthefirstcontactpoint,receivingsecurity
concernsandprovidingthemwithadvice
Counsel
Monitorthephysicalandpsychologicalwell
VPRS beingofvictimsandwitnesses
Locateand/orprovidemedicalassistance,
psychologicalsupportandotherservicesfor
victimsandwitnesses
AssistwitnessestoappearbeforetheCourt
Page:5/25


e. ToliaisebetweenLegal
RepresentativesandVictimsfor
thepurposesofvictim
participation/reparations.
f. ToassisttheTFVtoidentify
potentialbenefactorsand/orto
implementTFVschemesin
connectionwiththeuseoftheir
otherresourcesortoimplement
reparationsordersoftheCourt
Facilitatecontactbetweenvictimsandtheir
legalrepresentativetoconveyinformationto
Counsel
clients,collectevidenceforaparticular
submission,anddeterminevictimsviewsand
concernsand/orobtaininstructions
InformvictimsabouttheTFV
AssiststaffoftheSecretariatoftheTFVto
TFV
identifyandimplementprojectsforthebenefit
ofvictimsandtheirfamilies,andto
communicatewithvictims

Below is a summary in a different form of the main tasks conducted by intermediaries in

relationtotherelevantorgans/unitsoftheCourt.

Organ/
DescriptionofTasks
Section

Closepartnershipwithpartnersat grassrootslevel(localNGOs, traditional/religiousleaders,local

authorities,andespeciallyvictimsthemselves)

Assisting victims to assist themselves through empowering them to undertake rehabilitation

activities to help them restore, as far as possible, the life they had or would have had if they had
notbeenvictimsofthecrimesunderthejurisdictionoftheICC

TFV Mobilizing victims into groups with similar characteristics regarding levels of victimisation and
capacity to respond/rehabilitate in order to provide group assistance and encourage self help
initiatives

Working with communities, insisting on a mixed participation of families and communities

alongsidevictimsintherehabilitationoftheircommunities

AsdirectrecipientsoffundsfromtheTFV/ICCtoadministertovictims

Providing lead information that may assist an investigation, in particular in relation to other
OTP
individualswhomaybepotentialwitnesses

Initiating contact, assisting in arranging meetings and maintaining contact with relevant

individuals

Establishing initial contact and approaching victims of sexual violence, traumatised witnesses,
childrenorelderlypersonswithwhomheorshedevelopedarelationshipoftrust

Providing accompanying support to a witness during the screening and interview, upon witnesss
requestandwherethisispracticable

Assistingwithlogisticalsupportandassistanceforwitnesses,asappropriate

Assistinginmonitoringthesafetyandwellbeingofthewitnesses

Page:6/25

Organ/
DescriptionofTasks
Section

AssistinginseekingandreceivingviewsofvictimsatallstagesoftheworkoftheOTPinorderto
bemindfulofandtotakeintoaccounttheirinterests

OPCV FacilitatingcontactwithvictimsrepresentedbytheOffice

InformvictimsabouttheirrightsbeforetheICC,includingpreparingrelevantmaterials

Assistvictimsincompletingtheapplicationformsforparticipationorreparation

Act as channel of contact between the ICC and the victims in order to keep them informed about
developmentsconcerningthestatusoftheirapplicationsorofdevelopmentsintheproceedings,or
to request missing information or documents, where there is no legal representative (these are

dutiesoftheRegistryunderRule92RPEandRegulation86.4,ROC)

VPRS Act as a channel of contact between the ICC and the victims where the Registry is ordered to
implementspecificrequestsbyChambers

Facilitatemeetingsorotherdirectcontact(suchasbytelephone)betweentheICCandthevictims

Identify and inform the Court regarding any security concerns of applicants or victims linked to
participationinproceedings

AssisttheCourttoidentifycommunitiesofvictimsandpotentialintermediaries

AssisttheCourtinpreparingandtestingmaterials,evaluateimpactoftheCourtsactivities,etc.

