Making Justice a Reality

Amira El Ahl: 
Welcome to a new episode of "Die Kulturmittler:innen," the ifa Podcast on Foreign Cultural Policy. My name is Amira El Ahl and I’m very glad to have you with me again. The release of this episode falls on Human Rights Day, which is observed by the international community every year on the 10th of December. It commemorates the day in 1984, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the universal declaration of human rights. One place that stands up for human rights is the International Criminal Court in The Hague. It deals with genocide, crimes against humanity, crimes of aggression and war crimes. Affiliated to the ICC is the Trust Fund for Victims, the TFV. The fund’s mission is to support and implement programmes that address harms, resulting from crimes that are tried before the ICC. In this episode, we take a look at the work of the trust fund, the International Criminal Court and talk about human rights. My guest today is Deborah Ruiz Verduzco. She is Executive director of the TFV. She has a PhD in International Law and prior to her current position as director of the coalition for the ICC, she held several senior roles in a variety of international organisations, including the International Commission on missing persons. Deborah Ruiz Verduzco, welcome to "Die Kulturmittler:innen!"  

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco:  
Thank you so much, Amira, for making this space for the Trust Fund for Victims and for International Criminal Court to celebrate, to commemorate the International Day for Human Rights, which is important and unique to all of us, and in which society and many actors participate. So it’s great to be here.  

Amira El Ahl: 
Thank you so much for taking the time to be with us, really. Deborah, before we talk about your and the TFV’s work, I would like to take the birds eye view and talk about justice. A big topic, but let’s try. Because justice is THE topic that a company as your work on a daily basis. What does the idea of justice mean for you and perhaps also for the work of the Trust Fund?  

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco:  
Thank you. Yes, indeed, we are day to day trying to make justice a reality. For many people, justice is divine, it’s a concept that is not at a human level. They feel that only god can bring justice and that means fairness, and peace, right? And making things equal. For others, it’s a notion, that is an aspiration, but it’s difficult to impersonalize. And this is done by the creation of rules to make sure that there are no inequalities, and that the weak ones are protected from abuses. And in the case of the International Criminal Court, justice means ensuring that certain acts do not happen again. It’s called tributing to the prevention of certain acts which shocked the conscious of humanity. Where in our societies, in order to survive, and to thrive, certain things should never happen. And the International Criminal Court seeks to achieve this by ensuring that those who commit certain acts are held accountable for them. And that the impact that these crimes have on the victims are redress to send a signal of solidarity and of affirmation of our common principles  

Amira El Ahl: 
Let’s maybe go back to human rights, because, as I said, this episode will be released on the 10th of December, the day that marks one of the world’s most groundbreaking global pledges: the universal Declaration of Human Rights. What exactly are we talking about when we talk about human rights? And why are they considered fundamental to human dignity? Because I think that’s also the basis of your work, right?  

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco: 
Yes, indeed, we are working in one dimension of preserving human rights. One of those dimensions of human rights are thought to be those values that are universal, and they’re ineligible and that are inerrant to our human condition. And there has been a whole negotiation as you mentioned in 1984, to determine what are those rights that apply always to all of us, just for the mere fact of being born. They are thought to be also ineligible because they are also connected. They are indivisible, and they are interdependent. And they are stemming from the principle of equality of all of us before the law, and they are also based on the principle of non-discrimination. So there shouldn’t be a reason why some humans can enjoy human rights, and others cannot. We are talking about the right to be educated, to have a name, to exercise our freedom of believe, to become organized, to elect our governments, to have access to justice. To make sure that if there is any wrongdoing against us, that the law will protect us. And that, if we are accused for any wrongdoing, that the process to determine whether we are responsible, is conducted in a fair and impartial manner. It protects life, and it protects also peace, and the future. It’s the right to live in convenience, it’s the right to exercise employment, to benefit from rest, to have a family life – it’s everything that defines us as humans. That is what human rights is. And it is upon the governments to protect those human rights.  

Amira El Ahl: 
And you said "universal," I mean, there are the universal Declaration of Human Rights as you said, and they are inalienable, you said. But are human rights really universal? Or are they characterized and shaped by cultural perspective? Do they change from country to country or culture to culture?  

