The Appeals Chamber unanimously rejected the jurisdiction challenge raised by Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta, former head of the civil service Francis Muthaura, Eldoret North MP William Ruto and radio presenter Joshua arap Sang.
The Defence teams of the accused had challenged the court’s jurisdiction before the Pre-Trial Chamber.
The Ocampo Four submitted that the ICC had no jurisdiction and also contested the interpretation of the term ‘organisational policy’ as a component of crimes against humanity under article 7 (2) (a) of the Rome Statute.
" In its decisions, today (Thursday), the Appeals Chamber indicated that the interpretation and existence of an ‘organisational policy’ relate to the substantive merits of this case as opposed to the issue of whether the Court has subject-matter jurisdiction to consider such questions," said the ICC in a statement.
The Appeals Chamber ruled that "whether the Prosecutor can establish, in law and on the evidence, the existence of such a policy is not a question of jurisdiction, but rather a question to be determined on the merits".
"The Appeals Chamber concluded that the issues raised on appeal are therefore not properly before the Appeals Chamber. The Appeals Chamber decisions relate only to the issues raised by the accused and are with no prejudice to the merits of the cases," said the statement.
The judges found that the ICC has "subject-matter jurisdiction" over the crimes.
On January 30, the defence teams of the accused filed their appeal requesting the Appeals Chamber to find that the Pre-Trial Chamber, which had confirmed their cases a week earlier, had made legal, factual or procedural errors stemming from it's interpretation of the term ‘organisational policy’.
The accused have been summoned to The Hague in June to attend Status Conferences where participants will among other things determine the date of the trial, languages to be used in the proceedings, in particular, the languages spoken by the witnesses the parties intend to call and the anticipated length of the presentation of evidence at trial.
The Status Conference will also determine whether the prosecution anticipates issues concerning the protection of witnesses including the disclosure of the identities of witnesses. They will also determine whether a protocol regulating contacts between the parties and protected witnesses called by another party is necessary.
This according to the judges will include; “conditions under which the parties may make reference to the identity of protected witnesses, including the fact that they are witnesses, during their investigation".
The Status Conference will also determine the timing, volume and format of disclosure of evidence, material already disclosed and intended to be disclosed by the prosecution and whether there are any outstanding issues relating to documents or information which the prosecution obtained on the condition of confidentiality.
“The prosecution is requested to provide a detailed list of those items of evidence it intends to include in its List of Incriminating Evidence or disclose to the defence with respect to which redactions or other protective measures are required; including whether redactions previously authorised by the Pre-trial Chamber need to be maintained,” the judges said.
Mr Ruto and Mr Sang are expected to appear before the ICC on June 11 and a day later it will be the turn of Mr Kenyatta and Mr Muthaura.
Source: Daily Nation
No comments:
Post a Comment