From Coercing to Complementing Sample Clauses

From Coercing to Complementing. Whereas the threat of ICC intervention was clearly a catalyst for the attempted Special Tribunal in Kenya, the predominant driver behind the push for an ICD has been Chief Justice ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇. Following the STK’s defeat, domestic leadership on the issue of accountability for electoral violence has migrated almost totally to Kenya’s judicial branch, particularly in the wake of the 2013 election of ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇, former political rivals who aligned, under the banner of the Jubilee Alliance, in opposition to the ICC proceedings.561 The establishment of an ICD is also more feasible than any attempt to revisit the failed special tribunal as that would require parliamentary assent, a political impossibility at this point. While the ICD remains a distant prospect in Kenya, the discourse there, as in Uganda, has shifted away from a threat-based model of complementarity to one that instead sees the Division as an extension of the ICC’s work, rather than an alternative to it. The JSC report appears to endorse, for example, a burden-sharing model of complementarity, wherein the ICD would “try middle and lower perpetrators of crimes against humanity as related to the post-election violence period,” while the ICC deals with those “who bear the highest responsibility for crimes against humanity that were perpetrated against citizens.”562 ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ of the Nairobi-based NGO Kituo ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇, similarly writes that, “The ICD should be seen as complementary to the International Criminal Court that only holds those who bear the greatest responsibility to account.”563 The ICC’s outreach coordinator in Kenya has also said that the division would “serve the important role of complementing the ongoing ICC work.” In her words, “It is not a question of comparing the ICD and the ICC. It is a question of the complementing role the two institutions can play to bring about justice to victims. It is our hope that the ICD will meet international standards.”564