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco: 
No, I think that this is a central, central debate about that universality of human rights, and in our experience from justice, we have seen that actually justice is universal. We work and operate in societies that often have very little contact or exposure to judicial institutions where the state is not necessarily very present. And that do not have… they are not so exposed through a tradition process where an investigator would come to determine what happened, and then a case would be open. And nevertheless, when genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes happen against them, they all have inerrantly to be recognized, to be supported, and to find out who did it, and why. And that that individual be held accountable for their actions and their decisions. And that is really present everywhere. Every society has that notion of equality. We can have a debate of how certain norms or certain cultural specificities interpret human rights, but when we look really deeper through institutions, and through modes of being, I think that we can find those human rights being really generally universal. 

Amira El Ahl: 
But, because it’s often said that it’s a kind of, you know, Western concept, and doesn’t really take into account different forms of societies, for example how societies work.  

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco: 
Yes, I think in the context of International Criminal Court, this is very interesting. I had the honour, really, to work for then years in promoting the ratification of the Rome Statute, which is the treaty that created the International Criminal Court. And I was able to work on this project with parliamentarians for Global Action, which is a network of members of parliament who are committed to the fight against impunity in more than forty countries around the world. And in some of these countries, in Africa, in Asia, in Latin-America, in Europe, and in some of these countries, this activists would never benefit from the work of ICC, because they have suffered wrongdoings, from crimes of the past, that had never been accounted for. And they all had the sense that it was important, it is important that certain acts do not go unpunished. That for certain acts, genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression, an international tribunal be there to help domestic institutions to make sure that these crimes do not go unpunished. And this is something, we see the ICC has being ratified by 124 states. Very soon, we will have 125 countries, that is Ukraine. We have deposited the instrument of ratification just last week, and this is a whole universe. And yes, there’s a number of countries that haven’t joined, well, they haven’t joined not because they think that justice is not universal or because they don’t believe in justice. There is more concerns about the institutions or the relationship that exists between the international dimension of justice and the domestic one. But it's really never about the universality of it, I think every country around the world has an ombudsperson, every country has a tribunal, every country has authorities that are recognized to help determine the fact in impassion manner. And to help solve conflict between humans that are a part of the society.  

Amira El Ahl: 
That’s really interesting, because that brings us maybe also to your work, and because, you know, I mean, human rights are fundamental to your work, you explained before. But maybe to understand the work of the TFV, I think we first have to understand how the International Criminal Court works and what it does exactly. You already gave us a brief insight, but maybe you can give us a quick overview on how the ICC works and what it does exactly.  

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco: 
Yes, of course. There is this notion that if something happens to you, you should be able to report it to the authorities, to be supported in the process, and that be investigated what happened to you. And then, there also is the notion that whatever harm was on to you should be repaired. And the idea of the International Criminal Court reflects this right to redress that is composed of the right to access to justice, the right to an effective, impartial, fair, genuine, prompt investigation that determines the facts and the right to reparations. And the International Criminal Court exists because every country around the world is capable of prosecuting genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and the crime of aggression. But they have decided that because these four crimes shock the conscience of humanity and threaten peace of security when they are committed, they want to make sure that they do not go unpunished, and that if at all, ever, they are unable to prosecute this crimes, there should be an international tribunal. So, they have even to the ICC the power to do what they can do themselves. So, in human rights courts, you know, the American court of Human Rights, the European Court of Human Rights, the African Commission, those tribunals deal with the relationship between individuals who have suffered human rights violations against the state, who have failed to protect them. And then we have the International Court of Justice, which is looking at any claim between two states, so, about borders or about certain rules of international law where you have judges that determine which rule apply. And that is between two states. And what the International Criminal Court focuses, is on the responsibility of individuals. And why is this? It’s because the notion that comes from the Nuremburg Tribunals after the Second World War, where is determined that this crimes are committed as a consequence of the decisions, the calculated decisions, the rational decisions of individuals who have the power to order or to participate or to collude or who decide to not stop certain actions. And they are in a unique position of authority. So, instead of prosecuting a state for the commission of certain crimes, you cannot take that state to jail.

