ICC President Corruption allegations

The president of the International Criminal Court (ICC) is facing calls to resign after it emerged that she may have received financial rewards said to be in millions of dollars to ensure the indictment of Sudanese President Omar al Bashir.

Information reaching The London Evening Post here say that between 2004 and 2015, Argentinian-born ICC President Judge Silvia Alejandra Fernández de Gurmendi allegedly received into her private bank accounts at Banco Popular in the Virgin Islands, the First Caribbean Bank in the Bahamas and the Congregation B’nai Israel unexplained funds mounting to over US$17million that was allegedly used to bribe witnesses that enabled the ICC to indict the Sudanese leader.

The funds are alleged to have been channelled through Judge de Gurmendi’s accounts by Barting Holding Ltd, Atlantic Corporation, Genesis International Holdings and Napex International, all of which are offshore financial companies, who allegedly made wire transfers ranging from US$150,000-US$250,000 to the judge’s bank accounts. It is alleged that these funds were made available to Judge de Gurmendi during the time that President Bashir was under investigation and the ICC was looking for evidence to indict him.

It has been further alleged that funds channelled through Judge de Gurmendi’s accounts were allegedly distributed by her to groups in Darfur including the Sudan Liberation Movement, formerly the Darfur Liberation Front founded by Abdul Wahid al Nur and others in 2002. Appointed ICC President in March last year, de Gurmendi is alleged to have used the funds to ‘recruit, coach and fake evidence and witnesses to testify against President Bashir’.


ICC is a mess. Corrupt and incompetent. Ruto is still a crook and we can do better.


You, Talkers, asked for popcorn prematurely. Now is the time for that popcorn, literally!


If that is true then a storm is coming

1 Like

I briefly chatted with Matsanga at the JKIA pride lounge on 27th June on his way to Europe to slay the ICC on the Bashir case.


How do we react to that information?


Ulisa Babuon

ICC is a political court designed to rearrange the political chess board in developing countries to suit neo colonial interests.
Consider this, Charles Taylor was convicted not for atrocities committed in Liberia but for “aiding and abetting” atrocities in Sierra Leone :rolleyes::rolleyes: by trading in blood diamonds, thus funding the conflict yet not a single arms dealer has ever been charged at the ICC for aiding and abetting that particular conflict:rolleyes::rolleyes:
The arms trade is a billion dollar industry in the developed world and we know for a fact that Sierra Leone has never manufactured AK 47s nor bullets.
Why is it that arms suppliers to conflict regions have never had to answer to this court for aiding and abetting conflict??:rolleyes::rolleyes:



Hehehehehehe! The farcical court continues to crumble. Ocampo chopped his slices from JaKuon, Annan and others, left Fatty Bensouda holding the empty calabash…and then the ‘suspects’ slipped out one by one.



As a lawyer, the easiest cases to defend are the ones that the witnesses have been bribed or someway adulterated. It would be stupid for the ICC to perjure witnesses because it almost guarantees them( the ICC) loosing the case. If you bribe a witness , he usually has to memorize facts to give as evidence making him highly inconsistent. This is easy roadkill for a lawyer. For example, if a witness comes to court saying that he witnessed a a beating which he was not present, he usually has very accurate info eg it happened at 9:17 am. Now as a lawyer, I begin trapping him by asking him events before and after the crime. eg Otieno called him right before the crime. Then I zero in on the crime. I mean how did he know the exact time. In reallity people only remember estimates of time eg it was around 9:15 or 9:30. If he says he received a call from Otieno before, then I present evidence showing Othis called him at 9:20 which is after. Also if he was not present, there is certain obvious information he would not have. For example, if the crime took place on the roundabout of Nyayo House at 9:17, I then ask him if the police intervined. I very well know that I have evidence showing the neareset policeman drinking a soda at Uhuru park , 300 meters away, unable to witness the events at that exact time. The witness will start hesitating , start thinking, you will see him shaking in court. Then he guesses. There’s 10000 other ways I can trap him. He wasn’t there remember. Thats like me asking you which room did Jomo sleep last night at state house. True you can crum certain things about the room, then I ask unexpectedly what time did they serve him water. You say 10 pm, I show evidence they brought him a tusker at 11 pm to his room , not 10 pm. Tusker not water. Inconsistencies galore for a bribed witness. Remember what I ask he is unprepared for. There is now way to cover even 10 % of what happens in a single event if you were not present. To many ways for me to bury cheating prosecutors.
An adulterated witness cannot stand the best lawyers in the world. Jomo and Ruto hired some of the best.
Truth is if you committed a crime, corroborative evidence makes it harder to shake off, but the challenge many times is at the prosecutor.
I see many people confusing Witness protection and bribing Witnesses. Two different things. ICC is a mess, as some say, but only in Kenya. It is a functioning recognized credible body in the rest of the world. Some people have been let go, some have been jailed. Very few complaints about those who have been jailed from their home countries. Why? Every legal case has a prosecution, a defense and sitting Judges. In Kenya people have been made to gauge only the prosecution side. Ultimately it is the judges who give a ruling - not the prosecution. Prosecution can present whatever they want. But does it stand the rule of law? The judges decide, just like the Kenyan case.
As a reminder, The ICC did not come here uninvited. We simply could have said no. Story finished.
My argument is of the legal side- some aspects of it ( theres alot more ), not political side of ICC.


