ICC separates Ongwen case from Kony

On 6th February 2015, Single Judge Ekaterina Trendafilova, on behalf of Pre-Trial Chamber II of the International Criminal Court (ICC), severed the proceedings against Dominic Ongwen from the case of The Prosecutor v. Joseph Kony, Vincent Otti, Okot Odhiambo and Dominic Ongwen.

As the three other suspects in the case have not appeared or have not been apprehended yet, the Chamber deemed it necessary to separate the case so as not to delay the pre-trial proceedings against Mr Ongwen. After having consulted the Prosecutor, the Chamber decided not to proceed against the other three suspects in absentia. Joseph Kony, Vincent Otti and Okot Odhiambo remain at large, almost ten years after the issuance of the warrants of arrest.

This decision does not in any way affect the rights of the victims accepted to participate in the case of the Kony et al. case. The Chamber will, in due course and in a separate decision, address the issue of victims' participation in the Ongwen case. 

In deciding on the way ahead, the Single Judge was  mindful of the following factors:

1. the present case is the oldest case before the Court, which has been dormant for the last 10 years due to the unavailability of the suspects;
2. Whereas Mr. Ongwen appeared before the Court on a voluntary basis, there is no real prospect that the other suspects will appear nor certainty that they will be apprehended in the near future; 10 and
3. The factual allegations brought by the Prosecutor against Mr. Ongwen are significantly less than those pertaining to the other co-suspects. 

In the view of the Single Judge, the latter point in particular has a bearing on the preparation of the proceedings leading to the confirmation of charges hearing insofar as the limited scope of the current case against Mr. Ongwen, compared to the broader scope of the case against Joseph Kony, Vincent Otti and Okot Odhiambo, necessarily impacts the disclosure of evidence and other related issues, such as restrictions to disclosure of information and protection of witnesses.
In this regard, the Single Judge is particularly attentive to the fact that Mr. Ongwen has the right to be tried fairly and without undue delay, as stipulated in articles 64(2) and 67(1) of the Statute.