The inclusion of reparations in the Rome Statute is an important advance in international criminal justice, in comparison to past tribunals.1 With the numerous developments in national, international, and human rights law,reparations for international crimes based on state responsibility have become a fundamental component of redressing such serious crimes. However, unlike its international and national counterparts, the Court’s regime is based on individual criminal responsibility. Accordingly, threparations regime of the ICC is sui generis. Moreover, the Pre-Trial Chamber I has declared that reparations are ‘not only one of the Statute’sunique features. It is also a key feature . . . the success of the Court is, to some extent, linked to the success of its reparation system. This chapter builds on the theoretical discussion in Chapter 1 by examining whether the Rome Statute’s provisions on reparations can delivervictim-centred justice. This can be contrasted to victim- orientated justice discussed in the previous chapter on the criminal proceedings of the ICC, which has to be balanced with other interests in order to determine justice. This chapter submits that even though the reparation regime ofthe ICC was established to provide justice to victims, its structural limitations of being connected with the criminal trial will restrict its effectivenessin remedying victims’ harm. Accordingly, the Court cannot by itself sufficiently redress the harm suffered by victims with reparations. Instead, theICC requires the support of the Trust Fund and State Parties to assist its reparations regime.