OPCD SeeIssuesraisedbelow

TheneedtodevelopclearandtransparentpoliciesisrootedintheCourtsoverallstrategic
goals to be: (1) a model of international criminal justice, (2) a wellrecognized and
adequately supported institution and (3) a model of public administration. In particular,
Objective 3 of the first Strategic Goal is to further develop policies for implementing the
quality standards specified in the Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence with
respect to all participants in proceedings and persons otherwise affected by the Courts
activities. Also relevant is Strategic Goal 3: to achieve the desired results with minimal
resourcesandthroughstreamlinedstructuresandprocesses,withinacommonICCculture,
whilemaintainingflexibility.Withaviewtoimplementingtheseoverallstrategicgoals,the
Court has already elaborated several strategies in specific areas including outreach and
victimsthatweredrawnuponinthepresentexercise.

Page:7/25

The necessity for specific requirements for some parts of the Court is recognized, as a
numberofofficesandindividualsoperateindependentlywithinthestructureoftheCourt,
althoughthey share the common mission. Harmonisingwill not be possible insome cases,
wheredifferentrolesrequiredifferentpolicies.

As the proposed outcomes of the project contain innovations, the effectiveness will be
monitored and the various outcomes updated where required to integrate lessons learned.
Forthisreasonamechanismformonitoringandevaluationhasbeenbuiltintotheprocess.

FORDISCUSSION:

To what extent should the present exercise aim to establish duties and obligations
onintermediaries(aswellasontheCourt),suchasethicalworkingstandards?

Page:8/25

II.Policiesonintermediaries
1.Howtoidentifyandselectintermediaries

1.1.ScopeofthetermintermediarycoveredbythepresentGuidelines

Thefirsttask thatwasidentified bytheWorkingGroupwastheneedtodefine clearlythe

notion of intermediary, which is a term used by different organs and units of the Court
butnotalwaysusingthesamedefinition.Itwouldthenbepossibletoproceedtodefinethe
rightsandobligationsthatflowfromthis.Theresultoftheexercisetoattempttodefinethe
categoriesofintermediary,andtherelevantlegalandpolicyframeworksissetoutinAnnex
1.

AlthoughintheRomeStatuteorRulesofProcedureandEvidence,thereisnodefinitionof
an intermediary, the role of third parties of various kinds and capacities is mentioned
directlyorindirectlyeitherinthelegaltextsoftheCourtorvariouspolicydocumentsofthe
Court.

Theessenceofthenotionofanintermediaryissomeonewhoactsbetweenonepersonand
another;whofacilitatescontactorprovidesalinkbetweenoneoftheorgansorunitsofthe
Court on theone hand, and victims, witnesses, beneficiaries or affected communities more
broadlyontheother(refertothedifferentdefinitionsofvictimintheStrategyonVictims).

As such, it is to be distinguished from where the Court simply contracts an individual or
companytoprovideservicesinthefield.Examplesofthiswouldbewhereanindividualor
group is contracted to prepare a mapping of victims in a particular area, or a hotel that is
paidfortheuseofameetingroom.

ThenotionofanintermediarydoesnotnecessarilyimplythattheCourtitselfhasrequested
the intermediary to assist; an intermediary might be chosen by a victim or other person to
assisttheminmakingcontactwiththeCourt.

Actingasanintermediaryinmostcasesisnotafulltimeoccupation.Anintermediarymay
assist the Court on a oneoff basis, or may cooperate with the Court over an extended
period of time and/or in relation to multiple communications. An intermediarymay work
with only one organ or unit of the Court, orit may have contact with multiple organs and
unitsorwithindividualcounsel.Further,inmanycases,thereisnotjustoneintermediary
serving as a conduit between the ICC and victims, instead, it is often the case that a large

Page:9/25

organisation may be working locally with multiple local groups and it involves a chain of
contacts.

Theresponsestotheinternalandexternalquestionnairesrevealedthatintermediariescome
from a wide variety of backgrounds. They often tend to be local nongovernmental or
communitybasedorganisationswhoareveryclosetothecommunitiesmostaffectedbythe
crimesinquestion. 3Anintermediarycanalsobeanindividual.Insomecircumstances,an
international organisation or agency operating in the relevant country might be an
intermediary,oragovernmentalbody.Manyintermediariesarelocatedinornearaffected
communities, although some still have to travel long distances to meet with victims who
maybescatteredoverawideareawithdifficultroadcommunication.Someintermediaries
arelocatedincitiesoroutsidethecountry,butifso,theywouldthemselvesnormallywork
withintermediarieswhoareclosertothevictimcommunities.

