THE SYSTEM HAS COLLAPSED
October 16, 2014
THE SYSTEM HAS COLLAPSED
October 16, 2014
The System is in Deep crisis and even Court orders are no longer respected
October 14, 2014
Kenyan civil society campaigners said at the United Nations on Friday that International Criminal Court member states should consider imposing sanctions on Kenya if ICC judges rule that the government is not cooperating in the case involving President Uhuru Kenyatta.
The three activists speaking at a news conference at UN headquarters suggested that such action may be needed to ensure that justice is done for those victimised in the post-election violence nearly seven years ago. The government has blocked efforts by ICC Chief Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda to obtain records that could serve as evidence against President Kenyatta, the activists charged.
They have been presenting that view in meetings in recent days with the UN missions of nations that are parties to the treaty establishing the ICC.
And they have been warning the UN missions that even if the ICC judges conclude that Kenya is not cooperating, the case against President Kenyatta could still languish unless the ICC’s Assembly of State Parties somehow compels the government to provide the records sought by the prosecutor. At present, “there is no mechanism for compelling such cooperation,” noted Haron Ndubi, a member of Kenyans for Peace with Truth and Justice.
He and the other two Kenyans addressing reporters did not express confidence that the case will even reach the point of being referred to the Assembly of State Parties. “It is highly likely that the case will collapse,” said Abdul Noormohamed, legal officer for the Open Society Initiative for East Africa. ICC Chief Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda should not be blamed for such an outcome, added Stella Ndirangu, a program manager for the International Commission of Jurists-Kenya.
Ms Bensouda lacks the ability to force the government to hand over documents she believes may contain evidence against President Kenyatta, Ms Ndirangu said. The prosecutor’s task has been further complicated by the death, disappearance or recanting of testimony of some prosecution witnesses in the case, Ms Ndirangu commented.
She noted that there is another option open to ICC trial judges other than terminating the case or referring it to the Assembly of State Parties. The judges could also dismiss the case “without prejudice,” meaning that the prosecution could be revived if new evidence arises, Ms Ndirangu said. Whatever The Hague court decides, the activists vowed that they will continue working in Kenya to deliver justice for the election violence victims.
Civil society groups have brought two cases to Kenyan courts. One involves a Constitutional issue regarding those displaced by the 2007-2008 violence. The other focuses on eight victims of sexual violence, “both male and female,” Ms Ndirangu said.
In matters involving international criminal law, there is no time limit on liability, Mr Noormohamed noted. He cited the example of cases related to the World War II Nazi Holocaust in which “it can take 50, 60 years, but one day you see justice done.” He pleaded for attention to the plight of the thousands of Kenyans who were killed, raped or displaced during the 2007-2008 mayhem. “They’re poor, they’re indigent, no one gives them a voice,” Mr Noormohamed said.
He noted that more than 100 Kenyan MPs accompanied President Kenyatta to The Hague on Wednesday, “but nobody spoke for those who died.” “Our situation is such that the perpetrators have become the victims,” Mr Noormohamed remarked.
October 14, 2014
Harun Gathece whose images are attached was on Wednesday 8/10/2014 evening hacked to death by City Council Askaris. He was cornered at his place of work at New Ngara Market (Sunami) as he went about his hawking business. Several others were serious injured.
As earlier reported, city council askaris have for the last two years been attacking small scale traders popularly known as hawkers with machetes and other crude weapons. Efforts by victims to register complains at central police station have been unsuccessful since the officers at the station’s report office have instructions not to record reports from hawkers. Instead whenever they attempt they are intimidated or locked up and charged with illegal hawking.
Within the two years, 9(nine) have lost their lives in similar circumstances while about 50 (fifty) have been attacked and seriously wounded.
26 year Harun Gathece is the latest victim. He died on arrival at Kenyatta National Hospital where he was rushed by colleagues on referral from Guru Nanak Hospital and his body lies at the city mortuary.
