Kenyan Lawyer Seeks Justice for Jesus at International Court

Dola Indidis, a former spokesperson for the Kenyan Judiciary, has taken it upon himself to challenge the conviction and death sentence of Jesus Christ.

Indidis is seeking to sue the Republic of Italy and the State of Israel, among others, over the execution of the Christian Messiah. This audacious legal endeavor is not only a testament to the enduring impact of Jesus’ trial and crucifixion, but also a reflection of the universal quest for justice.

Indidis’s case is built on the premise that Jesus’ trial was fundamentally flawed. He argues the mode of questioning used during Jesus’ trial and the punishments inflicted upon Him while proceedings were ongoing.

He also says the substance of the information used to convict him were all in violation of the rule of law. His aim is to establish what crime Jesus was charged with and to have the court declare that the Roman courts’ proceedings were null and void.

The Kenyan lawyer’s pursuit of justice for Jesus is not without historical precedent. He hopes to rely on the case of Joan of Ark, the peasant girl who proclaimed herself a warrior sent by God to deliver France from the English.

Her trial and conviction were later found to be unsound, providing a potential legal precedent for Indidis’s case.

However, the path to justice is fraught with obstacles. Legal experts do not expect Indidis’s efforts to succeed, primarily because the International Court of Justice (ICJ) does not have legal jurisdiction over this matter.

The ICJ only has jurisdiction to hear claims brought by one state against another state. As Indidis’s claim is not brought by a state, the ICJ would lack jurisdiction over it.

Despite these challenges, Indidis remains undeterred. His determination to seek justice for Jesus reflects a deep-seated belief in the sanctity of the rule of law. It is a reminder that the quest for justice transcends time and geography.

Indidis’s case also raises profound questions about the nature of justice itself. If Jesus’ trial was indeed flawed, as Indidis argues, what does this say about the countless other trials conducted under similar circumstances?

How many other convictions might be overturned if subjected to the same scrutiny?

While the outcome of Indidis’s case remains uncertain, its implications are far-reaching. It serves as a stark reminder of the enduring power of faith, the timeless quest for justice, and the universal relevance of the rule of law.

Regardless of the final verdict, Indidis’s pursuit of justice for Jesus will undoubtedly leave an indelible mark on legal history.