The questionnaire asked whether intermediaries had changed the scope of their work in
order to undertake Courtrelated activities. The answers revealed that the work of the
intermediaries has changed to some extent in order to accommodate Courtrelated
activities, including conducting interviews with victims and witnesses and assisting in the
victim application process. It was mentioned that some intermediaries changed their
strategies to include Court related activities. Some intermediaries allocated resources and
staff exclusively for carrying out work related to the VPRS due to the requirements of
confidentiality and security. Some local intermediaries in the affected areas have been
focusingontheCourtrelatedactivities,suchasoutreachandinformationdissemination.

Thedeterminingfactorinwhetherornotarelationshipiscoveredbythepresentprojectis
not the nature of the individual or organisation, but the nature of the function that they
carryoutinrelationtotheCourt.

NotallofthosewhocooperatewiththeCourtwillbeconsideredintermediariesforthepurposes
ofthisproject.Forinstance,someentities, suchasintergovernmentalorganisations(IGOs)and

3 Amongthetypesofindividualswhoactasintermediarieswerethefollowing:communityorlocal
leaders,traditional,culturalorreligiousleaders,membersofNGOs,humanrightsdefenders,
lawyers,journalists,IDPleaders,volunteers,universityprofessors,teachers,victims.Amongthe
organisationswere:localNGOs,internationalNGOs,communitybasedorganisations,associations,
victimsgroups,womensassociations,religiousinstitutions,humanrightsorganisations,local
communities,organisationsinthediaspora,localcouncils,universities.Othersincludedlocal
authorities,parliamentarians,nationalauthoritiesandintergovernmentalorganisations.
Page:10/25

nationalauthoritieswhoserelationshipwiththeCourtisbasedoncooperationagreements(such
as Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), national implementing legislation etc.), are not
consideredasintermediariesforthispurpose.Anexamplemightbewherenationalauthorities
agreetoassistintheprotectionofwitnesses.

Alsoexcludedfromthescopeofthisexercise,atleastsofarasprotectionisconcerned,are
intermediaries who are themselves victims or potential witnesses, and who therefore may
beentitledtotheprotectionoftheCourtintheirownright(forinstancealreadycateredfor
underRule87oftheRulesofProcedureandEvidence).

IntermediariesmayactwithorwithoutacontractualrelationshipwiththeICC.

FORDISCUSSION:
Whether the elements covered in this document and the annexes are sufficient to cover
intermediaries who link defence counsel or legal representatives of victims with the
victims/witnesses/otherswithwhomtheywanttobeincontact.

1.1. WhytheCourtworkswithintermediaries

As PreTrial Chamber I found in a decision of 8 November 2008: intermediaries who assist

applicants in accessing the Court are essential to the proper progress of the proceedings for
instanceinexplainingandprovidingsupporttovictimsinrelationtotheirparticipationin
proceedings(ICC001/04545paragraph25).

Intermediaries may provide (a combination of) the following assistance to the Court,
dependingontheirnature,expertiseandlocation:

a) Access to (remote) affected geographical areas: Intermediaries, because of their

permanentpresenceontheground,mayhaveaccesstoareaswheretheCourthasnoor
limitedaccessto victims,witnessesand/oraffectedcommunities.OftentheCourtworks
with intermediaries to establish the first contact with witnesses, victims and others.
Intermediaries also serve a function in enabling the OTP and the Registry to take a
proactiveandpreventativeapproachtowitnessprotectionissues.Afterthefirstcontact,
theCourtattemptstohaveadirectrelationshipwiththewitnesses,victimsandothers,but
due to security risks, logistical challenges in the field and limited resources the Court is
notalwaysabletoreachoutdirectly.

b) Specializedexperience/expertise(Legal/workingwithvictims):Intermediariesmight
haveagoodunderstandingandknowledgeoftheCourtduetotheirnormalprofessional
experience or specific interest. Furthermore, due to Outreach, awareness raising and

Page:11/25

 training activities, an increasing number of organisations and individuals have good

knowledgeandunderstandingoftheCourtsactivities.
Intermediariesmighthave experienceinworkingwithvictimsfromtheircountry.Some
havespecializedexpertiseinworkingwithspecificcategoriesofvictims,suchaswomen,
younggirlsandchildren.Some,suchaslegalaidproviders,haveexperiencesinworking
withvictimsinjudicialrelatedactivities.

