. . . Carine Bapita, legal representative for victims at the ICC.
Why?
Her statements in the admissibility hearing in Katanga today shows she has the Defense strategy all mapped out (so much so, Defense lawyer David Hooper himself acknowledged it).
I don’t have the transcript yet, but to paraphrase Bapita: The admissibility challenge is not about getting the case taken back to the DRC, it’s about stalling /stopping the case from going forward anywhere, and about turning Katanga from an accused into a victim.
As I was twittering my way through it I understood the first part, but hadn’t latched onto what she had meant about turning Katanga into a victim – until Hooper drew his conclusions for the defense, where he quite literally said that Katanga has no intention of going back to the DRC. Hooper continued that Katanga was not brought to Dutch soil by his own choice, but now that he is here he comes under the authority of the European Court for Human Rights(ECHR) and Hooper will soon be making a submission to the ICC about the DRC’s unlawful conduct against Katanga . . . presumably to lay the groundwork for a claim before the ECHR that The Netherlands, as a State Party to the ECHR, would be violating Katanaga’s rights if they forced him to return to the DRC.
I guess you have to say that the Judges are on full notice now that the consequence, if they find the case is inadmissible before the ICC, is that there’s going to be a fight to get it tried anywhere. The DRC delegation themselves are clear they don’t want it, and even if they did, Katanga will be trying to avoid being sent back. End result: victims lose. No wonder Bapita has her eye on the ball.
Speak Your Mind