Comprehension
Dominic Ongwen, a former commander of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) in Uganda, was convicted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in February 2021. The case marked a significant milestone in international criminal law, focusing on issues of child soldiering, forced marriage, and sexual and gender-based violence. Ongwen was found guilty of 61 counts of crimes against humanity and war crimes, including murder, torture, enslavement, forced marriage, rape, and conscription of children under the age of 15 into armed groups. The ICC’s judgment emphasized the importance of accountability for leaders who exploit children in conflicts and commit sexual and gender-based crimes.
A critical aspect of the judgment was the consideration of Ongwen’s own history as a child soldier. Ongwen was abducted by the LRA at around the age of nine and was forced to commit atrocities as he rose through the ranks. The court balanced this background against the gravity of his crimes, ultimately ruling that his personal history did not absolve him of responsibility for his actions as an adult commander. The judgment is also notable for its comprehensive approach to reparations for victims. The ICC ordered collective reparations, including symbolic measures like memorials, physical and psychological rehabilitation, and financial compensation to support the victims and their communities. This case reinforces the ICC’s commitment to addressing serious international crimes, particularly those involving vulnerable populations such as children and women and underscores the principles of justice and reparation in international criminal law.
(This extract is taken from Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen (ICC, 2021))
A critical aspect of the judgment was the consideration of Ongwen’s own history as a child soldier. Ongwen was abducted by the LRA at around the age of nine and was forced to commit atrocities as he rose through the ranks. The court balanced this background against the gravity of his crimes, ultimately ruling that his personal history did not absolve him of responsibility for his actions as an adult commander. The judgment is also notable for its comprehensive approach to reparations for victims. The ICC ordered collective reparations, including symbolic measures like memorials, physical and psychological rehabilitation, and financial compensation to support the victims and their communities. This case reinforces the ICC’s commitment to addressing serious international crimes, particularly those involving vulnerable populations such as children and women and underscores the principles of justice and reparation in international criminal law.
(This extract is taken from Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen (ICC, 2021))
Question: 1
Which principle of international criminal law ensures that individuals, regardless of their position or rank, can be held accountable for committing serious international crimes?
Which principle of international criminal law ensures that individuals, regardless of their position or rank, can be held accountable for committing serious international crimes?
Updated On: Sep 10, 2025
- Sovereign immunity
- Command responsibility
- Diplomatic immunity
- Universal jurisdiction
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is B
Solution and Explanation
In international criminal law, the principle that ensures individuals are held accountable for serious crimes, regardless of their position or rank, is known as "Command Responsibility." This principle is crucial for prosecuting leaders who commit or are complicit in international crimes, even if they are not directly involved in the acts. It holds commanders and superiors accountable for the actions of subordinates when they fail to prevent or punish criminal actions.
This was exemplified in the case of Dominic Ongwen, a former commander of the Lord’s Resistance Army. He was convicted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) on multiple counts of crimes against humanity and war crimes, which included murder, enslavement, and child soldier conscription. The court considered Ongwen's background as a child soldier himself but ultimately ruled that it did not exempt him from responsibility for his subsequent actions as a commander. The judgment highlights the application of "Command Responsibility" to ensure justice for victims and reinforce accountability at all levels.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 2
In the context of international criminal law, what does the principle of “individual criminal responsibility” entail?
In the context of international criminal law, what does the principle of “individual criminal responsibility” entail?
Updated On: Sep 10, 2025
- Only states can be held accountable for international crimes
- Individuals can be held personally liable for committing war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide
- Individuals are immune from prosecution if they act under state orders
- Only military personnel can be held responsible for international crimes
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is B
Solution and Explanation
The principle of "individual criminal responsibility" in international criminal law entails that individuals, regardless of their official position or role, can be held personally liable for committing serious international crimes such as war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. This principle underscores the accountability of persons who commit such offenses, irrespective of whether they act as private individuals or in a capacity as government officials or representatives of a state.
