“Hunger for Justice:” A Tale of Three Cities

 

Berlin, Germany—September/October 2007

It is the most indescribable feeling to walk on the same cobble-stoned streets where soldiers once marched to the cry of Heil Hitler! over sixty years ago as you make your way to the Berlin Parliament—the quietly grand and beautiful Abgeordnetenaus—to participate in a conference dedicated to the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) fight against impunity for the world’s worst crimes. It is nothing short of marveling awe as you recall the recent history of today’s breathtakingly diverse, bold, and beautiful Berlin—a city once torn in two with a divisive, glaring Wall separating East and West after World War II. It is simply astounding to see this city—once the headquarters of the Nazi government responsible for the calculated mass slaughter of millions—now the proud and deserving second home of international justice (IJ). For those of you who asked me why the conference on the ICC’s challenges and successes was being held in Berlin (as opposed to IJ’s first home—The Hague), I can only say that Germany’s capital city is living proof of the advancement of international law and justice.

And where are we—Americans—on the advancement of IJ? Has the U.S. shifted its reactionary and counterproductive policy toward a now adolescent ICC? That was, essentially, the topic of my speech at the Berlin Conference. Imagine trying to explain to a hall full of international organizations, civil society leaders, and German officials why the U.S. government, once responsible for the Nuremberg Trials prosecuting Nazis for their crimes, is now a challenge to a Court that is the natural and necessary evolution of Nuremberg. Not a simple task. Far less simple with only twelve minutes at the podium.

As promised, I emailed a number of you snippets of my speech. I will not regurgitate it here—I have made my position and supporting analysis of whether the U.S. is in fact shifting its policy toward the ICC clear in previous blog entries. Sufficed to say that my goal in Berlin surpassed a simple explanation of U.S. foreign policy. I was far more eager to articulate a fundamental truth that seldom makes it past the alienating foreign policies our government enforces in the IJ world: when it comes to the American public, there is majority support for the ICC. There is recognition of our moral backsliding, in particular in the years following September 11, 2001. And above all else, in the moving and eloquent words of ICC Judge Hans Peter Kaul on the last day of the Berlin Conference, there is a hunger for justice.

As I said in Berlin, I believe the American people are not only passionate but equally compassionate. We too are showing a ferocious appetite for peace, justice, and accountability. Engage us on the crises Darfur or Northern Uganda and you will experience our resolve and compassion. Galvanize us through targeted advocacy and you see our empathy and action. Challenge us and behold a people who are not willing to give up on their country’s once proud commitment to the rule of law. After trekking through the political analysis, I wanted the audience to know that if our current Administration has thus far failed to grasp the common goals and values that the United States has historically shared with those of the ICC, this has been far less the case with the American people, and increasingly, members of the 110th Congress who represent them.

Washington, D.C.—November 2007

Fall is by far the most beautiful season in Washington, D.C. One need only take in the rich colors of falling leaves amidst the dizzying aesthetic juxtaposition of national monuments, quiet, rowhouse-lined streets, a bustling downtown, and an ever calm Potomac River to see why this short lived season beats a universally admired, cherry blossom-adorned spring.

Never has there been a more exciting fall in D.C. for an IJ advocate. In Berlin I had announced to the audience that the 110th Congress was on fire. Upon my return to D.C., I was happy to see I had not overstated the case to my European peers. All year we have seen Congressional leaders push for a number of bills including but not limited to the Child Soldier Prevention Act, the Darfur Accountability and Divestment Act, and the Genocide Accountbility Act; introduce and co-sponsor a resolution calling for the recognition of the Armenian Genocide (more on this soon); and hold a slew of Congressional hearings tackling questions such as, why are such a large number of war criminals (that’s right—war criminals) living and prospering in the U.S.? (my guess: palm trees + no domestic laws to end impunity = great place to retire).

Regardless of which side of the Atlantic we’re on, it looks like this fall the prevailing trend is a renewed call to fight the good fight: the fight against impunity. In the equally eloquent words of Senator Dick Durbin who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Human Rights and the Law Subcommittee,

“Repressive regimes that violate human rights create fertile breeding grounds for suffering, terrorism, war, and instability. In our time, the world is a much smaller place, and the social ills caused by human rights abuses know no borders. We will never be truly secure as long as fundamental human rights are not respected.”

