{"id":41447,"date":"2019-05-16T08:13:39","date_gmt":"2019-05-16T06:13:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html"},"modified":"2019-05-16T08:13:39","modified_gmt":"2019-05-16T06:13:39","slug":"icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html","title":{"rendered":"ICC judges at centre of controversy"},"content":{"rendered":"

For years the Office of the Prosecutor was seen as the problematic organ harming the reputation of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Now the ICC judges have triggered multiple controversies on their morality, integrity or independence. The latest incident involved a French judge.<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Earlier this year the former president of Ivory Coast, Laurent Gbagbo, was acquitted<\/a> by the International Criminal Court (ICC) after having been detained in The Hague for more than seven years. His former Youth minister Charles Bl\u00e9 Goud\u00e9 was set free as well. The acquittals were the last in a series. For years the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) has been marred by problems with investigations, management issues and scandals that gravely affected its reputation. So far, since the ICC\u2019s start in 2002, just three accused have been found guilty by the ICC, while the cases against twelve other defendants have been closed \u2013 before, in the middle or at the end of their trial \u2013 because the evidence was lacking.<\/p>\n

But now it is the judges who are at the centre of controversy. In January The New York Times<\/em> wrote that a number of ICC judges<\/a> filed a lawsuit against their own court at the tribunal of the International Labour Organization. Annually earning a tax-free salary of 180,000 euros, they are demanding a pay rise of 26 percent, retroactive compensation, more pension and damages \u201cthat could run into the millions\u201d, according to the NYT. The lawsuit is led by the president of the ICC, Chile Eboe-Osuji (who earns an extra 18,000 euros a year as president). Although twelve judges out of eighteen haven\u2019t joined the lawsuit, the case harms the image of the court.<\/p>\n

\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\r\n\t\t\t
Recommended reading<\/div>\r\n\t\t\t
\"\"<\/div><\/a>\r\n\t\t\t\r\n\t\t\tMoney Matters at the ICC\r\n\t\t<\/a>\r\n\t\t\r\n\t\t\t\t<\/div><\/span><\/p>\n

Judge Ozaki\u2019s conflict of interest<\/h3>\n

The news about the salary conflict was followed by a scandal featuring judge Kuniko Ozaki of Japan. She is part of the Chamber handling the trial against Congolese former warlord Bosco Ntaganda, who surrendered himself to the court on 22 March 2013. His trial started on 2 September 2015 and the closing statements took place last August. The judges are now writing the judgment. Ozaki\u2019s term had ended in March 2018, but she stayed on to complete the trial until a verdict is reached.<\/p>\n

Suddenly, on 7 January 2019, Ozaki sent an internal memorandum to the presidency of the court asking to resign \u201cas a full-time judge\u201d as of 11 February 2019. It was for personal reasons, she wrote. One week later, on 18 February, she informed her colleagues that she had been appointed as Japan\u2019s ambassador to Estonia and that her diplomatic duties would start 3 April. \u201cIt is my firm belief that my new responsibility would not in any way interfere with my judicial function,\u201d she stated. Ozaki asked permission to combine the two jobs<\/a>, and if that was not possible, she would simply resign from the ICC.<\/p>\n

The judges organised a plenary meeting on 4 March 2019 to discuss the matter and decided by a majority of 14 judges that the combination of jobs \u201cdoes not violate any aspect\u201d of Article 40 of the Rome Statute which deals with the independence of the judges. The article says that judges \u201cshall not engage in any activity which is likely to interfere with their judicial functions or to affect confidence in their independence\u201d and that they serve \u201con a full-time basis\u201d not engaging \u201cin any other occupation of a professional nature.\u201d A minority of three judges objected to Ozaki\u2019s diplomatic position saying it was \u201cevident\u201d that a judge performing an \u201cexecutive or political function\u201d for a government \u201cwas entirely likely to affect public confidence in judicial independence.\u201d<\/p>\n

An email from Japan<\/h3>\n

On 1 April the defence lawyers of Ntaganda said that Ozaki should be disqualified because of her diplomatic appointment and her conduct in this affair. The team believed there was \u201ca serious risk\u201d that the right of their client to a fair trial was violated<\/a>. The defence\u2019s request for a temporary stay of proceedings to litigate a disqualification was however denied by the Trial Chamber<\/a>.<\/p>\n

On 30 April the defence team asked the presidency<\/a> to reconsider the decision that the diplomatic job of Ozaki was not a violation of Article 40. The lawyers stated that her service for the government of Japan \u201ccreates the appearance that she is not independent\u201d and that a \u201creasonable observer\u201d would suspect that an ambassador would like to avoid controversy if she has to choose between a conviction or acquittal in \u201ca high-profile case.\u201d Her diplomatic job is \u201cclearly incompatible with her judicial duties,\u201d they argued.<\/p>\n

One day later, the presidency disclosed that judge Ozaki had resigned as ambassador. In fact the court had already been informed on 23 April by email by the Japanese ministry of Foreign Affairs about her resignation, which itself had taken place on 18 April.<\/p>\n