According to the options provided, the correct interpretation of this principle is: Individuals can be held personally liable for committing war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. This means that individuals do not have immunity from prosecution for these crimes, even if they were ordered by a state or acted in an official capacity.
The case of Dominic Ongwen exemplifies the application of this principle. Ongwen, a former commander of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) in Uganda, was held accountable by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 2021 for 61 counts of crimes against humanity and war crimes, demonstrating the enforcement of individual criminal responsibility regardless of his previous status as a child soldier or the commands he may have acted under. The ICC's verdict highlights that such crimes committed during armed conflict are subject to legal scrutiny, and the individuals perpetrating them can and will be prosecuted to ensure justice and reparation for victims, reinforcing the commitment to address violations that impact vulnerable populations.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 3
The concept of “crimes against humanity” includes which of the following acts, as exemplified in the Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen case?
The concept of “crimes against humanity” includes which of the following acts, as exemplified in the Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen case?
Updated On: Sep 10, 2025
- Piracy and terrorism
- Enslavement, forced marriage, and sexual violence
- Espionage and sabotage
- Intellectual property theft
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is B
Solution and Explanation
In the case of Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen, the International Criminal Court (ICC) addressed various criminal acts under the category of "crimes against humanity." These acts included:
- Enslavement
- Forced marriage
- Sexual violence
Dominic Ongwen, formerly a commander in the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) in Uganda, was found guilty of multiple counts of such crimes alongside other war crimes, such as murder and torture. The ICC's ruling in February 2021 marked an important phase in international criminal law by underlining the significance of holding leaders accountable for actions involving child soldiering and gender-based crimes. Ongwen's case was particularly notable because it examined his history as a child soldier, considering this background in evaluating the gravity and responsibility for his actions as an adult commander. Despite his past, the court ultimately ruled that it did not excuse his later crimes.
In conclusion, the correct answer to the question is: Enslavement, forced marriage, and sexual violence.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 4
What is the significance of the principle of “complementarity” in the context of the International Criminal Court (ICC)?
What is the significance of the principle of “complementarity” in the context of the International Criminal Court (ICC)?
Updated On: Sep 10, 2025
- The ICC can prosecute cases only when national jurisdictions are unwilling or unable to do so
- The ICC has primary jurisdiction over all international crimes
- The ICC can only prosecute crimes committed within its member states
- The ICC shares jurisdiction equally with national courts
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
The principle of "complementarity" in the context of the International Criminal Court (ICC) is a fundamental aspect that defines the ICC's jurisdiction over cases of international crimes. This principle emphasizes that the ICC acts as a court of last resort, intervening only when national jurisdictions are either unwilling or unable to prosecute criminals of severe international crimes. This mechanism ensures that the ICC respects the sovereignty of states, allowing them the first opportunity to handle prosecution.
The significance of complementarity is reflected in its role in maintaining a balance between national and international judicial systems. By allowing domestic courts to take precedence, it fosters national accountability and builds trust in domestic legal frameworks. However, in situations where a state's judicial system fails due to incapacity or unwillingness, the ICC can step in, ensuring that justice is served and international legal standards are upheld.
Let's consider the options provided:
The ICC can prosecute cases only when national jurisdictions are unwilling or unable to do so.
The ICC has primary jurisdiction over all international crimes.
The ICC can only prosecute crimes committed within its member states.
The ICC shares jurisdiction equally with national courts.
The correct answer is:
The ICC can prosecute cases only when national jurisdictions are unwilling or unable to do so.
This choice precisely captures the essence of complementarity, underscoring the ICC's role in global justice and accountability, as seen in cases such as Dominic Ongwen's, where issues of national inability to prosecute inform the ICC's intervention in the pursuit of justice and reparations.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 5
Which of the following statements best describes the significance of the Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen case in the context of international criminal law?
Which of the following statements best describes the significance of the Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen case in the context of international criminal law?