The states are abstract entities composed of individuals who make decisions. And that is what International Criminal Court is focus, is who did what, and ensuring that there is evidence, that it can be established without any reasonable doubt that that individual participated by either ordering or conspiring or commanding or directly committing certain crimes. And that is what ICC is about and why it is that an International Tribunal is needed. Sometimes, these crimes take place, and the government maybe doesn’t have credibility or there’s a lot of proximity to the crimes. So, there is a feeling that the trial cannot be impartial. Therefore, that distance, we are in The Hague in the Netherlands, far away, hopefully, remotely from where the crimes happen. And the court is composed of eighteen judges that are elected by 124 states that compose the membership of the Rome Statute, and they are given the mandate to on behalf of international community. Here, what the prosecution has to say, here, what the defence has to say, and here, what the victims have to say about certain incidence and come out with a verdict that will result in two very important things. If the person is found to be guilty, that person will need to be sentenced to a prison sentence, to be accountable for the crimes, and also that person will be ordered to repair the harm caused on the victims. And that reparation comes in the form of a monetary value that is established for the harm caused on the victims. 

Amira El Ahl: 
So that is already where the Trust Fund comes in, right? But before that, I would like to take a step back quickly and just to maybe make it clearer: When does the International Criminal Court become involved? I mean who calls the International Criminal Court? Or does the International Criminal Court go and say we have to go after the person who is responsible or like a certain individual themselves? Who decides the investigation under which definition of genocide or war crime exactly? 

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco: 
Yes, very good. This is very important to understand. So, first of all, the state that join the Rome Statut. Because they themselves are able to prosecute these crimes in their own territories, and they are also able to prosecute the nationals of the wrong countries. If they commit a crime outside of a country, they have given this same powers to the ICC. So when a country joins the ICC, the ICC is able to prosecute crimes committed in the territory of each state party or committed by the nationals of each state party. So if the nationals of a state party commit a crime in the territory of another country that is not a state party, the ICC can intervene. If a state that is not a party commits a crime in the territory of the state party, the ICC serves, or the Rome Statut serves as a protection of that country. So that is the territorial and the personal element of what the ICC can do. And then there are the crimes, as I mentioned, genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression – and those crimes include a number of conducts that fall under those categories, more than fifty different conducts. So that is the "what." And then, there is the "when." So, the ICC can only prosecute crimes that were committed from the date of entry into force, that’s the first of July of 2002, when the Rome Statut entered into force.  

Amira El Ahl: 
So everything that was before cannot be prosecuted?  

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco:  
Cannot be prosecuted, that is the principle of non-retroactivity. And then, we have the "who." Who can the ICC prosecute? It can prosecute any individual. Even if you are a head of state. The immunity of head of state, of presidents cannot bar the ICC from acting, so it can be a personal, a private individual, but it can also be a government official including a head of state. So that is the main framework of the ICC. But then, of course the activation needs to be triggered, we call it trigger. So, we have this latent jurisdiction. So right now, even if my country, there are no - necessarily - crimes, we are protected, we have this protection that is active. And then, if something happens, we have three modes of activation. The first one is that victims can share their information and evidence and document what is happening, or any person, and share that information with the prosecutor of the ICC. And the prosecution then will open a preliminary analysis and determine: Do we have sufficient evidence to determine that there are crimes happening here? And if they do, they go to judges and they say, we have this case, and we want your affinisation to act in this situation. Is that a case, a mistake, is that a situation? When is a situation… 

Amira El Ahl: 
Because not yet, it is not yet a case, it is not yet opened?  

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco: 
Yeah, exactly. It’s a situation that means it’s a location of one or more countries over a certain period of time for certain acts that are taking place. So we have at the moment seventeen situations under the jurisdiction of the ICC that are defined across different countries or one single country for a specific period. And the judges have to tell the prosecutor yes, you may command some investigation in this situation. The other two ways of starting is that the states parties can make a referral to the ICC, to the prosecutor, and say we refer the situation. And this has happened many times, that countries, for example of Uganda, the Democratic Republic of the Kongo, of central African Republic, have said: We are dealing with some crimes we cannot address them judicially, so we are going to refer the situation in our own countries to… 

Amira El Ahl: 
… to the ICC. 