New York, New York—December 2007

Comprised of one delegation from each country that has joined the Court, the Assembly of States Parties (ASP) currently boasts 105 ICC member states and serves as the Court’s oversight body. Since the Court’s inception in 2002, the annual ASP meeting has been held in The Hague, Netherlands, where the Court sits. This year it’s being held in right here in the U.S., at the United Nations (U.N.) in another seminal IJ city: New York. For the next two weeks, my IJ colleagues and I will join government delegates from over 150 countries to participate in an ambitious agenda adopted by this 6th ASP. From the election of three new judges to kick-starting the work of the Trust Fund for Victims, preparing for the highly anticipated Review Conference to take place in 2009, and fittingly, addressing US-ICC relations, this ASP embodies the urgent energy we all feel as the Court grows, Americans prepare to vote, and the world waits to welcome a new year with the greatest promise of justice yet.

Before the holiday rush sets in and dinner parties take precedence over political will, I hope you take a moment and reflect on the significance of this past year. With the imminent arrival of 2008, we will once again have the opportunity to demand our voices be heard on Capitol Hill and at the White House. If we are sincere in our efforts to end the genocide in Darfur—if we are genuine in our outrage when we see children with amputated limbs in war-torn Congo—if we truly believe that the U.S. must contribute to future IJ successes, not challenges, then we need to ensure that this hunger for justice we feel does not fall to the wayside amidst the frenzy of elections and party politics next year. Many of the presidential candidates have made positive and promising references to justice, accountability, and the ICC—let’s make sure these references turn into an unwavering resolution to reunite us with the rest of the world on a cause that we should have been championing all along.

I wish you all a safe, peaceful, and beautiful fall.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And he won’t be the last…

Given the nature, magnitude, and duration of the violence, the twenty-year conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has surpassed even the Darfur genocide as the worst humanitarian crisis in the world. But for many of the war-wary and displaced people of the DRC, justice, not violence, was the order of the day yesterday.

Acting under a sealed warrant issued back in July by the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) Pre-Trial Chamber I, the DRC government arrested and transferred Congolese rebel fighter Germain Katanga to the Court to face nine counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity in accordance with the Court’s Rome Statute. Mr. Katanga is the alleged leader of the Force de Resistance Patriotique en Ituri (Patriotic Resistance Force in Ituri, FRPI), a rebel militia group accused of committing massacres and other human rights violations in Eastern DRC’s war-ravaged Ituri region. Specifically, the charges against Mr. Katanga include three counts of crimes against humanity: murder, inhumane acts, and sexual slavery, and six counts of war crimes: willful killing, cruel or inhumane treatment, using children under 15 years of age to participate actively in hostilities, sexual slavery, intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population, and pillaging.

Yet after two decades of a brutal conflict that has been called the “African World War,” it seems like impunity is losing its grasp on the DRC—Mr. Katanga is the second suspect from the DRC to be handed over to the ICC in less than two years. The first Congolese suspect is a name you should be familiar with—Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, leader of the Union des Patriotes Congolais (Union of Congolese Patriots), who was the ICC’s first ever suspect in custody and is accused of conscripting child soldiers. His trial is set to start in early 2008.

Mr. Katanga and Mr. Lubanga Dyilo have much in common: both are violent militia commanders with the blood of innocent Congolese men, women, and children on their hands, knives, and machetes. But don’t expect them to become friends: the two men are from rival militia groups—a detail not lost on many who have criticized the ICC for failing to investigate other DRC militia leaders aside from Mr. Lubanga Dyilo, particularly those committing unspeakable atrocities in the Ituri region.

Undoubtedly, the ICC’s DRC investigation still has a long way to go—notwithstanding the gravity of conscripting child soldiers, the ICC faced criticism this past January for not charging Mr. Lubanga Dyilo with additional crimes. Some critics also argued that given the high number of violent militia factions in the DRC, only charging and trying one leader of one faction makes the Court seem biased and politicized.