Updated On: Sep 10, 2025
- It was the first case to address environmental crimes in international conflicts
- It marked a milestone in addressing sexual and gender-based violence and the exploitation of children in armed conflicts
- It was the first case to involve cybercrimes committed by international armed groups
- It primarily focused on the financial aspects of running an armed group
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is B
Solution and Explanation
The significance of the Prosecutor v. Dominic Ongwen case in international criminal law can be best described by the following key points:
- Focus on Sexual and Gender-Based Violence: The case was a landmark in addressing offenses related to sexual and gender-based violence. It was one of the first instances where the International Criminal Court (ICC) highlighted these issues in armed conflicts.
- Exploitation of Children: Ongwen was found guilty of the recruitment and use of child soldiers. The case brought attention to the severe impact and criminality of abducting children for warfare.
- Comprehensive Judgment: Ongwen faced 61 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity, including forced marriage, rape, and murder. The judgment reinforced the importance of holding leaders accountable for exploiting vulnerable groups such as women and children.
- Consideration of Perpetrator’s Background: The court acknowledged Ongwen's own history as a child soldier but balanced it against his responsibilities and actions as an adult commander, concluding that his background did not absolve him of guilt.
- Reparations for Victims: The ICC's decision included reparations, focusing on symbolic measures, rehabilitation, and financial support for victims, demonstrating the court’s commitment to providing justice and reparations.
The correct answer to the significance of this case is: It marked a milestone in addressing sexual and gender-based violence and the exploitation of children in armed conflicts.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Top Questions on Criminal Law
Match the LIST-I with LIST-II
Choose the correct answer from the options given below:
- CUET (PG) - 2025
- Criminology
- Criminal Law
- How much does a complainant have to pay the police to get a copy of the FIR or complaint?
- CUET (PG) - 2025
- Criminology
- Criminal Law
- ........... is an internet scam done by cyber criminals where the user is convinced digitally to provide confidential information.
- CUET (PG) - 2025
- Criminology
- Criminal Law
- Under the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which of the following is a unique provision for 'children in conflict with law'?
- CUET (PG) - 2025
- Criminology
- Criminal Law
- Who among the following are authorised to arrest under criminal procedure law?
- CUET (PG) - 2025
- LLM
- Criminal Law
View More Questions
Questions Asked in CLAT PG exam
- The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘Nil Ratan Kundu and another v. Abhijit Kundu’ 2008(3) Apex Court Judgements 232 (SC), while granting the custody to the maternal grandparents observed: In our judgement, the law relating to custody of a child is fairly well settled and it is this. In deciding a difficult and complex question as to custody of minor, a Court of law should keep in mind relevant statutes and the rights flowing therefrom. But such cases cannot be decided solely by interpreting legal provisions. It is a humane problem in live in relationship and is required to be solved with human touch. A Court while dealing with custody cases, is neither bound by statutes nor by strict rules of evidence or procedure nor by precedents. In selecting proper guardian of a minor, the paramount consideration should be the welfare and well-being of the child. In selecting a guardian, the Court is exercising parens patriae jurisdiction and is expected, may bound, to give due weight to a child’s ordinary comfort, contentment, health, education, intellectual development and favorable surroundings. But over and above physical comforts, moral and ethical values cannot be ignored. They are equally, or we may say, even more important, essential and indispensable consideration. If the minor is old enough to form an intelligent preference or judgement, the Court must consider such preference as well, though the final decision should rest with the Court as to what is conducive to the welfare of the minor.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘Gaurav Nagpal v. Semedha Nagpal’-(2009)1 SCC 42, while giving paramount importance to the welfare of the child, which should include moral and ethical values, besides ethical well-being, observed as under:
When the court is confronted with conflicting demands made by the parents, each time it has to justify the demands. The Court has not only to look at the issue on legalistic basis, in such matters human angles are relevant for deciding those issues. The Court then does not give emphasis on what the parties say, it has to exercise a jurisdiction which is aimed at the welfare of the minor. As observed recently in Mausami Moitra Ganguli case, the Court has to give due weightage to the child’s ordinary contentment, health, education, intellectual development and favorable surroundings, but over and above physical comforts, the moral and ethical values have also to be noted. They are equal if not more important than the others.
