Nipate
Forum => Kenya Discussion => Topic started by: mya88 on November 13, 2014, 05:21:54 PM
-
THE stage is set for a showdown between states critical of the ICC and the Court’s backers as Kenya has tabled a detailed account of what it terms gross violations of the Rome Statute by the global institution.
Already, the President of the Assembly of States Parties, Tiina Intelmann, has informed the Court’s 122 signatory states of Kenya’s proposed supplementary agenda at an upcoming assembly in New York next month. The two top members of the Kenyan Presidency have crimes against humanity cases before the ICC
http://www.the-star.co.ke/news/showdown-looms-us-over-kenyas-icc-agenda (http://www.the-star.co.ke/news/showdown-looms-us-over-kenyas-icc-agenda)
I am no longer surprised at the lengths uhuru is willing to go to avoid ICC. Kenya had already proven incapable of trying the cases, so I fail to see the point Macharia is trying to make. Is that even what he ; Macharia should be occupying all his time with? Looks like everyone in uhuru's government is there for a specific personal reason and it all comes down to ICC.
"Kenya accuses the ICC of politicising the cases, incorrect interpretation of the Rome Statute and continuing to prosecute cases that do not meet evidentiary thresholds.
He went on: “Today, Kenya find itself saddled with a Court that has lower evidentiary thresholds and prosecutorial practices than those found in Kenya’s national courts.”"
-
Macharia is "Doctor" Matsanga on a weight loss regimen.
-
I don't know about the excitement shown in the Star article. I am a member of the Coalition for the ICC, which is usually up-to-date on such matters, especially in the lead-up to annual ASP sessions. Here is what we know:
* On 16 Oct, GoK wrote a sketchy note verbale to the president of the ASP and was asked to provide details. This one:
http://www.coalitionfortheicc.org/documents/2014-10-16_Letter_Kenya_to_PASPrequest_inclusion_of_ASP13_agenda_item_17oct1721.pdf
* On 3 Nov, GoK sent a more detailed note verbale. This one:
http://www.coalitionfortheicc.org/documents/2014-11-4_Letter_Kenya_to_PASPsupplementary_information_NV_561-14.pdf
* On 7 Nov, the principals of the ICC wrote a letter objecting to the Kenyan request. This one:
http://www.coalitionfortheicc.org/documents/Letter_from_the_3_principals_at_the_ICC.pdf
* On 10 Nov (Monday), GoK produced another misguided note verbale. This one:
http://www.coalitionfortheicc.org/documents/2014-11-11_Kenya_NV_on_letter_from_the_Court_NV_612-14(1).pdf
What, if any, of Kenya's request will be included in the agenda is unknown at this point; contrary to the impression given by the Star article, no decision has been made on the matter. But it is almost certain that if anything is included, it will leave out much of what GoK wants tabled.
Macharia, as usual and like Prof. Amicus Mortician, is going out of his way to help a fellow who recently insisted on going to the ICC in his "individual capacity". One of their current headaches is what would happen if the court cites (to the ASP) Kenya for "non-cooperation". If that were to happen, Uhuru's case would not be terminated, even with the current lack of evidence sufficient for a conviction; instead the court would simply wait until Uhuru got out of power, and who knows what could be found before that.
-
Kenyans for Peace with Truth and Justice respond to Macharia:
"Ambassador Kamau needs to be reminded that he is not the defence counsel for Uhuru Kenyatta, William Ruto or Joshua arap Sang, all of whom are charged in their individual capacities. He is the permanent representative of the Republic of Kenya to the United Nations and as such he should represent all Kenyans including the victims of post-election violence in their quest for justice and not merely pursue the partisan interests of the powerful individuals who have been indicted by the ICC."
See:
http://www.coalitionfortheicc.org/documents/KPTJ_Response_to_Kenya_UNGA_Statement_on_ICC.pdf
-
There in lies the dilemma kenya gov find itself in the fight against ICC. If UhuRuto were being tried for killing somalis..it would be easy for GoK. But GOK find themselves in a fix..victims and accused are all kenyans.
But when they can raise common sense issues..like UhuRuto excusal from attending trial..they have won.
And therefore they've scored victories...
They need to crystallize and simplify their tirade into something ASP can grant.
-
The Permanent Mission of Kenya to the United Nations would also like to remind that it
should not be lost sight of that, the genesis of this State Party's (Kenya) pursuit of this
special agenda item is to be found in the Prosecutor's own pursuit of a resolution of the
challenges that they face by suggesting that Kenya should be referred to the Assembly
for non-cooperation. I t is therefore not only our right to anticipate that this might indeed
happen but it is also our obligation to ensure that we, and the membership, are prepared
to deal with this matter should it arise.