According to witnesses the Askaris descended on the market attacking everyone on sight. They caught up with Gathece who tipped as he tried to flee and set upon him with knives and machetes. Before he died, he named one of his attackers as Akasi Abhani aka Wasiwasi a city askari [pictured in a green sweater holding rocks].
Akasi Abhani aka wasiwasi was also named by Irungu Kamau who was removed from a city hotel and hacked to death on 23rd Sep. 2013 moments before he passed out.
As good citizens, editors are now requested to put these cases in the court of public opinion since the authorities are unwilling to investigate and bring the heinous acts to a halt by prosecuting the culprits.
October 13, 2014
From today, Monday, 13th October 2014 until Monday, 27th October 2014 in Sweden, any non-white person can be stopped by police in the streets, inside and outside train stations, inside the train, at shopping centers and at any other public place to be asked for identification.
More scary is that police can knock on any door and claim that they have a tip that an illegal immigrant aka paperless person is living at the address. If you are the owner of the house and you just lost your ID, you will, most certainly, be taken in “for investigations” to establish your status before being released. In fact, if you have a visa that has expired, you will most likely, hit home base with the next flight so pack all your stuff neatly just in case! This is the new Sweden.
The program is called “Mos Maiorum”, an Italian instigated pan-EU project intended to round up “illegal immigrants” and “refugees in the underground” to be caged ahead of deportation to their home countries. As a member of the European Union, Sweden has accepted to participate in the project, a move that has created a major uproar within the immigrant community, refugee groups, radical politicians and human rights activists.
The program comes hot on the heels of another failed program called REVA which empowered police to stop any “suspected illegal immigrant” or refugee to be checked and, if found paperless, locked before deportation. According to Malin Björk, a Parliamentarian of the Left Party, “Mos Maiorum is REVA on steroids”
Although the stated purpose of Mos Maiorum (which is Latin and means ancient custom or unwritten law) is to “gather information in order to identify illegal immigrant smuggling and to identify and prosecute organized criminals”, Björk has argued that there is already enough mechanism to gather such information. Björk says that such work can be conducted through Frontex, an EU boarder agency that includes the so called “debriefing team” which interviews people in the refugee camps to track their routes and to try and nab human smugglers.
Apart from igniting memories of the ill-fated REVA, Mos Maiorum has rekindled debate about an illegal and secretive racial profiling of the “Roma people” aka Gypsies by Swedish police, a program which saw Roma people categorized in police records under circumstances that fitted racial profiling.
This time round, non-white people are the main targets of Mos Maiorum and it will be impossible for the Swedish police to implement the program without the police being seen as racist.
Patrik Engstrom, Deputy Head of the border police, told Aftonbladet newspaper that people will not be stopped by police for identification based on skin colour. “According to the law, it is not allowed to stop someone based on their appearance”, Engström said, adding that “We must have a valid reason, a tip, conduct or behavior, and so we carry out checks in combination with other police work, like drunk driving controls”.
Linguistically speaking, the Swedish police are well trained in covering up controversial or potentially racist police activities using acceptable phraseology and anonymous citing of the law to add credibility to the explanation. Why?
Rule of engagement
Because it is already the rule of engagement that when a person is stopped for any suspected offence (drunken driving, strange conduct or behaviour etc) the first thing the suspect is usually requested by police to do is to produce an identification document. Consequently, the police does not need to put Mos Maiorum in motion to establish the legal status of a person in Sweden. The main purpose of Mos Maiorum is to enable police to stop anybody (read non-white) to be asked for identification.
Just like any immigrant or refugee in Sweden will testify, the so called undocumented aka paperless immigrants are almost impossible to be caught by police under current circumstances unless police breaks the law. This is because this group rarely engage in petty crimes like drunken driving, shop-lifting, peeing by the road side, creating a disturbance in a public environment, spitting at a public place, consuming alcohol at prohibited places, smoking in public, excessive partying in pubs (where security guards ask for IDs at the door), engaging in a fight, raping women, doing drugs, being present at a crime scene, or running down the train station without a valid ticket.