(Extracts from Jaswinder Singh and Another vs Surjit Singh, AIR 2010 (NOC) 425 (P. & H.))- CLAT PG - 2025
- Family Laws
- The Companies Act, 2013 does not deal with insolvency and bankruptcy when the companies are unable to pay their debts or the aspects relating to the revival and rehabilitation of the companies and their winding up if revival and rehabilitation is not possible. In principle, it cannot be doubted that the cases of revival or winding up of the company on the ground of insolvency and inability to pay debts are different from cases where companies are wound up under Section 271 of the Companies Act, 2013. The two situations are not identical. Under Section 271 of the Companies Act, 2013, even a running and financially sound company can also be wound up for the reasons in clauses (a) to (e). The reasons and grounds for winding up under Section 271 of the Companies Act, 2013 are vastly different from the reasons and grounds for the revival and rehabilitation scheme as envisaged under the IBC. The two enactments deal with two distinct situations and in our opinion, they cannot be equated when we examine whether there is discrimination or violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. For the revival and rehabilitation of the companies, certain sacrifices are required from all quarters, including the workmen. In case of insolvent companies, for the sake of survival and regeneration, everyone, including the secured creditors and the Central and State Government, are required to make sacrifices. The workmen also have a stake and benefit from the revival of the company, and therefore unless it is found that the sacrifices envisaged for the workmen, which certainly form a separate class, are onerous and burdensome so as to be manifestly unjust and arbitrary, we will not set aside the legislation,solely on the ground that some or marginal sacrifice is to be made by the workers. We would also reject the argument that to find out whether there was a violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India or whether the right to life under Article 21 Constitution of India was infringed, we must word by word examine the waterfall mechanism envisaged under the Companies Act, 2013, where the company is wound up in terms of grounds (a) to (e) of Section 271 of the Companies Act, 2013; and the rights of the workmen when the insolvent company is sought to be revived, rehabilitated or wound up under the Code. The grounds and situations in the context of the objective and purpose of the two enactments are entirely different.
(Extracted, with edits and revision, from the judgement in Moser Baer Karamchari Union Thr. President Mahesh Chand Sharma v. Union of India and Ors, 2023 SCC Online SC 547)- CLAT PG - 2025
- Company Law
- Ahmadi, J. (as he then was) speaking for himself and Punchhi, J., endorsed the recommendations in the following words-The time is ripe for taking stock of the working of the various Tribunals set up in the country after the insertion of Articles 323-A and 323-B in the Constitution. After the incorporation of these two articles, Acts have been enacted where-under tribunals have been constituted for dispensation of justice. Sufficient time has passed, and experience gained in these last few years for taking stock of the situation with a view to finding out if they have served the purpose and objectives for which they were constituted. Complaints have been heard in regard to the functioning of other tribunals as well and it is time that a body like the Law Commission of India has a comprehensive look-in with a view to suggesting measures for their improved functioning. That body can also suggest changes in the different statutes and evolve a model on the basis whereof tribunals may be constituted or reconstituted with a view to ensuring greater independence. An intensive and extensive study needs to be undertaken by the Law Commission in regard to the Constitution of tribunals under various statutes with a view to ensuring their independence so that the public confidence in such tribunals may increase and the quality of their performance may improve.
Before parting with the case, it is necessary to express our anguish over the ineffectiveness of the alternative mechanism devised for judicial review. The judicial review and remedy are the fundamental rights of the citizens. The dispensation of justice by the tribunal is much to be desired.
