ABSTRACT
Many have predicted that collective reparations would significantly shape the reparations regime of the International Criminal Court (ICC) (Ferstman 2002) and that the argument for the ICC to award such reparations is intuitively strong. Yet the degree to which collective reparations should be prioritized is not a matter of universal agreement among victims, let alone among international lawyers and policy makers. This chapter seeks to assess some of the challenges of making the case for collective reparations and, in the process, to provide a more principled defense of the need to prioritize collective reparations than has arguably been offered so far. In developing its argument, this chapter notes that great latitude was initially given to the court in terms of defining its principles of reparation 1 and that, although this latitude will gradually narrow, much still remains to be decided and much will depend on actual practices of reparation. The Trust Fund for Victims (TFV) will also have a key role and will, in all likelihood, be less hamstrung by restrictions, given its more flexible and administrative mode of operation even when acting as an implementer of court awards.
