B. To free from blame or accusation
This word is most often used in adjective form, Exculpatory.
Listen
to pronunciation of Exculpate and ExculpatoryLegal Definitions :
Exculpate - To free from blame or accusation. Black's Law Dictionary® Eighth Edition © 2004
Exculpatory Evidence - Evidence tending to establish a criminal defendant's innocence. Black's Law Dictionary® Eighth Edition © 2004
Exculpatory Clause - A contractual provision relieving a party from liability resulting from a negligent or wrongful act. Black's Law Dictionary® Eighth Edition © 2004
Recent Usage - "Recent legal developments at the International Criminal Court in The Hague suggest a behind-the-scenes battle is being fought between the prosecutor and judges in the pre-trial chamber for control over the investigation stage of proceedings.
The pre-trial chamber is dealing with the situation in the Democratic Republic of Congo, where the prosecutor alleges that serious human rights violations have been committed including unlawful killings and the illegal use of child soldiers.
The court decided earlier this year that six Congolese victims who applied to be part of the court’s processes could be represented in court. Through a tangle of legal documents available on the court’s website, it is clear that serious precedents are being set about victims’ roles within the court and those of the judges and the prosecution.
The prosecutor has not only challenged the court’s decision to allow victims to participate, but he has also called on the court’s appeals chambers to give him the right to appeal the judges’ decision – after the pre-trial chamber denied him that right – arguing that any decision has 'serious potential consequences for the fairness and efficiency of the court'.
The new role that victims will play at the court is one of the most interesting features of the newly created ICC, which only formally began operating in July 2002. Lawyers and human rights activists alike are watching intently to see how exactly victim participation will be allowed, and what its consequences will be for subsequent trials.
When the court decided in January this year that six victims of alleged crimes in the DRC could present their views during the investigation phase, the decision was greeted in some quarters with considerable rejoicing.
Sidiki Kaba, Director of the Federation International des Ligues des Droits de l’homme, FIDH, who represented the victims in their applications, said that it was 'an international legal first…a landmark victory' for the victims.
'For the first time the violation of the fundamental rights of victims, the harm they have suffered and their rights to defend their interests have been recognised by a court,' he continued.
The other previously established international criminal institutions, such as the ad hoc tribunals for Rwanda, former Yugoslavia and the Special Court for Sierra Leone, did not provide for victim participation. Intense lobbying from NGOs in the lead up to the creation of the court successfully highlighted the importance of victim participation in the justice process.
But the prosecution is deeply concerned about when victims can take part.
The prosecutor is objecting to the timing of victim participation in this instance. As investigations in the DRC are still underway, he argues there is no specific “case” with which the victims can identify themselves - although the court now has its first accused person in the DRC case in custody.
However, the applications for participation by victims were granted before the accused, Thomas Lubanga, was arrested for alleged recruitment of child soldiers.
Early victim participation, in the opinion of the prosecutor, would be detrimental to the efficiency of pre-trial investigations, because the prosecution would be required to consider and respond to their concerns, diverting resources from the investigation.
Further, he says, it could encourage 'tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands of individuals' to seek victim status.
One of the people closely involved in drafting elements of the court’s rules, David Donat Cattin, an expert in international criminal law, disagrees with the prosecutor’s argument.
He told IWPR that it would be a 'false stereotype' to believe that countless applicants will be seeking victim status. He pointed out that despite the ICC’s investigations and issuance of arrest warrants in connection with the situation in northern Uganda, victims of that conflict are yet to exercise participatory rights. Many victims are unaware of their rights or are unable to complete the application form without legal assistance, he says.
But legal observers in The Hague say this apparent lack of applications may not hold true in every case.Prosecutor Challenges Judges’ Decision at ICCBy permitting the participation, the court needs to consider the ways in which victims will contribute. The issues surrounding the participation of victims for the first time in the history of international criminal institutions are likely to be quite complex, many observers say. One such legal expert who did not want to be named has told IWPR that it will 'require a pragmatic approach' and that the question will become 'how are the judges going to control the victims?'
Cattin, though, counters that provided the rights of the accused are not in jeopardy, the participation of victims during the investigation phase can only assist the pre-trial chamber in its 'responsibility to discover the truth'.
The rules provide that all evidence gathered by the prosecution, whether incriminating or exculpatory, is obliged to be presented to the court. The views and experiences of victims provide an additional element that serves to better inform the investigation of crimes.
The pre-trial chamber appears to agree. It considers that 'the personal interests of victims are affected in general at the investigation stage, since the participation of victims at this stage can serve to clarify the facts, to punish the perpetrators of crimes and to request reparations for the harm suffered'. Prosecutor Challenges Judges’ Decision at ICC byAlison Butler, Independant legal observer based in the Hague.