Friday, December 9, 2022

Ruto and Sang case

Must read

Editor
Editor
DIPLOMAT MAGAZINE “For diplomats, by diplomats” Reaching out the world from the European Union First diplomatic publication based in The Netherlands Founded by members of the diplomatic corps on June 19th, 2013. Diplomat Magazine is inspiring diplomats, civil servants and academics to contribute to a free flow of ideas through an extremely rich diplomatic life, full of exclusive events and cultural exchanges, as well as by exposing profound ideas and political debates in our printed and online editions.

Pre-Trial Chamber II grants leave to appeal the decision rejecting the amendment of the charges.

Situation: Situation in the Republic of Kenya
Case: 
The Prosecutor v. William Samoei Ruto and Joshua Arap Sang

September 2013, Pre-Trial Chamber II of the International Criminal Court (ICC) granted the Prosecutor leave to appeal the decision rejecting the amendment of the temporal scope of the charges against William Samoei  Ruto and Joshua Arap Sang.

The charges were confirmed on 23 January 2012 by Pre-Trial Chamber II and the two accused were committed to trial. The Prosecutor thereafter requested, on 22 July 2013, permission from Pre-Trial Chamber II to amend the charges against the accused by broadening the temporal scope of those charges in relation to crimes allegedly committed in the greater Eldoret area on 30 and 31 December 2007.

On 16 August 2013, Pre-Trial Chamber II rejected the request for amendment due to, inter alia, the Prosecutor’s failure to submit the amendment request in time, the prejudice caused to the Defence at this advanced stage of the proceedings, and the impact of the requested amendment on the fairness and  expeditiousness of the overall  proceedings. The Prosecutor sought the Pre-Trial Chamber’s leave to appeal this decision.

Today’s ruling permits the Prosecutor to put before the Appeals Chamber the issue whether Pre-Trial Chamber II abused its discretion in rejecting the Prosecutor’s amendment request. Pre-Trial Chamber II acceded to the Prosecutor’s request by considering that the decision of 16 August 2013 may have an impact on the outcome of the trial.

Trial Chamber V(a) set the commencement of the trial for 10 September 2013. Today’s decision does not address the further course and schedule of the proceedings which remains under the authority of the Trial Chamber

A Questions and Answers document on the opening of the trial is available here.

For further information on the trial, click here.

- Advertisement -spot_img

More articles

- Advertisement -spot_img

Latest article