This was, of course, before Mr. Katanga’s arrest and transfer to the Hague—ICC critics and advocates alike cannot deny that yesterday’s events mark a new chapter in the progress and future success of the five-year old ICC. The Court’s Chief Prosecutor, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, has made it very clear that he is far from finished with investigating the brutal impunity that has led experts to call the DRC conflict one of the worst in the last 100 years—Mr. Moreno-Ocampo reiterated what his office has said from the beginning of the investigation: “When Thomas Lubanga Dyilo was surrendered to the Court we said, ‘This is our first case in the DRC, not the last.’ Today a second person from the DRC is in custody, and he will not be the last one to face justice in the ICC. We are selecting a third case…the ICC is at work in the DRC.” It seems Mr. Lubanga Dyilo and Mr. Katanga can expect more company in The Hague.

Additional Resources:

• Official ICC Press Release on Germain Katanga’s arrest and transfer to ICC
• Pre-Trial Chamber I’s arrest warrant decision for Germain Katanga
• ICC decision scheduling the first appearance of Germain Katanga befor the Court
• Human Rights Watch Press Release on Germain Katanga’s arrest and transfer to ICC
• News stories about Germain Katanga’s arrest on IJ Wire

Goose Bumps

We seem to hear the word “prosecutor” all the time here in the U.S. and our connotation of the word is seldom a positive one. Maybe it’s because names like Johnny Cochran, Kenneth Starr, and Mike Nifong end up on the six o’clock news on a far too frequent basis. But the often controversial reputations of individual prosecutors here in the States aside, being in charge of “putting the bad guys away” is not exactly easy. It’s even more challenging if, say, you’re a prosecutor in your early twenties and your very first case involves trying a group of war criminals for genocide. Or if you can’t picture that, imagine you know who the bad guys are, you have evidence of their crimes, and witnesses are eager to testify, but you don’t have a police force to actually arrest them. That would be like a Law and Order episode ending with the characteristically somber investigators walking away from the suspects they tried so hard to nab because the NYPD doesn’t answer to them. Tough job indeed.

Henry T. King Jr. is both an extraordinary and ordinary American.  He is extraordinary in that at 88 years of age, he is still the embodiment of the kind of fierce idealism that keeps us in humbling awe and admiration. And yet Mr. King is also incredibly ordinary—he is like every American who believes that rule of law, justice, and accountability are not just side issues that come and go with terms in office, but rather a core set of values upon which this country was built. Mr. King reminds all of us that sixty two years after the Nuremberg Trials, Americans still champion justice and accountability. This remarkable man is one of three surviving prosecutors who made history by trying Nazi criminals for the horrors of the Holocaust during World War II. That should get the hair on the back of your neck raised. Get ready for the rest of you.

Luis Moreno-Ocampo must wonder why a country that can boast of its Nuremberg legacy has taken such a bizarre, hyper-sensitive position vis-à-vis the International Criminal Court (ICC), where he’s employed as the Chief Prosecutor. A native Argentinean and the ICC’s first Prosecutor, Mr. Moreno-Ocampo has spent the last five years building cases against the leaders of the Lord’s Resistance Army in Northern Uganda, rebel warlord Thomas Lubanga Dyilo of the Democratic Republic of Congo, and two Sudanese suspects accused of perpetuating the Darfur genocide.

And Mr. Moreno-Ocampo remembers, like many international justice (IJ) advocates, a different (yet equally political) era where the U.S. didn’t make undermining the existence and functioning of the first ever international criminal court an actual foreign policy objective. But Mr. Moreno-Ocampo’s job is particularly hard—not because it’s a little difficult to gather evidence and interview survivors in four different countries. Or because the ICC is still young and there is too much to do with too little time, money, and staff to do it (notwithstanding their laudable efforts). No, Mr. Moreno-Ocampo faces a far greater challenge that would probably make most prosecutors retire to private practice: he doesn’t have a police force to execute the arrest warrants he issues.

What do I mean, you ask? Put simply, when the ICC’s treaty was negotiated back in 1998, the majority of countries (the U.S. included) decided that giving the ICC a police force would be conceding too much power. Instead, the ICC relies on member states and the international community at large to carry out arrest warrants of the world’s worst criminals. What happens if countries don’t step up or are committing the atrocities themselves? Well, then you get the sickening story of Ahmad Harun, the Sudanese Minister (of Humanitarian Affairs!), strolling through the same Darfur villages that he orders burned and their inhabitants raped, tortured, and killed.

