skills/central-african-special-criminal-court-jeanne-sulzer/SKILL.md
Méthodologie « verification-first » pour la Cour Pénale Spéciale de Centrafrique (cour hybride, siège à Bangui). Toute citation est vérifiée (JusticeInfo, FIDH, HRW, legal-tools.org ; les sites officiels renvoient souvent une erreur 403). Couvre l'affaire Paoua, le « notamment » de l'article 3, et la complémentarité avec la CPI. Aide à la recherche, pas un conseil juridique. Fait partie de la bibliothèque open source « Skills for International Justice » — méthodologie : github.com/jeannesulzer/international-criminal-tribunals-skills
npx skillsauth add lawvable/awesome-legal-skills cps-rca-central-african-republic-jeanne-sulzerInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
This skill governs every output that touches the Cour Pénale Spéciale de la République Centrafricaine (CPS) — the Special Criminal Court in the Central African Republic. The discipline is simple and the reason for it is concrete: the CPS is the first fully hybrid court integrated into a national judicial system with jurisdiction over international crimes, and one of the only such courts operating in a country experiencing ongoing armed conflict. Its case numbers and procedural records are still developing; the Court conducts its principal work in French; and its complementarity relationship with the International Criminal Court (which has two situations in the CAR) is institutionally distinctive.
For any case-specific document — judgment, decision, indictment, filing, ordonnance d'instruction, requisitoire — verify before citing. "Verify" means web_fetch (or equivalent retrieval) to cpsrca.cf (the official CPS website) in the current conversation. Foundational texts in project knowledge (Loi organique 15.003, Loi 18.010 on the RPE, Code pénal centrafricain, Loi de coopération avec la CPI) are the exception; they may be cited directly. Nothing else.
In practice, cpsrca.cf is actively maintained (the CPS is operating with regular new audiences, decisions and press releases), but direct web_fetch to it — like several CPS-related sites (JusticeInfo, HRW) — often returns a 403 or partial content. Treat that as expected and work the fallback ladder (legal-tools.org, MINUSCA, JusticeInfo, RJDH, Radio Ndeke Luka) rather than as a dead end. Three levels:
Label the level where relevant. The CPS publishes summaries of judgments in addition to the full reasoned judgments; for substantive holdings, the arrêt motivé (full reasoned judgment) is authoritative, not the press release summary.
Step 0 — Identify the document. Before anything else, distinguish:
Step 1 — Plan citations. List every citation that will appear and the proposition each supports.
Step 2 — Verify with the fallback ladder. cpsrca.cf → JusticeInfo.net (Tier 2, for case summaries) → MINUSCA press releases (Tier 1 for institutional cooperation matters) → FIDH / Human Rights Watch monitoring reports (Tier 2) → ask the user.
Step 3 — Draft using verified material. Use the citation format in references/citation-format.md.
Step 4 — Self-audit. Each citation must trace to project knowledge or to a successful retrieval in this conversation.
references/foundational-texts.md on the debate over whether the list is illustrative rather than exhaustive.If not in project knowledge, retrieve from cpsrca.cf/documentations/textes-juridiques.
Tier 1 (authoritative):
minusca.unmissions.org) — institutional cooperation; some judgment announcementsTier 2 (secondary, must be labelled):
Never authoritative: Wikipedia, Grokipedia, social media, AI summaries.
CPS citations differ from international tribunal citations. Cases are referred to by name of the affair (not by case number in the international-tribunal sense) and chamber. The citation format follows French/Central African judicial conventions:
General form:
Procureur spécial contre [Defendant(s)], [name of the affair], Chambre [chamber], [Document type], [Date].
Worked examples:
See references/citation-format.md for the convention.
In either mode, Step 0 (identify the document and the affair) comes first. CPS proceedings move quickly between chambers (Chambre d'instruction → Chambre d'assises → Chambre d'appel) and the same defendants appear in multiple decisions across the proceedings — Step 0 prevents conflation.
The skill does not encode doctrine line by line. Starting points (each verified through the workflow before citing):
For each, verify through the workflow.
