Utilisez un ou plusieurs des filtres situés dans le menu latéral gauche pour affiner votre recherche

Type de document

Source du document

Phase de l’affaire

Appel interlocutoire (sélectionnez d'abord l’affaire)

Documents publics

Lesser redacted version of “Reply to the Prosecution’s Response to Paul Gicheru’s Written Submissions,” 18 May 2021, ICC-01/09-01/20-147-Conf
Le Procureur c. Paul Gicheru
  • Réplique
  • ICC-01/09-01/20-147-Red2
Public Redacted Version of "Reply to the Prosecution's Response to Paul Gicheru's Written Submissions," 18 May 2021
Le Procureur c. Paul Gicheru
  • Réplique
  • Défense : Gicheru
  • ICC-01/09-01/20-147-Red
Reply to the “Prosecution’s Response to OPCD’s ‘Appeal[] against the Decision on Applicability of Provisional Rule 165’”
Le Procureur c. Paul Gicheru
  • Réplique
  • Bureau du conseil public pour la Défense
  • ICC-01/09-01/20-94
Public Redacted Version of the Common Legal Representative for Victims’ Joint Reply to the “Ruto Defence Request for Judgment of Acquittal” and to the “Sang Defence ‘No Case to Answer’ Motion”
Le Procureur c. William Samoei Ruto et Joshua Arap Sang
  • Réplique
  • Représentants légaux des victimes
  • ICC-01/09-01/11-2005-Red
Common Legal Representative for Victims’ Reply to the Sang Defence Response to Ruto Defence Application for Extension of Time Limit to Submit a ‘no case to answer’ Motion
Le Procureur c. William Samoei Ruto et Joshua Arap Sang
  • Réplique
  • Représentants légaux des victimes
  • ICC-01/09-01/11-1967
Common Legal Representative for Victims’ Reply to the Ruto Defence Application for Extension of Time Limit to Submit a ‘no case to answer’ Motion
Le Procureur c. William Samoei Ruto et Joshua Arap Sang
  • Réplique
  • Représentants légaux des victimes
  • ICC-01/09-01/11-1966
Victims’ reply to the ‘Defence response to Victims’ request for reclassification’
Le Procureur c. Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta
  • Réplique
  • Représentants légaux des victimes
  • ICC-01/09-02/11-980
Public redacted version of “Prosecution’s Reply to the “Defence Response to Corrected version of ‘Prosecution’s eighth application pursuant to Regulation 35(2) of the Regulations of the Court’”, 21 August 2014, ICC-01/09-01/11-1463””
Le Procureur c. William Samoei Ruto et Joshua Arap Sang
  • Réplique
  • Bureau du Procureur
  • ICC-01/09-01/11-1471-Red
Public redacted version of Prosecution reply to the Ruto Defence’s 8 January 2014 and the Sang Defence’s 8 January 2014 responses to the Prosecution’s request under article 64(6)(b) and article 93 to summon witnesses and variation of time limits
Le Procureur c. William Samoei Ruto et Joshua Arap Sang
  • Réplique
  • Bureau du Procureur
  • ICC-01/09-01/11-1183-Red
Prosecution reply to the Government of Kenya’s 20 December 2013 observations
Le Procureur c. Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta
  • Réplique
  • Bureau du Procureur
  • ICC-01/09-02/11-894
Prosecution’s Reply to the “Sang Defence Response to Prosecution Application pursuant to Regulation 35 (2) for Addition of Documents to the List of Evidence”
Le Procureur c. William Samoei Ruto et Joshua Arap Sang
  • Réplique
  • Bureau du Procureur
  • ICC-01/09-01/11-1002
Reply by the Government of Kenya to the "Prosecution response to the 'Government of Kenya's Submissions on the Status of Cooperation with the International Criminal Court, or, in the alternative. Application for Leave to file Observations pursuant to Rul
Le Procureur c. Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta
  • Réplique
  • Autres participants
  • ICC-01/09-02/11-755
Reply by the Government of Kenya to the ''Prosecution response to the'Government of Kenya's Submissions on the Status of Cooperation with the International Criminal Court, or, in the alternative. Application for Leave to file Observations pursuant to
Le Procureur c. William Samoei Ruto et Joshua Arap Sang
  • Réplique
  • Représentants des États
  • ICC-01/09-01/11-769
Public Redacted Version of "Defence Reply to Confidential redacted version of the 25 February 2013 Consolidated Prosecution response to the Defence applications under Article 64 of the Statue to refer the confirmation decision back to the Pre-Trial Chamb
Le Procureur c. Francis Kirimi Muthaura et Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta
  • Réplique
  • Défense
  • ICC-01/09-02/11-678-Red
Public Redacted Version of the Defence Reply to the "Confidential redacted version of the 25 February 2013 Consolidated Prosecution Response to the Defence applications under Article 64 of the Statute to refer the confirmation decision back to the Pre-Tr
Le Procureur c. Francis Kirimi Muthaura et Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta
  • Réplique
  • Défense
  • ICC-01/09-02/11-681-Red
Prosecution’s Reply to the Defence Responses to the Prosecution’s Submission of the Charges
Le Procureur c. William Samoei Ruto et Joshua Arap Sang
  • Réplique
  • Bureau du Procureur
  • ICC-01/09-01/11-514
Prosecution’s Reply to the “Defence’s Response to the “Prosecution’s Submission of the Charges against Francis Kirimi Muthaura and Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta pursuant to Trial Chamber V’s Order ICC-01/09-02/11-536””
Le Procureur c. Francis Kirimi Muthaura et Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta
  • Réplique
  • Bureau du Procureur
  • ICC-01/09-02/11-575
Reply on behalf of the Government of Kenya to the Responses of the Prosecutor, Defence, and OPCV to the Government’s Application pursuant to Article 19 of the Rome Statute
Le Procureur c. Francis Kirimi Muthaura, Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta et Mohammed Hussein Ali
  • Réplique
  • Représentants des États
  • ICC-01/09-02/11-91
Reply on behalf of the Government of Kenya to the Responses of the Prosecutor, Defence, and OPCV to the Government’s Application pursuant to Article 19 of the Rome Statute
Le Procureur c. William Samoei Ruto, Henry Kiprono Kosgey et Joshua Arap Sang
  • Réplique
  • Représentants des États
  • ICC-01/09-01/11-89
Reply by Professors Max Hilaire & William A. Cohn to Victim's Response to the Request to Appear as Amicus Curiae
Situation en République du Kenya
  • Réplique
  • Autres participants
  • ICC-01/09-12
About 20 results