c) Cultural, linguistic and proximity to affected communities: The cultural and societal
norms in many communities makeit difficult for outsiders to communicate with people
from the communities without going through local leaders. Intermediaries are more
familiarwiththeaffectedcommunities,speakthelanguagesspokenbythem,caninform
the Court of the best way to communicate respecting societal norms and customs, and
haveoftenexperiencedthemselvesthesameconflictorcrime(sometimestheyareorhave
been, witnesses / victims themselves). Consultingwith intermediaries, particularlythose
fromaffectedcommunitieswillalsooftenbeusefulinseekingandreceivingtheviewsof
thevictimsinordertobemindfulofandtotakeintoaccounttheirinterests.

Often, intermediaries already have relationships of trust and confidence with

victims,andcanthereforefacilitatethecontactwithvictims/witnesses.Furthermore,
in the standard application form to apply to participate as victims in proceedings,
applicants are asked to indicate how they would like to be contacted. Frequently,
duetothelackofatelephoneorapostaladdress,victimsindicatethattheywishto
becontactedviaanintermediary.

d) Security: The security situation in many places would make it difficult for ICC staff to
directly and openly access particular communities, or to do so in a low profile manner
withouttheassistanceoflocalintermediaries.

IntermediariesserveafunctioninenablingtheOTPtoidentifywitnessesandtotake
a proactive and preventative approach to witness protection issues. Through
intermediaries, the OTP is able to reduce the number of individuals it has to come
intodirectcontactwith.

Insomeinstances,functionscouldbecarriedouteitherbyintermediariesorbyCourtstaff.
Forinstance,thefunctionofassistingvictimsdirectlytoapplytoparticipateinproceedings
and for reparations and to disseminate information on the development of judicial
proceedingscouldbeachievedtosomeextentbyincreasingthenumberofVPRSfieldstaff.
Likewise,moreoutreachactivitiescouldbeconductedintargetedareaswithanincreasein
staff of PIDS. The advantages would be that Registry staff are security vetted and benefit
from the privileges and immunities of the Court in performing their duties; and also that
they receive security training from the Court and could implement best practices in

Page:12/25

protectingvictimapplicants.Inotherwords,thisistosomeextentaquestionofchoiceas
tothelevelandscaleofactivitiesoftheCourtascomparedtootherlocalactors.

However,inotherinstances,theuseofintermediarieswillbeofassistance.

OnereasonforthisisthefactorsandconstraintsfacedbytheICCsetoutabovethatmake
intermediariesbest,andsometimesuniquely,placedtoenablecommunicationtotakeplace
between the Court and victims. In particular, the security concerns in many places
sometimesmakeitadvisablethatcontactwithvictimsorwitnessesbemadethrough,orat
least involving, intermediaries. In such cases it is best for Court staff not to be directly in
contactwithvictims,atleastinitially.

Another reason is that regardless of what the Court itself does, some intermediaries will
themselves choose to undertake activities in relation to the Court, such as to assist victims
to apply for participation or to conduct sensibilisation activities. In other words, it is
sometimes victims themselves, or the intermediaries, who decide to make contact with the
Courtratherthantheotherwayaround.

1.2. Challengesanddisadvantagesofworkingwithintermediaries

The propriety and efficacy of using intermediaries may potentially be affected by the
following:

(1) Intermediaries are not necessarily familiar with the development of the judicial
proceedingsbeforetheCourt.Thismay,forinstance,affecttheirabilitytoassistthe
victimstoformulatetheirapplicationsinatimelyandpropermanner,iftheyarenot
keptregularlyinformedofdevelopments;
(2) The Court lacks sufficient mechanisms for controlling or monitoring activities
carriedoutbyintermediaries;
(3) Intermediaries are normally affiliated with particular interest groups, which might
notalwaysbeconsistentwiththebestinterestofthevictims;
(4) Intermediariesarenotnecessarilytrainedinsecurityandprotectionmatters,and
(5) Some intermediaries may be in contact with more than one organ and section(s) of
the Court, even though each organ or unit of the Court might not be aware that
others are in contact with the same intermediary. This can have adverse
consequences.

