General
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. It is an operationally independent office 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 inspections, evaluations and investigations at the request of Heads of Organs or the Bureau (ICC-ASP/12/Res.6). The IOM became fully operational in 2017. It has four full-time staff members; the Head of IOM, A Senior Evaluation Specialist, An Associate Investigator and a GS-OL staff member.
Evaluations
An evaluation is a rigorous, 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 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.
Inspections
An inspection is a verification exercise designed to determine whether a specific activity or series of activities have been undertaken or carried out to predetermined standards or conditions. It can be planned or ad hoc, and can be undertaken with or without prior notice. Its immediate focus is therefore on effectiveness – "is X being achieved by Z to standard Y?" for example.
An inspection differs from an investigation in that it is not an exercise associated with or seeking to prove any wrongdoing. It also differs from an evaluation in its scope and complexity, in that it is usually a shorter and more targeted exercise, although an inspection can be designed as a form of "mini-evaluation" to answer specific effectiveness questions, as above.
Inspections are undertaken by the IOM at the direct request of the Bureau or a Head of Organ. Heads of Organ may also request the IOM to provide technical assistance with internal inspection activities, such as helping with the planning of an inspection or acting as a witness to an internal inspection activity. The IOM cannot initiate an inspection without having received an authorised request to do so.
Investigations
The IOM reviews and if necessary undertakes investigations at its own discretion into any report of misconduct or retaliation that it receives concerning an elected official or member of Court personnel. Misconduct in the context of ICC staff members and other personnel is the non-compliance with a relevant ICC rule, regulation or other administrative instruction, including relevant standards of conduct. Misconduct in the context of elected officials and their specific functions is separately detailed in the Court's Rules of Procedure and Evidence.
An investigation is a legally based and analytical process designed to gather information in order to determine whether wrongdoing has occurred and, if so, the persons or entities responsible. It is an independent, evidence based process separate from any disciplinary decision-making process.
All Court personnel have a duty to cooperate with an IOM investigation. Investigations will not be carried out into disputes of a human resource management or contractual nature, or into reports where to do so might impede the independence of the Presidency or the Office of the Prosecutor. Investigation reports are issued to the relevant Head of Organ, where disciplinary responsibility lies.