Mkenya aenda ICJ kupinga mateso ya Yesu

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The
Hague has constituted a panel to hear a case
filed by a Kenyan man residing in Nairobi
challenging the unfair trial, sentencing,
punishment and death of Jesus Christ.
Dola Indidis, a lawyer and former spokesman of
the Kenyan Judiciary, first filed the unprecedented
case in the High Court in Nairobi on behalf of the
‘Friends of Jesus’ in August 2007 (Republic of
Kenya Constitutional Petition No. 965 of 2007).
The court said it had no jurisdiction, prompting
Indidis to seek international justice at the
Netherlands-based court in 2011.
“The court has communicated to me. I am now
waiting for the date of hearing,” Indidis told
Kenyan Media.
Dola Indidis says Jesus Christ’s rights were
violated
There has been no trial or execution in history
that has had such a huge impact, especially in
Christianity, as that of Jesus of Narazeth in Roman
occupied Jerusalem over 2,000 years ago.
“I filed the case because it’s my duty to uphold
the dignity of Jesus and I have gone to the ICJ to
seek justice for the man from Nazareth,” said
Indidis, who is also a former police
spokesperson. “His selective and malicious
prosecution violated his human rights through
judicial misconduct, abuse of office bias and
prejudice.”
Indidis moved to the ICJ in The Hague to have the
conviction and sentencing of Jesus Christ
quashed arguing that he was “Convinced that
Pontius Pilate erred in law by convicting and
sentencing Jesus Christ while acknowledging his
own lack of jurisdiction and the accused’s
innocence.”
The case was first filed under sections 65 and 67
of the constitution of Kenya (now repealed). The
petitioner was ‘Friends of Jesus’ through Dola
Indidis suing Tiberius (Emperor of Rome 42
BC-37AD), Pontius Pilate (Governor of Judea),
Annas, Jewish Chief Priest, Jewish elders, Jewish
teachers of the law, King Herod, The Republic of
Italy and The State of Israel.
The Kenya Civil Liberties Union was listed as an
Amicus Curie while Humprey Odanga Achala was
an interested party.
The petitioners named the states of Italy and
Israel in the suit because upon the attainment of
independence, the states incorporated the laws of
the Roman Empire and those in force at the time
of the Crucifixion.
Jewish Chief Priest Caiaphas is accused of
arresting Jesus, trying him in a kangaroo court
and convicting him on a religious charge that
carried the death penalty because he did not want
Jesus to challenge his authority, especially not at
Passover time.
Pilate, the Governor of Judea, found Jesus not
guilty, but had him executed in order to keep the
peace.
“It was wrong for Pilate to witness the accused
being beaten,” Indidis says. “A judge must stand
above all people and all forms of irregularities.”
Dola says he filed the case because it’s his duty
to uphold the dignity of Jesus Christ
The petitioner challenged the mode of
questioning used during the trial, prosecution,
hearing and sentencing of Jesus Christ; the form
of punishment meted out on Him while
undergoing judicial proceedings and the
substance of the information used to convict
him.
Indidis wants to establish what crime Jesus was
charged with and prays that the court declares
“that the proceedings before the Roman courts
were a nullity in law for they did not conform to
the rule of law at the material time and any time
thereafter.”
He says: “Some of those present spat in his face,
struck him with their fists, slapped him, taunted
him, and pronounced him worthy of death.”
Asked if this is a frivolous case pursued by a
zealot, Indidis told The Nairobian: “This case is
not about fanaticism. It’s a case of law and it’s the
duty of counsel to help in the development of
law.”
The lawyer says the petitioners are relying on the
precedence of the case of Joan of Ark, the peasant
girl who proclaimed herself the virgin warrior
sent by God to deliver France from her enemies
the English, whose trial was later on reversed.
“This is the same case with Jesus,” Indidis
explains. “The judge who sentenced him said that
he had no jurisdiction to attend to the matter but
he went ahead to convict and pass a capital
sentence under duress.
He adds that the judgement meted was not even
right because under the Galilean law the sentence
of blasphemy was stoning to death, but Jesus was
crucified — a punishment that was under the
Roman law.
“Blasphemy against the God of Jews was not even
a crime under Roman law. The judge passed the
wrong sentence,” he says.
Who was responsible? Was it an execution or a
judicial murder?
The lawyer, who delved into politics in the last
General Election, says that he researched for over
10 years before filing the case in court.
“My research was not misguided or emotional. It
was purely academic,” he says. “I know that I
have a strong case and I hope to see justice done
while I am alive.”