I see many people confusing Witness protection and bribing Witnesses. Two different things. ICC is a mess, as some say, but only in Kenya. It is a functioning recognized credible body in the rest of the world.


The court that hired the clownish, Spanglish-speaking Ocampo and Fatty Bensouda the proxy prosecutor who had to be replaced by the ‘real’ guys behind the Ruto case because she was too daft and clueless to carry the sham through?

As for your description of a good lawyer dismantling a false or bribed witness, do not lecture; we all watched how Karim Khan, Katwa Kigen and their teams tore down each of Bensouda’s 30+ ’witnesses’. Not a single one convinced the court or the world.

Your quasi-‘legal side’ is soaked in political prejudices. Why should your ‘functioning recognized and credible’ court only have failed in the Kenyan case because, according to you, Kenyans were ill-informed?

IMHO, the ICC and its sponsors underestimated Kenya and sought to ‘make an example’ of a subject geopolitically more prominent than the weak testing grounds DRC, liberia, etc. Little did thet know that Kenyans are nobody’s playthings!


First off I didnt tackle t

First off I only looked at a small part of the legal side not political. A legal court process has prosecution, defense and judges who make the final determination. This is in actuality a court. How did the court fail in Kenyan cases? Remember a court is three parts. Or are you defining the court as the prosecution as most of the comments? ( On a political note,some people even think Ocampo or now Bensouda is the ICC. Truth is on a hierachy, they are not even top 5 in the ICC officials in terms of which positions wields power).
But like I said, a prosecutor can present anything, but will it stand with one, decent attorneys to defend and two judges too determine the bullshit if any presented.
My argument is legally, a bribed witness, as insinuated by comments before me , is a huge liability to any prosecution if he dares to testify. All prosecutors (anywhere in the world) know this.

You are lecturing again as though only you know the ICC. I was there and followed proceedings every single day. Check out the long discussions on RC Bowen (Njamlik) and www.nipate.com (Nattydread).

So, you say that a prosecutor is bound to fail if he relies on false/procured/bribed witnesses. What did Ocampo and Bensouda do?

By the way, the Kenyan cases were marked by the oddity of lieutenants in a political conflict being charged while their generals were left untouched. That is where the ICC erred most, in that it politicized justice right off the mark. We cannot blame the prosecutors alone for that. No, the entire structure and its unseen sponsors and funders royally fucked up!


It’s funny how knee-jerk defenders of the ICC try to deflect solid criticisms and debate over its observed failings by saying things like ‘Kenya invited Ocampo’.

This thread discusses yet another ICC official’s alleged corrupt activities. It does not matter if you think that God created the ICC on the 9th. day. What matters is whether it is susceptible to all the vices and evils that plague the rest of humanity.


In the Kenyan cases, the collapse began with OTP 4, James Maina Kabutu. He was a bribed opportunist spinning yarns about his Mungiki connections and meetings he witnessed in non-existent locations. Only a prosecutor and pre-trial chamber hell bent in distorting justice could have groomed such a person.

Apparently, funds available for ‘witness protection’ are as unaccouted for as Kenya’s devolved county budgets!


@ Nattydread
To me a judicial process or a court, a prosecutor presents evidence, I defend myself, the judges rule. Wasn’t that followed in this process?
So to answer your question Ocampo or Bensouda was bound to fail with doctored witnesses. All it takes is 1 doctored witness to crumble an argument.
To me I dont think a Court has failed because a prosecutor has failed to make an argument. Thats why a judicial process has a defence. Hey the defense worn.
One problem with us is if Mama mboga or raia is charged, u hear wacha atajivunia ama atajipanga. If a politician is charged ( Cord or Jubilee) , oh its orders from above. Unseen sponsors in your case.
If these Kenya county budgets are unaccountable, so where was this money going before. We saw nothing in 50 years. 0.

Hah! So it was politics after all? You seem now to be admitting that Ocampo and Bensouda failed, and the case did not collapse because Kenyans misunderstand the mechanisms and structures of justice and the ICC.

I will be bolder and reiterate that besides the OTP, various chambers, judges and panels failed when they refused to sift Ocampo’s nonsensical charges and allowed him to conduct political experiments in their courts. The few that had the integrity to see and call the bullshit out were sidelined (Christine v.d. Wyngaert, the late Judge Fremr, etc)

1 Like

arms suppliers are doing business hehehehe. unless there’s an embargo, i don’t think anything else (maybe UN regulations) stop it.
remember, also nations supply arms. they may not necessarily sell but will ask for something in return. global political dynamics are cloudy though.
Remember al capone? he was never nabbed for racketeering and murder and theft and bootlegging, but for tax evasion
if they can’t pin one thing, they’ll find another thing

1 Like