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco: 
But it has also happened that another country refers a situation happening in a third party to the ICC because that shows solidarity, to say we are aware that there is a situation in Ukraine, and we want the ICC to investigate and open the situation.  

Amira El Ahl: 
Is this a recent example, or what’s the most recent example maybe you could give on this cert situation? 

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco: 
Yeah, we have the situation of Ukraine, where Ukraine had originally in 2015, even if they were not a state party, they were able to accept the jurisdiction on a specific basis. And then, the ICC was considering to act, and then, a large number of states, more than thirty, came to the ICC and said: No, we are referring the situation of Ukraine. But also, the situation of Venezuela has been referred by a number of countries from Latin America who consider that there were potential crimes being committed, and they referred the situation to the court. And then the judges validate this, and then, there’s an opening of an investigation. And once the prosecution has enough information to understand which particular individual or individuals have committed what, and they coordinate with domestic authorities, and they say: Are you prosecuting this case? Are you prosecuting this incident? Who is doing what? They will determine certain cases that they will bring against concrete individuals. And the principle is that the ICC should look at the cases of the most concern, the highest and most serious, the highest and most perpetrators, because we know that it is more costly to conduct an international process, and the ICC needs to be complementary to domestic jurisdiction. So it is the domestic, the national courts who need to be acting, and only when they are unwilling or unable, is that the ICC should come in to help out.  

Amira El Ahl: 
And now, let’s go to where you come in, or where the Trust Fund comes in. What exactly does the Trust Fund for Victims do, and when do you come in? Because this is, I think, after all of the procedures that you just explained, right?  

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco: 
Yes, indeed. And before going into the Trust Fund, if I can, I would like to share a very important element of the ICC which then links to us, which is the place of victims. The Rome Statute that established the ICC innovated in many ways. It created, it articulated the definitions of crimes that didn’t exist before, it brought a lot of definitions for sexual and gender-based violence and took them and turned them into crimes in order to protect, and end this rape, and use of sexual violence as a weapon of war. And also defined crimes against children, for example when they are being used as a soldier. But one of the other innovations was that it gave victims, those who suffered the crimes, or the families, a very important place. So, as I mentioned, they are able to bring information to the prosecutor, but they are also, when the case is open, they are able to participate in the proceedings. They can say: Oh, I was affected by this case, and I want to be part of the proceedings, not to also serve like the prosecutor to accuse, but actually to bring the perspective of victims including controlling or trying to correct what the prosecution may be doing wrong.  

Amira El Ahl:  
As witnesses, or…? Or as a party?  
 
Deborah Ruiz Verduzco: 
As a party! So, we have the defence, the prosecution, and the victims. And victims receive legally, that means that state parties pay for a legally regime, that allows for lawyers to be paid for to represent them. So, the lawyers consult with victims, and then they appear in the proceedings to protect the interest of victims. And if that case ends up in conviction, as I mentioned, there will be this sentence for an imprisonment, maximum thirty years, there is no life imprisonment, there is no death penalty at the ICC, because of human rights, because life is a protected value, and the death penalty is not in line with international human rights standards, and there will be an order for reparations. So, the individual is expected to participate in judicial proceedings where the judges, once they say okay, this individual was there, he was responsible, now let’s look at what happened to the victims, and they will try to determine who, how many people were affected by a given case, and what happened to them. What type of harm did they suffer, and then they come up also with a monetary sum that the convicted person is expected to pay as reparations to the victims. Until today, we have five cases convicted, and you will say, oh, that’s a very little number of cases, but in reality, the smallest case has a little bit less than 300 victims, only one case. We are talking about one attack against one village. And the most recent case has almost 50.000 victims.  

Amira El Ahl: 
So, this is then, when you come in as Trust Fund for Victims?  
 
