450 Between Yesterday and Tomorrow (1914– )been prime minister of the country at the time of the killings. By 2013, over
twenty- fi ve convictions for genocide had been handed down by the Rwanda
Tribu na l.
Th ere was criticism of the Yugo slavia and Rwanda Tribunals for the slow
pace of their proceedings. Both bodies were still in existence at the end of
2012, although nearing the ends of their respective tasks (fi nally). Th e
Rwanda Tribunal was marred by some corruption incidents. It was also
accused of bias, for its decision not to indict anyone associated with the new,
postgenocide government— which had allegedly resorted to brutal methods
of its own in taking power and halting the killings. On the whole, though,
the achievements of the two tribunals were impressive. In all, 161 persons
were indicted by the Yugo slavia Tribunal, and all of them were (eventually)
apprehended and brought to Th e Hague for trial. By mid- 2012, over 120
cases had been concluded. By 2013, seventy- fi ve persons had been tried by
the Rwanda Tribunal, although nine indicted persons remained still at
large. Sixty- three of these accused parties had been convicted, many of
them for genocide.
Th ese experiences stimulated the taking of a bolder step yet: the creation,
at last, of a permanent International Criminal Court. A conference was held
in Rome in 1998 and produced a statute for the tribunal, which entered into
force in 2002. It is located at Th e Hague, alongside the World Court. Four
crimes were placed under its jurisdiction: genocide, crimes against human-
ity, war crimes, and aggression. (Not until 2010, however, were the states fi -
nally able to craft a defi nition of aggression.) Th e Court (like the Yugo-
slavia and Rwanda Tribunals) was given its own in- house prosecution
division, empowered to bring cases on its own initiative. Th is meant that the
Court would not be dependent on states or on the UN Security Council for
its cases. It was given jurisdiction over all acts committed either in the terri-
tory of a state party or by a national of a state party (provided that the act
was committed aft er the relevant state’s ratifi cation of the Rome Statute). In
addition, there was a provision for conferral of jurisdiction onto the Court
by decision of the UN Security Council.
In its fi rst de cade of operation, all of the Court’s cases concerned African
countries. Th e governments of four countries— Uganda, the Congo, Central
African Republic, and Mali— expressly asked the Court to take action re-
garding events in those states. Th ese related to civil confl icts. In two other