Ongwen tells ICC to go for Kony, not him

THE HAGUE /Kampala. It was a dramatic start to the trial of former rebel commander of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA), Dominic Ongwen at the International Criminal Court (ICC) as he put up a spirited fight, denying he had understood the 70 charges slapped on him and saying he was not fit to stand trial.
Mr Ongwen also denied criminality, saying he is neither the LRA nor its leader Joseph Kony to qualify to be put in the dock at The Hague-based court.
“When I was initially brought here to this international court, when I was in the bush, I heard people talking about the international court. For these reasons, I should have started by crying and just surrender and there is anything that has to be done. Let them go ahead and do it. First I would like to ask you if the court grants me permission,” he said.
“I did understand the document (of charges translated in Acholi), but not the charges because I understand the charges as against the LRA and the LRA is Joseph Kony who is the leader...it’s the LRA that committed the crimes. International Criminal Court, do you agree that I am the leader of the LRA, do you agree that my life was not ruined?” Ongwen asked the court.

Shifting blame
As Ongwen continued shifting the liability of crimes against him to his former boss Kony in the two-decade insurgency in northern Uganda, until the trial judge Mr Bertram Schmitt, shut him down.
The judge told Ongwen he has no right to ask the court questions at that time but to respond to court’s questions of whether he is guilty of the charges or not.
“You are here before the court and you are not in the position to ask the court questions. You will receive a fair and impartial trial. I would ask you to answer the question I have repeated; do you make admission in respect to the charges?” the visibly irritated trial judge told Mr Ongwen.
The other dramatic scenario was when Ongwen at the last-minute, insisted he did not understand the charges, hence not fit to stand trial.
This followed an objection by his Ugandan lawyer, Mr Krispus Ayena Odongo, who is leading the defence team before the Trial Chamber IX that Ongwen did not understand the trial and he required psychological or psychiatric examination to determine whether he was fit to stand trial.

Ill health
The defence team had told court on the eve of the trial that they had learnt from experts that Ongwen was not in sound mind to understand either the charges or their grave nature while he was in the bush and therefore, he was unfit to stand trial.
This submission generated a discussion in court that saw the panel of three judges breaking off for 15 minutes before returning with a common position.
They overruled him and stated that Ongwen had, at the preliminary stage of the trial, personally told the court that he understood the charges against him.
“Mr Ongwen confirmed to the Pre-Trial Chamber II that he had read and understood the charges as set out in the document containing the charges. Mr Ongwen said back then and I quote, ‘thank you your honour. For me whether the charges are read or not, it’s all going to be a waste of time,” Justice Schmitt quoted Ongwen and dismissed the submission that he did not understand the indictment.
“First, the charges that Mr Ongwen said he understood in January are not materially different now. Other information before the chamber also confirms that he understands the charges. Lacking further substantiation and in light of Ongwen’s admission at the confirmation stage, the Chamber is not persuaded that he does not understand the nature of the charges,” the judge observed.
Mr Ongwen shortly yielded to the court’s direction and denied all the 70 charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity against him. The court entered a plea of “not guilty”.
Mr Ongwen is on trial over charges related to attacks against civilians in the former camps for internally displaced people at Lukodi, Pajule, Odek and Abok in northern Uganda between October 2003 and June 2004 during the LRA insurgency.
After the dismissal of Mr Ongwen’s claim of not understanding the charges, the ICC prosecutor Ms Fatou Bensouda made lengthy details of the case to the court.
Ms Bensouda informed court the type of evidence that she will rely on during the hearing in January next year. She cited the Ugandan army interceptions of the LRA communications about the planned attacks on civilians in the camps and also the witnesses whom Ongwen abducted and raped while in the bush.

Experts say...

“The commencement of this trial is an important step towards justice for the victims of atrocities committed during the conflict in Northern Uganda. Over the coming months as the prosecution lays up its evidence against Dominic Ongwen, we will know the extent of the war and the impact it had on the communities. This trial is key in bringing out the truth about the conflict in Northern Uganda”.”
Ms Sarah Kihika Kasande, official with International Centre for Transitional Justice.

“It (trial) brings back a bit of the history of Uganda, which some of us would like to forget. I sometimes get goose bumps by the way LRA advanced that war. The trial gives so much proximity to the victims of the LRA war. It’s very hurtful. There’s a real sadness [from the proceedings]. But what’s important is that justice is being done.”
Ms Mirjam Blaak, Uganda’s head of Mission in Brussels WHO is attending the proceedings on behalf of Uganda government.

[email protected]