Page:13/25

1.3. Whatrolesshouldandshouldnotbeplayedbyintermediaries

The following comments have been provided in response to the questionnaires completed by
externalcommentators,particularlyNGOs:

The general sense of intermediaries consulted on their role and relationship with the
Court is that of frustration. They feel that the various organs of the Court have been
asking atremendous amount from intermediaries; to accomplish basic Court tasks; the
workundertakenbyintermediariesisnotbeingsufficientlyrecognisedbytheCourt;and
that the most basic needs of intermediaries resulting from this work, especially their
needforprotectionandforlogisticalandothersupport,isnotrecognisedbytheCourt.

Insomeinstances,theCourtslackofresourcesinitsownbudgethasbeenusedtoassign
tasks onto intermediaries. The core functions of the Court should be undertaken by
officials of the Court. Intermediaries may assist and support but should not be called
upontoundertakecorefunctions.

The fact that the Courts own outreach is so limited in means that the intermediaries
receive the brunt of the societys complaints about the functioning of the Court.
Intermediaries are also at the receiving end of the complaints from victims when the
victimsseethattheircaseshavenotadvancedorhavenotbeenrecognisedbytheCourt.
Victims have a range of concerns about the Court process, including the selectivity of
charges.Notonlyisthisunfairtointermediaries;italsofurtherblursthedistinctionof
who and what the Court is (and who represents it), and heightens security risks for
intermediaries.

FORDISCUSSION:
Are there some things that the Court should always do itself and never outsource to
intermediaries?Isitnecessarytodefinethose?
Establish a clear understanding of what is meant by intermediary and the relevant
legalandpolicyframework.

2. CriteriaforSelectionofIntermediaries

2.1. Establishedvettingprocedures

AfterinformationwassharedwithintheWorkingGroup,itwasseenthatsomeorgansandunits
of the Court already conduct assessments of intermediaries, and have developed criteria and
vettingproceduresforthatpurpose.

The OTP develops profiles on intermediaries and conducts initial assessments in order to
evaluatetheirfunctionalityagainstdefinedcriteria.

Page:14/25


The VPRS gathers information about intermediaries and maintains profiles with reference to
selection criteria, in order to determine which intermediaries to work with and/or to evaluate
theircapacityandhowtoworkwiththem.

Itisimportantthatanevaluationofanintermediaryisnotjustaoneoffexercise,butmonitoring
should continue throughout the entire period of the relationship with the intermediary to
ascertainwhetherchangeshavetakenplace,particularlyasregardspotentialrisks.

2.2. Scopeforchoosingintermediaries

Some organs and units of the Court have greater scope to exercise choice than others in the
selectionofintermediaries.Adistinctionneedstobemadebetweentwosituations:

a)SituationswheretherelevantorganorunitoftheCourtisinapositiontochoosewhetheror
nottoworkwithaparticularintermediary,and
b)SituationswheretherelevantorganorunitoftheCourtisnotinapositiontochoosewhether
ornottoworkwithaparticularintermediary.

An example of the second category is the VPRS when receiving applications for
participation or reparations. The VPRS has found that in reality it is not always in a
position to select intermediaries. In practice, intermediaries are often selfselected and/or
chosenbythevictims,i.e.theydecideontheirownvolitiontoengageinactivitiestoassist
victims in relation to ICC proceedings and approach VPRS, either in order to present
applicationsortoexpresstheirintentiontodoso.

Where the VPRS itself decides to contact a victim, for instance to follow up on an
application, in reality its choice of intermediary will be limited. Some victims will have
specified in their applications that they wish to be contacted through a particular
intermediary.

Even where the options for choosing intermediaries are limited, efforts are still made to
evaluate intermediaries according to defined criteria. The VPRS takes steps to gather
information about intermediaries and to evaluate them. Issues arising from such a
proceduremightpotentiallybeamatterforjudicialconsideration.4Further,stepsmightbe

4 TheexampleoftheKenyaArticle15representations,wheretheVPRSexplainedtotheChamberin
detailtheprocessbywhichitidentifiedandevaluatedintermediariesusedfortargetingcommunity
leadersinaccordancewiththeChambersOrderneedstobeaddedinthisfootnote.
Page:15/25

takentoaddressproblemsidentifiedthroughthescreeningprocedure,suchasdeficiencies
intheabilityofintermediariestosafeguardconfidentialinformation.

