QUATRE DÉTENUS EN RÉPUBLIQUE DÉMOCRATIQUE DU CONGO ENTENDUS À LA COUR PÉNALE INTERNATIONALE : SAISINE INÉDITE ÉTABLISSANT LA PRIMAUTÉ DES DROITS DE L’HOMME INTERNATIONALEMENT RECONNUS LORS DE L’APPLICATION DU STATUT DE ROME

The jurisprudence of the Trial and Appeal Chambers of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Lubanga and Katanga and Ngudjolo Chui cases has given rise to the Court’s test for compliance with Article 21(3) of the Rome Statute. This test must be undertaken whenever the application of a provision of the Statute or a related instrument would be inconsistent with internationally recognized human rights, and establishes that Article 21(3) is held as paramount in regards to other provisions. This jurisprudence follows the filing of motions for the ICC to delay the application of Article 97(3)(b) of the Statute and thereby allow four witnesses, detained in the Democratic Republic of Congo, to proceed with requests for asylum to the Dutch government — a matter unforeseen in the drafting of the Statute. These motions raised the question of whether an immediate application of this article would constitute a violation of the detained witnesses’ rights to apply for asylum — embodied in multiple international instruments — and to fully enjoy the application of the non-refoulement principle — considered to be a norm of customary international law. Aside from setting out the genesis of these motions and the legal reasoning of the Court’s chambers, this article analyzes briefly the national and international legal obligations of the Dutch government in assessing the witnesses’ claims and highlights the legal consequences and political effects of this novel jurisprudence.