ICC Judge withdraws from Uhuru, Ruto case

Ab-Titchaz said:

It seems like you are the only one who new the gist of this piece of news that the Kenya media decided to spin and make it look like the Judge withdrew because of poor investigations by the OTP. However the truth of the matter is in the following statement:

Decision replacing a judge in Trial Chamber V, due to Judge's expected workload

Judge Christine Van den Wyngaert has been excused from Trial Chamber V due to the Judge’s expected workload, as we she was in Pre-Trial Chamber I, Trial Chamber II and Trial Chamber V, which are handling the situations in Libya, Côte d’Ivoire and Kenya, as well as the case The Prosecutor v. Germain Katanga in the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. She has been replaced in Trial Chamber V by Judge Robert Fremr.

Factual background

By memorandum dated 8 April 2013, the Judge requested the Presidency to excuse her from her functions as a judge of Trial Chamber V, pursuant to article 41(1) of the Rome Statute (hereinafter "Statute") and rule 33 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence (hereinafter "Rules"), and to be replaced as a judge of Trial Chamber V pursuant to rule 38 of the Rules (hereinafter "request") before the start of the trials in the cases of The Prosecutor v. William Samoei Ruto and Joshua Arap Sang and TheProsecutor v. Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta (hereinafter "Kenya cases"), scheduled to commence imminently.

The request for excusal is based upon the current and anticipated workload of the Judge, who as a member of Pre-Trial Chamber I, Trial Chamber II and Trial Chamber V, is currently seized of the situations in Libya and Côte d’Ivoire, the case of The Prosecutor v. Germain Katanga and the two Kenya cases.

The Judge indicated that the commencement of the trials in the Kenya cases will lead to an intensification of the work of Trial Chamber V, thereby significantly adding to the Judge's already “unprecedented” heavy workload. The Judge submits that her assignment to that Chamber was temporary, only for the purpose of the preparation of the two Kenya cases for trial. ”


The last sentence is confirmed here, when Trial Chamber V was set up:

www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc1380732.pdf

​

Click to expand...

Very many thanks for this piece of self-explanatory and informative news/article, I made an intelligent guess out of my own ignorance by scrutinizing that piece of biased presented information of the judge's withdrawal. I have enjoyed reading this article. Super mod, keep on giving us things of this nature to expand our horizon not only on information but also understanding! Ubarikiwe sana...

ICC president should stop a shameless lie to the world

Belgian judge Christine Van Den Wyngaert withdrew from the kenyan case leaving a stinging
criticism of the ICC prosecutor madam fatsou bensouda.
Christine Van Den Wyngaert wrote a stinging criticism of ICC prosecutor Fatsou Bensouda before
asking to be withdrawn from the case.

"There are serious questions as to whether the Prosecution conducted a full and thorough
investigation of the case against the accused prior to confirmation. In fact, I believe that the facts
show that the Prosecution had not complied with its obligations under article 54(1)(a) at the time
when it sought confirmation and that it was still not even remotely ready when the proceedings
before this Chamber started."
"there can be no excuse for the Prosecution's negligent attitude towards verifying the
trustworthiness of its evidence. In particular, the incidents relating to Witness 4 are clearly
indicative of a negligent
attitude towards verifying the reliability of central evidence in the Prosecution's case. This negligent
attitude is particularly apparent in relation to Witness 4's evidence because, as the Prosecution
concedes, 'the Office as a whole was on notice, prior to the confirmation hearing, of the
inconsistencies in the account Witness 4 gave during his [second]
screening'. 4 The Prosecution offered a number of explanations for overlooking the problems with
Witness 4's evidence.^ However, what all
these explanations reveal is that there are grave problems in the Prosecution's system of evidence
review,...."

Click to expand...

In an attempt to control the damage ICC president Sang Hyun Song lied shamelessly to the world
saying that Judge Christine Van Den Wyngaert resigned from the Uhuru case due to a heavy
workload.
She is allegedly involved in 5 cases before the ICC. The two Kenyan cases and cases from the
Democratic Republic of the Congo, Libya, and the Ivory Coast.
But one need only check the ICC website to find these claims false.
The ivory coast cases and the lbya cases are both in pre trial they are not scheduled for any further
hearings this year. See ICC calender
The only cases scheduled for the rest of the year are. The Bemba Trial, Ruto Sang Trial , the Uhuru
Trial and the Ntaganda confirmation of charges hearing which doesn't start until September.
Only the Bemba trial runs at the same time as Uhuru and Ruto cases. But the judge Christine Van
Den Wyngaert is not in that case. Infact only lead judge Kuniko Ozaki is in both cases. That might
prove dicey if the Bemba case is not concluded before the Kenya cases.
So the ICC presidents explanation of a heavy work load for judge Christine Van Den Wyngaert is
bogus. The reason she gave earlier that the prosecution case is shaky is the true reason.