This is really poor wording. @Moonki, what are they talking about here? Is or was this in anticipation of the fact that Kenya was being referred to the Assembly for non cooperation by the prosecution for refusing to produce the bank records among other things? Where are the tabled gross violations the star was talking about? What are the chances that Kenya or the principals misguided claims will be heard?
-
Kenyans for Peace with Truth and Justice respond to Macharia:
"Ambassador Kamau needs to be reminded that he is not the defence counsel for Uhuru Kenyatta, William Ruto or Joshua arap Sang, all of whom are charged in their individual capacities. He is the permanent representative of the Republic of Kenya to the United Nations and as such he should represent all Kenyans including the victims of post-election violence in their quest for justice and not merely pursue the partisan interests of the powerful individuals who have been indicted by the ICC."
See:
http://www.coalitionfortheicc.org/documents/KPTJ_Response_to_Kenya_UNGA_Statement_on_ICC.pdf
Good rebuttal"The duty to prosecute lies primarily with the states, and in this regard, Kenya should be the last State to complain, given its own abysmal record in prosecuting perpetrators of post-election violence seven years after it occurred."
-
Top ICC principals, including the court’s president Sang-Hyun Song, have told off Kenya regarding a controversial agenda that the country wants discussed at an upcoming forum in New York
Its getting interesting.
http://www.the-star.co.ke/news/icc-slams-kenya-over-new-request-judges-says-it-amounts-interference-independence-court (http://www.the-star.co.ke/news/icc-slams-kenya-over-new-request-judges-says-it-amounts-interference-independence-court)
-
This is really poor wording. @Moonki, what are they talking about here? Is or was this in anticipation of the fact that Kenya was being referred to the Assembly for non cooperation by the prosecution for refusing to produce the bank records among other things? Where are the tabled gross violations the star was talking about? What are the chances that Kenya or the principals misguided claims will be heard?
"Poor wording" is very mild! The whole note is hopeless. It deliberately misunderstands the role of the ASP; it ignores that as the entire ASP is about the court, the court itself provides the most important input to the ASP; and so on.
Er, it is GoK that is misguided; the ICC principals are quite correct. Anyway, the answer to red, as far as I can see, is next to zero.
The first and biggest problem GoK faces---and something that will be a "turn-off" to many---is that the thing looks like it was written by some manamba going by his impressions rather than the actual facts: every single paragraph contains a huge claim that is totally false. Bizarre claims that are driven largely by emotion can work in AU meetings, but I would not try to sell them to the ASP.
The second problem GoK faces is that many of the issues it raises are matters that should be raised by the defence, and the defence alone, during court proceedings and especially before the Appeals Chamber (if satisfaction has not been obtained at the lower level). The ASP simply will not get involved in those.
The only item that can stand---on the basis of the title alone and not the "content"---is "B. Complementarity". But that will be raised because it is always an ongoing "item" and the ASP Bureau already released a document on what will be discussed:
http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/asp_docs/ASP13/ICC-ASP-13-23-ENG.pdf
But such discussions can only be, and are always, general; they cannot deal with a specific country and especially one (Kenya) that is on the line for failing to cooperate. Yes, the whole thing seems to be an attempt to deal with the possible citation for non-cooperation; that seems to be point of the badly written paragraph you refer to.
Funnily enough, GoK did not think through some of its "actions". Take, for example, the false claim in one note that the court has conflated Uhuru and Ruto's official roles with the individual ones. The fact is that the court has always insisted on the separation and requires that in official documents and court sessions the two be referred to simply as "Mr."; it is GoK and the AU that have been insisting that the two cannot be separated and that such high-level people not be prosecuted while they are in office. "Unfortunately" Uhuru himself has recently shown the world that the court can deal with him as an individual; among other things, that has left the AU with plenty of egg on its face, and on that matter it will have to sing a modified tune at the ASP session.
-
The second problem GoK faces is that many of the issues it raises are matters that should be raised by the defence, and the defence alone, during court proceedings and especially before the Appeals Chamber (if satisfaction has not been obtained at the lower level). The ASP simply will not get involved in those.
`KENYA has suffered a major setback in its bid to “expose” the ICC, after the Assembly of States Parties rejected its agenda to discuss the conduct of the court's judges and prosecutors.
...
Incoming ASP President Sidika Kaba yesterday informed the states that the Kenyan agenda will not be included, to the chagrin of Kenyan representatives in the US meeting. “The Bureau does not recommend inclusion of the Kenya agenda item on conduct of the Court and Prosecutor,” the former Senegalese Justice Minister said, dealing Kenya a serious blow '
http://www.the-star.co.ke/news/kenya-fails-convince-asp-against-bensouda
So much for the "showdown" that was being trumpeted by the same paper. It is astonishing that the country is represented at that level by people who do not seem to understand the role of the ASP.