Kenya’s President Uhuru Kenyatta was previously charged as an indirect co-perpetrator with five counts of crimes against humanity allegedly committed during post-election violence in Kenya in 2007- 2008.
In 2012, Kenyatta’s case was scheduled for trial along with several other Kenyan officials, but by March 2015, the case had fallen off the rails with the ICC prosecution complaining that continuing was impossible because Kenyatta and Kenya were either attacking or intimidating witnesses and destroying evidence.
While the ICC prosecution asked the ICC lower court to refer Kenya to the ICC’s Assembly of State Parties (ASP) or the UN Security Council due to its noncompliance, the ICC lower court rejected the request.
Rather, the ICC lower court essentially questioned the prosecution’s judgment; speculated that the prosecution could have been more creative in gaining Kenya’s cooperation; and blamed the prosecution for not being diligent enough in pursuing evidence from Kenya.
The ICC Appeals Chamber ruled that the ICC lower court’s analysis was flawed and that it must reconsider the idea of referring Kenya to the ASP or UN Security Council.
If involved, the ASP or UN Security Council potentially could take multilateral actions to pressure Kenya to cooperate more fully with the ICC prosecution.
https://endtime.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/ShowImage.ashx_186.jpeg 530 758 alphatimes https://endtime.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/endtime-logo.png alphatimes2015-08-20 00:00:002018-03-28 16:30:12Analysis: Could ICC ruling on Kenya impact ‘Mavi Marmara’ case?