ICC Day 3: The three suspects – William Ruto, Henry Kosgey and Joshua Sang are slowly but surely being vindicated
Posted by African Press International on September 3, 2011
By Korir, Chief editor, API
Hague, September 3rd, 2011: Sitting in ICC court room today and listening to arguments on the case by the defence and the prosecution and after listening to the first live witnesses, one is bound to say, if there is justice in this world, the three suspects, William Ruto, Henry Kosgey and Joshua Sang will be vindicated and compensated for the mental torture they have been put through by Moreno Ocampo’s incompetence for having relied on coached anonymous paid-up witnesses and written reports published by institutions that have people with hidden agendas.
It is now clear that prosecutor Moreno Ocampo has a different agenda, than giving justice to the suspects. The prosecution is working very hard to force a case on the three suspects, a case that has zero merits if the people listening to the arguments presented to the court by both sides are interested in the truth to prevail.
Stating these fact that the three are going to be vindicated if there is justice in the ICC system does not in itself mean we are forgetting the victims that lost their lives. However, to give justice to the victims does not have to happen by picking innocent people and prosecuting them.
It cannot be said clearer than this that Ocampo and his team did not investigate the case, if one has to go by their behaviour and presentation in the court the last 3 days. It is now coming out clearer that they have only relied on the 7 anonymous witnesses, that the court and the defence did not even get the chance to cross-examine, and reports, some of which were collected and edited by the Kenya National Human Rights Commission, a Commission that seems to have engaged people with hidden agenda to go out there and coach witnesses while collecting information that has now been used to implicate the suspects.
Mr Ruto addressing the members of the press at the ICC entrance, Hague, tells them that he has always believed he will be vindicated; adding, that he was happy with the day’s hearing.
There is no reasonable soberness that should allow ICC Judges to accept evidence that cannot be verified, because the evidence presented by the prosecutor is evidence collected during emotional period in Kenya’s history, a period when people were willing to say anything in order to benefit from monies and privileges promised.
Some institutions had their own desire to produce yearly reports in order to show that their institutions are active at all times, and yet it is a known fact that many yearly reports are issued to help in increased budgets for the said institutions.
The prosecution tried to confuse Ruto’s witness number two Mr Henry Kiptoo Murei. When the witness was asked if Mr Ruto has ever given him or any others money or if he has seen Ruto give out money in any place, the witness answered positively, saying yes he has seen Ruto giving out money. That may have made the prosecution to start getting excited thinking they were now scoring a point against Mr Ruto.
That was not to be, because when the prosecution asked the witness to elaborate what he meant by Ruto giving out money, the going got tougher for the prosecutor. The witness told the court that Ruto had given out 30 million Kenya shillings and specified that the money came from the central government for constituency development projects. He continued to state that it is not only Ruto’s constituency, but all the constituencies in the Republic of Kenya that are given money yearly through what is called CDF.
The prosecution had difficulties to understand what CDF is and that is an indication that they have not gone to the ground to investigate the case. If they knew they were going to dig into any money that Mr Ruto may have given out in the constituency, they should have known that CDF is not Ruto’s personal money.
The prosecution tried also to push the witness to confirm that the meetings were held inside Ruto’s house and not outside the house. The purpose for that, as it came out later was to try to mislead the witness to say the meetings were held inside the house, because the next question the prosecution had for the witness was “How many rooms are in Ruto’s house? Had the witness stated that he knew the number of rooms Ruto’s house, it was most probable the prosecution wanted to know if the witness saw weapons that may have been in any of the rooms. The prosecution wanted to cement their anonymous witness’s bogus claim that Ruto had weapons in his house, and that the weapons were given out to individuals inside the house by Mr Ruto personally.
The prosecution is beginning to hit the wall already. They know that if they cannot manage to crash Ruto, then it will be difficult for them to win the case against Kosgey and Sang. Mr Kosgey’s and Mr Sang’s case is based on Ruto’s. The prosecution knows that if Ruto is vindicated, the case against all the three will fall apart, because the prosecution says he was the head of the network.
It is only logical that if the prosecution is unable to prosecute and win a case against Ruto, the man they claim was the head of a network, then the prosecution will need magic on their side in order to be able to win over the subordinates in a network as claimed to have existed.
As the case now stands, it can be said without fear, the prosecution has no case against William Ruto, Henry Kosgey and Joshua Sang. The case the prosecution is trying to prosecute is built on innuendos, lies and corrupt methods because of the way the evidence they are relying on has no basis in truth that connects the three suspects in crimes of any kind whatsoever.
Mr Kosgey is in disbelief that Ocampo is pressing on with charges that everyone else can see does not hold. He is is hoping the judges will see through Ocampo and through out the charges against them.
Mr Kosgey addressing members of the press at the ICC doorsteps after the 3rd day’s hearing were adjourned until Monday the 5th of September.
Mr Sang addressing members of the press at the ICC doorsteps. Here answering questions from Jeff Koinange while API is filming.
It was a good day and a relieve for all the suspects. Mr Sang says, he did not use his Radio station to send out coded messages encouraging violence in 2007 post-election violence in Kenya as the prosecution claims.
The court, therefore, in the interest of justice, should terminate the proceedings sooner rather than later instead of playing into Mr Ocampo’s trap.