The Vampire Insurgency
The charges brought forth to the Trial Chamber in the International Criminal Court (ICC) regards war crimes and crimes against humanity. The main suspects in this trial are Col. Renfeld, his senior advisor under his command-Lt. Col Murray and Murray assistant Lt. Ratray, all citizens of the state of Stoker and of Lykins ethnic group.
Additionally, charged with an attempt to commit crime against humanity alongside the mentioned suspects is Vladmir Impaler, also known as Nosferatu from the republic of Shelly and a Vampire by ethnicity. The key witness against Impaler is Jonathan Harker, also known as Dracula and a Vampire. Hacker is treated as a witnessed since he cooperated with the authorities during this investigation and helped curtail possible death of many civilians in Stoker.
In a bid to protect Carpathia, their territory, Vampires formed an insurgency known as Vampire Liberation Organization (VLO). However, this liberation organization turned into a militia through the assistance of the State of Shelly which provided arms to its members. In every uprising, there must be a leader and VLO was led by Impaler as their military commander and Harker as the head of political activism. The two mentioned individuals are presented in court as described above as suspect and witness, respectively
The Republics of Stoker, Jabba and Shelly State are neighboring countries in Europe. The Republics of Stoker and Jabba are members of the ICC while the state of Shelly is not party to the Rome Statute of the ICC. Inadmissibility of this case because Shelly republic is not party of ICC is therefore not viable since all the four suspects have been brought forward by the Republic of Stocker which is a member state of the Rome Statute. Similarly, the state of Stocker has not commenced criminal proceedings against the four, neither does it object to ICC actions.
Article 8 of the Rome Statute describes war crimes as actions committed as part of a plan or systemically to; willfully kill, torture, unlawfully confine people, direct attacks against civilian populations not taking part in hostilities or military objectives or bombarding buildings like hospitals and churches which are undefended. These actions among others as embedded in the statute were committed by the three military officials.
Through the order of the state of Stoker to its commander, Col. Renfeld to take every action necessary action to quell the vampire insurgency, Renfeld and his assistants Murray and Ratray actions as explained forth will constitute war crimes. Article 8, part 2 (VIII) of the Rome statute defines unlawful confinement as a violation of the Geneva Convention, and a war crime. Through their resolve through a meeting on April 2, 2011, Renfeld, Murray and Ratray came up with a plan, which they executed, of forcefully detaining Vampires suspected to be members of VLO.
Admissibility
Notably, Col. Renfeld himself acted as the judge against those Vampires detained at Camp Garlic. The Rome statute recognizes fair hearing through a court process to determine ones responsibility in a suspected unlawful activity. The forum for legal counsel or judicial hearing was not given to the detainees at Camp Garlic. It is in the light of the mentioned facts that the prosecution directs war crime charges against the three mentioned perpetrators.
In addition, in April 2011, through the orders of Lt. Col. Murray, during the round-up of around 5000 Carthanian Vampires, unarmed Vampires and Children under the age of 15 were shot and killed as they tried to escape or resist arrest. A confession by Lt. Ratray, who executed the order through solders under his command was recorded and is hereby presented by the prosecution.
Col. Renfeld testifies against issuing such orders but admits failure to take disciplinary actions against his juniors citing ignorance to that fact. In his defense, Lt. Ratray presents acting under duress as a ground to absolve him from criminal responsibility. He explains that his senior Lt. Col. Murray threatened shooting him and any other person who would not execute his orders.
The Rome Statute, Article 31section 1(d), on grounds that can exclude a suspect from, criminal responsibility states that such an action can only be taken if there is threat of imminent death like Ratray was threatened to be shot. However, it goes further to state that this is only viable if the person does not intend to because of greater harm than the problem they are seeking to avoid. In this case, shooting children and unarmed people caused more harm in that the Vampire uprising would be more violent and it was the problem the army was seeking to solve.
Mistake of fact or mistake of law is well explained in Article 32 of the Rome statute. Col. Renfeld defends himself as having not known that the order of killing unarmed people and children by his senior advisor, Murray, was a crime. There is common saying that, ignorance is not a defense. Mistake of law cannot be used as a defense unless it negated the mental element of the crime committed. The lack of mens rea defense on the omission to conduct an investigation to killing of unarmed people and children by Renfeld juniors cannot suffice as his defense on mistake of law. Soldiers are trained on combat law and only to engage armed people who cause threats to life, not unarmed children.