It is unlikely, however, that this saga ends here. The defence has repeated its request<\/a> to the presidency to disclose documents and information related to the affair.<\/p>\n

No investigations in Afghanistan<\/h3>\n

While the Ozaki-scandal was unfolding, the court published the long awaited Afghanistan decision. On 20 November 2017, the prosecutor had requested permission for a full criminal investigation into international crimes committed by the Taliban, Afghan security forces, American military and CIA officials in Afghanistan and in secret CIA-detention-centres in Poland, Romania and Lithuania.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile the United States government had openly threatened the court if it would dare to prosecute Americans. In a scathing speech last year<\/a> John Bolton called the ICC \u201cineffective\u201d, \u201cunaccountable\u201d, \u201coutright dangerous\u201d and \u201cillegitimate.\u201d The U.S. National Security Advisor warned the ICC that his country would do anything to stop the court from investigating Americans. Judges and prosecutors would be banned from entering the United States, they would see their bank accounts frozen, and they could even be prosecuted. The same would happen to companies and states assisting an ICC investigation.<\/p>\n

On 4 April 2019 the U.S. revoked the visa of ICC prosecutor Fatou Bensouda. A week later, on 12 April, an ICC Pre-Trial Chamber rejected the prosecution\u2019s request<\/a> to start an investigation in Afghanistan. The three judges agreed there was \u201ca reasonable basis\u201d that crimes within the jurisdiction of the court were committed, but they said that it was not in the interest of justice to pursue this case. The \u201ccomplexity and volatility of the political climate still surrounding the Afghan scenario make it extremely difficult to gauge the prospects of securing meaningful cooperation\u201d which is needed for successful investigations and the surrender of suspects, the judges stated. They suggested that the lack of results would create \u201cfrustration and possibly hostility vis-a-vis the Court\u201d among victims. The judges added that an Afghanistan investigation would require financial and human resources, which will be at the detriment of \u201cscenarios\u201d that \u201chave more realistic prospects to lead to trials and thus effectively foster the interests of justice.\u201d<\/p>\n

A dangerous message<\/h3>\n

The decision triggered an avalanche of criticism. Param-Preet Singh, associate international justice director of Human Rights Watch<\/a>, said it was \u201ca devastating blow for victims who have suffered grievous crimes without redress.\u201d She pointed to the fact that \u201cthe judges\u2019 logic effectively allows member countries to opt out of cooperating with the court and sends a dangerous message to all governments that obstructionist tactics can put them beyond the court\u2019s reach.\u201d<\/p>\n

Academics commenting in tweets and blogs were divided in pragmatic and principled approaches. Alex Whiting, professor of practice at Harvard Law School and previously working for the ICC\u2019s prosecution, showed some comprehension in his Just Security post<\/a> pointing out that, as \u201ca fledgling institution, it might be necessary for the Court to build and establish itself with small steps, focusing on those situation where international support will allow it to succeed.\u201d But Sergey Vasiliev, assistant professor at the department of criminal law at the University of Amsterdam, wrote a two-part piece<\/a> under the ominous title: \u201cNot just another \u2018crisis\u2019: Could the blocking of the Afghanistan investigation spell the end of the ICC?\u201d<\/p>\n

What and whom a French judge likes, or not<\/h3>\n

If that was not enough, an old speech<\/a> from 17 May 2017 that the French judge Marc Perrin de Brichambaut gave before Chinese law students at the Peking University Law School created upheaval. In his talk the judge made a range of derogatory remarks. He stated that it is European countries that are paying the bills for the ICC, while the African countries \u201cprovide the suspects.\u201d The judge, who is of course well paid himself, talked about one of the victims\u2019 lawyers and said he made a good choice because working on the case against LRA-commander Dominic Ongwen means he is \u201cnow in business for the next few years.\u201d He commented on defence lawyers David Hooper and a \u201cwoman lawyer from Paris\u201d saying she is \u201ceven more of a pain than Mr. Hooper because she shoots at everything that moves on the other side, but she never met a victim either, but she\u2019s very effective in terms of defending their interests and makes the life of the chamber a little bit unpleasant occasionally. So, I don\u2019t like Madame Mabe at all, neither do I have enormous respect for Mr Hooper,\u201d he said, probably referring to Catherine Mabille, defence lawyer for Thomas Lubanga Dyilo. In the meantime, on April 10, Mabille filed a motion to disqualify<\/a> the judge because of his remarks related to the reparations proceedings in the Lubanga case which he is presiding.<\/p>\n

And there was more. A point that Kevin Jon Heller, associate professor of Public International Law at the University of Amsterdam, particularly wanted to raise in a blog for Opinio Juris<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\n

The ICC will never be seen as credible if its judges openly announce, sincerely or not, that they feel free to ignore important provisions in the Rome Statute they personally dislike.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