With or without papers, and with thousands of surveillance cameras mounted at every corner, street, train wagon, shop, toilet environments, ATM machines, public buses and any other public place, anybody engaging in any sort of crime (especially in urban areas) run the risk of being caught to face justice.
The underlying point is that although the number of the “paperless” continues to grow in Sweden, the police are increasingly being unable to catch their prey because of high discipline among the paperless. For this reason, the “unwritten law” in Mos Maiorum is to enable police to stop ANYBODY (an illegal act that does not exist under current Swedish law) and hope that they have their prey.
It is unfortunate that the implementation of this program is coming at a time when the Swedish Democrats (SD), an open racist Party calling for the expulsion of all immigrants from Sweden, has just made a big electoral advance in the just concluded Swedish national elections. Stopping refugees from coming to Sweden and spot checks of IDs by police (of non whites) was a constantly recurring theme of SD’s anti-immigrant propaganda during campaigns. It is therefore ironical that a Social Democratic government is implementing a policy that was principally being championed by a hard-core Neo-Nazi party whose program is teething with racist policies.
As Mos Maiorum gets into motion, the paperless have cause to worry. Interestingly, the Social Democratic party that has just come to power under a platform of reform, has so far refused to take a stand on the question of Mos Maiorum. According to the Press Secretary of the Interior Minister, Anders Ygeman who made a written response to Aftonbladet newspaper:
“It is the police who decide whether to participate in operational activities and how participation should look like. Controls are a natural part of police work. Police have regulations of internal immigration controls that will prevent the controls from being conducted in a manner that is ethnically discriminatory”, wrote Yegman.
For now, those concerned can only wait until December 11th 2014, time when the result of Mos Maiorum will be presented. The project is the 7th operation of its kind against undocumented immigrants in EU.
In September last year, operation “Perkunas”, another racist operation that openly discriminated against non-white people, was conducted and when the result was presented, the State was happy to announce that it had netted 10,459 undocumented immigrants who were stopped by police, nabbed and deported to their home countries.
What was never published is the number of victims who were stopped using the so called “valid reasons” or the number of tips that were received by the police ahead of arrests and deportation. As the paperless dig deeper into their fox holes in the deeper underground, it is a wait and see game before the count of the unlucky ones is presented in December. Living in Sweden without papers has just become tougher!
October 13, 2014
“The alarm is rising on the spread of the Ebola virus. Statistics, though not clear say at least 3,500 people have died from what they think is Ebola in 2014. The majority of cases have taken place in West Africa, mainly in Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leon. However the first fatality has now taken place in the United States of a Liberian national recently arriving in the US. Many questions are being asked from if this disease is man made to whether it is being used as an excuse by the United States to control more African resources? This after US president Barack Obama declared war on Ebola, but instead of ordering health professionals to Africa, he has ordered the deployment of thousands of military troops.”
October 8, 2014
Dekula Band “Ngoma Ya Kilo”
Place: Lilla Wien “Little Nairobi”
Address: Swedenborgsg. 20
Pendel: Södra Station
New CD Shujaa Mamadou Ndala
Buy it from amazon, itunes, qabuz
October 8, 2014
October 7, 2014
When Kenya’s President Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta shows up at The Hague he will become the first sitting head of state to appear before the International Criminal Court (ICC) as an accused person (Kenyatta attended his pretrial hearing at the ICC in September, 2011, but at that time he was still deputy prime minister).
Kenyatta has been called to The Hague for a status conference—a private meeting between the judges, the prosecution and the defense to consider the state of the case. In deciding to postpone the trial opening originally scheduled for October 7, and to schedule the status conference instead, Trial Chamber V(b) noted that the case had reached a “critical juncture.” This is also one of the reasons the chamber gave in its September 30 decision for insisting on Kenyatta’s presence, despite a defense request that he be excused from attending court.