Deborah Ruiz Verduzco:  
Exactly. That’s where we come in. And what we are supposed to do in principle, is that the judges will have freeze the assets of the individuals that go to trial. And once the person is convicted, those assets will be sent to the Trust Fund as a mechanism of a reparation order, or fines, or for features. And then, our job will be to create a program through which the victims can receive these reparations. But practice has shown that the individuals that are convicted do not have the means to pay for the reparations. And that’s why our job is to mobilize resources from public and from private sources to make sure that victims receive these reparations. And these reparations are not as many people can imagine in a civil trial, it’s about money, saying “I lost a house, therefore you have to pay me five millions.” But it’s more about looking at the type of harm that they suffered. So, it could be a moral harm, it could be a physical harm, it could be an economic harm. And because the cases that the ICC deals with are so massive, what the ICC is trying to do is to recognize, and say yes, you were a victim, you suffered, you lost a number of family members, you lost your house, and we are probably not going to be able to restore what was taken away from you, but in a symbolic act, we will recognize as international community that you were wronged.  

Amira El Ahl: 
Yes. So just to give an example. So you're responding to the harm resulting from the crimes under the jurisdiction of the ICC. And you help to realise the rights of the victims and their families through the provision of reparations and assistance. So we already started, I think, to explain this. But can you explain this dual mandate that the trust fund has? Because it's not just reparations, but also assistance. What kind of help, very concretely, can the trust fund provide? 

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco:  
Yes. So in the situations where the prosecution is investigating, we are able to also provide assistance and not related to this particular cases. So, for example, the prosecutor will be investigating an attack in one area and there are victims somewhere else and that the prosecution has not focused on for the cases. We are able to create programmes and these programmes are trying to address the most urgent needs of rehabilitation and also of recognition and memorialisation of victims. Considering that there may or may not be a case that ends up being associated to their situation. We have been in Uganda where we have health in northern Uganda for more than 15 years, more than 65,000 victims. We have been in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In parallel and in locations where the prosecutor was not investigating, also to address the needs of the victims of the Ituri conflict. For example, in Mali, we're working, our assistance programme is operating in areas outside of Timbuktu, whereas the reparation programmes for the cases that the prosecutor was able to convict are being done in other areas. So the assistance mandate is trying to create a footprint of legitimacy and of urgent assistance to the victims while the prosecutions advance. Whereas the reparations look at the victims that are directly linked to the to the crimes that are convicted by the court. 

Amira El Ahl: 
But because you just said like there is in one case what you said, 50,000 victims or 65,000, I mean, there are a lot. It's like, you know, you have whole villages that are affected by war crimes, genocide, whatever it is that the ICC will prosecute. So do you think that reparations are a just tool for these kind of harms? Or do all of these victims, let me put it this way, receive the same kind of reparations who have been all subjected to the same atrocities, the same harm and the same experiences? So do they get the same reparations? And do you think it's a just tool?  

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco:  
Yes, this is a very important question that we are all posing ourselves. So at the very basic, any individual that suffers from this type of acts should receive immediate assistance by their own state. So if there is an attack against a village, I should be able to go to a hospital to have those bullets removed. Or I should be able, as on the basis of the right to health, to have access to a prosthesis in case, you know, I was mutilated and I don't have legs or arms. Right. So that medical treatment, which is a basic human right, should be there. If I was displaced, I should be able to, the state should be able to provide me with a home on the human right of housing. But unfortunately, the conflicts that we're dealing with ravage the state and the state is not able to respond. 
It's dealing with a conflict and is not able to respond to the needs of victims. And we have, of course, immediate humanitarian interventions to address the communities that are affected by war and conflict, where humanitarian agencies will come in and ensure that people have enough water, enough food, that there is sanitation, that people are getting their vaccines because they are in a state of emergency. But these humanitarian responses often are limited in time, and they will have to very much soon move on to the next response. And they are not able to build basic infrastructure that lasts, right? So we are also not supposed to be providing a humanitarian response. In an ideal world, we're able to focus on how can we recognise the victims? How can we make sure that it's acknowledged that they suffer from these crimes? Victims often also suffer from stigma. They are rejected by their societies. There is women that are raped or men that are raped who are not accepted by their own families again. And there is children that are born out of that violence who are also not accepted. And these are more structural problems that are the cause of the crime. 

Amira El Ahl: 
If we talk about assistance, so there's also psychological assistance, for example, for people like this, right?  