In his 2017 talk in Beijing Judge Perrin de Brichambaut had disclosed that he and the other two judges conducting the trial against former Congolese politician Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo and four others accused of bribing witnesses, had agreed to refuse interlocutory appeals. Heller points out that the Rome Statute allows parties to appeal a \u201c<\/strong>decision that involves an issue that would significantly affect the fair and expeditious conduct of the proceedings or the outcome of the trial.\u201d Referring to the judge\u2019s remarks Heller says it is \u201cimpossible to overstate how reckless and damaging statements like these can be. [\u2026] The ICC will never be seen as credible if its judges openly announce, sincerely or not, that they feel free to ignore important provisions in the Rome Statute they personally dislike.\u201d<\/p>\n

No less than four controversial matters came up during the first months of this year: the salary lawsuit, the Ozaki scandal, the refusal of the Afghanistan investigation and the French judge\u2019s talk. Considering that judges are selected for their impartiality and integrity, if every month their conduct leads to public commotion and doubt, the court should become very worried.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

For years the Office of the Prosecutor was seen as the problematic organ harming the reputation of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Now the ICC judges have triggered multiple controversies on their morality, integrity or independence. The latest incident involved a French judge.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":64,"featured_media":64718,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[562],"tags":[],"ji_location":[2567],"class_list":["post-41447","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-icc","ji_location-international"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nICC judges at centre of controversy - JusticeInfo.net<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"ICC judges at centre of controversy\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"For years the Office of the Prosecutor was seen as the problematic organ harming the reputation of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Now the ICC judges have triggered multiple controversies on their morality, integrity or independence. The latest incident involved a French judge.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"JusticeInfo.net\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/JusticeInfo\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2019-05-16T06:13:39+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/4071f92a410700934722ac6b6b5a0da3.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1200\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"800\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Tjitske Lingsma\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@justiceinfonet\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@justiceinfonet\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Tjitske Lingsma\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"NewsArticle\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"solivri\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/6e53cba1629e2e66f3fc1821d3091865\"},\"headline\":\"ICC judges at centre of controversy\",\"datePublished\":\"2019-05-16T06:13:39+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html\"},\"wordCount\":1807,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/4071f92a410700934722ac6b6b5a0da3.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"ICC\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html\",\"name\":\"ICC judges at centre of controversy - JusticeInfo.net\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/4071f92a410700934722ac6b6b5a0da3.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2019-05-16T06:13:39+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/4071f92a410700934722ac6b6b5a0da3.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/4071f92a410700934722ac6b6b5a0da3.jpg\",\"width\":1200,\"height\":800},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"ICC judges at centre of controversy\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/\",\"name\":\"JusticeInfo.net\",\"description\":\"For justice to be done, it must be seen\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Justice Info\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/justiceinfo_logo-trans_1200x1200px.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/justiceinfo_logo-trans_1200x1200px.png\",\"width\":1199,\"height\":1200,\"caption\":\"Justice Info\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/JusticeInfo\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/justiceinfonet\",\"https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/justice-info\",\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/channel\/UCyCEsARodyuWtkWyhn-e7pA\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"name\":\"Tjitske Lingsma\",\"url\":\"\/en\/?s=Tjitske Lingsma\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"ICC judges at centre of controversy - JusticeInfo.net","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"ICC judges at centre of controversy","og_description":"For years the Office of the Prosecutor was seen as the problematic organ harming the reputation of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Now the ICC judges have triggered multiple controversies on their morality, integrity or independence. The latest incident involved a French judge.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html","og_site_name":"JusticeInfo.net","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/JusticeInfo\/","article_published_time":"2019-05-16T06:13:39+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1200,"height":800,"url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/4071f92a410700934722ac6b6b5a0da3.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Tjitske Lingsma","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@justiceinfonet","twitter_site":"@justiceinfonet","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Tjitske Lingsma","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"NewsArticle","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html"},"author":{"name":"solivri","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/6e53cba1629e2e66f3fc1821d3091865"},"headline":"ICC judges at centre of controversy","datePublished":"2019-05-16T06:13:39+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html"},"wordCount":1807,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/4071f92a410700934722ac6b6b5a0da3.jpg","articleSection":["ICC"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html","url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html","name":"ICC judges at centre of controversy - JusticeInfo.net","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/4071f92a410700934722ac6b6b5a0da3.jpg","datePublished":"2019-05-16T06:13:39+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/4071f92a410700934722ac6b6b5a0da3.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/4071f92a410700934722ac6b6b5a0da3.jpg","width":1200,"height":800},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/41447-icc-judges-at-centre-of-controversy.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"ICC judges at centre of controversy"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/","name":"JusticeInfo.net","description":"For justice to be done, it must be seen","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#organization","name":"Justice Info","url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/justiceinfo_logo-trans_1200x1200px.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/justiceinfo_logo-trans_1200x1200px.png","width":1199,"height":1200,"caption":"Justice Info"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/JusticeInfo\/","https:\/\/x.com\/justiceinfonet","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/justice-info","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/channel\/UCyCEsARodyuWtkWyhn-e7pA"]},{"@type":"Person","name":"Tjitske Lingsma","url":"\/en\/?s=Tjitske Lingsma"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/41447","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/64"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=41447"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/41447\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/64718"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=41447"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=41447"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=41447"},{"taxonomy":"ji_location","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/ji_location?post=41447"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}