Laurent Gbagbo and Charles Blé Goudé at the opening of their trial before Trial Chamber I at the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, the Netherlands, on 28 January 2016 © ICC-CPI.   Today, 28 January 2016, the trial in the case of The Prosecutor v. Laurent Gbagbo and Charles Blé Goudé opened at the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, the Netherlands, before Trial Chamber I, which is composed of Presiding Judge Cuno Tarfusser (Italy), Judge Olga Herrera Carbuccia (Dominican Republic) and Judge Geoffrey Henderson (Trinidad and Tobago).

The trial started with the reading of the charges against Mr Gbagbo and Mr Blé Goudé. Upon receiving confirmation from Mr Gbagbo’s Defence Counsel Emmanuel Altit and Mr Blé Goudé’s Defence Counsel Geert-Jan Alexander Knoops, Presiding Judge Cuno Tarfusser was satisfied that the accused understood the nature of the charges. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charges. ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda and Senior Trial Lawyer Eric MacDonald took the floor for opening statements. The proceedings will resume tomorrow, Friday 29 January 2016, with the opening statements of the Legal Representative of Victims in this case, Paolina Massidda, as well as the opening statements of the Defence of both accused.

Background: Laurent Gbagbo, former President of Côte d’Ivoire, was surrendered to the ICC on 30 November 2011 and he first appeared before the Pre-Trial Chamber on 5 December 2011. On 12 June 2014, Pre-Trial Chamber I confirmed, by majority, four charges of crimes against humanity (murder, rape, other inhumane acts or – in the alternative – attempted murder, and persecution) against Mr Gbagbo and committed him for trial before a Trial Chamber. Charles Blé Goudé, born on 1 January 1972 in Niagbrahio, Côte d’Ivoire, was surrendered on 22 March 2014 to the ICC by the national authorities of Côte d´Ivoire following a warrant of arrest issued by the ICC on 21 December 2011. On 11 December 2014, Pre-Trial Chamber I confirmed four charges of crimes against humanity (murder, rape, other inhumane acts or – in the alternative – attempted murder, and persecution) against Mr Blé Goudé and committed him to trial before a Trial Chamber.

Statement of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Fatou Bensouda, following judicial authorisation to commence an investigation into the Situation in Georgia Today, the Office of the Prosecutor (“Office”) of the International Criminal Court (“ICC”) has been authorised by the Judges in the Pre-Trial Chamber I (“PTC”) to commence an investigation into the alleged ICC crimes occurring on the territory of Georgia between 1 July 2008 and 10 October 2008. The Office had made a request for authorisation from the PTC on 13 October 2015, following its preliminary examination into the situation in Georgia since August 2008, in the course of which it gathered information on alleged crimes attributed to the three parties involved in the armed conflict – the Georgian armed forces, the South Ossetian forces, and the Russian armed forces. The timing of that request was determined largely by the pace, and eventually, lack of national proceedings. Under the complementarity principle in the Rome Statute, the ICC cannot proceed if national authorities are already undertaking (or have undertaken) genuine domestic proceedings into the same cases. Until recently, the competent national authorities of both Georgia and Russia were engaged in conducting investigations against those who appeared to be most responsible for some of the identified crimes. These investigative measures, despite some attendant challenges and delays, appeared to be progressing. However, in March of last year, relevant national proceedings in Georgia were indefinitely suspended. The Office continues to monitor relevant proceedings in Russia, which, according to the Office’s information, are still on-going. The findings made by the PTC at this stage are preliminary: they are made for the purpose of deciding whether an investigation is warranted. The decision does not make any determinative findings on the guilt or innocence of particular persons. Only if and when, based on the evidence collected, there are reasonable grounds to believe a person is criminally responsible for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court, will I request the judges to issue an arrest warrant or summons to appear. The Office’s own investigators will collect the necessary evidence, independently and impartially, and from a variety of sources. The investigation will take as long as needed to gather the required evidence. The Office counts on the full support and cooperation of all parties throughout the investigation. Video for download Audio for download      

ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I authorises the Prosecutor to open an investigation into the situation in Georgia Today, 27 January 2016, Pre-Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court (ICC) authorised the Prosecutor to proceed with an investigation for the crimes within the ICC jurisdiction, allegedly committed in and around South Ossetia, Georgia, between 1 July and 10 October 2008. Pre-Trial Chamber I is composed of Judge Joyce Aluoch, Presiding, Judge Cuno Tarfusser and Judge Peter Kovacs, who appended a separate concurring opinion. On 13 October 2015, the ICC Prosecutor submitted her “Request for authorisation of an investigation pursuant to article 15” of the Rome Statute, asking for authorization from Pre-Trial Chamber I to proceed with an investigation into the situation in Georgia, for war crimes and crimes against humanity allegedly committed in and around South Ossetia in 2008. On 4 December 2015, the Chamber received the representations by or on behalf of 6,335 victims on this matter. The Chamber noted that, according to article 15 of the Rome Statute, it has the mandate to ensure judicial control over the Prosecutor’s exercise of her proprio motu power to open an investigation in the absence of a referral by a State Party or by the United Nations Security Council. The Chamber also stressed that, in light of the procedural stage and the purpose of its control, the Chamber’s examination of the Prosecutor’s request must be strictly limited. After examining the request and the supporting material, the Chamber concluded that there is a reasonable basis to believe that crimes within the ICC’s jurisdiction have been committed in the situation in Georgia. Such crimes include crimes against humanity, such as murder, forcible transfer of population and persecution, and war crimes, such as attacks against the civilian population, wilful killing, intentionally directing attacks against peacekeepers, destruction of property and pillaging allegedly committed in the context of an international armed conflict between 1 July and 10 October 2008. The Chamber also found that potential cases arising out of the situation would be admissible before the Court and that there are no substantial reasons to believe that an investigation would not serve the interests of justice taking into account the gravity of the crimes and the interests of victims. In conclusion the Chamber granted the ICC Prosecutor’s request to proceed with an investigation into the situation in Georgia. Judge Peter Kovacs joined a separate opinion, indicating that while he shares the Majority’s views that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation into the Georgia situation, he differs with it on the scope and extent of the judicial control of the Prosecutor’s request, on the Chamber’s role in examining and eventually rectifying the Prosecutor’s assessment of the alleged crimes under the Court’s jurisdiction, and on the scope and the level of details required for the admissibility assessment. Decision on the Prosecutor’s request for authorization of an investigation      