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco:  
Exactly. Psychological assistance is very important. Mental health is the first thing that gets affected by conflict. The traumatism, the trauma, the stress that comes from having suffered violence. And in circles where we are not only suffering violence, but individuals are not able to restore their lives. Their lives have been destroyed. They are not able to come back to that home. They have lost their children. So it is a stress that continues and perpetuates and have important impact in society, generates violence between generations, between family members. Families are broken up because of that stress. But also they impede people from regaining employment, from being able to cope with normal life, with being able to cope. And that creates also chronic disease and exacerbates other problems. So centrally to rehabilitation and to addressing harms of victims is the psychological state, is making sure that people are in a good place to be able to cope then with all the other challenges that come from conflict. And our interventions are looking at exactly what happened in the sense of what crime was committed to make sure that the psychological treatment also helps them to reconnect those social bounds, but also to the international community where we're saying these are crimes that also shock us, that we are affected by it and we want you to be okay. And that's why it's a central component of the reparations programme. 

Amira El Ahl: 
Yeah. And so it's quite a, I would say, holistic approach that you have, correct?  

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco:  
Indeed. Indeed. 

Amira El Ahl: 
Maybe let's look at your role, like what are you responsible for in your role as executive director?  

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco:  
Yes. Well, I have the most beautiful job in the world. I work, we work for an institution, for an ideal of justice. We exist in the intersection between the court and the assembly states parties. They establish the Trust Fund with a board of directors that independently without influence from states or from the ICC or from the prosecutor will help decide how do we use the resources that we have, the money that we have. And my job is primarily to make sure that the board has good advice, that they are well-informed so that their decisions can consider all views and all stakeholders. And because resources will never be enough to service all the victims, there are very difficult choices that we need to make. There are sequences and priorities that needs to be established. And it's the board of directors, very difficult job to decide which interventions are going to be prioritised and how we're going to distribute those money. So my job is a lot about drawing scenarios and counting numbers and saying, well, how can we maximise what we have to try to give the majority of victims as much as we can? And my work is to work with the board. They represent the international community. And then I work with a fantastic, very small, but very dedicated team who is responsible of implementing the programmes. And they are responsible of selecting partners that are experts in the different fields because reparations really can be anything. So if the environment is harmed, then we need to have environmental experts who are going to help us to restore the environment. If a building is destroyed and had a cultural or religious value, we need to work with those experts in art and culture to restore that building. If we need to give treatment, we need to work with experts that can deliver that treatment. So our teams are mostly trying to find who can we partner with. And then we have to integrate their job into the work of the ICC, where they are not delivering this treatment because these services are done by many organisations around the world. But in our case, this is being done as a measure of justice, as a measure of the future, of rule of law. So the way they do things have to be very specific so that individuals that come as beneficiaries understand who is giving them and why they are receiving this. That is very important. And then we also work with states to make sure that they provide the resources to finance our operations. And we have to demonstrate impact. And we work with NGOs that are central to activism and to policymaking and to representing the interests of victims. 

Amira El Ahl: 
So, just quickly, because you said you're working also with states and you earlier said that, you know, where the money comes from for the fund. I mean, you don't have enough assets to give to everybody. Where does the money come from? You said one is assets and fines that the ICC puts on individuals that they are trying. But where else? So the states give money, you find donors. What could you like maybe put two, three examples where your funds come from?  

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco:  
Yes, of course. So one source of funding is from the convicted person. So that'd be a fine that the court imposes on the individual. It could be a forfeiture. So the court could say these assets are not going to be ours. We're forfeiting them. Or it could be a reparation award. They are told you have to pay one million and then the individual has to come up with a sum. And therefore, we would be receiving this from the convicted person. To date, we only have received one time a fine for a value of 330,000 euros from Mr. Jean-Pierre Bienba in the case against him and others for offences against administration of justice. That is, he was found responsible for intimidation of witnesses to participate in trials. So we receive the value of that fine, and we hold those resources for using it under the instruction of the judges. The other source of money are the states, and they can give us those resources as individually each state, providing us with grants or with voluntary contributions. There are small states who do not have a lot of resources, but they consistently give us every year a symbolic amount to make sure that it's known that they support victims. And then there are larger, more developed, more capable states who are able to contribute in a more substantive manner to the projects. And our work right now is to persuade them to increase those contributions and to make sure that they connect their development and their aid priorities to the work that we're doing. Because what we're doing is going to help the rule of law, is going to help the prosperity of the communities, is going to prevent conflict, and we want to access those resources. So we are in a big change of our approach to mobilising resources from states. We want the European Commission to also give us resources. We believe that the portfolio of the European Commission is aligned to what we're doing, and we hope to find a bridge of collaboration with them. And the states can also, together as assembly, may decide to give us resources. And this has never happened to date, so there is a long way for debates to consider whether that could be a mechanism funding the trust fund.  

