ICC Day 2 case 2: Prosecution implicates former President Moi in the Killings telling the court he mandated Mungiki to assist Uhuru to attain power
Posted by African Press International on September 22, 2011
By Korir, Chief editor, API
The prosecution has just implicated former President Daniel arap Moi in the chaos that took many lives in Kenya during the post-election violence.
Telling the court that Uhuru has been a member of Mungiki, the prosecution claimed that the former president mandated Mungiki to help Uhuru Kenyatta ascend to power by all means possible.
The prosecution was hard on the defence today. They chose a different approach. If the evidence is to be believed, then one can say they scored points in cleverly putting their details across. The problem, however, is the questionable credibility of the witnesses they are referring to when putting their points across. These are anonymous witness and according to the defence, they are people who have misled the prosecution for the sake of money and other favours.
They were detailed in their presentation which started at 14.30 hours Hague time. They will also proceed with the same tomorrow.
<Ambassador Francis Muthaura.
They told the court that Mr Francis Muthaura and Uhuru Kenyatta created an organization using the money that they had and that the organization was used to infringe people’s rights.
The prosecution stated that Mr Muthaura created an environment for committing crimes. They told the court that suspect number 3, Hussein Ali in an earlier statement written in Nairobi stated that he was reporting to Mr Muthaura when he was the commissioner of Police.
This is something that the defence reacted to yesterday by stating that the police is under the Internal Security Ministry and not Muthaura’s office. The prosecution wants the court to believe that Muthaura had the full control over the police while Uhuru Kenyatta had power over Mungiki.
<General Mohammed Hussein Ali
By saying Ali was reporting to Muthaura, they are also insinuating that the same Ali was receiving orders from him, a calculated move to tie Mr Muthaura to the murders.
According to the prosecution, Muthaura gave orders that the police should not interfere with Mungiki who according to the same prosecution were sent out to kill and displace the Kalenjins, Luos and Luhyas living in Naivasha and Nakuru areas.
The prosecution did not stop there. She continued to say that the Mungiki militia forcefully circumcised Luos in Kabati area. The prosecution witness told according ot the prosecutor narrated how he was forced to seek refuge in Naivasha police station while others went o the Naivasha prison because they feared for their lives.
This point is a very interesting one. How can the same police purported to be under orders from Mr Muthaura and Ali to kill, give refuge to the witness and others from a tribe that was supposed to be killed. This is a clear mix up far from the truth that indicates the statements are not genuine, thus the need by the defence and the court to cross-examine such a witness.
< Hon. Mr Uhuru Muigai Kenyatta
According to one anonymous prosecution witness, Mr Kenyatta distributed 3.3 million Kenya shillings to each person that attended a meeting to plan the murders, rape and eviction of non Kikuyus particularly the Kalenjins and the Luos in the said regions.
The accusation is out of proportion. If the Chief prosecutor Mr Ocampo wants to be a dignified man, he should instruct the prosecutors presenting the evidence to shed more light into the witnesses they are using, and enable the court and the defence to cross-examine them.
By not helping to discover the whole truth, the prosecution is abusing its powers. And that serves no justice to the suspects in this case.
uhuru kenyatta, anonymous witness, election violence, commissioner of police, and president daniel.