Being an international justice nerd, I always wondered what it would be like if the world’s prosecutors—past and present—came together and said enough. Enough to genocide. Enough to pre-adolescent kids being forced to fight on the front lines as child soldiers. Enough to rampant sexual violence against women in conflict. And enough to time ticking as we all watch and do nothing. This past week, nine remarkable men with the toughest job in the IJ world did just that—they gathered at the First Chautauqua Conference in New York and issued the Chautauqua Declaration. So as to ensure my promise of goose bumps, I’ve taken the liberty of pasting (and bolding) the Declaration below (courtesy of the American Society of International Law(ASIL)).

The Assembled International Prosecutors, both Past and Present

Celebrating the 100th anniversary of the Hague Rules of 1907;

Remembering the legacy of our Nuremberg colleagues;

Recalling the principles of Nuremberg;

Noting the importance of the rule of law in facing down impunity;

Understanding the need for a family of nations united for peace;

Appreciating that the legal tools are now in place to prosecute those who bear the greatest responsibility;

Aware of the need to seek justice efficiently and effectively;

Noting that international humanitarian law still remains the cornerstone to controlling international and internal armed conflict;

Recognizing that both truth and justice create sustainable peace;

Highlighting that justice is not an impediment to peace, but in fact is its most certain guarantor;

Now do solemnly declare to the world  

That ending impunity by perpetrators of crimes of concern to the international community is a necessary part of preventing the recurrence of atrocities.  

That it is no longer about whether individuals agree or disagree with the pursuit of justice in political, moral or practical terms; now, it is the law.

That the challenge for States and for the international community is to fulfill the promise of the law they created; to ensure the arrest and surrender of individuals sought; and in that light;

That Ratko Mladic, Radovan Karadzic, Felician Kabuga, Joseph Kony, leader of the Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda, Ahmed Harun,  the Sudanese Minister who organized the system of persecution and attacks against the civilians in Darfur, and all others not listed here and are sought by international justice, be arrested and  surrendered to the appropriate court, tribunal or chamber;

That States are reminded of the words of Martin Luther King Jr. that “the arc of moral justice is long but it bends towards justice.”

That the world community take note of the words of Justice Robert H. Jackson at Nuremberg: “We are able to do away with domestic tyranny and violence and aggression by those in power against the rights of their own people only when we make all men answerable to the law.”

You’d have to be made out of stone not to feel the singular weight of this Declaration. It is the culmination of a century of international justice norms, mechanisms, and advocates. It captures the voices of three generations of hope, idealism, and an unwavering commitment to making “Never Again” a reality. True, the Declaration won’t make the Ahmad Haruns of the world appear in a cell in The Hague tomorrow. But something tells me if these nine men have anything to do with it, judgment day for the world’s most violent war criminals is a lot sooner than we think.  

But as remarkable and committed as the prosecutors are, they alone cannot fight and win against the kind of evil that leaves millions of innocent civilians in conflict displaced, starving, or dead. Thousands of miles away from the ICC and other international tribunals, we have to do our part too—it’s September and school isn’t the only thing back in session. The U.S. Congress will resume its legislative activities after the Labor Day weekend, and this fall is bound to be a flurry of activity on Capitol Hill. To that end, here are two quick and easy things you can do to stay informed, push for more constructive IJ policies, and make sure your voice is heard in D.C.:

1. Check out the website(s) of your presidential candidate(s) of choice and see if they support the ICC and core IJ laws such as the Geneva Conventions. If they don’t, send them an email—now is the time to get their attention on issues that matter.

2. Call your Representatives in the House and ask them to support the passage of the Genocide Accountability Act of 2007—a bill that will (finally) allow the U.S. to prosecute those who have committed genocide in other countries and are currently on U.S. soil. Click here for Senator Durbin’s summary of the Act and its implications if passed.

Some of these prosecutors are in their eighties. Some of them have stared into the eyes of the world’s most brutal war criminals. All of them still fight for a world free of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. So should we.

For news articles on the Chautauqua Conference and Declaration as well as Mr. King’s criticism of counterproductive U.S. policies on key IJ issues, check out IJ Wire.

