President Uhuru Kenyatta’s ICC trial pushed to February 2014

Nairobi, Kenya: President Uhuru Kenyatta will now stand trial at the ICC in February 2014 if Kenya’s petition to the United Nations Security Council seeking a deferral of proceedings for a year fails. On Thursday, International Criminal Court judges postponed the start of the president’s trial to February 5 following an agreement by the defence and prosecution
. The trial was scheduled to begin on November 12 but Kenyatta’s lawyers sought a postponement to investigate some prosecution witnesses while the prosecutor acknowledged she needed more time to prepare.

The development came as a joint Kenyan and African Union delegation held talks with the UNSC to press for Kenya’s petition to be considered by the council’s plenary.
Diplomatic sources indicated Kenya’s request for deferral of the cases against President Kenyatta and his deputy William Ruto could be considered in a closed-door session of the 15-member council next week.
 The decision by the ICC judges gives Kenyan authorities more time to lobby for the deferral to prevent President Kenyatta from becoming the first sitting head of state to appear at The Hague-based court.

VICTIMS LAWYER
In making the ruling, the judges of Trial Chamber V(b) dismissed an application by the Common Legal Representative of Victims Fergal Gaynor stating that victims had waited for far too long for justice.
The judges said they had the power to postpone the case at the request of either the prosecution or the defence. They added that they were guided by the need to ensure the trial is both fair and expeditious.
“ The Chamber notes that the parties are in agreement on postponing the trial date until February 2014 in order to give the prosecution additional time to investigate recent factual allegations raised by the defence,” read a decision signed by the three judges led by Presiding Judge Kuniko Ozaki.
They added: “ The Chamber accepts the parties’ submissions that a postponement is warranted and vacates the trial date of 12  November 2013. “
 The judges expressed regret that while they wanted the trials to begin and be disposed of as quickly as possible, the adjournment was necessary to allow the parties in the case more time to prepare.
But they warned against further postponements in future saying that both the prosecution and defence must accelerate their preparation.