FORDISCUSSION:

Should there be common criteria and a common screening/vetting procedure for all
organs/unitsoftheCourt(eveniftheresultsarenotshared)?
What are the consequences of noncompliance by intermediaries for different
organs/units?
Proposal of the TFV: To avoid any conflict of interest, a confidential database
will be established for verifying and monitoring whether an intermediary is
simultaneously working with different organs of the Court and monitoring any
possible conflict of interest arising from the interrelationship between
intermediariesanddifferentorgansoftheCourt.Atthesametime,thedatabase
will also contribute towards preventing particular intermediaries becoming
overloaded with too much demand from the Court, and will enable one part of
the Court to see what form of support might have been provided to the
intermediarybyanother.
ProposaloftheVPRS:sinceitmaynotbefeasiblefororgansandunitstoagree
to sharing information about their intermediaries through a confidential
database, consideration should be given to a mechanism for sharing at least
certain information about intermediaries (eg drawing attention to problems
encounteredwithaparticularintermediaryetc.).

Page:16/25

3.EstablishingarelationshipwithanIntermediary

[Tobecompleted]

Formalisingtherelationship

Establishingmutualrightsandobligations

Clarifyingtermsandconditionswiththeintermediary

Determining the appropriate status for the relationship: MOU/Contract/Agreement, or

informal,noncontractualrelationship?

Forms of contract or MoU are in use by different organs and units of the Court, however
thesearenotuniform.

Codeofethicstobegiventointermediariessettingoutwhatisexpectedininteractionswith
victims?

FORDISCUSSION:
Can any common factors or principles be identified for determining in what
circumstancesaformalcontractualagreementwouldbemadeandinwhatcircumstances
aninformalnoncontractualrelationshipbemaintained?
Should intermediaries be given a code of ethics governing interaction between
intermediariesandvictims(Annex4)?

Page:17/25

4.ManagingrelationshipswithIntermediaries
4.1. SupportprovidedbytheICCtointermediaries

The results of the consultation process show that only some intermediaries receive funds
from donors to carry out Court related tasks. Therefore they often have limited financial
and human resources and their fundraising capacity is low. Problems faced by
intermediariesinclude:lackofresources,staffingandfacilities,security,andconstraintsin
reachingremoteareas.

Thispartwilldealwithtwoquestions:

Thecircumstancesinwhichdifferentformsofsupportareprovidedtointermediariesby
theCourt,and
Wheresupportisgiven,thebasisonwhichitisprovided.

TheapproachesofthedifferentorgansandunitsoftheCourtcurrentlyvaryinrelationtoboth
aspects.

Furthermore, a distinction can be made between two things. On the one hand, to pay /
reimburse for work carried out by intermediaries on a voluntary basis need to be very
carefullyconsideredsoastoavoida)puttingtheRegistrysneutralityandimpartialityinto
question and b) creating a financial interest that could put into question the objectivity of
theintermediaries.

On the other hand, where the Court effectively outsources certain tasks to intermediaries,
orrequestsintermediariestoprovideassistanceincarryingoutthosetasks,thenatleastthe
costsincurredincarryingoutsuchtasksshouldbereimbursed.

When interacting with intermediaries the terms and conditions under which Courtrelated
activities should be carried out, and the level of support and protection that could be
expected, often differs between different parts of the Court and is confusing to
intermediaries. In some instances, there are sound reasons why policies of the different
parts of the Court vary. In other areas, there seems to be no reason why harmonisation
could not take place. It is incumbent upon the different organs and units of the Court to
make every effort to take a consistent approach, always taking into account the differing
mandatesofeach.

Page:18/25

4.1.1. Materialresources
Remuneration/feesforservices

FORDISCUSSION:
IsitthecasethatsomepartsoftheCourtpayintermediariesandothersdonot,for
thesametypeofwork?(remuneration/feesforservices/perdiems)
Ifthisisthecase,isthisanissueorshouldtheCourtaimtobeconsistent?

4.1.2. Reimbursementofcosts
Reimbursement scales for contracted intermediaries should be consistent in all organs /
units of the Court. It seems desirable to develop common standards based on certain
criteria,includingobjectivityandimpartiality,forexpensesincurredasaresultofcarrying
outfunctionsattherequestofanorgan/unit/sectionoftheCourt.Thisalsoreducesthe
chance of intermediaries choosing to work for the organ / unit that pays the most. The
amountsaretobeadaptedpercountryandwillberevisedregularly.

