On 8 November, CIJA Deputy Director Chris Engels took part in a panel discussion on the challenges involved in collecting and preserving evidence of international crimes committed in Syria. With support from Amnesty International and the Heinrich Böll Foundation in Berlin, the event brought together a range of stakeholders including the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR), the Syrian Center for Media and Freedom of Expression (SCM), and the Syrian Center for Legal Studies and Research (SCLSR). Also in attendance was Ms. Catherine Marchi-Uhel, Head of the UN International, Impartial, and Independent Mechanism (IIIM) for Syria. The event provided CIJA an opportunity to showcase the critical role it plays in accountability efforts to date, with regards to both universal jurisdiction cases and broader international efforts, including the recently established Syria Mechanism.

CIJA participated as panelists in a public panel hosted by The Cardozo Law Institute in Holocaust and Human Rights’ Benjamin B. Ferencz Human Rights and Atrocity Prevention Clinic, the U.C. Berkeley Human Rights Center, and the Center for Justice & Accountability. The panel discussed accountability efforts and survivor-centered advocacy strategies for the Yazidi genocide. Panelists included:  the Center for Justice & Accountability,  Free Yazidi Foundation;  United Nations Commission of Inquiry on Syria; Special Advisor on International Criminal Law Prosecution Strategies, International Criminal Court Office of the Prosecutor.

 CIJA participated in a meeting of civil society actors working on evidence collection and litigation concerning justice for the Yazidi genocide in New York to discuss ethical work practices and areas of potential collaboration. Legal representatives of victims and NGOs involved in bringing cases, particularly in relation to third-country prosecutions, had the opportunity to hear about CIJA’s work and how to make a request for assistance.

CIJA Director Bill Wiley was one of the speakers at the event hosted by the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Nuremberg Academy where participants discussed the challenges of preserving evidence, and the critical shift from documentation of crimes to judicial action, and the important part that the IIIM will need to play in this.

CIJA’s Executive Director provided testimony before the Subcommittee on International Human Rights of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development of the House of Commons on 22 November 2016 in Ottawa, Canada. The testimony concerned CIJA’s ongoing efforts to combat violations of ICL through the application of individual criminal responsibility and the role Canada is playing to ensure that those most responsible for the perpetration of core international crimes are held accountable for their acts in courts of law. 

The Permanent Missions of Qatar and Liechtenstein to the United Nations hosted a briefing by civil society organisations working on accountability issues in Syria and Iraq; namely, CIJA, Syria Justice and Accountability Centre, and Syria Accountability Project. Held on 28 October 2016, the briefing was attended by roughly 8-12 country representatives (primarily European and Gulf countries) who have prioritised accountability in Syria and Iraq, or who are interested in doing so. CIJA Senior Staff provided a briefing on CIJA’s investigative work and operations. The meeting and CIJA’s participation was indeed successful with positive feedback by participants that CIJA’s mandate and operations were distinctive in the field and a much needed resource to international and domestic atrocity accountability efforts.

The Executive Director of CIJA, William Wiley, was invited to provide the Distinguished Canadian Annual Address to the Bridgewater State University  / Canada Studies Program in the United States in October 2016. This was the sixteenth time a distinguished guest has been invited to provide the annual address. CIJA’s Director focused on the criminal investigative operations vis-à-vis the Syrian regime and Daesh since 2011.

On November 19, 2015 the Atlantic Council's Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East in cooperation with the Friedrich Ebert Foundation (FES) and the Commission for International Justice and Accountability (CIJA) hosted a discussion on the conflict between accountability for war crimes and negotiating a peaceful resolution to the war in Syria. Former US Ambassador at-Large-for War Crimes Issues Ambassador Stephen Rapp, Commission for International Justice and Accountability Director Dr. William Wiley, and German Parliamentarian Dr. Rolf Mützenich joined the Atlantic Council to discuss this timely issue. Rafik Hariri Center Fellow Mr. Faysal Itani moderated the discussion.

Dr. Wiley explained that CIJA is a non-profit organization that builds cases regarding war crimes and crimes against humanity up to a criminal law standard for the conflict in Syria. To do this, his teams in the field have collected 600,000 to 700,000 pages of documentation generated by Syrian regime elements, security, intelligence, and military forces. Wiley pointed out that what is unique in this situation is that the current president of the Syrian regime is among the suspects.

Ambassador Rapp discussed how in some conflicts, it is difficult to get individuals to negotiate when they are implicated in war crimes and crimes against humanity. In that regard, oftentimes international powers have an instinct to push justice aside in order to progress with negotiations. However, Rapp asserted that pushing justice aside is not possible in Syria given the extent of violations. Similarly, Rapp explained that granting amnesty in exchange for peace is a violation of international law in and of itself.

Dr. Mützenich explained that even while being directly affected by the flow of refugees, many in Germany believe peace can only be possible if there is justice. Mützenich explained that Germany participated in the development of the international criminal code. Therefore, while his government is very interested in the success of the negotiations, many believe the international community must not forgo the necessity of seeking justice. 

