International Criminal Tribunals
Expected Council Action
In December, the Security Council is scheduled to hold its semi-annual debate on the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (IRMCT). The President of the IRMCT, Judge Graciela Gatti Santana, and the Chief Prosecutor of the IRMCT, Serge Brammertz, are expected to brief during the debate and to meet with the Informal Working Group on International Tribunals prior to that.
Background and Key Recent Developments
The IRMCT—with branches in The Hague, the Netherlands; and Arusha, Tanzania—focuses on completing the work of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), which closed in December 2017 and December 2015, respectively. Its tasks have included hearing the remaining trials and appeals from the ICTY and the ICTR, locating fugitives indicted by the ICTR, assisting national jurisdictions with requests related to prosecuting international crimes committed in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, monitoring cases referred to national courts, enforcing sentences, protecting witnesses and victims, and preserving archives.
The IRMCT was established in 2010 by resolution 1966, which said that “the Mechanism shall continue the jurisdiction, rights and obligations and essential functions of the ICTY and ICTR” and that it “should be a small, temporary and efficient structure, whose functions and size will diminish over time, with a small number of staff commensurate with its reduced functions”.
Under resolution 1966, the IRMCT was mandated to operate for an initial period of four years and for subsequent periods of two years unless the Council decides otherwise. The Council most recently extended Brammertz’s term in resolution 2740, which was adopted on 27 June with 14 votes in favour and Russia abstaining. It incorporated several new elements, including requests for two reports from the Secretary-General by 31 December 2025: one regarding “the administrative and budgetary aspects of the options for possible locations of the archives of the ICTR, the ICTY, and the [IRMCT]”; and another concerning options for transferring certain remaining functions of the IRMCT, including supervision of sentences and the provision of assistance to national jurisdictions. Resolution 2740 also recalled the Council’s request in resolution 2637 of 22 June 2022 for “the production of clear and focused projections of completion timelines for all the [IRMCT’s] activities” and took note of the information that the IRMCT submitted to the Informal Working Group on International Tribunals in response to this request. (For more information on resolution 2740, see our 27 June What’s in Blue story.)
The Council’s most recent semi-annual debate on the IRMCT took place on 11 June. Gatti Santana and Brammertz briefed. In her briefing, Gatti Santana noted that active proceedings in the final core crimes cases before the IRMCT had ended and said that the IRMCT had therefore “completed its transition to becoming a truly residual institution”. She also provided an update on several of the IRMCT’s remaining tasks, including supervising the enforcement of sentences; managing, preserving, and facilitating access to the archives of the ad hoc tribunals and the IRMCT; and offering support to victims and witnesses who took part in proceedings.
During his briefing, Brammertz said that his office had now accounted for all of the fugitives indicted by the ICTR, thereby completing one of the residual tasks of the IRMCT. In this regard, Brammertz referred to the IRMCT’s 15 May announcement regarding the deaths of the remaining two fugitives, Ryandikayo and Charles Sikubwabo. The remainder of Brammertz’s briefing focused primarily on the IRMCT’s ongoing work assisting national authorities with pursuing accountability for crimes committed in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia. He noted that his office had received 629 requests for assistance during the previous two years and had met with prosecutors from several different member states, including Belgium, Canada, Eswatini, France, Mozambique, South Africa, the UK, and the US.
The IRMCT’s Appeals Chamber began a review hearing in the case Prosecutor v. Gérard Ntakirutimana on 18 November. Ntakirutimana is seeking a review of his convictions after a witness allegedly recanted his evidence against him. On 8 November, IRMCT officials travelled to Belgrade and held preparatory meetings regarding the monitoring of contempt proceedings in the Šešelj et al. case.
Key Issues and Options
Continuing to monitor the work of the IRMCT and the implementation of its mandate is a key issue for the Council. In this context, members could choose to use the closed format of the Informal Working Group on International Tribunals to have a frank discussion with Gatti Santana and Brammertz regarding the next phase of the IRMCT’s operations. Members could also use this format to seek more information about the IRMCT’s completion timelines. Members may also ask if there is anything the Council can do to help with the IRMCT’s ongoing work, including the tasks referred to by Gatti Santana and Brammertz during the 11 June semi-annual briefing.
Council Dynamics
Council members generally have a positive assessment of the IRMCT and the progress it has made, with the exception of Russia. During the semi-annual briefing on 11 June, Russia strongly criticised the IRMCT, saying that its reports had failed “to answer to the key question as regards the ultimate and reasonable timeframe for winding down the IRMCT and/or transferring all its functions” and instead “retain vague references to the year 2052, which cannot be considered reasonable”. Russia also argued that the “IRMCT should have closed long ago” and called for the transfer of its remaining functions to national authorities and UN entities. Other Council members expressed positive views regarding the IRMCT and its work during this meeting.
Russia has regularly criticised the appointment of Brammertz, who was the ICTY prosecutor from 2008 until its closure in 2017, and it has abstained on the bi-annual resolutions appointing him as prosecutor since 2016. Russia was also consistently critical of the ICTY.
The negotiations concerning resolution 2740, which most recently extended Brammertz’s term, were lengthy, difficult, and contentious. Russia apparently objected to many aspects of the draft text, provided comments on almost every paragraph, reiterated the criticisms of the IRMCT that it raised during the semi-annual debate, and pushed strongly for a concrete timeframe and deadline for the transfer of the mechanism’s remaining functions. While some of Russia’s suggestions were supported by China, they were largely opposed by other Council members. (For more information on the negotiations, see our 27 June What’s in Blue story.)
| Security Council Resolutions | |
| 27 June 2024S/RES/2740 | This resolution was adopted with 14 votes in favour and Russia abstaining. Among other matters, resolution 2740 re-appointed Serge Brammertz as Chief Prosecutor of the IRMCT for another two years, until 30 June 2026. |
| Security Council Meeting Records | |
| 11 June 2024S/PV.9651 | This was the semi-annual debate on the work of the IRMCT. |
| Security Council Letters | |
| 29 July 2024S/2024/570 | This letter transmitted the 12th annual report of the IRMCT. |
| 16 May 2024S/2024/392 | This letter transmitted the assessments of the President and the Prosecutor of the IRMCT. |