Amira El Ahl: 
Yeah. 

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco: 
And then there is a private sector, right? So you as an individual can make contributions to the trust fund, but also companies and foundations, and also we are able to make investments. And all this is supervised by the board and by the assembly of states parties.  

Amira El Ahl: 
I would be interested to know like how the recent wars and conflicts in the world impacted your work, or have they impacted your work? Do you feel there is a change?  

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco:  
Yes, of course. From the 17 situations on the jurisdiction of the ICC, 11 of them are on the top humanitarian crisis around the world, which means that where conflict is happening, war crimes and crimes against humanity and potentially genocide is also happening, unfortunately. Even if there are norms and rules for the conduit of hostilities, which is governed by international humanitarian law, we know obviously that when these conflicts are taking place, these rules are not being protected, and that leads to the existence of international crimes. That also means that there are many, many more victims. And the cases that the ICC is dealing with are very complex, include a massive number of victims, but also include the highest individuals responsible in structures of power, be that the state or the militias or the armed groups that are participating in the conflicts. It has also created much more insecurity for the victims themselves, because, for example, the conflict in northern Uganda, where we are implementing the largest reparation programme, or we will be wanting to start the largest reparation programme for the ongoing case. There is thankfully now no more conflict in northern Uganda, but in the majority of other situations where we are operating, the conflict is ongoing, which means that whatever intervention we do, it's always at risk of being lost because of the ongoing conflict. It also makes our work more difficult. We want to be close to our implementing partners and close to the victims, but security situations and constraints means that we have much more limited access. Things take longer because we need to wait until there is security clearances, when we can travel. And also there has been developments that affect our capacity to operate. We collaborate with the United Nations, with peacekeeping operations that through different arrangements can guarantee our security, can give us access. And the closing of spaces for international collaboration in peacekeeping has also limited our capacity to be close to the victims.  

Amira El Ahl: 
So what would you say are some of the main challenges in enforcing human rights globally? What would you say?  

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco:  
I mean, I think there is a consensus of the shrinking space to operate for the victims who are affected, but also for the defenders. And yes, we are celebrating the Day of Human Rights, 10 December, but yesterday we commemorated the International Human Rights Defenders Day on 9 December of every year. And they are essential for documenting the crimes, for representing the victims, for advocating for policies and for funding. And their work is very dangerous and they do it at great expense and a lot of courage and to protect the frontline defenders. They are the care workers of the first responders of justice. And their work has become very difficult. Social media, of course, and fake news and disinformation and the incapacity of journalists to cover the facts have also created myths. And it takes much longer to be able to ascertain what actually is happening somewhere. So that is a big, big threat to us. And also solidarity as the international community is and certain countries are worried about the economy and their own stability. They are closing in. And for human rights to be protected and defended and for justice to prevail, we need solidarity. We need collaboration. We need openness. We need creativity. We need to look at the future and not only in the short term. And all that is becoming increasingly harder to secure.  

Amira El Ahl: 
Yeah, it's interesting that you were talking about human rights defenders because human rights are also part of ifa's self-understanding and programmes such as the Elisabeth Selbert Initiative, the ESI, actively help human rights defenders worldwide. And this programme provides threatened human rights defenders with a safe place to recuperate, to cope with trauma and when possible to network and further develop their professional skills. How would you assess such programmes and what else can institutions like ifa do to help in these, you know, precarious situations?  