(Extracted with Edits from R.K. Jain v. Union of India, 1993 (4) SCC 119)- CLAT PG - 2025
- Constitutional Laws
- The elements of tort of negligence consist in – (a) duty of care; (b) duty is owed to the plaintiff; (c) the duty has been carelessly breached. Negligence does not entail liability unless the exacts a duty in the given circumstances to observe care. Duty is an obligation recognised by law to avoid conduct fraught with unreasonable risk of damage to others. The question whether duty exists in a particular situation involves determination of law. Hence, three ingredients are necessary for the existence of a duty of care: (i) foreseeability of the damage, (ii) proximity of relationship between the parties; and (iii) whether it is “just, fair and reasonable” that the law should impose a duty of care. In Caparo Industries Plc. v. Dickman, 1990 2AC 605, the court held that breach of duty is concerned with the standard of care that ought to have been adopted in the circumstances and whether the defendant’s conduct fell below that standard i.e., whether he was careless.
The court while quoting Rajkot Municipal Corporation v. Manjulben Jayantilal Nakum, 1997 stated that as a tort, negligence consists of legal duty to take care and breach of that duty. Duty determines whether the type of loss suffered by the plaintiff in the particular way in which to occurred can ever be actionable. The division of negligence into duty, breach and consequent damage is convenient for the purpose of exposition but it can be confusing because the issues will often overlap. The process of determining a breach of duty involves three steps: First, it is necessary to ascertain the qualities of the reasonable person, given the qualities attributed to him, would have taken in the circumstances. The factors that are permissible to take into account in this regard are prescribed by law, but the amount of care that the reasonable person would have taken is a question of fact. Thirdly, it must be determined whether the defendant took less care than the reasonable person would have taken.
(Extracts from Managing Director, Kerala Tourism Development Corporation Limited v. Deepti Singh and Ors., 2019 SC)- CLAT PG - 2025
- Law of Torts
- Article 14 of the Constitution stipulates that the State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of laws within the territory of India. Article 15(1) states that the State should not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them. Article 15(4) stipulates that nothing in Article 15 shall prevent the State from making any special provision for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes. Article 16 deals with equality of opportunity in matters of public employment. Clause (1) of Article 16 guarantees equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State. Clause (2) stipulates that no citizen shall be discriminated in or be ineligible for any employment or office under the State on the grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth, residence or any of them. Clause (4) of the provision states that nothing in Article 16 shall prevent the State from making any provision for the reservation of appointments or posts in favour of any backward class of citizens, which in the opinion of the State, is not adequately represented in the services under the State. The purpose of the equal opportunity principle in Article 16(1) and the reservation provision in Article 16(4) has emerged as a focal point of the jurisprudence on reservations in this Court. A discussion of the journey of the competing models of equality that the Court has espoused and their evolution over the course of the years is necessary to understand the constitutional vision on equality.
The impugned constitutional amendments by which Article 16 (4-A) and 16 (4-B) have been inserted, flow from Article 16 (4). They do not alter the structure of Article 16 (4). They retain the controlling factors or the compelling reasons which enables the State to provide for reservation keeping in mind the overall efficiency of the state administration under article 335. Sub-categorization within a class is a constitutional requirement to secure substantive equality in the event that there is a distinction between two sections of a class; Sub-classification must not lead to the exclusion of one of the categories in the class. A model that provides sufficient opportunities to all categories of the class must be adopted; and Sub-classification among a class must be on a reasonable basis.
Justice Bela Trivedi opined, in dissent, that presidential list of scheduled castes notified under Article 341 cannot be altered by the States. Any change to this list can only be made by a law enacted by Parliament. Sub-classification, according to her would amount to tampering with the Presidential List and undermine the object Article 341, which aims to eliminate political influence in the SC-ST List. Further, she emphasised the importance of adhering to the rule of plain and literal interpretation. She mentions that any preferential treatment for a sub-class within the presidential list would deprive other classes within the same category of their benefits. In the absence of executive or legislative power, state lack the competence to sub-classify castes and the benefit reserved for all SCs. Allowing states to do so would constitute a colourable exercise of power, which is impermissible under law. Justice Trivedi concluded by affirming that affirmative action by States must remain within constitutional boundaries and held that the law laid down in E.V. Chinnaiah case was correct and should be upheld.
(Extract from The State of Punjab & Ors. v. Davinder Singh & Ors. 2024 SC)- CLAT PG - 2025
- Constitutional Laws
View More Questions