The CAR conflict (2003 to the present, with successive waves) involves Christian/animist (anti-balaka) and Muslim (Seleka, ex-Seleka, 3R, MPC, FPRC, UPC) armed groups, with extreme violence against civilians, sexual violence on a massive scale, displacement of about a fifth of the population, and ongoing fragility. The accused before the CPS are often members of armed groups still active or recently active. Witness protection is a major operational challenge. Victims and survivors are frequently in close proximity to perpetrators. Maintain factual precision, avoid sensationalism, use the language the Court itself uses (typically "groupe armé" rather than ethnic or religious shorthand), and never minimise. The Bangui Forum (2015) was a Central African national reconciliation process — referencing it as the political-institutional foundation of the CPS is appropriate.
references/authoritative-sources.md — source hierarchy and URLs (cpsrca.cf, JusticeInfo, MINUSCA, FIDH/OCDH)references/citation-format.md — citation conventions, named cases ("Affaire Paoua / Lemouna et Koundjili", "Affaire Ndélé 1", "Affaire Ndélé 1 contumace"), chamber designationsreferences/verification-workflow.md — fallback ladder, CPS-specific traps (national court vs international tribunal; CPS vs ICC; French as principal language; civil parties vs ICC victim participation; Affaire Paoua trial vs appeal sentence discrepancy; trial in absentia retrial right)references/foundational-texts.md — Loi organique 15.003, RPP (Loi 18.010), Code pénal centrafricain, MINUSCA cooperation MoUreferences/jurisprudence-map.md — topic-by-topic map of CPS holdings (small but growing as of 2026)examples/example-verification.md — verifying a Paoua case citation end-to-endexamples/example-audit.md — auditing user-supplied documents (Paoua trial vs appeal sentence; CPS misnomers)development
Perform language and framework specific security best-practice reviews and suggest improvements. Trigger only when the user explicitly requests security best practices guidance, a security review/report, or secure-by-default coding help. Trigger only for supported languages (python, javascript/typescript, go). Do not trigger for general code review, debugging, or non-security tasks.
development
Expert CMMC 2.0 (Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification) advisor for US defense contractors and subcontractors in the Defense Industrial Base (DIB). Use this skill whenever a user asks about CMMC 2.0, CMMC Level 1, Level 2, or Level 3, DoD cybersecurity compliance, NIST SP 800-171, CUI (Controlled Unclassified Information) protection, System Security Plan (SSP), Plan of Action & Milestones (POA&M), C3PAO assessments, DIBCAC audits, self-assessment, SPRS score, or any requirement under DFARS 252.204-7012 or 7021. Also trigger for: "CMMC gap analysis", "CMMC readiness", "FCI protection", "CUI scoping", "CMMC practices", "DoD contract cybersecurity", "defense supply chain security", or "prime contractor flow-down requirements".
tools
Build a client instruction schedule — a plain-English, Scott Schedule-style Word table that gathers a struggling client's evidence and instructions issue by issue, with a one-page covering note. Use whenever the user asks for a "client instruction schedule", "instruction schedule", "client questionnaire", "schedule of questions for the client", "get instructions from the client on the papers", or says the client is overwhelmed and needs the case broken into manageable questions. Also trigger when asked to turn case papers into a structured request for client input. Do NOT use for court-facing Scott Schedules, pleadings, witness statements, or advice letters — this skill produces a client-facing working document only. Output is always a .docx draft for solicitor review, never a final document.
tools
Turn complex legal analysis into clear, commercially useful client-facing advice. Use this whenever the user has dense legal material — drafting, internal analysis, counsel notes, research memos, pleadings, a case update, or correspondence — and wants it converted into something a client can actually understand and act on. Trigger on phrases like 'explain this to the client', 'put this in plain English', 'translate this for a non-lawyer', 'turn this into client-facing advice', 'make this client-ready', 'draft a client update', or when the user shares legal analysis and asks 'what does this mean for them'. Also trigger when the user wants a board summary, litigation risk update, or call script derived from legal material. The skill preserves legal nuance, uncertainty, and risk rather than oversimplifying — it makes advice usable, not just simpler.