War Crimes
Ratray also ordered the bombarding of a cathedral that he suspected harbored VLO militia. Without investigation or confirming if this was true, his actions ended up killing unarmed people who were not taking part in the hostilities as defined in Article8 2 b (i) of the Rome statute. In addition, the same article part 2 b (v) and (ix) defines bombarding of undefended buildings and religious institutions as a war crime as perpetrated by Lt. Ratray.
Despite knowing that the above mentioned act was an atrocity, Lt. Col. Murray only warned Ratray and reassigned him to a different post without bringing court martial charges against him. Murray actions confirms his failure to act or rather his encouragement to commission of criminal acts among his junior officers. Article 28 a (ii) of the Rome Statute on responsibilities of commanders and other seniors states that the said individuals are criminally responsible for failing to submit such actions for investigation and prosecution to competent authorities.
With the above actions in mind, willful killing and bombarding unarmed buildings is considered a war crime and hence, the prosecution finds Murray, Ratray and Renfeld viable for charges against war crimes. As explained earlier, their direct actions, indirect actions, commissions and omissions to act caused loss of lives to 200 unarmed people and children and death of many others in a cathedral in Carthania. This is against the Rome Statute stand against war crimes as inscribed in article 8.
The Rome Statute article 7 defines crimes against humanity as those acts committed as a part of systematic attacks against civilian populations like murder, imprisonment, torture or acts causing great mental or physical suffering or body harm. Through their actions in one way or another, the resolve by Renfeld, Murray and Ratray to detain all people suspected to be members of VLO constituted crime against humanity.
The Vampire population was subjected to torture, mental and physical harm by Lt. Ratray action of forcefully feeding the striking Vampires at Camp Garlic. As indicated in Article 25, 1 b of the statute, individual criminal responsibility is defined as when a person orders a criminal activity against another. Ratray has admitted ordering his soldiers to forcefully feed the Vampires during their hunger strike. This does not absolve Col. Renfeld of the same charges for failing to act against a junior officer criminal actions claiming that he was not under his direct chain of command.
Murray omission to act on a crime against humanity committed by his junior while he was on leave cannot also absolve him from the crime. It means that he knew that Ratray had acted against the Rome Statute code of conduct but still, failed to take action even after resuming duty because he was on leave. Murray, Renfeld and Ratray are therefore jointly charged with the commission of and omission to act against crimes against humanity.
On the charges against Vladmir Impaler, a recording from Hacker on Impaler involvement in an attempt to cause crimes against humanity is being used as evidence. The prosecution understands that Impaler VLO co-leader, Jonathan Hacker is similarly being charged in the Republic of Jabba. Inadmissibility under Rome Statute article 17 1(a) states that one cannot be admissible in ICC if another state has commenced prosecution for the same charges just like in Hacker case.
Vladmir Impaler lack of objection to these charges leads the prosecution to conclude that he is guilty as charged on attempt to commit crimes against humanity. His intention to commit these crimes is confirmed by the bombs found in the republic of Stocker after Hacker confession and his lack of objection to the charges.
References
Primary Sources
Cases
The Prosecutor v. William Samoei Ruto, Henry Kiprono Kosgey,Joshua Arap Sang, Francis Kirimi Muthaura, Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta and Mohammed Hussein Ali [2011] ICC-01/09-02/11 O A [42]-[43]
Statuses and Statutory Instruments
The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
ICC Legislation and Cases
International Criminal Court Investigations in Kenya
The Appeals Chamber determination of Admissibility Challenge of Kenyan Cases
Directions for the Moot Court Mini Brief Assignment
Prosecutor v. Renfeld, Murray, Ratray, and Impaler
Judgment of Trial Chamber II
Secondary Sources
Command Papers and Law Commission Report
Waki report and referral to the ICC
Judgment on the appeal of the Republic of Kenya against the decision of Pre-Trial Chamber II of 30 May 2011 entitled “Decision on the Application by the Government of Kenya Challenging the Admissibility of the Case Pursuant to Article 19(2) (b) of the Statute
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