4.1.3. Materialsupport
Intermediaries frequently lack basic resources required for carrying out their activities
effectively. This may include equipment and materials that are essential for maintaining
the confidentiality and security of information. For instance, many lack secure offices or
otherpremises.Thiscancreaterisksforthesecurityofinformationandpersons.

4.1.4 Capacitybuilding
Theexpertiseandcapacityoftheintermediariesisdiverse.Differentorgansandunitsofthe
Courtprovidetrainingtointermediaries,sometimesjointly.

Strengthening the capacity of intermediaries also has the benefit of contributing towards
strengtheningnationalmechanismsrelatedtocombatingimpunityforinternationalcrimes.

FORDISCUSSION:
TheNGOsmakethecriticismthatmanyofthetaskscomingfromorrelatingtothe
ICCarecomplexanddonotrelatetotherealitiesonthegroundandthattheCourt
expectstoomuchfromintermediaries.Trainingalonewillnotresolvetheproblem.

Page:19/25

4.1.5. Otherformsofsupport

4.1.5.1 Psychosocialcareandsupport

FORDISCUSSION:
The NGO Victims Rights Working Group has proposed that the Court provides
psychologicalcareandsupportforintermediarieswhoassisttheCourttodealwith
victimsandwitnessesandexperiencetraumaasaresultofsuchwork.Howtoreact
to this proposal? Could the Court provide written guidelines, or referrals to local
organisations?

4.1.5.2 Acknowledgement/Recognitionoflegalstatus

FORDISCUSSION:
Who should decide what is recommendable for which intermediary? What to do if
intermediary wants recognition, but Court thinks confidentiality is necessary for
securityreasons,orviceversa?

FORDISCUSSION:
Which of the above forms of support, if any, should be conditional upon an
intermediaryhavingbeenscreenedaccordingtotheselectioncriteriaintheprevious
section(OPCDproposal)?

Page:20/25

4.2.SecurityandProtection

OneofthemostfrequentlymentionedconcernsraisedwiththeCourtbyintermediariesare
security concerns. Manyintermediariesfearthat theirworkwithvictimsinrelationtothe
ICCexposesthemtorisksorpotentialrisks.TheywanttoknowwhattheCourtwoulddo
iftheywereexposedtothreatstotheirsecurityasaresultoftheirconnectiontotheCourt.
The internal and the external questionnaires revealed that both intermediaries and the
organs and units of the Court that work with them believe that the security of
intermediaries is compromised by interaction with the Court (footnote answers to Q 11 of
the Questionnaire).56 Further, the results of the survey indicated that intermediaries are
oftenexposedtorisksduetotheirnormalbusiness,buthadalsooftenchangedthescopeof
theirworkinordertoworkwiththeCourt.

Different parts of the Court already conduct analysis of the risks prior to establishing a
relationship with an intermediary and/or prepared plans to mitigate foreseeable risks. 7
Some have produced guidelines for intermediaries on risk prevention and management.
These documents were shared within the Working Group and there appeared to be scope
for consolidation into a single document that could serve as guidance Courtwide. If
necessary,versionsspecifictoasituationcouldbeprepared.

AtleastonejudicialdecisionhasshedlightontheresponsibilitiesoftheCourt.On13May
2008, in an appeal in the Katanga case, the Appeals Chamber decided that: Rule 81(4) of
the Rules of Procedure and Evidence should be read to include the words persons at risk
on account of the activities of the Court so as to reflect the intention of the States that
adoptedtheRomeStatuteandtheRulesofProcedureandEvidence,asexpressedinarticle
54(3)(f)oftheStatuteandinotherpartsoftheStatuteandtheRules,toprotectthatcategory