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco:  
Such an important programmes, the shelter programmes for rest and respite for human rights defenders that have been established recently in many locations around the world are so important. As you say, they give that space for rest and also they give that space for connection and collaboration between defenders of countries that may seem very different and very removed from each other, but they create spaces for creativity to be contagious and sharing lessons of how challenges are faced together. They create networks of solidarity and they allow us to really connect in the human web that we are. They provide skills to professionalise the work. Many defenders are not there by choice, but by force and by... for fear. And they help them professionalise, to help them think and be strategic. But also very importantly, I think that one of the challenges of the human rights movement is the challenge of collaboration. We are often dominated by authoritarian models of work, hierarchical models of work, where collaboration is a challenge of the human rights movement. Everybody wants to be a leader and everyone wants to do things their own way and everybody's very creative. And how can we actually collaborate to build on each other, to turn that competition into an asset that makes us be more effective against the forces of destruction? Because it's much easier to destruct, but to construct, we need to think more, we need to really collaborate more. And I think these spaces of rest and respite and shelter are essential. So really very important work done by the Institute on this.  

Amira El Ahl: 
But what you just said, collaboration, I think is really essential. This, you know, bringing together forces and like joint forces for the good is like super important, as you just said. 

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco:  
Very important! We have common challenges, right? So for example, in Asia, the fight against organised crime and drug trafficking and the human rights violations that that brings is able to be connected to Latin America and is able to be connected to Africa. And there are common challenges on, you know, preventing the use of weapons or preventing sexual violence that yes, each country is different and has its different context. But in reality, the solutions are very common. 

Amira El Ahl: 
Yes. And we can learn from each other. Absolutely. I'm sure we could talk for another two hours or half of the day about all of these topics and human rights, because they are so big and they are so broad and they're so important. But unfortunately, time is running out. So, I would like to end with something personal, because I would like to know from you how you cope with being confronted every day with traumatising stories. What keeps you going and what gives you hope, despite all the challenges and all these traumatising stories that you see every day?  

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco:  
Yes. Of course, self-care and having a community with whom to share the challenges is very important. And we have that in the Trust Fund and in the ICC and and with the partners and the NGOs that we work with. But I don't know if you have ever seen, you know, a paved road with the concrete and there are cracks in the concrete. And there is very often a little piece of a plant that is emerging and there's sometimes flowers there because life, life wants to be even through concrete. And I think this is what we see with the survivors of these crimes. They are resilient. They are so powerful. They are hopeful and they are looking at a future and they're fighting every day. And it's amazing. It's inspiring. They are amazing. We are amazing as human beings. We can overcome so much if we are together. And that's what keeps us going. We know that what we're doing is very small to the big needs. We know that it is often unfair that only certain victims receive what we give, but we try to do it in a way that it catalyses actions of others. And we are certain because we have measured with external evidence that the impact that reparations can have on showing solidarity is enormous for the resilience that individuals can gain at the psychological level. And it also creates trust in institutions. They believe in institutions and therefore they are less likely to join militias because they have lost the hope. So it is hope. It's the hope that survivors bring us. It's the new generations. It's the children that are emerging from this conflict on which we have to bet. And they are amazing and we are so honoured to serve them. 

Amira El Ahl: 
Thank you so much for this hopeful view and outlook. And thank you so much, Deborah Ruiz Verdusco, for your time and for all these insights and for being with us today. Thank you so much. 

Deborah Ruiz Verduzco:  
Thanks to you for listening.  

Amira El Ahl: 
So if you enjoyed the podcast, please feel free to recommend this episode to others. Over 60 episodes of our podcast on topics such as the protests in Iran, documenting war crimes in Ukraine or media in the Middle East are waiting for you on our website ifa.de or wherever you listen to your podcasts. You can also subscribe to the "Kulturmitler:innen" so you don't miss any of the upcoming episodes. And you can find out even more about ifa and our projects on our website or our social media channels. You can find our profile on Instagram with the handle @ifa.de and on LinkedIn as ifa-Institut für Auslandsbeziehungen. If you have any questions or comments about the "Kulturmittler:innen," please send us an E-Mail to podcast@ifa.de. My name is Amira El Al. Thank you so much for listening and see you next time.