MONROVIA – Since the inception of the International Criminal Court(ICC), in The Hague, The Netherlands, no professional legal institution has ever openly challenged the Court’s the application of the law, selection criteria of counsel or its own rules and procedures governing the appointments of counsels for defendants until recently when the African Bar Association(AFBA) and the US based International Justice Group(IJG), took the liberty to openly question and challenge not only the Court’s decision to sideline African lawyers but also the selection criteria adopted in appointing Mr. Peter Haynes KC., a a British lawyer and a European, chosen by the ICC to represent an African defendant Joseph Kony indicted for war crimes and crimes against humanity. As the ICC scramble to justify and defend its selection criteria, there are more questions than answers, which is why both the ILJ and the African Bar Association(AfBA) are not only objecting to Mr. Haynes’ appointment but are also calling on the ICC to revisit the entire selection criteria, adhere to its own rules and standards regarding “gender and geographical representation” in order to select a qualified, experienced and competent counsel from Africa to represent Joseph Kony. The group accused the ICC for being overly protective of Mr. Haynes’s appointment and egregiously dismissive of any suggestion to revisit the selection criteria, something which has prompted them to file formal complaints before the Assembly of States Parties(ASP) which has oversight responsibility over the operations of the ICC. Our diplomatic correspondent reports.
It’s like a battle that has been rumbling beneath the surface for years but only need a trigger to tumble like a boulder rolling down a steep and gate-crashing onto the stage, and exposing some of the most acrimonious debates between the ICC and the African Bar Association and International Law Group(ILJ) over the ICC’s alleged failure to adhere to its own rules and procedures in the appointment of counsel for defendants before the Court.
Two separate letters in the form of an appeal, written by the African Bar Association (AfBA) and the International Justice Group(IJG) to the Assembly of States Parties(ASP) of the ICC have accused the Court’s Registry of bypassing its own selection and adopting a secret process that excluded lawyers of African descents who had applied to represent Mr. Joseph Kony, the Uganda rebel leader of the Lord Resistance Army (LRA) indicted for war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Credible information gathered by the paper from unimpeachable sources closed to a number of US based International Law Group(ILJ) and the African, has revealed that after series of communications exchanged, objecting the secret criteria adopted in appointing Mr. Haynes and demanding a complete review of the entire process for accountability and transparency failed, the two international bodies have complained the ICC’s Registry to the Assembly of States Parties(ASP) in order to overturn his appointment.
Mr. Haynes, a British lawyer, was among a total of 72 seasoned lawyers on the list of counsel of the ICC who applied to represent Joseph Kony, but was secretly selected and subsequently appointed as counsel for Joseph Kony.
Copies of the letters seen by our diplomatic correspondent reveal that both the African Bar and the ILJ are openly questioning the selection criteria adopted by the International Criminal Court in appointing Mr. Haynes, KC., a counsel of no African descent, and have no appreciation of the cultural and social dynamics of Africa ort Uganda which was a key factor of the ICC’s own rules and standards adopted for the application process regarding “gender and geographical representation.
The ICC recently published a vacancy announcement on its website and other media outlets around the world, soliciting qualified, experienced and competent counsels already on list of vetted counsels, to apply, in order to give the court the opportunity to select the most qualified counsel.
Based on the Registry’s bulleting, which is published on its website, there are a sundry of qualified, experienced and competent lawyers on that list of Counsel, including seasoned professors of law, active courtroom lawyers and advocates from Arica, most whom applied, but none was ever selected or shortlisted for interview according to the letters written by the two international civil society organizations.
Although the Confirmation Hearing is slated for October 15, 2024 and will be held in absentia while Joseph Kony is currently on the run and is not under the jurisdiction of the Court, the groups believe that the exercise must be headed by an African lawyer who understands the inflexibilities and intricacies of criminal prosecution and defense in the African settings, and has excellent trial credentials in managing complex cases, but noted that Mr. Haynes does not fit the court’s own “geographic representation and gender balance” criteria and therefore his appointment be noting but a complete “imposition”.