European Commission discusses draft Schengen Evaluation Report on Greece Brussels, 27 January 2016 The College of Commissioners has today, in view of the findings and their significance, taken note and discussed a draft Schengen Evaluation Report on Greece. The Schengen evaluation mechanism, established in October 2013, provides for the verification of the application of the Schengen rules through monitoring visits to a given Member State by Commission-led teams with experts from Member States and Frontex. The draft Schengen evaluation report for Greece, drawn up jointly by Member States experts and Commission representatives, will now be sent to the Schengen Evaluation Committee which will give its opinion. The report will then be adopted by the Commission by means of an implementing act. Migration and Home Affairs Commissioner Dimitris Avramopoulos said: “If we want to maintain our internal area of free movement, we must better manage our external borders. This means that we will only save Schengen by applying Schengen. The Commission continuously monitors the implementation of the Schengen rules in all Schengen Member States. The draft Schengen evaluation report on Greece looks at the management of the external border during an evaluation visit of Member States and Commission experts in Greece in November. The report shows that there are serious deficiencies in the management of the external border in Greece. We know that in the meantime Greece has started undertaking efforts towards rectifying and complying with the Schengen rules. Substantial improvements are needed to ensure the proper reception, registration, relocation or return of migrants in order to bring Schengen functioning back to normal, without internal border controls. This is our ultimate common goal.” The draft report – which is not public – is based on unannounced site visits to the Greek-Turkish land border and to Chios and Samos conducted from 10 to 13 November 2015. The report looks at the presence of police and coast guard personnel on the inspected sites, the efficiency of the identification and registration process, sea border surveillance and cooperation with neighbouring countries. Whilst acknowledging that the Greek authorities are under pressure, the report notably finds that there is no effective identification and registration of irregular migrants and that fingerprints are not being systematically entered into the system and travel documents are not being systematically checked for the authenticity or against crucial security databases, such as SIS, Interpol and national databases. On this basis, the draft report concludes that Greece is seriously neglecting its obligations and that there are serious deficiencies in the carrying out of external border controls that must be overcome and dealt with by the Greek authorities. Schengen Evaluation Mechanism Schengen evaluations are carried out in Member States based on a multi-annual and an annual evaluation programme. Such visits can be announced or unannounced. Following each visit, a report is drawn up identifying any shortcomings and making recommendations for remedial action, with a deadline for their implementation. The recommendations are submitted by the Commission to the Council for adoption. As a follow-up, the Member State in question is required to submit an action plan setting out how it intends to remedy the weaknesses identified. Member States can be assisted in fulfilling the recommendations via practical and/or financial measures from the Commission, Frontex or other EU bodies. The Eighth bi-annual report on the functioning of the Schengen area of 15 December 2015 already announced that, depending on the results of the Schengen evaluations in Greece, specific measures as referred to in Article 19a and 26 of the Schengen Borders Code may be recommended. Procedures addressing exceptional circumstances If a Schengen Evaluation Report concludes that the evaluated Member State is “seriously neglecting its obligations under the Schengen rules” and if there are “serious deficiencies in the carrying out of external border control”, the Commission can propose recommendations, to be adopted by the Council, for remedial action to address any deficiencies identified during the evaluation. In order to ensure compliance with these recommendations, the Commission may, under Article 19a of the Schengen Borders Code, recommend that the evaluated Member State take certain specific measures, which may include the deployment of European border guard teams or the submission of a strategic plan setting out how the Member State will deploy its own personnel and equipment to address the concerns. The Commission’s proposals must be adopted by a Committee of the Member States, acting by qualified majority. The evaluated Member State then has three months to complete the remedial actions. Where, after three months, serious deficiencies persist and the measures taken have not proved sufficient to ensure the adequate remedy of these deficiencies, the Commission may trigger the application of the procedure provided for in Article 26 of the Schengen Borders Code. Under Article 26 of the Schengen Borders Code, if the measures under Article 19a have not been effective, the Council may, based on a proposal from Commission, recommend that one or more Member States reintroduce border controls at all or at specific parts of their internal borders as a matter of last resort, to protect the common interest of the Schengen area. The Council recommendation needs to be adopted by qualified majority. Under Article 26, and in the exceptional circumstances described above, controls can be reintroduced for a period of up to six months. This measure can be prolonged for additional six month periods up to a maximum duration of two years. For More Information: The Schengen Border Code Eight biannual report on the functioning of the Schengen area (15 December 2015) The Schengen Evaluation and Monitoring Mechanism Directorate-General for Home Affairs website