By Jessica A Badebye
The Pan African Forum (PAF) has given the president of the Assembly of State Parties (ASP) at the International Criminal Court (ICC) Sadiki Kaba, a three months ultimatum to exploit Article 112 2(b) of The Rome Statute to add an agenda on its order paper in its November sitting at The Hague.
The agenda being suggested is “an independent Commission of Inquiry into the conduct of the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) and the chief prosecutors since 2008 so as to be circulated and discussed in the 14th ASP expected to be held in The Hague. The prosecutors in question include the current ICC chief prosecutor Fatou Bensouda and her predecessor Luis Moreno Ocampo. Article 112 2(b) provides for management oversight to the presidency, the chief prosecutor and the Registrar regarding the administration of the court, therefore, if invoked a motion to censure Bensouda could be tabled.
PAF Chairman Dr David Nyekorach Matsanga gave the ultimatum on behalf of his organization in its quest to include the above motion in accordance with the Rules and Procedures of the Statute in its 18 to 26 November 2015 sitting. In a submission to the ASP secretariat this week, Dr Matsanga who is also Chief Executive Officer of The London Evening Post, complained that all avenues to correct the mess in the OTP have been rejected by the presidency and the chief prosecutor of the ICC who have already been told about the flawed cases against Kenya. He added that all the state parties, institutions and individuals that voluntarily contribute to the resources of the ICC, want to know why fake cases characterized with perjury, perversion and obstruction of evidence, were ‘taken to the alter of international justice because it is a justice immorality that cannot go unpunished’.
The organization challenged Bensouda to see to it that there was proper administration of justice in the ICC to both the defence and the prosecution sides, arguing that Article 70 of the Rome Statute should not be invoked on what PAF called ‘framed whistleblowers’ of defence as it is in the Kenyan Post Election Violence (PEV) cases but on OTP investigators and intermediaries like AFRICOG and other Kenyan organizations that assisted in the procurement of witnesses to fake evidence. PAF further argued that all avenues of redress have been either compromised or blocked by the OTP vexatious litigations against any mind that tries to look into the flaws in the Kenyan cases and on that note listed 15 facts as to why an inquiry into the OTP is required.
PAF indicated that it wants to add to millions of complaints of corruption, incompetence and abuse of office by the OTP but it (the OTP) has never been investigated by an independent panel as it is done in normal democracies and institutions of justice. It said this was one of the facts listed because the veracity of allegations against the OTP have reached the highest level of impunity even when the African Union has voiced its concerns about the cases. Dr Matsanga also listed OTP’s failure to refer all ‘lying witnesses’ to court for action as per Article 70 of the statute yet they have recanted their statements in court. He revealed that his organization has evidence to put forward to ASP showing that witnesses in both the PEV cases against Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta, his deputy William Ruto and Kenyan journalist Arap Sang, were procured and coached by OTP and intermediaries.
He clarified that as an honest viewer, his organization has tendered in its request to expose rot and corruption behind Luis Ocampo citing case situation of Central Africa Republic of Congo in which Matsanga said Ocampo smacked off corruption, bribery and foul play .He noted that since 2008, Pan African Forum Ltd has walked, torrid, laboured and traversed what he called “the murky aisle of debunking the public perception of a hangman court” and would therefore like to set the record straight that Kenya never invoked Article 14 sub article 1 of the statute, because it never asked for a self-referral to the ICC.
“Kenya never asked for Self-Referral at the International Criminal Court as a party state, because it believed it has the capacity to handle the cases in her revamped and reformed judicial system,” Matsanga explained. He accused Ocampo for what he described as “a lousy fishing expedition” to make false history right at onset when he said he wanted to make Kenya a world example of managing violence.
Dr Matsanga observed that due to the tragedy that struck at the Pre-Trial chamber II when fake cases were confirmed against four Kenyans including President Kenyatta, his Deputy Ruto, journalist Arap Sang and Muthaura and declined two cases against Hussein Ali and Henry Kosgey on 23rd March 2011, it was proof enough that the Kenyan trials were political and not legal. He cited his article, “The Kenyan Trial is a political trial not legal as perceived by the world” in which he displayed Ocampo’s shortcomings and labelled the court as an ‘inappropriate vehicle of conflict resolution due to its temporal jurisdiction’.
He challenged ASP president Kaba to immediately employ his oversight role at ICC so as to safeguard the interests of all State parties, organizations and individuals that voluntarily contribute to the ICC Trust fund, because he believed that the OTP ‘appears running mad without evidence against Kenya’ after eight years and that this will end further damage of the image of ICC on the African continent.
By Jessica A Badebye