Folks,

First of all, the title of this news report is wrong……not all Americans are out to stop Ocampo….it is the known two dons, professors we read about …..which now brings very interesting questions………

Why would these Professors be interested to stop Ocampo and, Where were they at the initial stage…..Whose interest are they serving……Which category of mandate gives them access. What basis do they lay their grounds to stop Ocampo……..lastly Who invited them?

….or in who is who, Who are they hobbledehoy pompey of Kenya ? ? ? .

Who are their clients?……These two Professors are a big joker …… they have no idea how much Kenyans have suffered, they have no clue how our feet burned in dry cold winter of Washington DC, when we paraded demonstrating to bring calm – they are not even Citizens
of Kenya, their mothers were not hacked to death nor raped. What are they trying to do?

Before they go to Hague, they should stop their Mickey Mouse and Frog Hops and come clean publicly first, tell us who they are in this drama, what is their interest in the Kenya’s quagmire, lets know their Agenda, then tell us what they mean by this their going to Hague to stop Ocampo.

Regards,

Judy Miriga
Diaspora Spokesperson
Executive Director
Confederation Council Foundation for Africa Inc.,
USA
http://socioeconomicforum50.blogspot.com

Lawyers tell off American professors over suit

By Beauttah Omanga
The Law Society of Kenya and lawyer Paul Muite have said the move by two Americans to stop the International Criminal Court (ICC) from investigating the post-election violence will not succeed.

LSK Vice-Chairman James Mwamu and Mr Muite said it would be ridiculous for an international court to stop investigation into any alleged crime.

Mr Mwamu said: “I see that application being dismissed because the ICC Prosecutor merely wants permission to commence investigation into commission of an international crime against humanity. There is no application as yet for prosecution of anybody.”

The two lawyers said the post-election violence perpetrators wanted to derail the process at the expense of the victims who want to see justice done and impunity addressed.

Kenyan hand
Muite questioned the logic behind the two Americans’ move, saying he suspected a hidden Kenyan hand.

“On whose interest are they seeking the orders?” posed Muite, who urged local human rights bodies with their international partners to seek leave to be enjoined, as well as the post-election violence victims.

He said the victims and the human rights bodies should urgently instruct reputable lawyers to move to the ICC and file papers demanding to be party to the strange suit.

“That suit is demonic in the first place. How were the two Americans affected by the Kenyan chaos? They must also be pressed by the Kenyan human rights lawyers to reveal on whose behalf they are acting,” said Muite.

Who is behind Americans out to block ICC’s case on Kenya?

By Ben Agina
Two prominent Americans have launched a bid to block International Criminal Court from handling Kenya’s post-election violence trials.

Their suit echoes an earlier objection by a Belgian non-governmental organisation with the same aim.

The two, a lawyer and a political science professor, filed a suit on Tuesday that has raised questions as to their interest in the matter.

The International Criminal Court at the Hague. Two Americans, Prof Max Hilaire, who chairs Department of Political Sciences at Morgan State University, and a San Fransisco lawyer William Cohn, filed a suit at the Hague over the Kenya case, even though their country is not signatory to the statute that created the ICC. [PHOTO: courtesy]
They are seeking suspension of prayers by ICC Chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo for the court to take up Kenya’s case for at least 30 more days, so that they can raise their arguments. Their argument is Kenya’s case was, in legal terms, “overstretched” or “exaggerated” and does not meet ICC’s threshold for crimes against humanity. They say bringing the issue before the trial chamber (the phase where it is now) was unnecessary.

“We want to know why the case should go to The Hague since Kenya is not a failed State and efforts have already been made by the President and the Prime Minister to set up a local tribunal,” their suit document reads.

They also demand to know of “efforts to set up a local tribunal and actions of the President and the Prime Minister on the complementarity principle.”

The Americans want the ICC pre-trial judges to determine if the Kenyan situation qualifies as a “crime against humanity” or a “matter of civil unrest”.

