Independent Oversight Mechanism (IOM)

Major Programme V11-5, the Independent Oversight Mechanism (IOM) was established by the Assembly at its eighth session in accordance with article 112, paragraph 4, of the Rome Statute. The IOM became operational in 2017. It is an operationally independent office with its head reporting to the President of the Assembly of States Parties.

The purpose of the IOM is to provide meaningful oversight of the Court through its mandate to conduct internal Court inspections, evaluations and investigations at the request of the Bureau or the Assembly. The IOM mandate also allows it to undertake, subject to available resources, evaluations and inspections at the direct request of a Head of Organ as well as to provide guidance and support to assist with internal evaluation and inspection oversight activities.

An evaluation is a systematic and objective assessment of the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability of a project or programme, based upon agreed criteria and benchmarks. It is a forward-looking exercise that analyses the achievement of both expected and unexpected results and is likely to obtain most use if undertaken in participation with stakeholders. It is designed to assess what works and what does not and why and therefore contributes to organisational learning and accountability. It is distinct from internal or external audit and other oversight functions. Evaluations should provide credible, useful and evidence-based information to the decision-makers and other relevant stakeholders. Evaluations are undertaken by the IOM at the direct request of the Assembly or by a Head of Organ. A Head of Organ may also request the IOM to provide technical assistance or guidance (only) with internal evaluation activities undertaken by the relevant organ. The IOM cannot initiate an evaluation without having received an authorised request to do so.

An investigation is a systematic fact-finding exercise in order to determine whether a complaint alleging misconduct or fraud can be evidenced, and to inform the relevant decision making party of those facts. The IOM investigation mandate is strictly limited to matters of compliance with Court rules and regulations, including the Court's Rules of Procedure and Evidence, by personnel and staff members of the Court, including elected officials. Non-compliance is deemed to be misconduct. Fraud is any act or omission, including any misrepresentation that knowingly misleads, or attempts to mislead, a party in order to obtain any financial or other benefit, to cause a loss or to avoid any obligation.

In support of its investigation mandate the IOM also assists the Court in the development, communication and implementation of its ethical values and guidance strategy and training programmes.

The IOM plays an important part in the Court's Whistleblowing and Whistleblower Protection Policy and the ICC Anti-Fraud Policy. Whistleblowers are individuals who for the benefit of the ICC fulfil their responsibility by reporting, in good faith, suspected misconduct or by cooperating with duly authorised fact finding activities such as audits, evaluations and investigations. The ICC has zero tolerance for retaliation and whistleblowers and reporters of misconduct are entitled to preventative and protective measures against retaliation.

Reports of suspected misconduct or fraud concerning Court personnel or elected officials should be communicated via the confidential IOM email address below, or in writing and under confidential cover to the Head of the IOM for review and where relevant subsequent investigation.

Further information on any of the above can be obtained from the IOM ([email protected]) or by following the links below.