5 Risksfacedbyintermediariesmightincludeinsecurityandpersecution,intimidationandthreats,
arrest,orviolencedirectedagainstthem,theirfamiliesorassociates.
6 ThelevelofriskmaynotnecessarilybelinkedtotheactualroleinrelationtotheCourt.For
instance,intermediariesmaybeatriskduetothefactthattheyareseenashavingarelationship
withtheCourt,whethertheyareassistingtheProsecutorinidentifyingevidentiaryleadsor
assistingPIDSinoutreachactivities.
7 ForinstanceRegulation36oftheOTPRegulations:Priortocontactingapersontobequestionedin
connectionwithaninvestigation,theOfficeshallcollectasmuchinformationaspossibleonthelevel
of risk involved for that person as well as for others who may be at risk on account of such
questioning, including those who facilitated contact between the Office and the person to be
questioned.
Page:21/25

ofpersons.8TheChamberacknowledgedthatthereareprovisionsintheRomeStatuteand
the Rules of Procedure and Evidence aimed at ensuring that persons are not put at risk
throughtheactivitiesoftheCourtandwhicharenotlimitedtotheprotectionofwitnesses
andvictimsandmembersoftheirfamiliesonly. 9

Theapplicationofthisprincipleoutsidethescopeofredactionsisunclear,andtheAppeals
Chamberhasalsoheldthatprotectivemeasuresshouldrestricttherightsofthesuspect or
accused only so far as necessary, and that if less restrictive protective measures are
sufficient and feasible, a Chamber must choose those measures over more restrictive
measures.10

Insofarasuncertaintiesastothescopeoftheselegalobligationsremain,itisincumbenton
the Court to nevertheless adopt clear and transparent policies so that intermediaries know
whattheycanexpectfromtheCourtasregardsprotection.

There is scope for harmonisation and policy development in the following areas:
prevention,managementofconfidentialinformationandresponse.

4.2.1. Prevention

Preventing the exposure of the identity of intermediaries is one important way in which
riskscanbeprevented.Howeverthishastobebalancedagainsttheinterestsofpublicityof
proceedingsandtherightsofthedefence.

Conductingriskanalysispriortoestablishingarelationshipwithanintermediary.

ICCstaffexercising(harmonised)bestpracticeswheninteractingwithintermediaries.

4.2.2.Confidentialityagreements

Problemsarisebecausemanyintermediariesarenotinapositiontosafeguardtheconfidentiality
ofinformation.Norhavetheyreceivedtrainingonmethodsofsecuringinformation.

8 ICC01/0401/07475,paragraph1,andseealsoparagraph56.
9 ICC01/0401/07475,paragraph43.
10 ICC01/0401/06773of14December2006intheLubangacase,paragraph33.
Page:22/25

Some parts of the Court had difficulties in ensuring the confidentiality of information on
intermediaries,throughdifferentinternaladministrativeprocessesattheCourt.

4.2.3. Responsestosecuritythreats

FORDISCUSSION:
Should there be any difference in the protection offered by the Court to intermediaries
betweenthosewhoserelationshipwiththeCourtisformalisedandthosewhereitisnot?
Conduct a thorough legal and operational review of what measures of protection could be
providedtointermediarieswhoareatriskonaccountoftheactivitiesoftheCourt?

5.ConsequencesofaRelationshipwithanIntermediary

[Tobecompleted]

- Legaldisputesandclaims
- Security concerns and demands for protection: how to assess, and what constitutes
anappropriateresponse

Page:23/25

III.MonitoringandEvaluation

[Tobecompleted)

ICC Staff, staff from intermediary organizations, individual intermediaries, victims, and
witnesseswillparticipateinacomprehensivemonitoringprocessusingthefollowingmethods:

A) Staffandstakeholderssurveys
B) SemistructuredinterviewswithKeyinformants
C) Casestudies
D) Desktopreviewofpoliciesandprocedures
E) Permanentobservationandcomplaintmechanism

IV.Budgetaryimplications

Potentialimpactoftheguidelinesonthesectionalbudgets.

Page:24/25

V.Annexes

1Legal/PolicyFrameworkfortheCourtsrelationswithintermediaries(draft
available)

2Criteriaforselectionofintermediaries(draftavailable)

3StandardContracts/MoUs/agreementsbetweentheCourtandanintermediary
(tobedeveloped)

4RulesofEthicsgoverninginteractionsbetweenintermediariesandvictims(draft
available)

5Commonstandardsforreimbursementofcosts(draftavailableforsomeaspects)

6GoodPracticeSharing:GuidelinesforintermediariesonRiskPrevention&
Management(draftavailable)

7Questionnaires,internalandexternal(available)

8Listofpolicydocuments(guidelines,SOPsetc)sharedbymembersofthe
WorkingGroup(tobedeveloped)

Page:25/25