The temptation to turn away from the ICC Prosecutor election is strong, esp as my work and attention is now largely directed towards building cases not likely to come before the Court. Still no one can deny the ICC's importance (whether actual or, even after 18 yrs, conceptual)

I started out disillusioned by the (ongoing) failure to institute meaningful vetting in the face of distressing information concerning workplace misconduct at the ICC. The ICC Prosecutor is one of the most important jobs in ICL. Failure to properly vet is negligent and dangerous.

I’d wanted to see a greater proportion of strong female candidates. More realistically (bc continuing paucity of women at the higher echelons of ICL), I wanted more explicitly feminist messaging from candidates re: org culture and gender-competent approaches to case-building.

Then the sole female shortlisted candidate was told to smile. In an election inevitably characterised by candidates’ highlighting their achievements, one of the few candidates of colour received a snide public remark from the CEP about being aware of his accomplishments.

Then someone/some people set up an anon Twitter account to attack select candidates. Iraqi NGOs were contacted in the hope of eliciting concerns about UNITAD’s work (about which more later). So I’ve decided to say three things, one of which is about a candidate. I’ll start there.

First, I didn’t cross paths w/ Karim Khan much at the tribunals. What I knew was he (a) was good on his feet; (b) was robust in his representation; (c) demanded a high standard of work; and (d) had ruined a near-legendary storm out from the Taylor case by choosing the wrong door.

(Aside from (iv) that’s pretty par for the course for QCs, whether working domestically or internationally.)

I got to know him better at UNITAD in 2019, and he seemed, well, a lot more human than my perception of him allowed. (When it comes to successful/ overtly confident people, I think I tend to focus on them as a list of accomplishments rather as a person - am working on this)

What do I mean by more human? He had an inclusive approach to working, valuing diverse voices incl those who often don’t get listened to – female voices, Iraqi voices, non-WEOG voices. He made clear the standard of conduct he expected in the office, w/ natl auth, w/ survivors

He was also very thoughtful when it came to the “support” staff who often get overlooked in planning the days’ activities – interpreters, assistants, security. Basically all the people who can’t go to dinner or bed until he’s back in the compound. I notice things like that.

Yes he does expect a high standard of work. I would not be keen to consistently hand something slapdash to him. Fair enough: if you’re working to build cases for communities half-destroyed by mass atrocity, you should be doing quality work. (Aside from q of what the UN pays you)

I also think UNITAD’s been a rich experience for him – the diplomacy and the budgeting, sure. But do you know what a brutal learning experience it is go from private practice to a UN bureaucracy?

When you have fill in 2 forms, speak to 3 people and wait 4 days for an ID card, it has to change one’s approach to tasking, consensus-building, and cements the importance of focusing on morale. (Or you get immensely frustrated, fight the system and lose, which is my approach)

I also really appreciate he has never tried to draw me into discussions about the ICC Prosecutor election but rather has been focused on the job he has and the work he's doing on case-building for survivors of ISIL, and on working w/ Iraqi, Kurdish & other natl authorities.

So that’s my two cents on Karim. I think he’d be a strong Prosecutor. I also think the greatest danger to the ICC is that it stays on its mediocre low-morale course. Its survival needs a person able to bring big ideas and make changes. Karim may be the candidate for this moment.

Second, there is a v. superficial grasp of essential role of defence counsel. Some of the discussion reminded me of a comment made during the IHT, along the lines of “Saddam Hussein has every right to be presumed innocent – no matter how many thousands of people he has murdered!”

Not a single person in crim proceedings is there to make everyone comfortable with what they're saying. You may find (defence, prosecution, victims’) counsel bombastic, overly personal in their remarks, and dismissive of what you think are agreed facts. None of that is unethical.

It’s also bizarre to conflate representations made on behalf of a case or client(s) w/ the personal convictions of the lawyer. (That tends to happen with defence lawyers more than other parties to crim proceedings IMO)
See statement of Dinah Rose QC here: https://rozenberg.substack.com/p/leading-barrister-refuses-to-be-intimidated

Third, those who approaching Iraqi NGOs to try to elicit negative comments are beyond the pale. People who lived through ISIL should not be used as pawns in a gddmn prosecutor election. You’re lucky they don’t –for now- want to go on the record. Take a good look at yourselves.

I care a lot more about the Yazidi and other survivor communities than I do about who gets to be ICC Prosecutor. If in a week or a month or a year, they are willing to make a complaint, confidentially it need be, I and others will take it forward.

These are my own views fwiw. Unambiguously, I am not representing ATLAS, which advocates for meaningful engagement w/ the high moral character requirement, for proper vetting, and highlights the massive issue of workplace misconduct incl in ICL institutions.