On 1 October 2015, The Hague Institute for Global Justice hosted a panel discussion entitled “Pursuing Accountability in Syria.” The discussion took place under the Chatham House Rule.

Numerous reports about the Syrian conflict, such as those based on the 55,000 photographs provided by the Syrian defector Caesar, indicate that there is sufficient evidence to prosecute those responsible for violations of international humanitarian law, war crimes, crimes against humanity and torture.

In the absence of a UNSC referral to the International Criminal Court (ICC), or criminal investigations at the national or regional level, the Commission for International Justice and Accountability (CIJA) is collecting information that could eventually be used to  hold perpetrators of IHL violations accountable. The private actions of the CIJA amidst the ongoing conflict in Syria  represent a departure from the practice of conducting international criminal investigations under the aegis of public institutions. The panel addressed many aspects of this new and innovative model of private criminal investigations in the midst of ongoing conflict, including challenges, accomplishments, advantages, and  the future of CIJA.

After welcoming remarks by the President of the Institute, Dr. Abi Williams, the panel was opened for discussion by the moderator, H.E. Ms. Anniken Krutnes, Norwegian Ambassador to the Netherlands.

Panelists included:

Dr. William Wiley, Director and Founder of CIJA

Stephen Rapp, Former U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes Issues at the State Department

Mr. James A. Goldston, Executive Director of the Open Society Justice Initiative

The experts noted that the CIJA was created in response to the lack of effective action at the international level to secure accountability for international crimes that may have been committed during the Syrian conflict . They elaborated on the advantages and disadvantages of the CIJA in comparison with public institutions. On the one hand, the CIJA has a large number of highly skilled experts with significant experience in building international criminal cases; the capacity to take calculated risks; the ability to engage in the midst of an armed conflict; and minimal bureaucracy.

While the CIJA initially faced challenges securing adequate funding from donors, it can now operate effectively. On the other hand, the CJIA is faced with questions regarding its legitimacy, accountability and oversight, transparency, and quality control. The risks to which its staff and victims and witnesses are exposed are also cause for concern. The panelists pointed out that the CIJA originated from a request for capacity-building by training Syrian human rights activists. The CIJA or a related body would be even more useful if it could contribute to creating a domestic institution for criminal investigations in the future. This would further the long-term goal of ensuring adequate investigative capacity at the domestic level.

The Q&A session with the audience generated additional insights into several pertinent issues, such as the desirability and legitimacy of private  criminal investigations. The nature of the relationship between CIJA and public institutions such as the ICC was addressed  as well. It remains to be seen whether the information collected by the CIJA will actually be used by international or domestic courts. This could occur via an Advisory Opinion of  the International Court of Justice; the International Criminal Court, if it is granted jurisdiction in future; or national courts that are initiating criminal proceedings  to try perpetrators of international crimes in Syria under universal jurisdiction, such as in France.

The panelists emphasised that the CIJA is not meant to replace, but rather complement, public institutions involved in criminal investigations. It therefore seeks to cooperate with the ICC as well as national and regional  institutions that seek to address the challenge of impunity worldwide. According to the panelists, in the case of Syria, there is an abundance of evidence concerning international crimes. The CIJA’s efforts to gather and preserve  relevant information will give prosecutors a significant head-start during any future criminal cases.

 The Hague Institute for Global Justice works on these issues through its Fact-finding project, which is concerned with  quality control of criminal investigations and documentation efforts by organizations such as commissions of inquiry. We make practical use of this policy-relevant research through our complementarity capacity-building efforts and by developing standards for fact-finders, including civil society organizations that intend to assist criminal investigations.  On Monday 12 October, the Institute will co-organize a closed expert roundtable on fact-finding with the Public International Law and Policy Group. “Mass atrocities are being committed in Syria, with a quarter million killed and half the population displaced,” said Stephen Rapp. “But judicial accountability for these crimes is blocked internationally in the UN Security Council and domestically by the Syrian government. The best we can do now for the victims is to document the responsibility for these crimes for the day that justice will finally be possible.”

Large-scale violations of international criminal and humanitarian law are taking place in the Syrian conflict. In the absence of a referral of the situation to the International Criminal Court or the creation of a specialised tribunal, innovative efforts to gather and preserve evidence for future prosecutions are being supported by a number of states. 

The Commission for International Justice and Accountability is preparing prosecution case files that will meet international standards for evidence in criminal trials, recently completing a case file addressing individual criminal responsibility at the superior level for crimes committed in Syrian regime-controlled detention. The question remains what efforts are needed to establish jurisdiction of a properly constituted court or tribunal at the domestic or international level over these crimes? 

At this meeting, the commission presented its work, methodology and findings of the completed case files. The discussion looked at the legal ramifications of non-governmental organizations conducting high-level atrocity crimes investigations in ongoing conflicts; and how the results of such investigations may or should inform policy on the conflict in Syria.