A/HRC/45/CRP.7 jurisdiction does not appear limited solely to military personnel. The Military Criminal Procedure Law contains few “fair trial” procedural rights, although it does provide that the guarantees of the (ordinary) criminal procedure law are to apply on matters not stipulated in the military law.591 In July 2020, it was announced that a first hearing had taken place in the Military Court of Ma’rib in the prosecution of Houthi leader Abdulmalik al-Houthi and some 174 defendants (military and civilian) for offences related to the coup against President Hadi.592 Military court proceedings tend to be less documented than the civilian system, and as such remain somewhat opaque. However, the Group of Experts considers it unlikely that the military courts would be immune from the challenges that beset their civilian counterparts. Furthermore, the Group considers that the use of military tribunals should be restricted to specifically military offences committed by military personnel, to the exclusion of serious human rights violations, which should be dealt with through civilian courts.593 391. On the basis of the above-described factors, the Group of Experts has concluded that there are significant challenges facing the Yemeni justice system (in either its civilian or military forms) in being able to properly address the large caseload relating to violations that have occurred and are continuing to occur during this conflict. Even if the conflict were to end soon, it would take a significant period of time to rebuild a unified justice system and to address pre-existing weaknesses. This has confirmed the Group of Experts’ opinion that further initiatives are needed by the international community to help bridge the accountability gap in Yemen. International Justice Initiatives 392. While the primary responsibility to address violations remains with parties to the conflict, the international community can and should take further initiatives to help bridge the accountability gap. Particular initiatives that the international community might take are outlined below. There are some actions that the international community could take immediately. Others may require further dialogue and a more conducive national environment. However, the Group of Experts considers it important that the dialogue be commenced at the earliest possible time. 1) Refer the Situation in Yemen to the International Criminal Court 393. Yemen is not a party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Nor have most members of the coalition supporting the Government of Yemen in the conflict ratified the Rome Statute. However, the Security Council could refer the situation in Yemen to the Prosecutor of the ICC.594 This would send a powerful signal that the violations 4 – Illegally detaining civilians or taking them as hostages or using them as human shields during military operations. 5 - The perfidious use of distinctive emblem of Yemeni Red Crescent or any other International protective emblems provided for in international conventions. 6 – Attacking civilians and persons incapable of fighting, looting and robbing properties with the judgment stipulating the return of such items or pay compensation in cases of obliteration. 7 – Attacking civilian installations whether public or private. 8 – Attacking demilitarized areas with no justification for such attacks” (unofficial translation). It is unclear the extent to which serious violations of international humanitarian law under customary international humanitarian law are covered by this Article. 591 Military Criminal Procedures Law, art. 109. 592 https://www.sabanew.net/viewstory/64074. 593 See Principle 29, Updated Set of Principles for the protection and promotion of human rights through action to combat Impunity, E.CN.4/2005/102/Add.1 (2005). See also the Draft Principles Governing the Administration of Justice Through Military Tribunals, E/CN.4/2006/58 (2006) (“Decaux Principles”); and the Report of the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, A/68/285, (2013), para. 34. See also See Federico Andreu-Guzman, Military jurisdiction and international law: Military courts and gross human rights violations, Vol. I, International Commission of Jurists, Geneva, 2004, p. 12. 594 Rome Statute, art. 13(b). Note that on at least one occasion the Security Council’s referral has integrated a significant retrospective element: referring the situation in Darfur “since 1 July 2002” in a resolution passed in March 2005 (Security Council resolution 1593, S/RES/1593, 13 March 2005, para. 1). 99