Former US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Jendayi Fraser in 2008 described the violence as falling short of genocide but rising to the level of crimes against humanity.

Earlier, the International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL) filed an objection to restrain the ICC from intervening in Kenya.
The Brussels-based NGO claims it has global membership but Kenyan activists claimed it is linked to powerful individuals in the Cabinet.

“It is instructive that this organisation has had no known basis or track record of commenting, acting or participating on any Kenyan issues,” they said.

Though their country is not a signatory to the Rome Statute that created ICC, Prof Max Hilaire who chairs Department of Political Sciences at Morgan State University, teamed up a San Fransisco lawyer Prof William Cohn to file a suit at The Hague.

In the suit, among other seven legal issues they intend to raise, are questions on whether Kenya’s case qualifies to be taken up by ICC.
Though the two booklovers could on academic joyride or serious academic venture, locally where President Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga flatly declined to formally refer the Kenyan case to ICC, it will be speculation galore.

Pre-trial judges
Documents obtained by The Standard authored by the two show they want to be amicus curiae (friends of the court) before the Pre-trial chamber. If granted the status, they want the pre-trial judges, who were appointed to weigh the admissibility of the Kenyan case, to grant a stay on the decision on Moreno-Ocampo’s motion seeking their authority to commence investigation on Kenya’s high-profile suspects.

The arguments put up by the two professors are similar to those earlier advanced by PS Foreign Affairs Thuita Mwangi in a commentary critical of ICC’s handling of Kenya’s case.

The two Americans, however, have put up a disclaimer they are not affiliated to any organisation in Kenya or have taken any partisan position with regard to the Kenyan situation or any known suspect.
Three days before Moreno-Ocampo’s arrival in Nairobi, Mwangi dispatched an opinion article to newsrooms in which he criticised the prosecutor’s mission in Kenya.

Arguing it was too early for him to intervene, the PS questioned the legitimacy of the ICC’s jurisdiction over Kenya. He argued the ICC should not override Kenya’s justice system.

End impunity
Exuding confidence in the ability of the Judiciary to handle perpetrators of post-election mayhem, Mwangi petitioned Moreno-Ocampo to give Africa an opportunity to prove to the world she is ready, willing and able to end impunity.

In their submissions to pre-trial judges dated January 11, 2010, the Professors put out believe ICC intervention would ruin the political careers of key suspects said to be the Waki Envelope.

The professors want to know from the pre-trial judges the “long-term political and social aspects” relating to the prosecutions that have a bearing on the decision to commence investigation.

Professors Hilaire and Cohn would also want to know the cumulative effect of the efforts to set up a local tribunal and actions of the President Kibaki and Prime Minister on the complementarity principle and the interest of an investigations.

If granted the amicus curiae status, the professors would also want to know the extent of and progress in investigations and prosecutions of crimes against humanity in Kenya and the effect thereof on the complementarity principle under the ICC statute.
setting precedent

They are also questioning the timing of Prosecutor Ocampo’s application to the pre-trial chambers. In their justification to the court, the Americans said the orders sought by the prosecutor were precedent setting.

“This is the very first time in the history of ICC that the prosecutor seeks authorisation. It is important that the court clearly establishes the parameters for the exercise of jurisdiction in circumstance where a state with functional judicial system has not referred a situation to the court,” said the professors.

They noted as the prosecutor’s Motion under article 15 of the rules is essentially ex-parte, (for or by one party) it may be useful for the chamber to listen to other views and submissions on the applicable legal principles.

This development comes exactly a week after Imenti Central MP Gitobu Imanyara and human rights activists spoke of their disappointment at attempts to delay the Pre-Trial Chamber’s decision on Kenya’s post-election violence case.

An international lawyer’s organisation filed an objection to the case with ICC. The activists have also raised the red flag over an alleged plot to intimidate potential witnesses of the post-poll chaos through death threats, particularly in the North Rift and in internal refugee camps.

