Judge Wyngaert asked the Presidency to excuse her from the Kenya cases. She cited her unprecedented workload. The Presidency (made up of the President of the Court and the two Vice-Presidents) agreed with her and issued a decision replacing Judge Wyngaert with Judge Robert Fremr. It is somewhat of a disappointment as Judge Wyngaert had already made her mark on proceedings and her views on modes of liability would have been of great interest in this case.
Judge Fremr, her replacement, is a Czech jurist who also served as a judge ad litem (a temporary judge or judge for only specific cases) in the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. Before that, he worked as a Criminal Judge for over twenty years in Czechoslovakia (after 1993, in the Czech Republic). He was also briefly in the Czech Supreme Court.
I came upon a brief questionnaire that he answered when he was still a candidate for election to the ICC. In it, he talks about the institutional challenges of an international tribunal- particularly the need for efficiency and the complex and extensive casework that judges and the Prosecutor face. He also mentions that in the ICTR he faced some challenges similar to those ICC judges are up against- for example, “obstruction and stalling tactics” from parties. In the questionnaire, he states his desire that some ICC hearings should be held in an affected country “to shorten the “mental distance” between the ICC and the country concerned”. Judge Fremr also points to his long experience dealing with crimes of sexual violence- Rape as a crime against humanity is one of the charges against Uhuru Kenyatta. There’s lots more useful information in the questionnaire, not just about Judge Fremr but about how judges in general relate to the court in which they serve, how they prepare for new cases and postings, and how they interact with their colleagues and the parties.