A/HRC/34/62 2. Criminal justice 40. Victim participation in criminal justice procedures is a recent but not entirely new practice. Additional work is called for in streamlining and integrating lessons learned from criminal procedure at both the international and national levels. That it is important to integrate victims into criminal procedures both as a matter of protecting their rights and by virtue of the contributions they can make to the process is an idea that is taking hold. This is, of course, progress compared to the traditional notion, according to which victims have restricted roles in criminal processes, basically as witnesses and sources of testimony. International Criminal Court 41. Article 68 (3) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court contains a relatively vague provision, putting the concrete forms of victim participation at the discretion of the respective judges. 34 Given the breadth of the provision, different chambers have adopted different approaches to victim participation in Court proceedings. As a consequence, a clear and coherent approach to victim participation has thus far been lacking.35 42. Differences in approaches relate to the application process and the appointment of legal representatives, as well as to the scope of victim participation during proceedings and the modalities employed to give effect to these victims’ rights. 36 At the International Criminal Court victims can participate in a trial in the following ways: making opening and closing statements; consulting the record of proceedings; receiving notification of all public filings and those confidential filings that affect their personal interest; and tendering and examining evidence if the chamber feels it will assist in determining the truth. Moreover, legal representatives of victims can attend and participate in proceedings, as well as question witnesses, experts and the accused, subject to certain controls. 37 Thus, while participation does not reach the level of victims becoming a party to the proceedings at the Court, this is far better than locking victims into the role of witnesses and sources of testimony. 43. To manage the significant increase in the number of victims intending to participate in proceedings, some measures have been employed that allow for a more collective approach. 38 The move towards collective victim participation has raised questions as to whether treating victims as undifferentiated groups will further their interests. The collective approach assumes not only homogeneity of victimization, but also of the interests of victims seeking participation. Grouping victims into general categories, for example 34 35 36 37 38 See also rules 91, 102 and 104 of the Court’s rules of procedures and evidence. David Taylor, “Victim participation in transitional justice mechanisms: real power or empty ritual?”, Impunity Watch Discussion Paper, April 2014, p. 11. Victims’ Rights Working Group, “Making victim participation effective and meaningful”, June 2014, p. 2. For an overview, see Luke Moffett, “Meaningful and effective? Considering victims’ interests through participation at the International Criminal Court”, Criminal Law Forum, vol. 26, No. 2 (June 2015), pp. 255-289 By way of example, 129 victims were authorized to participate in the first trial at the International Criminal Court (the Lubanga case in the Democratic Republic of the Congo), represented by two teams of lawyers and the Office of the Public Counsel for Victims. In the subsequent Bemba trial, for crimes committed in the Central African Republic, over 5,000 victims participated, also in two groups. Another approach was taken in the Kenya cases, where a distinction was made between direct, individual participation and indirect participation through a common legal representative, with only the former requiring the participants to pass through the formal application process. 11