Good evening your honors, my name is Igor Strobilius and on
behalf of the Prosecution, I am here to demonstrate that Mr. Pozo
shall be convicted by this Court under art. 25 3 d for the crime against humanity of sexual slavery. Therefore, for the next 5 minutes I will show that the specific elements of this crime are present.
It’s important to note that this Court in the Conf of charges of
Katanga and Ngiudjo as well as the SCSL in Taylor have regarded sexual enslavement as a particular form of enslavement, being its actus reus composed of two elements: first, the exercise of any of the powers of ownership over a person or a similar imposition of deprivation of liberty and, second, that the enslavement involved sexual acts. In relation to the first element, central to the offense of enslavement, the drafters of the EC adopted the correct view that enslavement has many different forms, being one of them when girls and women are forced into marriage. Its was also this view that was held in Katanga, where the accused had its charges confirmed because women were forced to become “wives” of members of the group. Furthermore, the Supplementary convention on the abolition of slavery, to which the EC makes reference, establishes that it does not matter whether there was consent of the parents, because after all your honors we, who are distant from that reality, shall not forget that the children and the women are the ones abused every day, they are the one who suffer directly from this situation. And if the protected legal interest of this crime is the life of these child, this Court shall deem irrelevant whether there was or was not consent and whether this was a cultural practice. Slavery can under no circumstance be considered a cultural practice, in this situation the parents were exchanging girls for protection, exchanging humans for a service, isn’t that typical of slavery your honors? In this sense, the UN Special report on child marriage of 2014, as well as the report on servile marriage and on contemporaneous forms of slavery, have associated forced child marriage with slavery, emphasizing the terrible psychological and physical harms caused to the children. In the present situations, girls of 12 years old were being enslaved by Gruca, and they had absolutely no choice, they had to serve theirs “husband”, they had to have sexual intercourse, they even had to help gruca’s actions. Slavery is of the most horrendous practices, it’s to treat a person as an object, it’s to completely disregard their humanity, this cannot be considered acceptable under any reason. If the Court is not satisfied with that your honors, in Kunarac the trial chamber of the ICTY, in a decision that was further used by the SCSL in ARFC and RUF judgment as well as by this court in Ntaganda, has established that the consent of the victim is either irrelevant or impossible because in some circumstances such as the present one the victim is in a vulnerable position, under psychological oppression and other forms of coercion. In our case your honors, there was an armed group that almost governed an entire state, known for thousands of killings, is there any doubt of the fear of violence that they imposed on the population? Is there any reasonable doubt that these girls, and probably their parents, didn’t have the capability to say “no”? Because, even if they could that wouldn’t matter for Gruca, as stated in para.33. Even if they tried to escape later that would result in their death, as happened with almost 1200 women. The only decision that these girls could take was whether to be killed or to be sexual enslaved. In regard to the second element, your honors para. 33 of the case establishes that they had the obligation to keep sexual intercourse with members of the group, their will didn’t matter. Sufficing therefore such element. At last your honors, I would like to highlight that these children were deprived of the basic civil rights of free men; they were deprived of the right to move freely or to choose their place of residence; to live in a household with their families; to be educated, to go to school; to freely marry; to visit public places of their own choosing, to have autonomy. And in the words of the Milch case before the US military tribunal more than 60 years ago, those are sign-marks of slavery. It’s in light of that and of the horrendous nature of this long- standing crime, that this Prosecution submits that Mr.Pozo shall be considered guilty by this court of the crime of sexual slavery.