Ab-Titchaz said:

It seems like you are the only one who new the gist of this piece of news that the Kenya media decided to spin and make it look like the Judge withdrew because of poor investigations by the OTP. However the truth of the matter is in the following statement:

Decision replacing a judge in Trial Chamber V, due to Judge's expected workload

Judge Christine Van den Wyngaert has been excused from Trial Chamber V due to the Judge's expected workload, as we she was in Pre-Trial Chamber I, Trial Chamber II and Trial Chamber V, which are handling the situations in Libya, Côte d'Ivoire and Kenya, as well as the case The Prosecutor v. Germain Katanga in the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. She has been replaced in Trial Chamber V by Judge Robert Fremr.

Factual background

By memorandum dated 8 April 2013, the Judge requested the Presidency to excuse her from her functions as a judge of Trial Chamber V, pursuant to article 41(1) of the Rome Statute (hereinafter "Statute") and rule 33 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence (hereinafter "Rules"), and to be replaced as a judge of Trial Chamber V pursuant to rule 38 of the Rules (hereinafter "request") before the start of the trials in the cases of The Prosecutor v. William Samoei Ruto and Joshua Arap Sang and TheProsecutor v. Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta (hereinafter "Kenya cases"), scheduled to commence imminently.

The request for excusal is based upon the current and anticipated workload of the Judge, who as a member of Pre-Trial Chamber I, Trial Chamber II and Trial Chamber V, is currently seized of the situations in Libya and Côte d'Ivoire, the case of The Prosecutor v. Germain Katanga and the two Kenya cases.

The Judge indicated that the commencement of the trials in the Kenya cases will lead to an intensification of the work of Trial Chamber V, thereby significantly adding to the Judge's already "unprecedented" heavy workload. The Judge submits that her assignment to that Chamber was temporary, only for the purpose of the preparation of the two Kenya cases for trial. "


The last sentence is confirmed here, when Trial Chamber V was set up:

Click to expand...

16 Mar 2011​

The ICC has released the sole dissent to Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo's request for summonses in the case on Kenya's post-election violence.
The 19 page ruling by Justice Hans Peter-Kaul, the Vice- President of the International Criminal Court, contradicted those of his other colleagues in the Pre-Trial Chamber II. He argued that claims that the violence was organised were not supported by any of the material presented to the judges and that he found no evidence suggesting a State policy of attacking civilians.
In his view, the hiring of criminal gangs by politicians was a temporary partnership of convenience rather than an "organisation" established for a purpose. A series of meetings with facilitators and the principal perpetrators did not amount to an organisation. He failed to "see the existence of an "organisation" behind the violent acts which may have established a policy to attack the civilian population within the meaning of article 7(2)(a) of the Statute." He added that he failed to see how an ‘organisation' could have existed when the lead figures were the Mungiki gang and Kenya Police Forces, but acknowledged that the evidence suggested that Uhuru Kenyatta acted as the principal contact between the Mungiki gang and the principal perpetrator.
In discussing the Head of Civil Service, Francis Muthaura, and the then Police Chief, Hussein Ali, Justice Kaul stated that any assessment of criminal conduct by the Kenya Police Forces should have considered the official positions of the two principal perpetrators and the responsibility of others in the Kenyan Police Forces.
Justice Kaul was also of the view that the Court lacks jurisdiction ratione because the crimes alleged do not amount to crimes against humanity pursuant to article 7 of the Statute.


He further argued that the ICC has no jurisdiction in the situation in the Republic of Kenya and the alleged crimes fall within the competence of the Kenyan criminal justice authorities to be investigated and prosecuted. He stated that he took this position with a heavy heart, being profoundly aware of the crimes and atrocities as described in the prosecutor's Application for summonses.



Judge Hans-Peter Kaul's dissent in the Kenya case is released by the ICC