The gravity of the moment is reflected in the central question that will be before the judges on Tuesday and Wednesday: should the chamber indefinitely adjourn the trial, as requested by the prosecution, or terminate it, as Kenyatta’s lawyers have asked?
Both the defense and prosecution agree on one thing: the prosecution’s evidence does not meet the “beyond reasonable doubt” threshold necessary to prove the allegations against Kenyatta. Each side, however, has different reasons for reaching this conclusion.
However, judges will not be deciding on whether the evidentiary threshold has been met by the prosecution when they hear submissions between October 7 and October 8. In different decisions Trial Chamber V(b) and its predecessor, Trial Chamber V, have emphasized that judges can only determine the strength or quality of any evidence once a trial has taken place.
Instead, the chamber will be seeking clarity on the progress of implementing its decision of July 29 this year, which ordered the Kenyan government to provide the prosecution with eight categories of records relating to Kenyatta or companies and third parties associated with him. That decision followed an earlier one made in March in which the chamber required the Kenyan government and prosecution to meet and negotiate how to make available those records and then report to the chamber every two months.
In the July 29 decision, the judges did not set any reporting conditions, so the status conference on Tuesday will be the first time since that decision that the chamber will be hearing jointly from both sides. The prosecution has said these records will determine whether the prosecution will persevere with the case or withdraw the charges against Kenyatta.
Before this latest phase of the Kenyatta case, his lawyers had applied three times to have the case terminated or have the proceedings permanently suspended. In March last year, Kenyatta’s defense team asked the chamber to terminate the case. The judges at the time held that terminating the case was not the appropriate remedy to the issues Kenyatta’s lawyers raised. At the time, Kenyatta’s lawyers said that the withdrawal of a key prosecution witness and the prosecution’s delayed disclosure of evidence were grounds for terminating the case. Trial Chamber V disagreed and instead gave Kenyatta’s lawyers more time to prepare their defense.
In January this year, Kenyatta’s lawyers renewed their request for the case against their client to be terminated; at that time they cited a prosecution statement to the court that the current evidence against Kenyatta did not meet the beyond reasonable doubt threshold required by the ICC. Trial Chamber V(b) declined to grant that request. The chamber pointed out that the prosecution had yet to receive records that were requested from the Kenyan government in April 2012; it concluded that this matter needed to be resolved first, before any decision on the request to terminate the case could be taken. In that decision made in March this year, the chamber left open the issue of whether to refer Kenya to the ICC membership for failure to cooperate with the court.
Kenyatta’s lawyers also applied to the chamber to permanently suspend the case or issue a permanent stay of proceedings in October, 2013. They argued then that a witness, Witness 118, and an intermediary for the prosecution had sought to influence a group of 10 prosecution witnesses to make up evidence against Kenyatta. In that application, they also argued that another prosecution witness, Witness 12, had solicited money to change his evidence in favor of Kenyatta. The judges concluded that issuing a permanent stay of proceedings was an extreme measure to be taken to protect the rights of an accused person to a fair trial. The chamber said that was not the situation in the Kenyatta case.
The judges also concluded that a lot of what the defense said about prosecution witnesses could only be tested in a trial process. They gave an example of audio recordings Witness 12 made on the prosecution’s instruction. The judges noted that the defense and prosecution interpreted differently the translation of those recordings, and those interpretations, the judges said, could only be best tested in a trial.
Kenyatta’s trial has been postponed five times now. His lawyers have sought to halt the proceedings at least three times. These factors cumulatively raise the question of an accused person’s right to a fair and expeditious trial, as provided for in the ICC’s fundamental law, the Rome Statute. These considerations will also be on the minds of the judges of Trial Chamber V(b) once they rise at the end of the second status conference next week to go and reach a decision on whether to adjourn or terminate the trial.
The victims of the bloodshed that followed the December 2007 presidential election who are yet to receive justice will also surely be taken into consideration. This is the reason why the Kenyan cases are before the ICC in the first place.
As the chamber said, the case has reached a “critical juncture.”