Uhuru, Muthaura, and Ali: Initial ICC appearance, 8 April 2011

Situation: Republic of Kenya
Case: The Prosecutor v. Francis Kirimi Muthaura, Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta and Mohammed Hussein Ali

Today, 8 April 2011, Pre-Trial Chamber II of the International Criminal Court (ICC) set the date of the beginning of the confirmation of charges hearing in the case of The Prosecutor v. Francis Kirimi Muthaura, Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta and Mohammed Hussein Ali for 21 September 2011.

This date was announced at the initial appearance of Francis Kirimi Muthaura, Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta and Mohammed Hussein Ali before the ICC. During this hearing, in the presence of the Prosecutor and the suspects, assisted by their Defence teams, Pre-Trial Chamber II verified the identity of the suspects and ensured that they were clearly informed of the crimes which they are alleged to have committed and of their rights under the Rome Statute of the ICC.

A confirmation of charges hearing is held to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to establish substantial grounds to believe that each suspect committed each of the crimes charged. If the charges are confirmed, the Pre-Trial Chamber commits the person for trial before a Trial Chamber, which will conduct the subsequent phase of the proceedings: the trial.

During the hearing, the Presiding Judge also stressed that: “It came to the knowledge of the Chamber through following some articles in the Kenyan newspapers that there are movements towards retriggering the violence in Kenya, by way of delivering dangerous speeches. I would like to remind the suspects - and note that I am not referring to anyone in particular. This is a general point to be made to all the suspects - such action could be perceived as a breach of one of the conditions clearly set out in the summonses to appear namely, to continue committing crimes within the jurisdiction of this Court. Accordingly, this might prompt the Chamber to replace the summonses to appear with warrants of arrest. However, the Judges would not prefer to resort to such a drastic measure and would rather (and we assume the suspects endorse this view) continue carrying out the proceedings smoothly and respecting the liberty of the three suspects”