THE International Bar Association (IBA) has described the decision by the judges of Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to stay the proceedings in the case of Thomas Lubanga Dyilo as a "clear indication of the ICC's commitment to respect the fair trial rights of defendants".
The judges made the ruling because the prosecution was unable to disclose potentially exonerating confidential material to the defence.
While recognising that the decision was likely to be very disappointing for victims, the IBA nevertheless noted that it reinforced the fact that the ICC was an independent, impartial institution committed to conducting fair trials.
The Trial Chamber decided on 13 June to halt the Lubanga proceedings just over a week before the trial was due to start because judges determined that the prosecution had incorrectly applied a provision in the Rome Statute allowing the prosecution to obtain documents from a number of 'information providers' on condition of confidentiality for the limited purpose of leading them to new evidence.
The judges found that the prosecution had decided to use the information not only to generate new evidence as envisioned by the Statute, but also during the trial.
In the Lubanga case, the prosecution admitted that more than 200 documents it had obtained confidentially from information providers, such as the United Nations, were potentially exculpatory and could show or tend to show the innocence of the defendant, or were material to the defence's preparation of its case.