Abstract
A 2005 ICJ judgement concluded Uganda was liable for damage to the DRC. But it left the question of how much Uganda should pay up to the parties to decide.
These negotiations ultimately failed and the DRC took Uganda back to the court in 2015. The court has now determined that Uganda must pay the DRC US$325 million in reparations.
This award represents a mixed victory for the DRC. On the one hand, it is much less than the $11 billion it sued for. On the other hand, it’s a significant award, both in terms of money and policy. The International Court of Justice has not traditionally been asked to award reparations. Its determination that Uganda must pay the DRC $65 million annually over the next five years represents a significant avenue for recognition of violations of international law.
In analysing the judgement and its implications, international law scholars have focused on the rules of evidence. Of particular interest is how damages are calculated.
The case is also significant because states are turning to this court more frequently to try cases involving violations of international humanitarian law, the laws of war. But it also raises a broader question of what happens when a court that’s designed to keep international peace starts assigning crippling damage awards.
If participation in international law practice carries deep financial risks to states, they may be less willing to engage. This could carry risks for the peaceful resolution of disputes.
These negotiations ultimately failed and the DRC took Uganda back to the court in 2015. The court has now determined that Uganda must pay the DRC US$325 million in reparations.
This award represents a mixed victory for the DRC. On the one hand, it is much less than the $11 billion it sued for. On the other hand, it’s a significant award, both in terms of money and policy. The International Court of Justice has not traditionally been asked to award reparations. Its determination that Uganda must pay the DRC $65 million annually over the next five years represents a significant avenue for recognition of violations of international law.
In analysing the judgement and its implications, international law scholars have focused on the rules of evidence. Of particular interest is how damages are calculated.
The case is also significant because states are turning to this court more frequently to try cases involving violations of international humanitarian law, the laws of war. But it also raises a broader question of what happens when a court that’s designed to keep international peace starts assigning crippling damage awards.
If participation in international law practice carries deep financial risks to states, they may be less willing to engage. This could carry risks for the peaceful resolution of disputes.
Originalsprog | Engelsk |
---|---|
Publikationsdato | 3 mar. 2022 |
Udgiver | The Conversation |
Udgave | Africa |
Status | Udgivet - 3 mar. 2022 |
Emneord
- international law
- reparations
- DRC
- Uganda