Zimbabwe: SHDA – Current State of the Public Health Sector (27.11.2019)

Zimbabwe: ZLHR Condemns Assault of Human Rights Lawyer (25.11.2019)

U.S. House Committe on the Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler letter to President Donald Trump: Invitasion to appear at the first Impeachment Hearing in the next phase (26.11.2019)

ICC: Lessons learned from the Kenyatta Case of 2011

The Internal Investigation of the botched International Criminal Court (ICC) case of the ‘Kenyatta Case – The Prosecutor v. Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta – FORMERLY – The Prosecutor v. Francis Kirimi Muthaura, Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta and Mohammed Hussein Ali, ICC-01/09-02/11’, which the investigation started in Kenya in October 2010 and failure to produce anything binding or to justify the charges against them. So the charges was dropped by 2013 and 2014. While the whole case was terminated by March 2015.

Now the ICC has suddenly dropped an statement into their internal investigation into why it ended like this. Even if they have the warning, of if any of the judges get new evidence on the case. They might re-open it. However, what this states is very serious and the acts done to interfere in the investigation. Says also a lot, also about the shortfall of the jurisdiction and help from the government of Kenya. Which isn’t weird, as the state was investigating the President and allies of him. They don’t want any issues with an foreign court. That is all natural in the scheme of things.

Just look here:

The prosecutorial process in the Kenya cases, the experts found, was hampered by deadlines set by the first Prosecutor that were based on considerations other than what they considered to be sound prosecutorial practice. In their view, the effectiveness of the investigations and prosecutions was significantly undermined by a “decision over assessment” tactic respecting cases and a target-based – as opposed to evidence-based – approach to investigation and charging. This, coupled with other problems, meant that the prosecutions were burdened with weak cases, relying on one or only a small number of insider witnesses – whose evidence could not be independently verified by the OTP – to establish essential elements of the case” (ICC, 26.11.2019).

The key point concerning the Government of Kenya was the OTP’s delay in seeking the assistance of the Trial Chamber to compel cooperation, resulting in part from the contradictory approaches advocated by JCCD and PD (that is, continue to try to persuade the authorities to cooperate versus applying to the Trial Chamber for a finding of non-cooperation against the Government, respectively). This lesson has been taken on board. The OTP also has a range of strategies to secure cooperation from States Parties and situation countries, and these are still evolving” (ICC, 26.11.2019).

The investigations were further undermined by the decision to delay in-country investigations, which did not take place until after the CoC hearings. Unfortunately, after those hearings, investigating in Kenya became much more difficult: support for the ICC among Kenyans had been eroded by a concerted campaign of negative propaganda; OTP personnel were followed, putting them and anyone they contacted at risk; the witness interference orchestrated by the suspects/accused became even more pervasive; and the Government of Kenya (GoK) became even less willing to co-operate, if not actively interfering with OTP operations and witness security” (ICC, 26.11.2019).

As noted above, the GoK did not support the OTP investigative activities, instead it either allowed interference with witnesses inside and outside of Kenya and with OTP activities in Kenya, including surveillance of OTP investigators, and/or may have been directly involved in such interference. It refused Requests for Assistance (RFAs) thereby hampering the OTP’s ability to access potential evidence, or imposed such conditions or access as to, in reality, make that access so cumbersome as to be unworkable” (ICC, 26.11.2019).

We can see the ICC started this out on the wrong premise and lost because of it. They couldn’t present well enough evidence, either because of the deadlines. Nor the way the small pockets of witnesses was silenced. This was done, as the ICC haven’t secured them or ensured their safety. This was a mismanaged approach by the ICC and the ones seeking justice on this case. The Kenyatta case was finally dropped, because the ICC and their partners hadn’t done their job, neitehr had the Government of Kenya done its either. Therefore, this one got stalled and the charges got dropped.

Like the charges against William Ruto, Joshua Arap Sang and Uhuru Kenyatta. This was done because out of the 10 witnesses supposed to be put forward, only 5 showed up. That means the prosecution and the material they could assess wasn’t substantial enough nor digging deep enough. The ICC didn’t do their work and the Kenyans was doing internal actions to ensure the ICC didn’t get a case to begin with. They silenced the witnesses and intimidated the ones who could have come forward to the ICC.

This should be a lesson for the ICC. That to quick deadlines, not enough work with the coordinated leadership of where they charging people and get the proper jurisdiction might be more important. As they couldn’t do their job, as the Kenyans was putting hampers in their way. Next time find out ways to secure the witnesses and the affidavits to collect evidence before they are afraid of testifying. Peace.

Opinion: Onek warns NRM supporters, but he should have warned the authorities!

Politics of violence will not take the country forward but back to the pre-colonial times and the country will be reminded of dictatorial regimes of past leaders. NRM government has done many good things for Ugandans and there should be no panic or worry about any Opposition politician because what the NRM government has done speaks volumes” – Hilary Onek

Let me be perfectly clear, the message of Hilary Onek MP and Minister is good in one way, but his target is the wrong people. The supporters of the National Resistance Movement (NRM) isn’t known for violence. It is the ones the NRM and the government hires to their bidding, which is violent.

The MP and minister should warn the Police Force, the Flying Squad, the CMI, ISO and the Army. The Special Force Command and everyone else involved in during the Election Road Map and the Campaigning of everyone. Those are the ones who attacks, use live-bullets, arbitrary arrests and tear-gas. This is known and is the Modus Operandi of the state.

Expect like during the 2016, the Local Defence Units (LDUs) will act like the Crime Preventers did back-then. They will intimidate and follow the opposition. The Police Force will monitor, close rallies and silence the opposition parties. They will hurt, damage, destroy and skirmish, in and around opposition rallies and consultation meetings. That is common practice. They will send police to raid party offices and confiscate electronic devices and documents. That is just what the government does.

So, Onek should have gone after the authorities, the law-enforcement and the ones ordering them around. They are the ones doing the election violence, the ones who uses brutal force against civilians. That is well known, but seemingly not addressed. Because, then he would challenge the State House and the “Orders from Above”. No one seriously inside the NRM would do that, then you end up like a rebel and get whipped out like some cold coffee.

Onek is right, but also wrong. Violence is no good. But, this regime is known for it. It is known for ordering violence and arrests on the opposition. It is known for using illegal means of silencing the opposition, while charging the opposition for any kind of crime in the book. That is just what it does to stay in power.

If Onek was right, he would have warned the authorities, but he doesn’t, he warns the civilians standing behind the banner of the party. The ones that has joined the bus. That they have to act careful and kindly, as they have done so much since 1986. So, they got nothing to worry about. Alas, that is not the case, but the ones we should worry about is the authorities and the law-enforcement. They are the one coming with the violence. Especially in a election season. Peace.

Zimbabwe: Civil Aviation Authority of Zimbabwe – Zimbabwe Airspace remains open and operational (26.11.2019)

Mali: Communique du Gouvernement de la Republique du Mali (26.11.2019)

Togo: Ministere des Affaires etrangeres, de l’Integration africaine et des Togolais de l’Exterieur – Communique de Presse (26.11.2019)

Zimbabwe: SHDA – Re: Total Withdrawal of Medical Services (26.11.2019)

Kenya: The National Assembly – Message from the President – Invitation to the Launch of the Report of the Taskforce on Building Bridges to Unity Advisory (26.11.2019)