The 2025 International Crimes Tribunal Amendments

The official text identifies the statute being amended as the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act, 1973, Act No. XIX of 1973. It states that Ordinance No. 04 of 2025 came into force immediately on 10 February 2025. Its amendments are organised under headings concerning sections 4, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 19. A careful reading should follow the Ordinance’s own section numbering and wording rather than collapsing its provisions into a broad description of all tribunal procedure.

In section 4(2), the Ordinance substituted “Act” for “Statute” in clause (e). It also substituted a clause (f) which stated, in respect of war of aggression as a crime against peace, that the section applied only to persons in a position effectively to exercise control over or direct the political or military action of a state. That wording is a specific 2025 amendment. Its interpretation in a live matter cannot be inferred merely from the historical Ordinance or the portal’s later repeal notice.

For section 9(3), the text replaced “six weeks” with “three weeks”. Under the amendment to section 11, it inserted a new subsection (9), allowing the Tribunal to order freezing or confiscation of an accused person’s assets for the stated purposes of preventing evasion or flight, realising compensation under section 20A and ensuring justice. The amendment to section 12 replaced “Reports” with “Complaints, reports”. Each is a discrete textual change and should be cited as such.

The Ordinance inserted a section 19(5) stating that the Tribunal would not be bound by technical rules of evidence and could adopt and apply expeditious and non-technical procedures. The official portal now says that the Ordinance was repealed by the International Crimes (Tribunals) (Amendment) Act, 2026, Act No. XIII of 2026. The historical 2025 text therefore cannot independently answer a current procedural question.

First fix the relevant date and issue. Next identify the exact provision and version of the source being cited. Finally keep the historical text separate from the current legal framework, including any current legislation, rules, notifications or other materials that may govern a live matter. The 2025 instrument can be useful evidence of a historic legislative position; it is not a substitute for a current-law review.

TRW & Co works across regulatory, disputes and institutional matters. Explore our practice areas, read further Perspectives, or contact the firm for advice on a particular matter.