Hot off the Press

So much is happening in the world of IJ—are you up to speed on breaking IJ News? That’s what I thought. Check out my IJ Wire (conveniently located to your immediate right under “Pages”) for the latest news on a new Darfur film, Cambodia’s latest victory in the fight against impunity, the much-anticipated Victims Trust Fund at the ICC, new findings of sexual atrocities in the Democratic Republic of Congo, and much more.

You read, I write, we change. More soon.

Move over, Gucci, here comes International Justice

When we think of Los Angeles and its inhabitants, many words come to mind. Granted most of them are based on stereotypes, but let’s face it: L.A. must be the only city in the country where grocery shopping requires Gucci loafers in addition to your Safeway Club Card. But stereotype no more—as of July 24, L.A. must now be associated with two new words: International Justice.

I wrote my first blog entry about International Justice (IJ) Day which is commemorated around the world each year on July 17. This day not only marks the anniversary of the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) founding treaty, the Rome Statute, it also reaffirms the global commitment to making sure atrocities like those raging in Darfur, Sudan don’t go unpunished.

Last week the 15 representatives of the Los Angeles City Council passed a resolution declaring July 17, 2007 IJ Day. I heard through the IJ grapevine that the ICC Alliance (ICCA) of Southern California was instrumental in getting IJ Day on the Council’s Agenda and securing its ultimate adoption. I gave a talk last year to the very dedicated, genuine folks who make up the ICCA, and I must say, in a city that is often accused of existing in a bubble, the ICCA has done a tremendous job of raising awareness and advocating for the ICC.

But L.A. wasn’t the only city to support the cause of international justice and the ICC this month. Thanks to local activism and the tireless efforts of Amnesty International, Columbus, OH, New Haven, CT, New York, NY, Peoria, AZ, Portland, OR, and Terre Haute, IN all issued proclamations declaring July 17 International Justice Day. Here’s an excerpt from the Peoria proclamation (goosebumps warning in full effect):

“Whereas, during this century millions of children, women and men have been victims of unimaginable atrocities that deeply shock the conscience of humanity, and

Whereas, grave crimes such as genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes threaten the peace, security and well-being of the world, and

Whereas, those responsible for such crimes have largely gone unpunished throughout history, and

Whereas, efforts to hold those responsible for such crimes will contribute to prevention and serve as a catalyst for ending the armed conflicts in which such crimes are often committed, and [...]

Whereas, the ICC is today investigating those responsible for atrocities perpetrated in Northern Uganda, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Central African Republic, and Darfur, Sudan, which together represent some of the most protracted, violent conflicts in the world, and,

Now, Therefore, I, Bob Barrett, Mayor of the City of Peoria, do hereby proclaim July 17, 2007 as International Justice Day in the City of Peoria and urge residents to recognize the important contribution of the International Criminal Court to the advancement of justice, peace and security throughout the world.“

If you’re not from L.A. or any of the other six U.S. cities that have embraced IJ Day, there’s no need to relocate—you have 352 days to work with your local community leaders, advocates, and representatives to make sure your city adopts IJ Day in 2008. Next year marks the 10th anniversary of IJ Day. Seven cities have paved the way. It’s time for the rest of us chip in and show unwavering support for laws, norms, and mechanisms like the ICC that work to prevent and punish the world’s worst crimes. It’s time to show the international community that justice and accountability are American values, too.

Girl, Interrupted

Put the movie and Wynona Ryder out of your head for a moment and try to remember what your life was like as a teenager here in the U.S…I can’t speak for the boys, but for us girls, it often consisted of loud music, shopping malls, fast food, and daily commiseration with BFFs (best friends forever) as to the generally sad state of adolescence.

I met someone in the course of my ICC advocacy this past spring—a fifteen year-old girl from an eastern village in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), in Central Africa. For security and privacy reasons, I’ll call her Shuku. She was vibrant and beautiful, with a noticeable grace and maturity that far exceeded her age. I don’t think Shuku has seen “Girl, Interrupted,” but if she had, I wonder what she would think of the challenges that the young American girls in that movie faced. I think she would laugh her contagious laugh and tell me something in French (her second language) that would remind me why she’s like no other girl I’ve met. Shuku’s experiences as a teenager haven’t consisted of shopping malls and fast food. Shuku is a former girl soldier.