A legal practitioner at the US State Department, with deep interest in judicial accountability in Africa and with support for African lawyers playing a critical role in criminal defense and prosecution of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Africa, has questioned the selection criteria adopted by the ICC.
He said the entire process is shrouded in secrecy and exposes what he termed the Court’s blatant disregard for transparency and fair play on grounds that the court woefully failed to publish the names of those that were shortlisted for interview and their qualifications.
The counsel hinted this paper that a total of 72 qualified, experienced and competent lawyers applied, among which were experienced lawyers from Africa, but none of the applicants with African descent, was ever considered, selected or shortlisted, contrary to the Registry own rules and standards regarding “gender and geographical representation.”
He said if the Court had nothing to hide and had not predetermined the selection of Mr. Haynes, it would have taken the courage to publish the names of those who were shortlisted and would have provided reasons for their selection, the date of their interviews, among.
Concluding, he described the selection of Mr. Haynes as fundamentally flawed and maintained that the Confirmation Hearing of Kony’s trial which is expected to commence on October 15, 2024 in absentia, is even more questionable.
Other lawyer groups both in Europe and Africa have raised eyebrows over the secret selection and appointment of Mr. Peter Haynes as counsel for Joseph Kony.
The Presidents of the African Bar, Mr. Hannibal Uwaifo and the International Justice Group(IJG) Cllr. Jerome Verdier have expressed shocks and dismay over the refusal of the ICC to revisit the selection criteria and n make it more competitive.
They have questioned the rationale behind the appointment of Mr. Haynes and wondered how and why he was preferred over some of the most qualified, experienced, and competent lawyers from Kenya, Uganda and Liberia who also applied but were never shortlisted.
Two international organizations questioned the ICC over its reported failure to publish a shortlist of the ten (10) competing candidates, that it claimed were selected, and how many were females and males; how many were prosecutors and criminal defense counsels, among others.
ILJ and AfBA argued that the Registry did not give any indication of how the criteria and qualifying standards were applied to each of the candidates, individually or collectively and how the selection of the best candidate was derived which led to Mr. Peter Haynes, a male and obviously, not a female; a national of the European Continent, without geographic proximity to Africa, the mother Continent of the Absentee Defendant, Mr. Kony was selected.
The groups wonder whether or not there were any candidates of African descent with greater geographic proximity to Mr. Kony, the accused, making the shortlist.
Both Mr. Uwaifo and Cllr. Verdier in the respective letters to the ICC and the Assembly ofg States Parties(ASP) argued that the selection criteria was shrouded in secrecy which is why the Registry failed to notify the rest of the applicants that did not make the final list of ten or six shortlisted, because Registry fear an avalanche of challenges to the rules adopted.
“Is there any evidence to prove that the candidates who did not make the shortlist were notified?”, IJG and AfBA asked.
“Where is that evidence; did the Court notify the Uganda Law Society, the East African Law Society, and the African Bar Association (AFBA) or publish the names of the shortlisted candidates on its website; did the court set any date for the interview of the shortlisted candidates of 10 or 6?” the IJG and AfBA continued with a ton of questions for the ICC.
The IJG and AfBA added that they are troubled, and quite constrained to argue that this Court is, and ought to be, a court of records, and an evidence-based Court whose activities should be driven by evidence, accountability and transparency, something the groups noted is absent from the recent appointment of Mr. Haynes.
“The fact that some very pertinent questions of the integrity of the process is being raised by IJG, AfBA, and others, and an objection to the Selection criteria has been filed, is further evidence that the entire process was not transparent and therefore, it should be unconditionally revisited and its spurious outcome, selection and appointment of our colleague, Mr. Haynes, must be revisited and/or set aside.” The groups’ letters to the ASP conclude.
Meanwhile, the ASP is yet to respond to the complaints filed before it by the two international bodies regarding the alleged secret appointment of Mr. Haynes.
Your writing style is both engaging and informative,