Addressing the press on Friday, last week, Imanyara, along with rights activists Ndung’u Wainaina, Haron Ndubi and Ken Wafula, said that a Cabinet minister who feels he might be on the list of suspected perpetrators was behind the plot.

Go slowly
The minister, Mr Ndubi claimed, had been promising the witnesses land for resettlement, money, jobs, and scholarships among other inducements.

In their statement, the activists said that the minister was said to have held a meeting with officials of the internally displaced from all camps in the Rift Valley on November 25, last year. He allegedly urged them to influence other camp residents to “go slowly” in submitting their views ICC.

Americans out to stop Ocampo
International Criminal Court chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo (left) meets with President Kibaki (center) and Prime Minister Raila Odinga (right) at Harambee house . Photo/FILE

International Criminal Court chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo (left) meets with President Kibaki (center) and Prime Minister Raila Odinga (right) at Harambee house . Photo/FILE

By OLIVER MATHENGE and BERNARD NAMUNANE

Posted Thursday, January 14 2010 at 21:00

In Summary

* Two professors are questioning mandate of ICC in taking over Kenyan poll case

Two American dons have gone to the International Criminal Court seeking to stop Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo from taking over the post-election violence case.

However, the government immediately disowned their intervention and asked them to stop the uncalled for application, which could delay the ruling by the pre-trial chamber.

Professors Max Hilaire and William Cohn filed an application on Monday at The Hague asking the pre-trial chamber to suspend making a ruling for at least 30 days to allow them to raise their objections to the intentions of Mr Moreno-Ocampo to start investigating the masterminds of the post election chaos.

“May it please this honourable pre-trial chamber to stay the decision on the prosecutor’s motion pending the decision on this motion, and allow the applicants to appear as Amicus Curiae (friends of the court) and to file their brief within 30 days or within such period as the Chamber may direct,” they say in their plea to the three-judge bench tasked to hear Kenya’s case.

Professors Hilaire and Cohn, in their application, say they will question ICC’s mandate to investigate the crimes that were committed during the post-election chaos; whether the crimes committed qualify as crimes against humanity; and the clause which Mr Moreno-Ocampo used as the basis to place his case before the pre-trial chamber.

Prof Hilaire teaches at Morgan State University and Prof Cohn has practised as an attorney in California.
“This is the very first time in the history of the ICC that the prosecutor seeks authorisation under article 15. It is important that the court clearly establishes the parameters for the exercise of jurisdiction in circumstances where a state with a functional judicial system has not referred a situation to the court,” they argue.
Into any hotspot

They refer to Article 15, which details the ways the ICC Prosecutor can use to obtain permission from the pre-trial chamber to start investigations into any hotspot.

It allows the prosecutor to receive information from governments, UN agencies, NGOs and other reliable sources.

“If the prosecutor concludes that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation, he or she shall submit to the Pre-Trial Chamber a request for authorisation of an investigation, together with any supporting material collected,” the article states in part.

Justice and Constitutional Affairs minister Mutula Kilonzo described the two law professors as “busy bodies” who were interfering with the process of delivering justice to the victims of the violence.

“ They should cease and desist from interfering with Kenya’s choice to submit itself to the ICC,” he said.

He said Mr Moreno-Ocampo was allowed by the President and the PM to seek the permission of the chamber to investigate the violence that rocked the country after the December 2007 elections.

“It is surprising that lawyers from countries which are not even members of the ICC are interfering with the process,” he said.

Was not involved
Attorney-General Amos Wako said he was not aware of the development and that his office was not involved.

Mr Kilonzo said the decision as to whether investigations into the post-election violence would proceed lay with The Hague.
Mr Moreno-Ocampo went before the pre-trial chamber at the end of last November seeking permission to start investigating the plotters and executors of the election violence in which 1,133 people were killed and another 650,000 uprooted from their homes.

There have been reports that the government intends to use international lawyers to challenge Mr Moreno-Ocampo’s request at The Hague.

However, government officials have denied the claims.