The DRC is the third largest country in the continent of Africa. It shares its borders with Central African Republic (CAR), Sudan, Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, Tanzania, Zambia, Angola, and the Republic of the Congo (also known as Congo Brazzaville). The International Criminal Court (ICC) is currently investigating mass atrocities in three of these neighboring countries(Sudan, Uganda, and the Central African Republic). The ongoing violence in the DRC is also the subject of an ICC investigation; the trial of Congolese rebel leader Thomas Lubanga Dyilo is currently underway in The Hague. The charges? The use and recruitment of child soldiers.

The DRC gained its independence from Belgium in 1964. The years following independence were not free of violence. But the past twelve years have been particularly devastating for the people of the DRC. Since 1996 the DRC has been brutalized by two wars. The First Congo War took place from 1996 to 1997, when then President Mobutu Sese Seko was overthrown. The Second Congo War erupted in 1998 and “ended” in 2003 when the Transitional Goverment took over (I put ended in quotes because violence continues to break out in the DRC, particularly in the East). The Second Congo War was one of the deadliest in modern African history and has been called the “African World War.” The War engulfed eight different African countries and over 20 armed rebel groups. Nearly 4 million people died from violence, starvation, and disease. Millions more have been displaced and have set record (forced) migration numbers. The DRC is home to the largest United Nations peacekeeping mission in the world.

The DRC situation was the ICC’s first investigation and was initiated at the request of the DRC government in 2004. On January 29th of this year, Mr. Lubanga Dyilo was charged with three counts of enlisting, forcibly recruiting, and sending child soldiers into combat, all war crimes under the ICC’s Rome Statute. Some ICC opponents and proponents alike have criticized the Court for charging Mr. Lubanga Dyilo, the founder and leader of the rebel group Union de Patriotes Congolais (UPC), only with charges relating to child soldiers. Some rights activists argue (correctly) that these charges do not cover rape and other forms of sexual violence to which girl soldiers in particular have been subjected. The ICC can definitely do more to include gender-based crimes in charges against individuals like Mr. Lubanga Dyilo. Still, I’m compelled to point out that the lack of additional charges against Mr. Lubanga Dyilo in no way detracts from the singular heinousness of forcing an eleven year-old to fight, machete in hand, on the front lines.

I’m also encouraged by the fact that since the beginning of the case, the Court’s Chief Prosecutor, Mr. Luis Moreno-Ocampo, has made clear that the investigation in the DRC is ongoing and Mr. Lubanga Dyilo will likely not be the last suspect to face charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity in the DRC case (check out my IJ Wire for the latest story on forthcoming DRC indictments).

I am proud to say that the ICC is not alone in tackling the use of child soldiers in armed conflict. On April 19^th, Senator Richard Durbin (D-Il) introduced a Bill called the Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2007. The Bill has 19 Co-sponsors—both Democrat and Republican—and aims to limit U.S. military aid and training to governments that use children in hostilities. The week after the Bill was introduced, the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law, which Senator Durbin chairs, addressed the issue of child soldiers and heard testimony from leading child rights groups. The Human Rights and the Law Subcommittee has shown commendable leadership on the issue of child soldiers. Now it’s our turn. Here are three things you can do in less than five minutes that will send a clear message: Americans will not stand for the use of children in armed conflict, anywhere.

1. Check out www.ajedika.org. AJEDI-Ka is a DRC-based non-profit organization that is dedicated to demobilizing and reintegrating child soldiers in DRC and neighboring countries. Make sure to click on the clip of the documentary, “Duty to Protect: Justice for Child Soldiers in the DRC” (produced by AJEDI-Ka Executive Director and filmmaker Bukeni Beck).

2. Find your Senators’ phone numbers at www.senate.gov and tell them to support the Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2007. It’s time we use our foreign aid leverage in a positive way. Click here for the latest status of the Bill.

3. Educate yourself: set up a Google News Alert with the keywords “child soldiers” and get the latest news and analysis from sources like Human Rights Watch, World Vision, and the Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers.

This blog is dedicated to Shuku, whose grace and bravery continues to humble an inspire me. Merci Beaucoup, Shuku.