The right to a fair trial and judicial economy at the international criminal court

Abstract

Following the civil unrest in Kenya in 2008 and Kenya’s inability to prosecute the perpetrators of those crimes, the ICC prosecutor initiated proceedings proprio motu against Mr Uhuru Kenyatta and Mr William Ruto. Despite the impending prosecutions, Mr Kenyatta and Mr Ruto were elected as President and Deputy President of Kenya in 2013. Due to their prominent status, they both applied (separately) to be excused from continuous attendance at their trial proceedings. Mr Ruto’s argument was heard first, and Trial Chamber (A) granted the excusal request. In the course of Mr Kenyatta’s hearing by Trial Chamber (B), but before the Appeals Chamber reversed Mr Ruto’s Trial Chamber (A) decision, the issue of judicial economy was raised by the prosecution. Their contention was that Trial Chamber (B) should in fact wait for the Appeals Chamber’s final decision, but the Chamber dismissed the argument and proceeded with the decision at hand. This article contends that the Court missed a real opportunity to place judicial economy within the human rights discourse, particularly in the light of Article 21(3) of the Rome Statute.