LAW VIDEO’S ROLE AT THE DIFFERENT STAGES OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE PROCESS 1: Video’s Role in INITIATING AN INVESTIGATION In 2003, the DRC-based organization, AJEDI-Ka, alongside other courageous NGOs, started capturing video documentation of the use of child soldiers to complement their other forms of evidence collection. AJEDI-Ka took this risk in hopes that, someday, the military leaders responsible for using child soldiers would be held criminally liable. As part of AJEDI-Ka’s work towards this goal, they partnered with WITNESS to produce two films to contextualize the human rights crime, A Duty to Protect1 (14 min.) and On the Frontlines2 (15 min.). After the films were completed, AJEDI-Ka met with the DRC investigations team at the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) for the ICC. AJEDI-Ka screened the two films to provide the OTP with the broad factual context on the use of child soldiers in hopes that the OTP would ramp up its investigations into the use of child soldiers in war. The Prosecutor requested all the original, unedited footage from AJEDI-Ka and asked AJEDI-Ka to provide chain-of-custody information. The result: The provision and presentation of this video footage, in part, gave the ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor the information it needed to initiate an in-depth investigation into the enlistment, conscription, and use of child soldiers in eastern DRC. 2: Video’s Role at the SHOWN IN THESE VIDEOS These films tell the story of how child soldiers were used in the DRC’s civil war. The films include footage of child training in military camps and compelling testimony from demobilized child soldiers recounting the horrifying memories of life as soldiers. The videos are not legal evidence. CONFIRMATION OF CHARGES HEARING Over the next three years, the ICC’s OTP collected evidence — including video evidence — against Lubanga. When they had sufficient admissible legal evidence, they issued an arrest warrant charging Lubanga for the war crimes of enlisting, conscripting, and using child soldiers actively in hostilities. Once arrested, Lubanga appeared at his confirmation of charges hearing. At this hearing, the ICC Prosecutor told the judges he intended to show twelve video clips that would prove there were substantial grounds to believe that Lubanga enlisted, conscripted, and used child soldiers and, therefore, he should stand trial for the alleged crimes. Lubanga’s lawyers asked the judges to exclude these clips. They argued that the clips should not be admitted as evidence and not seen by the judges because: • the authenticity of the clips had not been proven, • the chain-of-custody of the clips had not been provided, and • some of the clips included discussions in Swahili and Kingwana (local languages) and Lubanga’s lawyers did not trust the prosecutor’s translations. The result: After two days of arguing, the judges decided to view the twelve videos. In the end, the judges gave special consideration to the video of Lubanga visiting the camps in determining that there was in fact substantial ground to believe that Lubanga used child soldiers in his militia. Then, based on all the evidence, the judges ordered Lubanga to stand trial. 24 VIDEO AS EVIDENCE: STAGES & STANDARDS OF PROOF V 1.0